|
Originally Posted by oncewasgood
(Post 3659007)
Don’t speak in opposition to the “know it all crowd”. Just follow along with the lies and inaccuracies.
|
Originally Posted by Dave Behnke
(Post 3659019)
I posted a quote directly from the NC email as posted the exact language from the TA. Exactly what "lies and inaccuracies" were there?
|
Originally Posted by Anthrax
(Post 3658995)
“this TA has the first hard limits.”
essentially, the whole bit about no new contracts etc when in 4a2bc. they also stated that history is binding in grievance and arbitration, but … THE LANGUAGE CHANGES IN THIS TA! The NC may firmly believe this, but a judge may and most likely would see it differently. These guys are blind and quite frankly clueless as to the possibilities this TA opens up for the company. It’s freaking unbelievable. Don’t tell us what you think it means, get that $hit in writing!!! Somehow I doubt it. |
Originally Posted by Dave Behnke
(Post 3658962)
This from the NC via email today:
This TA did not give away any hard limits. On the contrary, TA Section 1 has the first hard limit on wet leasing: during any bid period in which Section 4.A.2.c. is implemented. This limit ties our protections in Sections 23 (Furlough) and in 4.A.2.b. and c. to wet leasing. When coupled with the new SAM (System-Wide Average Metric) definition that decreases the likelihood of entering 4.A.2.b. and c., we have improved Section 1 with real job protections. From the TA: 10. Except for a wet lease to be performed between November 15 and the last day of the December bid period, the Company shall not extend, renew, or enter into any new Section 1.B.6. wet lease agreements during a bid period in which Section 4.A.2.c. is implemented except as agreed to by the Association. 11.Should the Company issue a non-voluntary furlough notice pursuant to Section 23.A., all Section 1.B.6. wet leases shall be subject to a penalty of one SPR for every wet lease block hour flown thereafter until all pilots have reported for duty from a recall notice (or declined recall) or the last furloughed pilot ceases to accrue longevity as provided in Section 23.A.4., whichever is earlier. This penalty is in addition to any penalty required by Section 1.B.6., however, in no event shall the total penalty exceed 2.5x SPR per block hour wet leased. Before the end of the first quarter of each fiscal year, penalty payments due under this provision shall be distributed on a per capita basis to pilots who were on furlough when the penalty accrued. Maybe I'm just missing the "Hard limits", but all I see is a prohibition against extending, renewing or entering into any new wet lease contracts during 4.A.2.c. I see no 'hard limits' and I'm pretty sure a second-year law or business student could figure a way to have a flexible long-term agreement written prior to entering 4.A.2.c... Rich was pretty condescending when asked a similar question during the road show and he talked about 'hard limits' and the NC email said they have 'hard limits', but for the life of me, I don't see it. Someone please help me connect the dots. Also, even if guys are furloughed the Company can STILL wet lease from Nov 15th through the end of December, so at most it's a 'soft limit' if you even call it a limit. |
Originally Posted by Dave Behnke
(Post 3659019)
I posted a quote directly from the NC email and posted the exact language from the TA. Exactly what "lies and inaccuracies" were there?
|
So there you are losers. The Union just blew all your scope paranoia out of the water. But I know, the Union is wrong, the MEC is wrong, everyone is wrong but this forum. Sorry Mr. Hagard but you can go on *****ing about nothing. The TA is going to pass.
mdeshazo, its sad for you but its time to just call it a day. Maybe there will be another TA if you are around for you can lie about. And now, popcorn. |
Originally Posted by Stan446
(Post 3659048)
So there you are losers. The Union just blew all your scope paranoia out of the water. But I know, the Union is wrong, the MEC is wrong, everyone is wrong but this forum. Sorry Mr. Hagard but you can go on *****ing about nothing. The TA is going to pass.
mdeshazo, its sad for you but its time to just call it a day. Maybe there will be another TA if you are around for you can lie about. And now, popcorn. "In closing, while we realize the Company restructuring plan has caused some concern over the airline staffing, the hypothetical “wet lease to furlough” scenario is unrealistic and irrational as a business model and entirely inconsistent with our history. You need to look no further than the ACMI operators themselves to see how that business model is performing in the current market conditions. We have attached two recent articles for your convenience." Imagine defending giving the company more flexibility and dismissing opposing opinions by saying it's "entirely inconsistent with our history" Wetleasing/ACMI was inconsistent with DHL's history, until it wasn't. Then in that same email, the union posted some ACMI operators who are struggling as if that's a reason why the company wouldn't wetlease to them. Don't you think the company would L O V E to go to those ACMI carriers right now and secure a dirt cheap wet lease because they know that those carriers have no other business right now? They could get them to sign a contract for pennies on the dollar right now. |
Originally Posted by Stan446
(Post 3659048)
So there you are losers. The Union just blew all your scope paranoia out of the water. But I know, the Union is wrong, the MEC is wrong, everyone is wrong but this forum. Sorry Mr. Hagard but you can go on *****ing about nothing. The TA is going to pass.
mdeshazo, its sad for you but its time to just call it a day. Maybe there will be another TA if you are around for you can lie about. And now, popcorn. Q: Why can't Fedex just sign long term wet leases? What your eyes tell you: Fedex signed a long term wet lease with Atlas. They seemingly can wet lease in perpetuity with ASL and have them flying aircraft in mainline livery that they don't own What Pat says: "...The Company prefers monthly or quarterly wet leases. They don't won't to lock themselves onto the coat tails of another airline and the Brand Xs that are out there." 24:05 roadshow video blah blah reliability global brand blah blah "They CAN have long term contracts ......." If you want to build your future on Pat May's perception about what the company will and won't do by all means click yes when the time comes. Me, I'm a skeptical $@$#$ who doesn't trust anyone when they tell me I should. He also makes the mother of all suppositions that we're gonna fix our currently overstaffed situation because this deal is so good people will retire early. Never once does he mention that some who might have considered retiring early might hang around for the massive:rolleyes: pay raises he's so proud of and still collect that all that extra retirement money. Only certainties in that equation are pilot greed and a mandatory retirement age. Neither of which particularly work in favor of his retire early thesis. They say well FedEx cannot do mass wet leasing, because they ignore ASL (not under RLA) and there seemingly isn't enough carriers available to do the job. If you believe this you are just being willfully blind. Amazon the newest competitor is doing exactly that. WTF is it gonna take for you to see it?! The NC doesn't want to see it. They want to believe what has happened historically will inform what will happen in the future, but then that begs the question, when in company history have they closed 4 pilot bases and had a massive down bid within 24 months? There's an all new management team here with stock price driven overlords. Just because Fedex never has furloughed does not mean they never will and you have to ask yourself is an SPR check while you're on the street what you signed up for. If you're cool with that click yes. Everytime these guys say "vote no, then what?" I want to throw my laptop through a wall. We are in this position because YOU CHOSE this deal and then the MEC signed off on it. Now you want to put the onus on us if it doesn't pass??!! That's the most shameful $#@ I've ever heard from union leadership in my life. It was your job to get the members the agreement they asked for and you advertised. If it doesn't pass and the consequences come to bear you don't get to say oh well I did my best. GTFOH!!! If it doesn't pass YOU FAILED! Not in selling a subpar TA. You FAILED TO DELIVER what the membership wanted, full stop, and you should accept responsibility for the fallout it if that comes to pass. Only part of this process where the rank and file get to have a say is now. So let's stop arguing and promoting and vote already. Enough talk. I know Stan I'm full of hate. Of course to you vocal disagreement means I hate you which just makes me think what you really need is a hug. |
Originally Posted by Shaman
(Post 3659064)
words… Only part of this process where the rank and file get to have a say is now.
Words . 4 days to NO! July 5, 1000 EST. No is the time! |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 10:24 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands