At least we don't have PBS! Oh wait, we do.
02-07-2019, 06:44 PM
#21
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2018
Posts: 95
Alternative to our Secondary (PBS) bidding system 75CA example - take all open trips after 1st round bidding that were dropped due to MIL, VAC, CIC, etc, and create 78 actual secondary lines. These lines can have minimum requirements (restrictions on reserve days per line or any other beneficial limitations or minimums FOR US). With all of the open time typically available, international lines can be created (or out and back lines, or hub turns, or RSV, or whatever) Then, after publishing these ACTUAL lines, we can have an ACTUAL seniority based secondary bid that is open and transparent.
If there are still a few uncovered trips, they will be most likely be snapped up by PNP or MKU or whatever who cares they'll be covered..
No more SLG shafting.
No cuts, no butts, no coconuts.
Tell me I'm wrong. DR K
If there are still a few uncovered trips, they will be most likely be snapped up by PNP or MKU or whatever who cares they'll be covered..
No more SLG shafting.
No cuts, no butts, no coconuts.
Tell me I'm wrong. DR K
02-08-2019, 08:57 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 767 Captain
Posts: 3,988
Originally Posted by MEMFO4Ever
And ratified by a plurality in accordance with the C&BL. So what.
02-09-2019, 06:19 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 1,622
Originally Posted by Adlerdriver
So, I'll bet a lot of the folks who now see the reality of CBA 2015 might reconsider just how valuable that "time value of money" really was. Because we gave up quite a bit for it, IMO when we shouldn't have been giving up much of anything. That ship has sailed but I can't help but wonder now and then how many people complaining about it now helped make it so.
To the new hires (post 2015 hires), DON’T LET YOUR CAREER GO DOWN IN FLAMES WHILE HAVING VOTER REGRET. You and your peers will have a large voice in the next contract. Get educated and get involved now. Your career depends on it. Don’t let this flying job become a stepping stone to other airlines. Fly your line.
02-09-2019, 08:39 AM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 936
Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox
It’s amazing how you can’t find a YES voter — yet everyone agrees how bad we were hoodwinked.
To the new hires (post 2015 hires), DON’T LET YOUR CAREER GO DOWN IN FLAMES WHILE HAVING VOTER REGRET. You and your peers will have a large voice in the next contract. Get educated and get involved now. Your career depends on it. Don’t let this flying job become a stepping stone to other airlines. Fly your line.
To the new hires (post 2015 hires), DON’T LET YOUR CAREER GO DOWN IN FLAMES WHILE HAVING VOTER REGRET. You and your peers will have a large voice in the next contract. Get educated and get involved now. Your career depends on it. Don’t let this flying job become a stepping stone to other airlines. Fly your line.
02-09-2019, 07:54 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: Excessed WB Capt.
Posts: 1,063
I was a no voter. Come to think of it it’s been along time since I voted yes. The company will only sign a TA if it means they are making money off of it. They have tons of guys with masters degrees that sit and account for every dotted i and crossed t. We will NEVER beat them. I’ve been waiting awhile and it’s never happened. Like not even in one area of the CBA is the company surprised how it’s interpreted or enforced by an arbitrator. Keep your head down. Stay senior and retire. It’s your only real option.
02-10-2019, 11:19 PM
#28
Proponent of Hysteria
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 3B
Posts: 1,052
Originally Posted by Huck
24.5 % of 757 captain lines are VTOs.
78 VTO lines
318 total lines
78 VTO lines
318 total lines
The point is that only 62.3% and 66.3% respectively are regular line holders. I doubt very seriously if anybody in the NC or the pilot group who voted for this contract figured those numbers would have turned out this way.
I point this out to demonstrate the absolute inability of this union to negotiate language that the company can't find a way around to its advantage. There is no way we we can negotiate a conversion to the variable pension scheme without suffering similar disadvantages after the ink is dry.
02-11-2019, 03:07 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2012
Posts: 711
Originally Posted by FXDX
Yes I stand corrected. I meant to say that 37.7% of the 75 CA and 33.7% of the 75 FO lines are either secondary or reserve, which is even worse than secondary (for most people).
The point is that only 62.3% and 66.3% respectively are regular line holders. I doubt very seriously if anybody in the NC or the pilot group who voted for this contract figured those numbers would have turned out this way.
I point this out to demonstrate the absolute inability of this union to negotiate language that the company can't find a way around to its advantage. There is no way we we can negotiate a conversion to the variable pension scheme without suffering similar disadvantages after the ink is dry.
The point is that only 62.3% and 66.3% respectively are regular line holders. I doubt very seriously if anybody in the NC or the pilot group who voted for this contract figured those numbers would have turned out this way.
I point this out to demonstrate the absolute inability of this union to negotiate language that the company can't find a way around to its advantage. There is no way we we can negotiate a conversion to the variable pension scheme without suffering similar disadvantages after the ink is dry.
02-11-2019, 05:06 AM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2019
Posts: 447
Originally Posted by FXDX
Yes I stand corrected. I meant to say that 37.7% of the 75 CA and 33.7% of the 75 FO lines are either secondary or reserve, which is even worse than secondary (for most people).
The point is that only 62.3% and 66.3% respectively are regular line holders. I doubt very seriously if anybody in the NC or the pilot group who voted for this contract figured those numbers would have turned out this way.
I point this out to demonstrate the absolute inability of this union to negotiate language that the company can't find a way around to its advantage. There is no way we we can negotiate a conversion to the variable pension scheme without suffering similar disadvantages after the ink is dry.
The point is that only 62.3% and 66.3% respectively are regular line holders. I doubt very seriously if anybody in the NC or the pilot group who voted for this contract figured those numbers would have turned out this way.
I point this out to demonstrate the absolute inability of this union to negotiate language that the company can't find a way around to its advantage. There is no way we we can negotiate a conversion to the variable pension scheme without suffering similar disadvantages after the ink is dry.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
