Council 48 Update Quote
#1
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
"We are hearing unofficial reports that senior company officers have stated the value won’t change much when we reengage, but they are willing to rearrange the deck chairs."
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 439
Likes: 0
"We are hearing unofficial reports that senior company officers have stated the value won’t change much when we reengage, but they are willing to rearrange the deck chairs."
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
You also have pilots posting on here that "it was the concessions, not the money".
#3
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2015
Posts: 2,960
Likes: 0
From: Power top
I would think you could say, hey about $400m for China Eastern vs $450m and add 1% on the DC on 1/1/2016. Or did CE need that $450m for their pilot's retirement?
In other words, the productivity gains the company needs from us go to China Eastern, GOL, Skymark, XYZ. The retirement money you don't get from DAL goes to everyone under the sun.
Our beef isn't with the union, it's with our friend "Richard". Who calls their boss by his first name? Another charade.
In other words, the productivity gains the company needs from us go to China Eastern, GOL, Skymark, XYZ. The retirement money you don't get from DAL goes to everyone under the sun.
Our beef isn't with the union, it's with our friend "Richard". Who calls their boss by his first name? Another charade.
#4
I would think they baked that all in there. The way some yes voters explain it, they say they're willing to increase cost 2%, if you want an 8% pay raise we need staffing and scope concessions to make it fit a 2% budget and we will cost it out for you.
#6
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 1,537
Likes: 0
From: Downward-Facing Dog Pose
What I should've been saying is, "it's not just about the money" when addressing posts which are exclusively pointing at the money.
#7
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jul 2010
Posts: 12,823
Likes: 169
From: window seat
"We are hearing unofficial reports that senior company officers have stated the value won’t change much when we reengage, but they are willing to rearrange the deck chairs."
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
I originally said take 1.0B and put it all into pay only, no other changes or concessions. That would be a 100M gift back to the company, although we should ask for that to go to charity to make it even harder for them to say no.
We get a TA that avoids ALL the concessions and adds (according to sailingfun's numbers, which I believe to be roughly correct) 19.5% over 3 years, without any changes to PS. We can then offer them the same 6% PS trade and get 6% on top of that, for a far greater TVM raise than POS15 had including the PS trade, all without any concessions.
If they say that, we call their bluff.
#8
"We are hearing unofficial reports that senior company officers have stated the value won’t change much when we reengage, but they are willing to rearrange the deck chairs."
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
WE ARE PAYING $52 MILLION DOLLARS OF UNION DUES TO ALPA FOR THIS
No one is stupid enough to write something like this on purpose.
So what are their intentions??
#9
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2009
Posts: 3,108
Likes: 0
Don't fight it. Call their bluff.
I originally said take 1.0B and put it all into pay only, no other changes or concessions. That would be a 100M gift back to the company, although we should ask for that to go to charity to make it even harder for them to say no.
We get a TA that avoids ALL the concessions and adds (according to sailingfun's numbers, which I believe to be roughly correct) 19.5% over 3 years, without any changes to PS. We can then offer them the same 6% PS trade and get 6% on top of that, for a far greater TVM raise than POS15 had including the PS trade, all without any concessions.
If they say that, we call their bluff.
I originally said take 1.0B and put it all into pay only, no other changes or concessions. That would be a 100M gift back to the company, although we should ask for that to go to charity to make it even harder for them to say no.
We get a TA that avoids ALL the concessions and adds (according to sailingfun's numbers, which I believe to be roughly correct) 19.5% over 3 years, without any changes to PS. We can then offer them the same 6% PS trade and get 6% on top of that, for a far greater TVM raise than POS15 had including the PS trade, all without any concessions.
If they say that, we call their bluff.
Just my opinion, whether they do it on purpose or not the concessions are vastly undervalued.
Just one of many points, hiring going forward with TA, 50/month.
Hiring now that we rejected TA, 110-120/month.
This is the reality of the Shadow MEC doing the jobs math.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



