Hey Chuck,

How's Alpa nationals?

Your statement is misleading. The assertion made is forward looking and therefore unprovable. You are clinging to a TA that extended and added concessions.

Your defense of the indefensible is sad.

There was plenty of time to debate the last TA since it was produced so quickly. But Donatelli would never have allowed it. In fact, he blew a gasket at the first road show. We all know the tactics used by the last Chairman. Police, black shirts, etc.

Had MD allowed dissent, the TA never would have seen the light of day. And there's a good chance we'd have a contract right now. Look in the mirror Dalpa, this isn't North Korea.

At the time this was published the argument of avoiding 3B4 raises was a threat and outside of standard practice. Where would that threat originate? Would it be from management or the group pushing the TA?

The 3% is well known now and was not as well known by the entire pilot group at the time. The joint letter was accurate and informative. The calculation was based on the Jan. 1. Industry average calculation from 3B4.

If the source of this threat was management, it was passed on as fact and used to threaten the NO voters instead of being explained and vetted. If the source of the threat was our own MEC, then it is divisive and manipulative. Which is it?

Ok Chuck,

If not 8%, what was the value ALPA placed on the concessions for JV production balance, sick, LCA trip pulls etc? The rebuttal never assigned a number. Given the excellent foresight on 3B4, they must have seen JV being a huge value now that we are soon to own 49% of AeroMexico and have a board seat on China Eastern and GOL. Also an increased stake and credit backing facility with GOL guaranteeing their debt.

And the 1E9 debacle is truly evident. You were being lead by the nose by management. They fed you the arguments and you ran with it instead of doing your own due diligence. Then the MEC chairman (and the Yes voters) decided to go all in with the hard sell when the tough questions came.

What was the value of the concessions again?

That there is some incredible spin. You must have a part time job as JJs spinmeister.

Just admit it. The information put out in that Joint Comm was misleading and a fabrication. Because if your vote was determined by those fabrications, then you cast an uninformed vote.

Here's another misleading fabrication:

Joint Comm:

“Between the hourly pay increase and reduced profit sharing payout from 2016, the average pilot will realize a cut in total 2017 compensation of some 2% below his 2016 earnings under current PTIX projections, and his 2018 earnings will be only 1% above that of 2016.”

Rebuttal:

"This is a complete fabrication. Whoever wrote this is trimming the facts to fit their agenda. This faulty analysis fails to take into account the two past changes in pay rates in 2015 combined with the TA pay rate changes."

You would have earned increasing pay every year over the status quo with the TA, regardless of PTIX.

The pilot group as a whole lost $113.4 million in contractual value from July 1st-December 31st. We made 8% less for the last 6 months of 2015, therefore our slice of PS pie is smaller and when determining our FLT and Advance pay to enter into determining our February PS, well that's less too. IOW, we will have a smaller PS check this year. Oh yeah, I'm also making 14.5% less this year until we get another deal, whenever that may be.

Don't worry, the authors of the joint comm promised that they would immediately reengage. Going on 7 months now without a pay raise and counting.

Those valuations you are talking about that offset the pay were a fabrication. Not at all produced by ALPA. At the September special meeting, in open session, the author of the "it's really only 4%" admitted that he was using back of the napkin math on numbers that he figured himself. Not a single rep could explain how $113.4m over 6 months equals 4%. You were lied to, you apparently bought into the lie hook line and sinker, and then cast an uniformed vote. Bravo!!!

Our negotiating committee brought forward pretty close to what the non contracts received. But over 3 years. The TA looked like management wrote it. So the majority voted no.

Why is last TA still a topic of discussion? It's dead and gone no matter which way you voted or why. How about the next one, any response at all from company yet??

I am still not getting answers.

What was the value, if any ALPA assigned to the concessions?

Who requested the 1E9 language ALPA or management?

Who originated the threat of 3B4 avoidance ALPA or management?

Your refusal to answer speaks volumes. We are all aware of the 8% we are missing how much have we retained by not giving concessions? Is 3B4 still in effect?

The next meeting with the NC and the company is 29 January.

Scoop