That is certainly a change from forum sentiment a year ago. Everyone said that management was desperate for a agreement and the only reason TA15 was not vastly better was a MEC corrupted and in managements pocket. All we needed was to show a little resolve and they would throw money at us because they had to have a agreement and we had huge leverage.

 

If you can show where I posted that, I'll acknowledge it. I don't think you will.

The claim is that we have doubled the value of the failed TA. I have no idea if this is correct. My judgement of a TA will not be on the multiple of a failure but on RESORATION. I suspect that we have increased our leverage or the company wouldn't offer twice the previous value. That however is with several sections to go and an undefined profit sharing grab. The only reason the TA was not better was because the previous MEC was not willing to fight for more. They took the easy way out and defended it with a TVM argument. There is no set timeline and your desire for one doesn't change that fact.

 

Well again what you post now is different then the forum sentiment a year ago. I have no idea where you come up with double the value of the failed TA. We have AIP's on less then 1% of the value in the contract. Managements table position on pay rates are 1% higher over the TA. The signing bonus was over 100 million and easily covers that 1%. At this point we are pennies ahead of TA15.
I voted no on the TA however I did so expecting us to reengage the company ASAP, clean up the objectionable items and have a new TA in under 60 days. We could have easily accomplished that and produced a TA that will be within 2% of what we will eventually settle on be it next month or 3 years from now. We would have been starting preparations for the next contract this spring and exchanging openers in 18 months. In the end that approach would have produced more value for the pilots.

 

The 2x is what I was getting from the forum banter. I know the reps and negotiators haven't put out anything official. You are correct about the "what if," that could have been the case had there been a continuity of leadership. The failure was so complete that the MEC chairman resigned and the members replaced several reps. Had C44 not conducted the recall meeting the way they did in an effort to stay in power we would be 3-4 months ahead of where we are. That's water under the bridge. I understand your frustration given your expectation.

Your argument justifies more now due to the delay. All of this is highly dependent on management accepting the reality that we are no longer in bankruptcy and in fact have exceeded all other industry standards for profitability over the last 3 years. When they realize there is a return due, is when we will get a deal.

 

100% agreed. Anyone found guilty of the last two should be immediately recalled then given a blanket party in the parking lot. The people they represent are raising families, buying houses, paying for college, planning for retirement etc. They were elected to protect and increase the value of this career. The political bs needs to be gone asap.

 

I assume by everyone you mean "one" of the more prolific posters on Chit Chat. But just in case I am mistaken, which occurs often, please refresh our memory with the names of the frequent APC posters that said this.

I do remember guys posting that management wanted an early deal, but "desperate for and agreement?" We should be so lucky.

Scoop

 

You don't remember the new TA in 48 hours posts? The new TA in two weeks posts? The new TA by the amendable date posts? The new TA before the busy summer season posts?

 

Yes, I remember. But who made those posts? A small minority of people who post here or the majority of us as you have suggested? I don't really know, but my guess is was the former.

I am positive I've never posted we'd have a fast deal, it makes no sense. We are a business expense to management; nothing more and nothing less, despite their empty rhetoric about "best pilots in the industry" BS. I'm not saying we can't make gains in a contract negotiation, but if costs go up significantly without anything in return then why would they ever agree? It would be like asking management if they want to pay $2.00 per gallon of fuel or $4.00 for the "best fuel in the industry". Fortunately unlike gasoline, pilots can take definitive actions to help encourage the company to change their tune a bit. It is my opinion that if we want the deal we deserve, then we won't get it until either profits or the stock price suffer as a result of our actions.

I believe the only road to a relatively fast deal will have sections that include unsavory bits that would make it difficult to pass. I haven't seen the surveys so I can't claim to know the will of the pilot group. The company and ALPA need to win over the 'middle third' swing voters like me. I won't lie over and play dead like the yes voters on TA15 did, but I also don't require restoration+.

In another post before the NMB put us in timeout somebody posted a rumor of 17/4/4 with ZERO concessions and I said something to the effect of "don't tease me" to which somebody else immediately ridiculed. In 3 years we'll wish we had 17/4/4 to tide us over as we fought among our ourselves and with management while earning an additional 0/0/0. EDIT: not that I think the company will give us something for nothing without us applying significant pressure.

 

Uhhh...no? Kind of like "Are you still beating your wife?" - It's a poor, leading question. The narrative that the NMB is punishing anyone is false IMHO. NMB sees two positions far enough apart that chipping away at them slowly if at all is assessed to be fruitless without significant change by one or both parties. They're doing the exact job we jointly petitioned them to do. The transparency being demonstrated by the MEC makes this timeout a productive one for us while pilots assess our status and communicate our wishes (in light of the company's reluctance to yield to our limited pressuring so far) to our reps.

Will more pressure be possible, will it have the effect we want, and will the resulting deal be worth the wait? My personal guesses are yes, yes and yes. And if I'm completely wrong, I won't regret the sacrifice I'll have made if for no other other reason than to register my objection to corporate greed. Many before me have given much more for much less.

 

I think they'd be happy with the current position for another 9 months. Uncertainty about what will happen with sick leave is leveraging extra productivity, they've made some gains on training throughput to help with manning, and pilots are jumping all over themselves to fly green slips - especially with the prospects of full retro being possible. But as next summer approaches, increased retirement rate looms, a signing bonus starts to look more likely than retro and the fleet becomes more complex with undetermined pay rates and a chance for street captains..."We'll just keep what we've got" will be heard more on our side than ours. JMHO