|
Originally Posted by DirtyPurple
(Post 3630284)
Always staggering how differently each person hears the same broadcast. My NC speaks for me. I saw an exhausted and determined PM who has been getting pummeled on my behalf for the last couple years. His points seemed logical based upon what I know so far. I don't plan on being dazzled by any particular TA section to the detriment of another section. I need to see the entire document to evaluate the impact upon my family and my career going forward.
General statement: I understand there is no silver bullet regarding international scope. Period. No matter who disappointed I am with that statement, I don't see how blowing up a TA will fix this universal truth. Simultaneously, I'm not fearful that I must vote yes on this TA. I haven't read the document yet, so I honestly don't know what's in there. Both positions can coexist. Everyone is entitled to their opinion and subsequent vote obviously. I don't think other pilots who disagree with me are stupid. We are all coming from different paths and perspectives. But don't expect me to grab a pitchfork because of posts in all caps, with multiple exclamation marks, with logic that works in absolutes. Life doesn't work in absolutes from what I've observed. In the end, we may agree to disagree, and that's ok. I didn't realize I was part of an identified minority oppressed group, the hapless post-2015 hires. As always, I can only speak for myself. Any sweeping statement that attempts to include "all post-2015 hires" as a singular group can be wholly disregarded. This is the most logical and rational post I've seen on the scope issue. Thank you for that. Everyone upset about scope needs to read his post. And they need to listen again to PM's speech, especially from 20 minutes to the end. From PM's briefing: 20mins30sec: "Before we get into Scope I want to ensure you that the MEC is proactively looking at this agenda item this week and they're receiving full briefings from national and local subject matter experts. That said we've received emails citing concerns over scope in light of the company's public statements. The Negotiation Committee does not have the authority on our own to go and create a new priority for the pilots. The MEC must decide if there's a priority that's changed or a new priority that's entered into negotiations. That's the MEC's purview we do not have the authority to do that. However, this does not preclude us from crafting ideas and solutions that would have an immediate impact, a positive impact on the lower half of seniority." If you think they haven't addressed scope, or listened to your DARTs, you're wrong.26mins: "There's other options that we have aside from opening up a section that's been TAd. We've already done that. We've already had some initial discussions with the company. Because again, don't take this as we are discarding the concerns of the crew members who have been hired here since 2015. This system bid causes a lot of concerns and anxiety and it should from everybody that has been here since that point of time. Umm but what we want to say is that we have other items we can bring to the table that won't disrupt bargaining. That won't cause the company to pull sections that they've already TAd. We have other more immediate impact things that we can address with the company in light of this system bid, So system bid 23-01 where you're closing down one FDA domicile and two pilot bases, one specific MD11 base in ANC and the other in LA, so there's an awful a lot of senior pilots in those bases. Do you think for a minute that those senior pilots who have been on the MD11 for the past 25 years want to come train the 777 in Memphis? That's right, that's right they don't. So does it make sense to offer an avenue to let those pilots come off the top, and to retire early, maybe incentive and or remove obstacles to retirement in the discussion? Because the more pilots we can pull off the top of this mess right now that the company has created in 23-01, the better off the junior pilots will be. There are other things we can do in negotiations as well to deal directly with stalled career progression, or career progression that isn't materializing in the way that you'd imagined or envisioned two years ago or a year ago. And we've brought those issues to the table. So we have more actionable items that can be achieved quicker and in more sufficient manner to deal with the problems that a lot of pilots have identified, clearly identified through this corporate wide restructure, that we can deal with at the table. And we're going to move those issues forward. But we all have to kind of go together on this. We have to have the MEC support to continue to fight that fight and we have to stand together during this pretty trying time." 29mins: "The opinions matter. There's pilots concerned about, significantly concerned about scope and the direction this company has chosen to take in it's historic um network redesign. So we're not taking that lightly. We're not ignoring it. We're taking proactive measures to deal with it the best way we can that won't harm what we've put on the table."
Originally Posted by DaRaiders
(Post 3630293)
What other meaningful ways, outside of Section 1, are there to address scope?
I am thankful that we have PM at the helm of the Negotiating Committee. They've listened to the scope concerns and are actively addressing them without trying to derail TAd sections of the negotiations while still trying to get a deal on industry leading pay rates in an environment which has our company struggling and restructuring to keep up with our competitors. MY NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE SPEAKS FOR ME !!! |
Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox
(Post 3630398)
THIS ^^^^^ THIS ^^^^ THIS ^^^^ THIS ^^^^^ THIS
This is the most logical and rational post I've seen on the scope issue. Thank you for that. Everyone upset about scope needs to read his post. And they need to listen again to PM's speech, especially from 20 minutes to the end. From PM's briefing: 20mins30sec: "Before we get into Scope I want to ensure you that the MEC is proactively looking at this agenda item this week and they're receiving full briefings from national and local subject matter experts. That said we've received emails citing concerns over scope in light of the company's public statements. The Negotiation Committee does not have the authority on our own to go and create a new priority for the pilots. The MEC must decide if there's a priority that's changed or a new priority that's entered into negotiations. That's the MEC's purview we do not have the authority to do that. However, this does not preclude us from crafting ideas and solutions that would have an immediate impact, a positive impact on the lower half of seniority." If you think they haven't addressed scope, or listened to your DARTs, you're wrong.26mins: "There's other options that we have aside from opening up a section that's been TAd. We've already done that. We've already had some initial discussions with the company. Because again, don't take this as we are discarding the concerns of the crew members who have been hired here since 2015. This system bid causes a lot of concerns and anxiety and it should from everybody that has been here since that point of time. Umm but what we want to say is that we have other items we can bring to the table that won't disrupt bargaining. That won't cause the company to pull sections that they've already TAd. We have other more immediate impact things that we can address with the company in light of this system bid, So system bid 23-01 where you're closing down one FDA domicile and two pilot bases, one specific MD11 base in ANC and the other in LA, so there's an awful a lot of senior pilots in those bases. Do you think for a minute that those senior pilots who have been on the MD11 for the past 25 years want to come train the 777 in Memphis? That's right, that's right they don't. So does it make sense to offer an avenue to let those pilots come off the top, and to retire early, maybe incentive and or remove obstacles to retirement in the discussion? Because the more pilots we can pull off the top of this mess right now that the company has created in 23-01, the better off the junior pilots will be. There are other things we can do in negotiations as well to deal directly with stalled career progression, or career progression that isn't materializing in the way that you'd imagined or envisioned two years ago or a year ago. And we've brought those issues to the table. So we have more actionable items that can be achieved quicker and in more sufficient manner to deal with the problems that a lot of pilots have identified, clearly identified through this corporate wide restructure, that we can deal with at the table. And we're going to move those issues forward. But we all have to kind of go together on this. We have to have the MEC support to continue to fight that fight and we have to stand together during this pretty trying time." 29mins: "The opinions matter. There's pilots concerned about, significantly concerned about scope and the direction this company has chosen to take in it's historic um network redesign. So we're not taking that lightly. We're not ignoring it. We're taking proactive measures to deal with it the best way we can that won't harm what we've put on the table." Did you pay attention? Please take a deep breath. Turn off social media for the weekend. But please watch the speech again. I am thankful that we have PM at the helm of the Negotiating Committee. They've listened to the scope concerns and are actively addressing them without trying to derail TAd sections of the negotiations while still trying to get a deal on industry leading pay rates in an environment which has our company struggling and restructuring to keep up with our competitors. MY NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE SPEAKS FOR ME !!! |
Originally Posted by threeighteen
(Post 3630243)
Hear hear. I’m glad I’m not the only one that was ****ed off about the tone in which the need for job security for post 2015 hires was disregarded.
Looking forward to reading a TA, and probably voting no. Will be happy to change my mind and vote yes if it’s excellent and what we deserve, but I know it’s not likely because our ask in too many areas was either too low or completely nonexistent. Pat said “don’t expect to vote no on a TA and see another one in short order” which couldn’t be further from the truth of what’s going to happen. The reality is, we’re not going to see a TA until the company needs one and at that point if we do reject a TA we will see a second offer rather quickly. The amount of people who are quitting or preparing to quit is high, and a mediocre TA with delta rates and a retirement fix isn’t going to be enough to stop them. They want QOL, they want scheduling to stop offering their trips to jumpseaters for 150% while they get rerouted to do OT trips that nobody wants to do and all they get is straight pay, they want shorter limits on how long they can be extended into time off, they want to get paid handsomely for revisions and losses of a BEDH, not just a few meager hours of add pay, they want hotels and GT for all training events, even in domicile, they want to have an expense report closed out without the company taking thousands out of their paycheck when they have tens of thousands of DBA money, they want the company to stop taking money out of their paychecks for scheduled layover hotels, they want to stay at better hotels than “insert dump next to mall here” etc etc etc "if we do reject a TA we will see a second offer rather quickly. " .... You DO NOT know this. You need to stop saying this because nobody knows the answer to this. This type of thought didn't work out for FedEx Ground's largest contractor. FedEx fired them. They even sued them to boot! https://www.automotive-fleet.com/101...est-contractor "The amount of people who are quitting or preparing to quit is high" FedEx DOESN'T CARE. We're over staffed. And then you go on a diatribe about all your wants. Who wouldn't want all of that stuff. You feel entitled well beyond the worth you bring to the bottom line. You need to come down to reality. It is time to become an adult and understand the situation that is before you. |
Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox
(Post 3630398)
THIS ^^^^^ THIS ^^^^ THIS ^^^^ THIS ^^^^^ THIS
This is the most logical and rational post I've seen on the scope issue. Thank you for that. Everyone upset about scope needs to read his post. And they need to listen again to PM's speech, especially from 20 minutes to the end. From PM's briefing: 20mins30sec: "Before we get into Scope I want to ensure you that the MEC is proactively looking at this agenda item this week and they're receiving full briefings from national and local subject matter experts. That said we've received emails citing concerns over scope in light of the company's public statements. The Negotiation Committee does not have the authority on our own to go and create a new priority for the pilots. The MEC must decide if there's a priority that's changed or a new priority that's entered into negotiations. That's the MEC's purview we do not have the authority to do that. However, this does not preclude us from crafting ideas and solutions that would have an immediate impact, a positive impact on the lower half of seniority." If you think they haven't addressed scope, or listened to your DARTs, you're wrong.26mins: "There's other options that we have aside from opening up a section that's been TAd. We've already done that. We've already had some initial discussions with the company. Because again, don't take this as we are discarding the concerns of the crew members who have been hired here since 2015. This system bid causes a lot of concerns and anxiety and it should from everybody that has been here since that point of time. Umm but what we want to say is that we have other items we can bring to the table that won't disrupt bargaining. That won't cause the company to pull sections that they've already TAd. We have other more immediate impact things that we can address with the company in light of this system bid, So system bid 23-01 where you're closing down one FDA domicile and two pilot bases, one specific MD11 base in ANC and the other in LA, so there's an awful a lot of senior pilots in those bases. Do you think for a minute that those senior pilots who have been on the MD11 for the past 25 years want to come train the 777 in Memphis? That's right, that's right they don't. So does it make sense to offer an avenue to let those pilots come off the top, and to retire early, maybe incentive and or remove obstacles to retirement in the discussion? Because the more pilots we can pull off the top of this mess right now that the company has created in 23-01, the better off the junior pilots will be. There are other things we can do in negotiations as well to deal directly with stalled career progression, or career progression that isn't materializing in the way that you'd imagined or envisioned two years ago or a year ago. And we've brought those issues to the table. So we have more actionable items that can be achieved quicker and in more sufficient manner to deal with the problems that a lot of pilots have identified, clearly identified through this corporate wide restructure, that we can deal with at the table. And we're going to move those issues forward. But we all have to kind of go together on this. We have to have the MEC support to continue to fight that fight and we have to stand together during this pretty trying time." 29mins: "The opinions matter. There's pilots concerned about, significantly concerned about scope and the direction this company has chosen to take in it's historic um network redesign. So we're not taking that lightly. We're not ignoring it. We're taking proactive measures to deal with it the best way we can that won't harm what we've put on the table." Did you pay attention? Please take a deep breath. Turn off social media for the weekend. But please watch the speech again. I am thankful that we have PM at the helm of the Negotiating Committee. They've listened to the scope concerns and are actively addressing them without trying to derail TAd sections of the negotiations while still trying to get a deal on industry leading pay rates in an environment which has our company struggling and restructuring to keep up with our competitors. MY NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE SPEAKS FOR ME !!! |
Two years into negotiations and a year past our goal for a TA and now, suddenly, anyone voicing a concern is saying “damn the rest of you” (18:40 in the vid) to those about to retire. Would be nice to save the tough talk for the company rather than to divide our pilot group.
|
Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox
(Post 3630241)
You really need to watch the video again and LISTEN because your assessment is wrong.
This is nothing like 2015. And if you were here you'd know it. We got and were sold a crappy contract because of the lack of unity. The lack of unity among the MEC and NC and our body of pilots. Really, his speech was condescending to you? He literally addressed your concerns and how the NC/MEC is trying to mitigate them. Cry me a river over your sacrifices. We've ALL made sacrifices to get to FedEx. PM and NC are trying to save jobs while keeping this job the best in the industry. There are other ways of addressing scope without opening up a TAd sections which would rip apart negotiations, which would no doubt take 2+ more years to get to where we are today. If you want to further delay getting scope fixed, go ahead and keep dividing this crew force. Delaying the TA by reopening sections, is going to be the slowest way to fixing scope. Do not doubt me on this. |
Originally Posted by PurpleToolBox
(Post 3630403)
You feel entitled well beyond the worth you bring to the bottom line. You need to come down to reality. It is time to become an adult and understand the situation that is before you. |
1 Attachment(s)
Attachment 7594
fillerrrrrrrr |
I do get PM point, that this late in the game you can’t reopen sections you already agreed to less you really damage your standing with NMB and the company negotiators.
I disagree that it’s unconscionable that people are retiring everyday and collecting the pension and what should be a pretty hefty 401k. That just kind of came off as a guilt trip to me. When this could have been fixed one or two contract cycles ago. Now that half the pilot group has been hired since 2015 (granted not all can vote yet). Lecturing us on how people are retiring under this contract and how such a raw deal that is just didn’t sit right. I’ll look at the TA and vote how I feel on the deal. I’m not an automatic no or yes, but I’m not voting yes on lackluster deal because folks are retiring. |
It’s just sooooooo unconscionable that pilots who saw the best, most lucrative 3 years of their career (2020-2022) just before they retire are going to retire with fat 401ks and with the old pension that they didn’t bother trying to improve in 2006, 2011, 2015, etc. I feel so bad for them :rolleyes:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:51 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands