Really just some personal thoughts...

-United rates on ALL jets + a percent or 2. AND NO, NOT PAYING FOR IT WITH PS, OR USING TOTAL COMP AS THE METRIC!!!(Because of their paybanding, will that create "unequal" increases and do you think we are discussing banding also?
-Real improvements in per diem, training/vacation day pay.
-Will accept minor "adjustments" to company "needs" ie sick, bidding, alv etc. Certainly not on the scale of TA15. Our advances must dwarf any company "gets"
-If company wants PS changes, it must be done outside of UA rates and be a real winner for us.

Bottom line is we will never accept a TA that doesn't exceed United BOOKRATES AT SIGNING OR AT ANY POINT IN THE CONTRACT. CERTAINLY THE COMPANY KNOWS THIS AND IS PREPARED TO NEGOTIATE WITH THIS REALITY?!?!? I know we can't cherrypick and we must look at the TA in its totality, but clearly we must be industry leading in most of the important areas of workrules, benefits, etc. Based on my first statement above, we need close to 20% at signing and then 4 to 5% minimum per year. And the other stuff as well. Thoughts???

 

Your numbers are off a bit. If you only want 1 to 2% above UAL on all equipment the overall cost to the company would be less then the failed TA. The 757 payraise which is still a huge part of our fleet would not even get a double digit raise. The only aircraft that would be at the 20% you mention would be the 767-400 and A330. Overall everything you want is probably doable for the same cost as the failed TA.

 

Thought...

Your mins are lower than mine.

But that's OK they are yours. If that's the aggregate mins, we will have to live with it. Personally I'm not in a hurry or see a reason to amend C2012 without a lot more. Sustainable record profits means sustainable RESTORATION, to include a retirement equivalent.

 

The failed TA rates included a PS trade and numerous concessions. Please forget about the failed TA.

He also said 20% day one with 4-5 each per year. That is about 30% keeping PS, the failed TA was about 15% after the PS trade, not even close.

Scoop

 

I have said this before and I will say it again. I need a PENSION. A rock solid, unable to retract tool to give us at lease 60% FAE or ok, 50%..

I became an airline pilot to enjoy my days off; instead I am more focused on what to do with my money or lack of money to ensure a comfortable retirement. I am not a financial analyst, stock guru or a person that can predict what the big institutions are going to do. No matter what I think I know, I will never ever be able to perfectly time the markets to achieve a solid 60% FAE on my own. The Big Money has control of that and god forbid on my 65th birthday, they decide to sell.

It is time to bring back a program that ensures and guarantees 60% FAE to us. Plain and simple.


TEN

 

We're gonna hear about the failed TA forever. These guys can't accept defeat. All you'll hear are comparisons as soon as the next one is made public.

 

He said he wanted 1 to 2% above UAL rates and believed that number to be 20%. It's not.

 

The dollar cost of the failed TA will be a factor regardless of your feelings on the issue. It's interesting to see pilot positions dropping so much lately on a new TA. 1 to 2% above UAL is well below what I want and again less overall cost then the failed TA. The company would be happy with that.

 

 

Well I guess I'm mistaken. I thought United rates were all close to 17 to 18% above ours. Clearly United plus a few is a minimum floor but 20% sounds better.