Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 07-05-2015, 08:29 PM   #21  
Gets Weekends Off
 
newKnow's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 7ER-A
Posts: 6,797
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bananie View Post
How about, "when was the last time UAL had a better contract than delta?" If that guy is so smart, how come the best he can do is copy our contract hook line and sinker? But only by being a year behind us. They got one third the bankruptcy returns as delta, no merger stock, no JCBA for three years and after all that failure the best they could do was to trail delta by a year. Yes, let's take that guys advice.
That doesn't address the point. We aren't debating if the UAL contract is, or ever was better then Delta's.

Is what he saying about our TA true?

Is our quality of life degraded? Did we make tradeoffs in health care, job security and quality of life items? Is this an unprecedented time in airline profitability?

Seriously, DOES THIS TA MOVE THE BAR HIGHER?

That's what he's asking.

If you think it does, please explain how so?
newKnow is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 03:53 AM   #22  
Snake
 
rube's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2015
Posts: 242
Default

"After weighing the pros and cons of the TA, it is difficult to say if it actually moves the bar any higher. Instead, a compelling argument can be made that the bar will be lowered because the TA is rife with concessions in quality of life (QOL), healthcare, and possibly even job security. It might be a reasonable agreement if just the profit sharing formula was traded for higher hourly rates, but it is self-evident that far more than that was sold.

During this time of unprecedented airline profitability, it is puzzling why the DAL MEC opened early to only settle for a cost-neutral contract at best. There are valid arguments about the time value of money. However, these can be countered with equally valid arguments on the value of job security and QOL. The UAL MEC aims to get a briefing from the DAL Negotiating Committee if the TA passes membership ratification."


Yeah, actually, I do have a comment on that. This is a bloated populist statement, coming from the VC of Council 34, not the UAL MEC as the title pretends.

Job protections are actually enhanced with the TA - furlough protection is bumped to DOS, medical release is moved out of the CPO with one exception, mental health issues finally get the respect they deserve, and disability is less of a bite with the top-off. Absent the TA's passage, section 15 of the PWA includes the CPO. Yeah, the DHS is an AME, but he's not MY AME, and that alters the responsibilities of his job. Press to test, and let's go to court - they put it in writing.

One hour of TLV buys 15% credit and trip mix input from the RCC. If the company can't handle that, we nix the program.

QOL? We fixed reroute. I get home within 4 hours, or it's FUPM.

LCP OE trip drops? I never got them, never will, and the numbers show a good trade by my reckoning. 67 more reserves, out of 12,500 pilots? Since C2012 and the FAR 117 LOA, reserve has gone senior, in case anyone actually checked. It's a wash because it's industry standard anyway, and we would lose this one in mediation.

There is a time to buy profit sharing - it's schmuck insurance - and that is in the middle of a downturn like we did in LOA 46. There's a time to sell it back to the company, like we did in 1996 when we set the Delta Dot with B777 pay rates and an across-the-board six percent raise. The TA sells it back to the company at a better then 1:1 ratio.

The last downturn was in 2008. Go look at our profit sharing windfall for that year, and apply the proposed formula to it. Does anyone here doubt that the good times won't last forever? Downturns turn profit sharing into nothing, but at the same time, hard rates force the company back to the table when they desire a rebalance to Section 3. At-risk income takes no time, negotiations for LOA 46 took three years; you lock in the rates, and strap in for the ride.

PRASM, PRASM, wherefore art thou PRASM? Yeah, let's draw down Atlantic traffic, and shrink into a domestic market that's about to learn a hard lesson on capacity discipline, then wonder about variable income.

A UAL pilot should know that without the Delta Dot, there would be no UAL 2000 contract to form a pattern on. Selling profit sharing is how we got to the rates that define restoration for Delta pilots.

I think it's out of line for a rep to speak about another MEC this way. It creates unnecessary friction between unions that are expected to share objectives and resources. Cheap populism.
rube is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 04:37 AM   #23  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Bananie's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by newKnow View Post
That doesn't address the point. We aren't debating if the UAL contract is, or ever was better then Delta's.

Is what he saying about our TA true?

Is our quality of life degraded? Did we make tradeoffs in health care, job security and quality of life items? Is this an unprecedented time in airline profitability?

Seriously, DOES THIS TA MOVE THE BAR HIGHER?

That's what he's asking.

If you think it does, please explain how so?
Of course it does. Industry leading pay, industry leading profit sharing, industry leading work rules, industry leading benefits. What else is there?

It all depends upon whether you want to talk real facts or just internet hype. The internet hype is "ignore the billion+ in gains and let's just concentrate on the little stuff". Okay, other than the 5 goals the us soccer team scored yesterday, they really didn't do anything big. In fact, if you ignore those goals, they lost 0-2. see how that works, now i get to say that team sucks because I just ignore the good things they did.

The real facts are that our health care is unchanged, if you are sick call in sick, go to a doctor and then deal with the paperwork. The vast majority of pilots will never even feel this new policy. Our scope is better not worse, more mainline flying, less DCI. The AF JV stuff is just invented crap trying to fool you, sounds like you have been fooled. Our work rules change, they always have. C2k had tons of work rule concessions. Look up negotiations in the dictionary, it doesn't include one side getting to make demands while the other shovels money in your face. This is industry leading in every possible way. After C2012, which you guys all mocked, the industry tried and failed to pattern up to us. We are already industry leading. For this united puke to talk about industry leading while still climbing on our backs as we pull him out of their hole is pretty funny. sounds like you have been fooled by him too.

You want to compare this contract to the perfect contract which will occur never. if you compare this to everyone else in the industry, no one is even close. that's raising the bar. how else would you define it?
Bananie is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 05:38 AM   #24  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Position: 7th green
Posts: 4,252
Default

Sadly, this is what "industry standard" pattern bargaining has come to mean. Its all "Corpspeak" for the race to the bottom.

You can thank pilot groups like (insert favorite ULCC here) for making the giant sucking sound your contract makes.
Packrat is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 05:56 AM   #25  
:-)
 
Mesabah's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Posts: 6,407
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bananie View Post

The real facts are that our health care is unchanged, if you are sick call in sick, go to a doctor and then deal with the paperwork. The vast majority of pilots will never even feel this new policy. Our scope is better not worse, more mainline flying, less DCI.
Adding more 76 seat jets is not a good thing. We have flights in high yield markets that depart two 76 RJ's within ten minutes of each other. This is the same as DCI having a 152 seat jet when you really think about it.
Mesabah is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 06:00 AM   #26  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Apr 2010
Posts: 394
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rube View Post
"After weighing the pros and cons of the TA, it is difficult to say if it actually moves the bar any higher. Instead, a compelling argument can be made that the bar will be lowered because the TA is rife with concessions in quality of life (QOL), healthcare, and possibly even job security. It might be a reasonable agreement if just the profit sharing formula was traded for higher hourly rates, but it is self-evident that far more than that was sold.

During this time of unprecedented airline profitability, it is puzzling why the DAL MEC opened early to only settle for a cost-neutral contract at best. There are valid arguments about the time value of money. However, these can be countered with equally valid arguments on the value of job security and QOL. The UAL MEC aims to get a briefing from the DAL Negotiating Committee if the TA passes membership ratification."


Yeah, actually, I do have a comment on that. This is a bloated populist statement, coming from the VC of Council 34, not the UAL MEC as the title pretends.

Job protections are actually enhanced with the TA - furlough protection is bumped to DOS, medical release is moved out of the CPO with one exception, mental health issues finally get the respect they deserve, and disability is less of a bite with the top-off. Absent the TA's passage, section 15 of the PWA includes the CPO. Yeah, the DHS is an AME, but he's not MY AME, and that alters the responsibilities of his job. Press to test, and let's go to court - they put it in writing.

One hour of TLV buys 15% credit and trip mix input from the RCC. If the company can't handle that, we nix the program.

QOL? We fixed reroute. I get home within 4 hours, or it's FUPM.

LCP OE trip drops? I never got them, never will, and the numbers show a good trade by my reckoning. 67 more reserves, out of 12,500 pilots? Since C2012 and the FAR 117 LOA, reserve has gone senior, in case anyone actually checked. It's a wash because it's industry standard anyway, and we would lose this one in mediation.

There is a time to buy profit sharing - it's schmuck insurance - and that is in the middle of a downturn like we did in LOA 46. There's a time to sell it back to the company, like we did in 1996 when we set the Delta Dot with B777 pay rates and an across-the-board six percent raise. The TA sells it back to the company at a better then 1:1 ratio.

The last downturn was in 2008. Go look at our profit sharing windfall for that year, and apply the proposed formula to it. Does anyone here doubt that the good times won't last forever? Downturns turn profit sharing into nothing, but at the same time, hard rates force the company back to the table when they desire a rebalance to Section 3. At-risk income takes no time, negotiations for LOA 46 took three years; you lock in the rates, and strap in for the ride.

PRASM, PRASM, wherefore art thou PRASM? Yeah, let's draw down Atlantic traffic, and shrink into a domestic market that's about to learn a hard lesson on capacity discipline, then wonder about variable income.

A UAL pilot should know that without the Delta Dot, there would be no UAL 2000 contract to form a pattern on. Selling profit sharing is how we got to the rates that define restoration for Delta pilots.

I think it's out of line for a rep to speak about another MEC this way. It creates unnecessary friction between unions that are expected to share objectives and resources. Cheap populism.
"you lock in the rates"

Cube rat - if the rates were locked in, how come they were higher over a decade ago?
texavia is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 06:11 AM   #27  
Gets Weekends Off
 
sailingfun's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mesabah View Post
Adding more 76 seat jets is not a good thing. We have flights in high yield markets that depart two 76 RJ's within ten minutes of each other. This is the same as DCI having a 152 seat jet when you really think about it.
On its own it's not a good thing but combined with the 1 for 2 swap with E190's and the 1.81 block hour ratio it's a easy choice.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 06:12 AM   #28  
Gets Weekends Off
 
sailingfun's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Posts: 14,940
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by texavia View Post
"you lock in the rates"

Cube rat - if the rates were locked in, how come they were higher over a decade ago?
One of the dumber questions asked on the forum.
sailingfun is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 06:22 AM   #29  
Gets Weekends Off
 
JetPilotMike's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: CRJ, CR7, A320, B737
Posts: 226
Default

Was UAL C2000 better than what DAL had? Probably the current UAL contract would be much better than it is if not for the roadblocks and SLI shenanigans of the CAL MEC and NC.
JetPilotMike is offline  
Old 07-06-2015, 06:26 AM   #30  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Bananie's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 115
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mesabah View Post
Adding more 76 seat jets is not a good thing. We have flights in high yield markets that depart two 76 RJ's within ten minutes of each other. This is the same as DCI having a 152 seat jet when you really think about it.
this is the same thing you said in 2012, or about 1700 new hires ago. At some point you have to give this up, you lost that argument.
Bananie is offline  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Scope and the JCBA WatchThis! United 254 02-10-2013 06:07 PM
UAL DEN Vice Chair Letter sl0wr0ll3r United 114 11-22-2010 03:40 PM
CAL MEC Update Redeye Pilot United 92 10-19-2010 08:02 PM
NWA MEC Hotline RockBottom Major 0 01-07-2006 03:24 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:04 PM.