I'm not mixing two different things. You stated that if our WB rate is above the 767-300 and A300 (AA only) rates just set by DAL and AA that it would be a win. I pointed out that while we band our WB rate to the 777 those other places band it to the 757, 321, and 737-MAX10. So if our WB rate just barely beat their 757/A321/MAX10 rates, where would our NB rate fall? I didn't advocate rebanding our rates. Don't twist it into that.

 

Well how about the reverse the 777 takes a lower rate so the other WBs can be happy? How about reclassifying the A380 rates we already paid to 777 and make those rates industry leading also.

 

Honest answer... I've watched it 3 or 4 times. I've read every email. I've kept up with things on the Alpa website. What I don't understand is why the voting members couldn't have been keeping up with this thing as we went along and voted over Zoom last Tuesday if that's what was needed to avoid wasting another 11 days plus whatever additional time they need on this issue. We don't know how much time they intend to waste at this point. The language that was approved on Monday wasn't much. If there's some extra thing that's involved with no way around it then it hasn't been spelled out at all.

At this point, it's spilled milk and it's more important to get things correct, but we're all out thousands of dollars because we wasted this time. The next election we have, amending this wasteful process will be something I ask of reps.

 

So you've questioned me staying informed so I'll ask you the same question... Have you been staying updated?

The updates in the Negotiations section on the Fedex Alpa website contained lists of what's TAed and what isn't. It spelled out what language was TAed and what wasn't. After all, a TAed section is a TAed section... Correct? The last major thing TAed was in early January (Retirement) where PM said that he was optimistic that a TA would be reached later that month. At that point the only things remaining were Compensation and Duration according to the January 10th update. At that point there is no good reason that every elected Rep shouldn't have been reading the entire thing if they hadn't done so already. The finishing touches a week and a half ago were likely mostly a pay table, retro pay, and duration. Very limited things to read. By this point it isn't too much to expect that they'd have already been read. Any required final paperwork and documents could've been prepared ready for finalities to be cut and pasted into them. For the record that update was dated January 10th meaning 5 months ago as of June 10th.

We aren't going to agree on the rest as I think making sure everyone meets in person should be changed in 2023. I've done plenty of union work before by various audio/video chat services. To me delaying this process to do things that it's very obvious could've already been done prior to last Monday is not a good thing. Given the fact that we chose not to prepare for this prior to the TA we must now do it to dot our i's and cross our t's. You think that doing things like they were done in 1999 is a better idea and despite delays for all of our pay increases, is better.

As for changing the way things run, there is a process to change it and it should've been done. It doesn't take an act of Congress with a 60 majority in the Senate plus the President's approval. It should be obvious that delays to make this vote happen aren't a good idea when a new TA can be emailed and read instantly whereas 25 years ago that might not have been a reality.

Maybe I need to attend more council meetings so I can be a voice against having our own union run things like this is 1993. I'll openly admit that maybe I trusted in this process too much, but as you can read, I did follow things closely and was well aware of the location we were in the scheme of the overall process.

Agree to disagree.

 

https://www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed...rejection/amp/

Interesting read. Apparently ALPA is not thrilled with what AA got…all I’ve seen here is some big pay rates. Not throwing spears either way since I don’t know what else they have. Wonder what they’re seeing at ALPA? It could just be that ALPA is miffed that APA said no thanks on a merger. 🤔

Hope we stand up to the scrutiny. We will find out soon.

 

They don’t like that the AIP has an additional 3% raise on the amendable date, which is ineligible for their snap-up clause.

 

No, DL's snap up is based on the highest rate for an aircraft flown on property, which AA/APA matched to the penny. Has nothing to do with a post-amendable raise (which is fraught with risk, actually).

ALPA is right, APA did not raise the bar for the industry, which affects us all.

 

Explain to me how having a 3% raise on the amendable date is “fraught with risk.” Bottom line, at the end of the contract AA will pay more, no?

DAL top rate - 474.20
AA top rate - 488.43

So again, APA did technically raise the bar, just not in a fashion that DAL can snap-up off of.

 

AA has a richer total package (8B). They didn’t raise the bar, they matched our pay rates at Delta to the literal penny, then spent the rest of their negotiating capital on better work rules. Only weak spot I see is their sick bank, but they do receive a max 200k payout at retirement. Also the sick bank is a carryover, not use it or lose it.

For the second time APA used DALPA’s resources during their negotiations. They created a APA-ALPA merger committee under false pretenses, then after the AIP and TA language was negotiated they voted down the merger. I think 67% AA pilots voted in favor of a ALPA merger? So they voted down the majority. It was just a bait and switch tactic (again) to utilize ALPA resources and ALPA’s president (JA) is not happy about it.

 

It was a pole to see who wants to explore a APA/ALPA merger. 67% voted yes,BUT only 53% of the pilot group even voted. So 47% of the group was actually so disinterested with the idea of exploring an ALPA merger that they didn’t even vote. Then 33% of those that voted said no.

It’s a very disingenuous way of framing the conversation and people are noticing. The pro ALPA folks at AA are using the same misleading language and it’s turning people off.