If it passes.. ?In time for payroll to process before EOY to include it in this years pay nad next Feb Profit Sharing would make me happy. As to "who" I don't know. Aren't we supposed to have the TA 45 days before we vote? Pretty long time in this era as the rules were invented before the internet. OFG

 

60 days reducible to 45 is the policy manual. They want it done by Dec 9th because there is substantial value to the pilot group in having the retro checks cut by 31 Dec. There seemed to be some implication there was something evil in speeding the process up.

 

I haven't made a decision on the AIP, and if I have implied that I have, I apologize. When I heard the pay rates, the lack of PS change, full retro and read the relatively strong list of ALPA-provided bullets on the AIP, I felt an internal pull to Yes...I sense that I was not alone. But as I read the full leaked document (which may or may not reflect what we'll vote on), I find myself having to justify a shift from an initial yes perspective...as opposed to reading with a completely neutral perspective.

Absolutely I'll wait for expert analysis and listen with a close ear. Unfortunately, my confidence in experts has waned a bit since watching many self-described experts got their forecast of this process (and the AIP) completely wrong. Overconfidence is a trait I see and exhibit too frequently, IMHO.

 

My confidence in the "experts" waned about 25 years ago and have been no reason to change my mind to the contrary since then................

 

Got it. No apology necessary. Just trying to have a civil discussion on how we arrive at decisions. I haven't read a word of the leaked document. Don't care to. I'm waiting for the full analysis, which always seems to provide details and consequences I didn't notice.

I have faith in our experts and advisors. I have faith in the process, even when some people violate the rules to derail the process. Being on the losing side of the last TA vote, I appreciate that the full power should rest with the pilots, who can be trusted.

2012 saw some crying "Manipulation!" because the results weren't what they wanted. We heard the same claims in 2015, but those same people were pleased with the results. I think a nearly identical process yielding a different result should strengthen our faith in the way things are being done, and the trustworthiness of the pilot group in these decisions.

Me too! Good thing we're trained to overcome it.