|
I think a lot of the No voters are looking at this deal and comparing it to what used to be. I can appreciate their desire to have their pension back, that is not the reality in which we currently exist.
The environment that we negotiate in (RLA) is designed to protect companies, not us. When times are good we will only be allowed to negotiate to what our peers have not matter the profitability of the company. When times are bad we are forced to negotiate to the financial position of the company no matter what are peers are doing. It's a rigged system that makes it pretty much impossible to "win". This deal is a fair deal. No one is jumping up and down saying we won, but I'd rather hang my hat on this one and see this thing turn into a (insert regional airline here) 5-6 year process where you are guaranteed to lose. |
Originally Posted by trustbutverify
(Post 2232575)
I don't do chit chat but I see a lot of posts decrying the toxic nature of that place, presumably attributed to the "no crowd".
Take a look at Elliot's little master piece. A bunch of false bravado and own crank stomping. The civil thing to do would be to apologize to Free Bird, but I'll bet he doesn't because that's not in his DNA. Trust, Elliot has received an infraction for his post which by the way would be considered a polite and restrained interaction on Chit Chat. We can not monitor this forum in real time but if you see something that seems over the line then report it via the red triangle on the left of each post and it will be quickly evaluated. Thanks Scoop |
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 2232449)
After quite a few posts here recently, I have come to one general thought on the differences between the yes and the no voters.
No voters and the ones leaning that way look at this TA and compare it to what they think we should have and see a minus. Yes voters and the ones leaning that way look at this TA and compare it to what we currently have and see a plus. IMO, when considering the pros and cons of this TA, one should be comparing it to what we currently have. Not an esoteric version of what should be. Denny The Yes voters are comparing this TA to the last TA. |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 2232657)
Denny, I think the No voters are comparing the TA to our current contract (at least I am).
The Yes voters are comparing this TA to the last TA. |
Originally Posted by satchip
(Post 2232657)
Denny, I think the No voters are comparing the TA to our current contract (at least I am).
The Yes voters are comparing this TA to the last TA. |
Originally Posted by 80ktsClamp
(Post 2232661)
It's over simplistic IMO to do either. I look at both our current contract as well as the failed TA. This is significantly superior to our current contract and magnitudes of that better than the failed TA.
|
QOL, how's it getting worse. I can't see it changing. This is no home run, but you can still have Mac and cheese, a PBR and Internet.
|
1 Attachment(s)
Originally Posted by Free Bird
(Post 2232475)
Well, it's all about you isn't it.
Lets pretend that from one year to the next Delta were to do the same amount of flying with the same number of airplanes. Pass this TA and it will require fewer pilots to do the same amount of flying. I would love to see the math on this if I'm wrong. Every contract since BK we have given productivity concessions. C2012 cost us something like 250 jobs, no idea on this one. Again, show me that this TA will not cost us jobs with VB, WB ALV increase etc. BTW, is the whole Princess thing necessary? You have no idea what I've been through. But I'm sure it makes you feel better so........... |
Looking at the above slide, if VB and TDY are discontinued (they are on a test basis) that would add 141 jobs back into the mix.
|
Originally Posted by ERflyer
(Post 2232720)
Looking at the above slide, if VB and TDY are discontinued that would add 141 jobs back into the mix.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:22 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands