|
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1911198)
I hold 30,000 shares of delta stock. I am a Delta pilot first and a shareholder second.
|
Originally Posted by Doug Madsen
(Post 1911228)
Really? $1,260,000 worth of DAL? No wonder you're voting no. You fly airplanes for a hobby.
This TA sucks. |
Originally Posted by scambo1
(Post 1911198)
Leine,
All work rules are interrelated. Straight pay rates do not necessarily mean you will make more money. This TA is a paycut (more accurately a W2 cut) for me and many others. There are no positives that I can hang my hat on. There are some crumbs, yes. But, the 8% isn't even one of them. No way, no how is this TA a gain on anything but spun costing using the most favorable conditions. It's a loss and should never have been TA-ed. I'm guessing by flame away, you are dismissing the various rep letters who have said the same things as me. $5,000,000,000 buy back (a waste of money) and I hold 30,000 shares of delta stock. I am a Delta pilot first and a shareholder second. This TA is absolutely a sellout. If this was war, these reps and shadow MEC members would be lined up against a wall, blindfolded, given a cigarette and shot. They are traitors. Period. If you are one of the relatively few FO's that makes more than the CA's they fly with then I get it. It will impact your niche. I've done the math and for me and many others it is a significantly positive contract. Not the one I wanted, but it's not "spun costs" unless you're the guy that gets all of his trips bought every month. I understand why that guy would be ****ed. I'm not dismissing the reps that are speaking out against it. However I've read what they wrote and have come to a different conclusion. My flame on comment was referring to the wave of negativity in this echo chamber. Anyone who dare speak up that they see some positives in this TA is labelled a coward, weak, Stockholm syndrome'd, mathematically challenged, or my new favorite....traitor :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by LeineLodge
(Post 1911242)
Scambo,
If you are one of the relatively few FO's that makes more than the CA's they fly with then I get it. It will impact your niche. I've done the math and for me and many others it is a significantly positive contract. Not the one I wanted, but it's not "spun costs" unless you're the guy that gets all of his trips bought every month. I understand why that guy would be ****ed. I'm not dismissing the reps that are speaking out against it. However I've read what they wrote and have come to a different conclusion. My flame on comment was referring to the wave of negativity in this echo chamber. Anyone who dare speak up that they see some positives in this TA is labelled a coward, weak, Stockholm syndrome'd, mathematically challenged, or my new favorite....traitor :rolleyes: |
Originally Posted by ghilis101
(Post 1911248)
Please do not destroy the next 30 years of my life. Im asking you to reconsider your decision based on not what we gain, but what we lose. If you think fast money now is worth the loss of widebody opportunities (less money), small narrowbody growth to replace aging larger narrowbody aircraft (less money), seniority stagnation (less money and QOL), the sick policy changes that nobody can admit to liking, less PS, and higher TLV, well then Id like to know how much of a raise would have convinced you to vote yes? 1%? So basically any money now would have been your rational to give up everything else in the contract? This is not a decision to be taken lightly. There are so many strings attached to this TA why risk it?
|
1 Attachment(s)
No sales job? 4 page full color mailer about rates. No marching band though. I am sure the comprehensive concession pamphlet with color and graphs is in the mail, I just haven't received it yet.
Attachment 2194 |
Gents,
A humble opinion from an outsider. I voted Yes on our AA/US JCBA simply because our MOU dictated that a No vote automatically sent our contract into cost neutral arbitration while locking us out huge pay increases, to be eventually averaged out to DL/UA pay rates (still well below each.) In other words, with a gun to our heads. The company won either way. I also voted Yes due to the fact that our membership and union leadership was completely at a loss as to what, or how, to fight if we voted it down. The MOU completely removed any leverage our union had, and tied our hands. Win for Parker/Kirby. And so here we are. You guys are not bound by an MOU that sends your contract into the hands of an arbitrator. You have tons of leverage. Your company is the best run and most profitable airline in the US and yet they are asking for concessions while using profit sharing to fund a small pay rate increase. This would be an automatic No vote for me. Had our JCBA not been bound by cost neutral arbitration, I would also have voted No for ours as well. You guys can do way better. Hold the line! 73 |
Originally Posted by ghilis101
(Post 1911248)
Please do not destroy the next 30 years of my life. Im asking you to reconsider your decision based on not what we gain, but what we lose. If you think fast money now is worth the loss of widebody opportunities (less money), small narrowbody growth to replace aging larger narrowbody aircraft (less money), seniority stagnation (less money and QOL), the sick policy changes that nobody can admit to liking, less PS, and higher TLV, well then Id like to know how much of a raise would have convinced you to vote yes? 1%? So basically any money now would have been your rational to give up everything else in the contract? This is not a decision to be taken lightly. There are so many strings attached to this TA why risk it?
If a poor TA defines your happiness or lack thereof perhaps you need to reexamine what motivates you in life. I hope this TA fails, and then we go back and fix what is lacking. That may take some time I admit. But even if it passes I won't stake my own well being on it. In fact if it passes two years from now half the no voters will hardly remember... which is how it always is (I still remember a captain swearing he was quitting ALPA due to the extreme concessions of now-revered C2K). |
Originally Posted by dc10guy
(Post 1911218)
Where is it stated the 3 year look back has changed. Been taking a break from here for a couple of days.
I am still a no vote. From Negotiators Notepad 15-04 June 16th Implementation The Company expects to be ready to fully implement the new sick leave items by the end of the year. In the interim, the look back periods for both the verification and medical release thresholds will look back no further than the beginning of the current sick leave year, June 1, 2015. That means any missed work days prior to June 1st will not count toward any thresholds. The 365-day metric will grow from that point as will the 1095-day metric. For example, if the new program is fully implemented on December 1, 2015 the initial look back will only be the number of missed work days since June 1, 2015. It will continue to grow until the 365-day point is reached and then will begin a rolling 365-day look back. The same will occur with the 1095-day metric. The company originally wanted the 3 year look-back to be retroactive but they have already backed off on this. So much for the myth of the "Last, best offer." Its called bargaining guys. We are allowed to hold out for more. They came to us for an early deal - they want something. We have leverage. Scoop |
Originally Posted by aa73
(Post 1911268)
Gents,
A humble opinion from an outsider. I voted Yes on our AA/US JCBA simply because our MOU dictated that a No vote automatically sent our contract into cost neutral arbitration while locking us out huge pay increases, to be eventually averaged out to DL/UA pay rates (still well below each.) In other words, with a gun to our heads. The company won either way. I also voted Yes due to the fact that our membership and union leadership was completely at a loss as to what, or how, to fight if we voted it down. The MOU completely removed any leverage our union had, and tied our hands. Win for Parker/Kirby. And so here we are. You guys are not bound by an MOU that sends your contract into the hands of an arbitrator. You have tons of leverage. Your company is the best run and most profitable airline in the US and yet they are asking for concessions while using profit sharing to fund a small pay rate increase. This would be an automatic No vote for me. Had our JCBA not been bound by cost neutral arbitration, I would also have voted No for ours as well. You guys can do way better. Hold the line! 73 |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:22 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands