Whoa, ER - do you really believe EVERY random number thrown at you? The last TA was obviously sold very hard with dubious numbers to justify it. Even if a costing number comes from our own Union, you probably shouldn't trust it. Why? Because you obviously see they manipulate the number to get the desired response.

Remember FO IOE trip pulls? Union says: "it only affects 2% of FO's", and then they cherry-picked a category during the summer, when they were no longer doing training. It was totally unrealistic and not reflective of how the Company is intent on using that clause. The reality is that trip pulls directly and indirectly after a vast number of FO's (and therefore probably a third of all captains) and create huge complex swirls of secondary and tertiary knock-ons that are difficult to model. So ALPA doesn't. That doesn't mean it won't harm you, they just don't want to put a number on it.

Similarly, these AIP's, and the last TA, use nebulous costing numbers (that we can't see. Why? because it's proprietary), that slant information towards what they want you to think. Does ALPA admin and negotiators want you to second-guess them and make their job difficult by asking for more? No. they just want you to accept what they tell you. After all, they are the experts, right? You can be assured though that all of their "costs" on concessions are only run at face value, with no secondary or tertiary effects thrown in. Those numbers are very big, very scary, and would make you vote "no" immediately. But, understandably, those numbers would also be caveated by such a large "delta" of likelihood, that they are practically useless. And thus, you won't see them.

Which is too bad, because we almost always get sold on the "best case", 'cuz we are mission-oriented optimists, but strangely, despite our profession, ignore "worst case" scenarios when it comes to our own work rules, pay and career progression.

paradoxical pilots...

 

A perfect example of disinformation and/or misunderstanding and/or furthering a rumor run amuck.

Your quote: "Remember FO IOE trip pulls? Union says: "it only affects 2% of FO's" "

They said it was 2% of FO rotations not 2% of FO's. An important distinction.

Additionally, I put far more faith in the accounting from the ALPA Economic and Financial Analysis team (actual real accountants) than the shoot from hip accounting on here, Facebook or ChitChat.

There is a method for costing. It's not the Internet Rumor Method.

 

Ah, excellent correction!

Did I just find the author?

 

ERflyer has outed himself on this forum as MM when he was imploring us to vote "yes" for NA15.

Since he IDed himself here, I'll be happy to give you his name via PM. Until he stopped posting on chitchat, every single post begged us to accept any deal, as long as it had higher pay rates. He is right up there with Curly, Parker, and tsquare/JamesBond.

Here's just one of his threads from NA15. He only cares about pay rates. He has no concept of QOL. He must really hate being home.

http://www.airlinepilotforums.com/de...ml#post1920614

 

That was truly worthless information. 2% of FO rotations when looking back. What percentage of FO rotations in a few years when the training burden is vastly increased? When every category from 777A to 717B is turning over every few years? Ill give you a hint - its a lot more than 2%.

Choose your poison, internet disinformation or DALPA spin? At least with social media we get a lot more viewpoints some sage, some wacky, but at least we are getting more than 1 point of view.

Scoop

 

They also stated it would affect most FO's. The only effect 2% of FO's was a fabricated statement that took off on social media.

 

Agreed. Trial balloons that hopefully flame out. Basic negotiating. When the finished product doesn't have some of the "trial" items in it, it feels like a win....sorta. I really don't think either side wants another NO vote

 

That's not at all how it went down. Revisionist history.

 

Well that is what was on the PowerPoint slide used in the roadshow and the negotiations updates.

 

The power point is no longer up. Here is the summary from the NC. I said most which is incorrect. They used many.

Summary
Limiting OE/TOE rotation removal will likely have an impact on the line awards for many pilots. Like all parts of the tentative agreement, you should analyze this provision in context as part of the entire agreement.