CX500T

Which is funny, because NYC had/has a lot of junior Captains that would have been furloughed. I was one of them. (Captain Pre/Post COVID, UNAd after losing 737 Captain slot and sent back to the 757/67 as a FO, furlough letter after that)

I will say, in the NY CA Reps positives, with me and others, when you have needed a Personal Intervention because the Company is doing/not doing something that is screwing up your life, he has been fantastic. NYC has kind of a bimodal distribution of Captains, tons of super junior guys (me, I'm a commuter, but can drive to NYC as it's the closest base) who unless they are local or local-ish bid out to the base where they can sit reserve at home (MSP is currently our most senior base) a few guys in the middle, and a butt-ton of super senior guys, many former NWA from the Boston base, that stay in NYC for the same reason I do.. Not gonna move to base, but it's an easy enough air commute, and can be driven in a pinch if needed. (215 miles 4:30 in current traffic Logan to JFK, for me 370 miles, 7:00 now, but usually 6 ish, less to EWR when I drive in the middle of the night) . That does kind of create a "hard for him to vote the way an overwhelming majority of NYC CA's want" and I get it, but the LOA for furlough prevention basically had zero long term or financial downsides, which made a lot of us scratch our heads. Keep in mind, a lot of us "super junior captains" who get reminded that "I couldn't hold CA anywhere until I was on property 13 years" were older than the complaining BommerCaptain was at 13 years on property when we were hired (lot of lost decade guys around my seniority, 5-7 years on property) this wasn't our first rodeo or "paying our dues". (it would have been layoff/company out of business #7 for me)

WearyEyed

Just ask Pat if there are no concessions and listen to his response. He’ll chop your head off for asking.

opt0712

If you were at the joint council meeting this past week he talked about the fact that the company had also wanted to go back into already TA'd sections, due to the more desperate staffing situation they were in when said sections were TA'd.

Further, I'd be ****ed too if all the hard work being put in was met with an automatic "I'm gonna vote NO, without even looking at it" like I've heard people say on the line. That's foolish. And I've yet to hear a good reason as to why they wouldn't even read an entire TA. I agree no concessions, but we owe it to the NC to at least read the TA in it's entirety then vote.

StarClipper

I intend to read the entire TA, but I like I’ve said in the past, the first CONCESSION I come across, my reading will stop and it an automatic NO VOTE. No need to read all if I’m voting no.

CloudSailor

Pat might tell you to expect a very easy (short) read.

And, I'm right there with you - a concession is an automatic NO vote. I'm not in any rush to agree to yet another subpar CBA for another 5-8 years. Be ready to hear the sales pitch: "time value of money".

Noworkallplay

I talked with another person from the NC at the PUB event a few months ago and I don’t get that jive from the NC. What I think is being said is that just because something changes doesn’t mean it’s a negative overall for us as crew members. I see a bunch of posters saying they want this or that changed. Yet when something changes they then say it’s a concession after we asked for changes in those areas.

Take a look at the openers document. We asked for changes in numerous areas that would take a different angles of attack on that item. Then when something is changed in that section we are going to say because it changed its a concession? Isn’t that what we asked the union to do in the surveys?

FrankTheTank

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Clearly you are not on our seniority list

StarClipper

Did we ask for a change in vacation?
Did we ask them to change the way we get AVA or Draft? “Makeup BLG before getting AVA or Draft”
If it’s wasn’t broken or we didn’t ask for it to change then why change it?
When you change things, it leaves new language to be interpreted to the company’s liking.
The reps are already trying to make excuses for their BS. Changes doesn’t mean negative overall my a$$. So it means negative to some extent, then I don’t want it.

FDX1

You’ll be waiting longer than your career has available to get that in a contract negotiation. What a bunch of foolish nonsense.

im sure the Company will be happy to take your “No” vote all the way to the bank in this era of cost cutting. Give them another year or two to get their financial health in order.

Putting your mad before your money. Fools.

Shaman

If anyone wants to know why certain people decry social media remember that he who controls the information controls the conversation. They don't want the rank and file knowing how the sausage is made. They believe in top down leadership. Command isn't concerned with what the conscripts desire. When a deal is made they will be assured its the best deal because THEY MADE IT. Then they will tell us how good the deal is. You cannot expect them to do anything else because that's all they know.


We just need to keep counsel with each other. Keep telling your colleagues we don't have to accept a concessionary agreement. Any change that materially effects our quality of life in a negative way is a concession. We do not need to accept "productivity improvements" in exchange for monetary benefits. The Delta contract is nothing more than a reference point. Like every other CBA in this industry from the commuters, to the pax haulers, to the other freight carriers every one has aspects that may be desirable to us.


What is your time worth? You aren't getting anymore of it.