Yes, yes it would. You can still pay your bills with their plan. Our 19 hour deal is less than unemployment.

Why was the union selling that turd to the pilot group? Would have failed if given a vote and no endorsement by the union

I'm not sure exactly what anyone else is thinking, but I felt like the MEC's position was that, for it to become obvious that more $$$ was needed, pilots had to be offered the 19 hour leave option and not take it in sufficient numbers that they'd have to come up with something better.

From my perspective, as the commuter situation continues to deteriorate, even 19 hours might look generous in a few months, depending on how bad things get. Keep in mind, around 60% of us are commuters. I know many people coming from tier 2 cities that aren't hubs that have essentially lost daily air service.

Their argument was that it didn't "cost" us anything. We didn't need to give anything up for it. I however argue, that by agreeing to it, we have potentially helped just enough that the company either won't come back for more or that they won't have to for much longer.

I dont like when we get things for only 10% of us. This is the same as our LOA issues two years ago that shuttled the PP's out leaving the rest of us on our own. Sure, I am happy that some of our pilots that can make 19 hours a month work get to stay home and be safe, but meanwhile I would guess the other 2000 of us get to wait patiently, always wondering if we are bringing back Covid to our families.

If it were me, I would have held out and asked for more. Virtually every other regional has a better offer than we do. Sure, Dera will chime in soon and say they gave up concessions, but what they had to give up wasn't a reduction in pay, it was a reduction in line hours, which even with the reduction, gives them higher values than most of ours.

In addition, they had to give up some OT stuff, but really who is wanting to fly OT if you are taking a PLOA? I think the union missed a big chance, but I also could be totally wrong. I sincerely hope I am as nothing would make me happier than the company coming back with a 50 hour PLOA.

I thought about that as well, but if that is true, it is pretty crappy to continue to expose us to higher risks. The better option would have been a flat out refusal or a pilot vote. Would send the same message except the company would have to come back to us sooner. We have essentially bought the company time, at our expense.

Anyone get their iPads yet from the buyback?

yeah, long time ago

Speaking of ipads, weren't we supposed to have the new mounts in the airplane by now?

What about the ones we returned and paid 135 to buy our old ones, did anyone get their old ipad back

from what i hear, you’re not getting the same ipad. You will get a random ipad, NOT the one you used to have.

That was not the deal specifically written in the company offer. I’m not saying they won’t screw us, but it specifically said you were getting your own iPad back.

they will lie to your face, nothing you can do about it.

Soo, we allowed to wear masks now but can't have beards?? I don't understand the logic. Won't wearing a mask inhibit the use of the "quick donning." Please correct me

The one I got has a small but very noticeable scratch on the screen that was not on the one I sent back.

yup a buddy of mine got one back, he said the battery dies way fast unlike the one he had before.

Why would you even want your ipad back? Did you leave your crap on it when you sent it in?

MY ipad was in excellent condition. I was lead to believe I would be getting MY ipad back.

That said, I knew I was risking a lie and decided to do it anyway. The small but noticeable scratch is not a killer thing for me anyway. The big deal would have been the battery and the battery on the one I got back seems to be good.

I got the one I sent. Confirmed the serial numbers.

Mine came back Friday. Same serial number I sent in.

Got my same ipad 2 weeks ago. Carved my initials in the back before i sent it in

So can we admit now that the 19 hour LOA agreement was a mistake? I mean come on, why in the hell did we even attempt to work with management? They have closed QT, canceled our training freezes, canceled upgrades for those awarded, "forgot" to mention to the schedulers about zero time lines and now have apparantly ceased all communication with our MEC.

Why do our MEC's always think the company is going to do the right thing? I just dont get it. They need to fight for every single inch and never assume that the company will honor anything, nor help us out in anyway shape or form that doesn't also benefit them. We should have thrown that stupid 19 hour LOA right across the table and walked out. Let them figure out how to save the company and come back with an industry neutral deal.

So frustrating. This is how it feels.
https://youtu.be/gk8NlRIZPIo

What are you talking about?
What was the company supposed to "honor" after the LOA?
You make it sound like company made some promises to us if we ratify it. Just FYI: There were no promises given, or expected.

Of that entire post you chose one word to point out. Think that means I’m onto something. The second paragraph was an all encompassing one, not “just” about this LOA.

We are all clearly aware there were no promises given on this LOA, but it did do exactly what I said it would do and that is stop them from negotiating for the rest of us. As predicted they are doing just that, with the added kick to the groin of shutting down our lock pay, qt and the rest I mentioned.

No you're not. You're just making stuff up in your head.

I think the status quo is not a bad place to be right now for the rest of us. Let's see what round 2 brings.

Even without the LOA, there would be no QT, no training freezes, and no CA pay for FOs. Just FYI.

Round 2? Didn’t you all just say they won’t even communicate right now?

The ironic part is, those jokers were telling us in the conference calls, the LOA, “wont cost us anything.” They seemed to forget about leverage.

Explain what I “made up”?

Status quo is great if you don’t mind exposing your family to higher risks of getting sick. Or if you can afford to live off less than minimum wage with the 19 hour deal.

I agree there wouldn’t be those things, but they would also still be negotiating for a better deal than 19 hours that would serve your entire pilot group, not just a sub section of them.

The fact that you think they have enough takers for this CSLOA just shows your ignorance on what's going on. There will be round 2. If not, then we won.

Exactly. They really were hung up on that part but failed to realize the obvious.

You just do you, ok. You do you. There's no point to argue with you because you have already made up your mind. It's just a shame you don't have any real information to support that.

Why doesn’t the union come out and tell us how many took it then so we can all rest easy knowing another round is coming, from a managment team that currently isn’t communicating.

Dera I know this is personal for you so I am going to walk away. I have stated my opinion many times and made it clear the company would behave just the way they have.

Time will tell and I sincerely hope I can come back on here sooner rather than later and admit how wrong I was.

Care to clarify? Enlighten us all on the information you have that makes this deal so great for the “majority” of the pilot group Until then you are digging in just as much as I am.

****, and I thought AIP week was bad.

You could count the number of pilots opposing this deal with your fingers. Majority was either "meh, who cares" or "ok sounds like a plan". The ones opposing this are the loud militant ones such as yourself, who think we had some magic "leverage" with this. We had a substantial number of pilots who were in a position to take this deal, and you want to deny this in hopes of getting your elusive deal that wasn't even on the drawing board.
Which one exposes pilots more to the risks? Denying this from everyone hoping they will come back immediately with a deal that is 2.5 times better because you believe so? Or giving this opportunity to a bunch of pilots, and seeing if it is enough? You need to run for a position if you believe you have the support for your POV.

It was offered to all 3 WO's in parity. PDT already ratified theirs before we did, and PSA didn't even have to discuss it. It's hard to have "leverage" when the others have already agreed to it.

Just so we all understand, there is no pilot leverage available for covid 19. Best case is maintain status quo. I dont like it, but covid is covid.

Have to call BS here. I personally know of more than that many people who emailed and said we thought it shouldn’t be taken. There were more than that many that grumbled at the call in and more than that many on this forum. Are you saying I ONLY know nine other people and those HAPPEN to be the ones that post on this forum and made the call in??

BS. Like I posted before, why doesn’t the union tell us exactly what the count was and how it was determined???

People seems to be more ****ed off about an LOA that is completely voluntary than losing 5hrs of pay and the list goes on-lemme catch my breath. Or am I miss something?

This didn't answer the question, how many accepted the deal? I hardly think I am militant. Do you just choose to attached this description to those who happen to disagree with your stance? I find it telling that someone arguing for the betterment of the entire pilot group is labeled that way by you and yet the company, the ones truly doing underhanded, dishonest things, you choose to defend their offer.

All of this information was known. What method did you use to accurately determine "majority"? Just because PDT and PSA accept it doesn't mean we have too. How would anyone know if there is a better deal out there if everyone agrees to the first one offered? Thats like negotiation 101, dont accept the first offer.

I know of a lot more than 5 people that disliked the deal and felt we should have held out for more.

Sure if you look at in simple terms of hourly pay, however there is another caveat to it and that is our health. The best case scenario would be to get a livable wage while allowing us to minimize our exposure to risk. The 19 hours doesn't do it for all but a small minority. The rest of us need to continue to expose ourselves and families to higher risks.

Yeah I am upset over that as well, but the language is the language as of now. If there is a violation the union will eventually file a grievance over it. That was a deal made long before this current MEC.