Fflllooooowwwwww.......
 

We gave in for flow again it seems.

We gave up opportunity for industry leading pay.

We gave up opportunity for quality of life increases.

But we'll flow just a shade faster (3 months) to help management with their sales tactics to new hires. :rolleyes:

:mad:

We never had that opportunity. The pay rates were set in stone before they started negotiating.

Honestly, if we're going to sell our selves to flow, I'd rather see something not tied to hiring rates per month such that when AA has a dry month (like August this year) it doesn't slow the flow.

:mad:

Is that the only thing you can pick on? Surely YOU have something better to say than that.

:mad:

Like what the union said we would NOT do? Yeah.

With zero facts available about the deal, it's kinda hard to say anything.
You're blowing a fuse over something we really know nothing about.

Give it a day or two and let's see what the numbers are.

Fact one: Pay to June 1.

AIP was pay to May 15th.

:mad:

AIP had backpay for 1 month. This one has almost 2 months of backpay. Maybe they made a compromise over something?

I haven't seen the AIP, neither have you. And I haven't seen the new deal, neither have you.

Let's wait and see.

Sure thing dera...

Any other management spin you want to put on it while you're at it?

:mad:

I do agree with dera on this.

I also agree, we could be making something out of nothing.

At the end the chairman stated it’s a new chapter of how management is acting towards us in a positive ,anger and to forget the past, I think some posters in here are from the bankruptcy age and have zero trust in management, but if the chairman of the union is stating that, let’s try and trust management, maybe they finally realized that the past ways is not effective especially after the AIP deal, so let’s just see what happens


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Well, technically the by-laws require posting for 10 days before voting.
Requires posting of special meetings at least 24 hours in advance (traditionally by email to all members and bulletin board in the MEC office)
If it is substantial changes it requires a pilot vote. Now, according to the ALPA lawyers the MEC determines what “substantial” means; however I’d say changes of up to 15% is substantial. Further, flow has never ever been changed by MEC vote. It’s always been by pilot vote or the result of arbitration award or settlement. This sets a bad precedent. Next to a 15% pay change and flow change... what else would be more substantial than that? The by-laws are there for a reason.

They are bleeding pilots and the MEC keeps passing band-aids. Use it to get your 50% of all new hire positions language back. Call the MEC office and demand your right to vote on substantial CBA changes. (817)685-7474
Then vote no until they give back what they stole. Get your raises and your 50% flow back, but for everybody. They want withholding to 29 for temporary tight staffing due to training bubbles, fine... but require them to show at least 50% flow by the end of each year.

The change to flow last year was by MEC vote.

Wasn’t that a grievance settlement....
Was there more than one change? Thought I read it was a grievance settlement?

The MEC doesn’t typically vote on grievance settlements.

The points are all still valid. By-laws exist for a reason.

I think it was less of a grievance settlement and more of an agreement to withdraw grievances and an agreement that the company can meter to 50%.

But I guess that’s just splitting hairs.

I am concerned that the union just accepted the deal that the company proposed without a counter. Certainly sounds that way to me. Literally nothing from the original AIP was included beside the pay increase. From the information we have now I am disappointed.

This is where I am. Should have held the line for AIP.

:mad:

While I agree, I am sure that they were put in a no win situation. The company clearly screwed up with the AIP. So what are the unions options? They could sue. If it made it though the federal courts (which would be years) then there’s a chance that they could win. More than likely they would end up settling, which would be less than the AIP.

Or they can go back and negotiate a smaller deal with the goal to continue to make gains. Let’s not forget that this isn’t section 6 and the company and the Association seem to do everything via LOA.

Knowing how people voted, and the details of the LOA are important to see in the very near future. ALPA has to post the minutes for transparency.

I agree with you. But it was an LOA voted on by the MEC to get increased flow and other items. In the LOA included the requirement to withdraw the flow grievance.

Forgive my ignorance, but isn’t the union supposed to keep its members in the loop on what’s happening with important things like contact change negotiations? Seems like a periodic email to the pilots would be in order as things develop. Details can’t be shared of negotiations, but a general update would help, right? How does that work for you guys??

So we can melt down twice!:mad:

We aren't in contract negotiations. more than likely the company said take it, or get

then tell them we'll get _____ until they run out of new hires. Envoy's reputation was circling the drain.

From the MEC email last evening - long call and other reserve changes where included in the company’s framework communique from the weekend. It is a bit vague in the email, however it seems to me that the company later provided a comprehensive proposal that was approved Tuesday night.

Hopefully that means in the next week we can review the actual language.

That’s what a grievance settlement is. Withdraw the grievance in exchange for something.

In this case there was no grievance pending and there is no section six.

They are saying big changes to the reserve rules including long call; new pay rates with up to 15% changes, and changes to the career flow thru program.

If those aren’t “significant” changes to the CBA I don’t know what ever would be. Per the by-laws Significant changes is what triggers a pilot vote over a simple MEC vote. The last time reserve rules were in the table all by itself it was to be a pilot vote. I do not see how adding even more to it can then be done without a pilot vote.

So it was a settlement of a grievance... done in LOA format. That isn’t unheard of.
Negotiating significant changes outside of section six and outside the grievance resolution process without a pilot vote is different.

So what would be the recourse?

I've now seen a few people reference reserve rules as being a part of this. The email I read said management intended to continue discussing reserve rule changes. Is there another message I'm missing?

:mad:

Once again, we are left in the dark by our union. Does anyone have hard and accurate information regarding this deal? The way it seems as of now is pretty lackluster without all the details.

I’ve lost track, is this the 10th time, or the 11th time they’ve “announced intentions to discuss changing RSV rules”?

This is what I mean. People are saying this is more than just pay raises and reference reserve rules. The only thing in that email I see regarding reserve rules is along the lines of "we're gonna talk about it".

What we got as far as I can tell:

-Pay raises. No, I have not seen the details but I'm guessing they're in line with Piedmont.
-A small group of pilots will flow a little faster. Some of us will benefit as much as 3 months. Some not at all.
-Sim check airman get a higher monthly guarantee.

Did I miss something?

:mad:

The way I interpreted the email is as follows, although I absolutely could be wrong.

This weekend, Envoy management transmitted to your MEC a Protocol Agreement... Finally, the company included its intent to continue discussing reserve changes that would include a long call system.

I interpret this that the company sent over an outline with pay, flow, training center, and reserve.

After several days of extensive negotiations and back and forth discussions, the company made a formal proposal...the MEC agreed to implement the terms of the company's proposal.

I interpret this as saying that after negotiations, the outlined changes discussed above were finalized without language.

...was spent with members of Envoy management finalizing contract language.

To me, it sounds as if once the finalized language is published, it will include the rates, flow language, and hopefully the new reserve rules.

I could be wrong, and absolutely agree this sounds vague but that is the way I interpreted the MEC brief.

I read this as they said they’re still willing to talk about it, but that the proposal was limited to pay and the small flow adjustment.

Yeah it felt like here is the money part, we will get back to you on qol stuff later.

Reserve rules and LOA’s were in 2015 and again in 2017, and now their written intent to negotiate in 2019. None ever passed or made to a pilot vote. Either the company or union always backed out.

Each and every time it’s been their genuine intent to negotiate positive changes to the reserve system.

It will never happen while the MEC continues handing them bandaids.

They aren’t giving you this because you deserve it. They are giving the absolute minimum they have to in order to keep a sufficient number of new hires coming in the door.
You finally have leverage. Don’t waste it. Call your LEC reps. Have them tell the company the same as the company did to them on the AIP... we’re sorry, it turns out this is a significant change requiring a pilot vote. Pull it back from them the way they did to you. Then vote no.

This is your opportunity. The opportunity here is to get back the full 50% of all AA new hire positions language for everybody in addition to the raises and decent reserve rules.

"Get back"?
You know that ship has sailed, right? With two other players in the flow game, the 50% is not gonna happen. The 50% was never part of the current contract for pilots who joined after DOS.
I mean, wasn't it you who gave it away?

Oh man... would I LOVE this!

:mad:

It's a good idea actually. :mad:

We could use more guys like you at the top, Cuj. It’s been nothing but bandaids for so long now. This place misses you, man.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

All those emails with tough talk from the union and this is what they settle for. Embarrassing