Well, that would be a majority so I would say they did what the membership wanted if they took the raise. Or is your post mere flamebait?

 

I don't know how the negotiations went - it's just an idea of how the company might approach VB down the road. You said that that "domestic is chump change" - so perhaps the company sees that as well and has future plans for a VB. Look at SWA - they didn't get a raise to their TA to match Delta (after our TA came out). Their President said they would just reengage in a bit to give the company something they want in exchange for higher rates.

Of course we aren't SWA - but the company will do the math (and so will DALPA) and the MEC will vote in favor what is best for all the pilots. We really don't know what the VB will be like - I'm happy it's just a test. We will see what it's like, and if we don't like it, we can end the test.

I doubt it would go through MEMRAT - when was the last time we did MEMRAT on a contract change? But I think the MEC would put the language out for the pilots to discuss and provide feedback before they agree to it.

Not flame bait, just how it might come down the road in the future. Everything is a tradeoff. I really doubt the MEC would make changes to the VB that benefited the company a lot if there wasn't demand from the pilot or just compensation.

The potential problem comes from the company and the MEC thinking something is worth X, and the pilots don't agree (see Stand-up overnights).

 

Then I guess we agree. If 8000 said yes and 4000 said no, the ayes have it.

I personally put CDOs in a little different category. That is a safety issue. Personally, and I am talking about me, if we had CDOs and I got assigned one, I would call in fatigued as soon as I landed. I... and again I am talking about me, cannot operate like that... safely. Whole different animal. But if the group wanted them I would have to accept that.

 

Not to mention you have a 1-6 chance of being qualified on the airframe of the month.

 

I'm OK with VB as a 1 year trial but do have one particular concern with this program, and maybe I'm just being paranoid but here it is:

Suppose we go through the 1 year trial period and the company goes out of there way to soft pedal it and really highlights the value of it to the Pilot group. Minimal complaints, many happy commuters so we codify it into the PWA and it becomes permanent.

Well at this point the company starts to change how they implement it - all while remaining within the PWA. It now markedly affects Bid packages and not for the better. Well at this point we stuck with it.

Like I said - I am OK with VB but perhaps we should retain the ability to pull it down unilaterally because as pointed out above the company can implement it any way they want - slowly at first and then show its true colors after it becomes permanent.

We definitely do not want to hear - "We did not think that they would do that" regarding the VBs.

Scoop

 

When we codify it via a LOA which is required we simply retain the right to pull it down.

 

IF the LOA stipulated that. If after one year we are getting communications from our union that a LOA is being discussed, I will be the first to contact my reps to keep that provision in the LOA, and not just part of the initial one year test period.

 

Guys are saying that, but my bet is they will fly more after the raise. "Gee look how much more I can make this month with just a couple of white slips! " They'll tell themselves they're piling up cash so they can retire early, but they'll go to 65, or whatever the new max becomes. We're pilots, man. It's what we do.

 

I agree with Scoop's post and your comment above.

My fear is the company does as Scoop says and makes it a year of nirvana for the pilots and everyone loves it. But then the company insists on removing our right to pull it down in the replacement LOA. I hope we don't fall for it.

Hook

 

That has not proved to be historically true. The highest block hours per pilot were when our pay rates were lowest.