The calm before the storm
07-24-2019, 05:03 PM
#11
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2014
Position: Semi-Retired...
Posts: 3,137
Originally Posted by EnyFlyr
FO’s broke even, they are taking away the retention bonus. Do the math, comes out to about same.
07-24-2019, 05:16 PM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2014
Position: Semi-Retired...
Posts: 3,137
No 10 day posting requirement anymore prior to voting?
No more requirement for a pilot vote on significant CBA changes?
Since when would a 15% change and flow changes be minor changes not requiring 10 day posting and a pilot vote? You really want the precedent of changing flow without the pilots voting, or without winning an arbitration? Get your 50% of all new hires language back.
If I were still there, I’d appreciate the opportunity to vote no on their insufficient pittance offering. They’re bleeding Pilots. Knock off the bandaids.
Your mileage may vary
No more requirement for a pilot vote on significant CBA changes?
Since when would a 15% change and flow changes be minor changes not requiring 10 day posting and a pilot vote? You really want the precedent of changing flow without the pilots voting, or without winning an arbitration? Get your 50% of all new hires language back.
If I were still there, I’d appreciate the opportunity to vote no on their insufficient pittance offering. They’re bleeding Pilots. Knock off the bandaids.
Your mileage may vary
07-24-2019, 05:17 PM
#13
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2017
Posts: 41
Originally Posted by Naviator
The article said up to 15% so this is the max we will get paid. Senior CAs on the higher pay band will get paid more than PSA, everyone else, NOPE!
I’ve attached the current hard rates for your review.
07-24-2019, 07:34 PM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,465
Originally Posted by Cujo665
No 10 day posting requirement anymore prior to voting?
No more requirement for a pilot vote on significant CBA changes?
Since when would a 15% change and flow changes be minor changes not requiring 10 day posting and a pilot vote? You really want the precedent of changing flow without the pilots voting, or without winning an arbitration? Get your 50% of all new hires language back.
If I were still there, I’d appreciate the opportunity to vote no on their insufficient pittance offering. They’re bleeding Pilots. Knock off the bandaids.
Your mileage may vary
No more requirement for a pilot vote on significant CBA changes?
Since when would a 15% change and flow changes be minor changes not requiring 10 day posting and a pilot vote? You really want the precedent of changing flow without the pilots voting, or without winning an arbitration? Get your 50% of all new hires language back.
If I were still there, I’d appreciate the opportunity to vote no on their insufficient pittance offering. They’re bleeding Pilots. Knock off the bandaids.
Your mileage may vary
Mad.
07-24-2019, 07:40 PM
#15
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Position: Resigned
Posts: 1,547
If the CA pay is as bad as initial indications suggest, nothing would’ve been better. At least then we’d have the implicit leverage of being the lowest paid regional airline pilots. Hilariously though, the people complaining loudest on the line are the same ones who were saying “meh we should’ve taken whatever they offered, union asked for too much.” Really sad they listened to these guys, who were always a vocal minority.
07-24-2019, 08:41 PM
#16
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jun 2019
Posts: 46
Originally Posted by NoValueAviator
If the CA pay is as bad as initial indications suggest, nothing would’ve been better. At least then we’d have the implicit leverage of being the lowest paid regional airline pilots. Hilariously though, the people complaining loudest on the line are the same ones who were saying “meh we should’ve taken whatever they offered, union asked for too much.” Really sad they listened to these guys, who were always a vocal minority.
07-24-2019, 09:14 PM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 128
Do you guys not understand pay banding? I see so many complaints that only the most senior guys will get the biggest benefit. It’s not that the union sold everyone down the river, but the contract has had pay banding for at least 5 or 6 years maybe more. Expecting the company to say ******* it to pay banding and pay everyone large rj rates is not reasonable. I get the frustration but I just assumed people knew what pay banding was, it seems like this is the first time people are hearing about it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
