10 years UAL, hired here last year? So he was a 2012 UAL hire? There we no furloughs in that time frame.

[QUOTE=globalflair;3665511]I voted yes. What’s the pay on furlough? What’s the top out on the WB FO on furlough? What’s your 401 contribution during furlough? Call me a management pilot, which I’m not. I’m just a line dog but it’s

Anger management courses might be helpful.

My Mess? Aren't we all "In Unity" here? Actually we did improve it all along the way to the point you wanted to come here. I'm assuming you joined us since 2015. You seem to trivialize the sacrifices made by individuals to correct things that needed fixing. Do you really think we were all just waiting around negligently waiting for you to show up to victimize you?

For the record....It is probably not going to be my last contract, especially if this fails...I'm not retiring within a year either way....I'd take a reduction in my A plan for retiring before 60.....besides I wouldn't have years of service to maximize my A fund regardless of the FAE. We have a lot of quarters to go.

This isn't a game winning touchdown, heck it's not even a first down, but It certainly isn't a sack.....I'm not going to call making 4 yards a failure....I'll take the gain and press forward just as hard...I certainly don't want to insist that all our plays are "Hail Mary" passes and risk interception...worse yet, be so aggressive we earn a penalty and have to make up that yardage.

I don't remember all the details....He was out of work many times during the period....the last was Covid reduced flying he told me. I had no reason at the time to doubt his veracity and quite honestly I was more concerned about getting him finished up in training and making sure he was having a good time.

Jackal, IMO we have the best contract in the industry. I'm happy to keep what we have now than accept the changes/concessions this TA makes. Here's your quote: "A lot of the "NO" sentiment seems to have no problem sacrificing some of us to get their priorities." Please explain how this TA not passing will "sacrifice" you. If that's your situation, then that's on you.

You need to go talk to RS quickly! They missed publishing this in the SEC filings. Maybe you can save them!

I’m sure investors and future investors should know what’s about to happen!!

Looks like some people would vote yes for a $1/hr increase.

No... and it is disingenuous to characterize my position that way.

A "NO" friend of mine in the mid level seniority band with at least 15 years to go texted me and said...I think we deserved more, but I think (this is the part that stuck with me): The Juice Ain't Worth the Squeeze.

This is not what any of would have like to see....many are disappointed, including me. But this is no where near a concessionary contract. Yes, when work rules change the playing field changes geometry....you need to be able to adapt.

Do I think we should gotten higher FAE? Most definitely! Do I think we should have gotten higher B Fund....Absolutely!...Do I need "Backpay" to make myself financially sound? Not in the slightest.....I'm looking at the long game though....You have not lost anything with payrates less than what you wanted.....and you cannot deny that the payrates are improved from current book by a tremendous amount. The main body of what you can use from this contract is what you will use to amass wealth.

Years ago the instructor group howled because their ability to get paid for two events in one day went away in a contract....(don't remember which one). Those guys were making a killing....At the time, it was one of the few ways guys were making FAE....a lot of guys had to bust hump for the last few years before retirement after they were "Empty Nesters" ...anyway...The union's position was that you shouldn't have to be in some special group to be able to make enough money for retirement You ought to be able to make FAE flying the line. Anyway, the instructor group said they were getting picked on, predicted the quality of instruction would suffer, said that good guys would quit etc....guess what....none of that happened. What awe did get for it was higher pay rated so that it is now fairly simple to make FAE that everyone wants it higher.

I view this whole SMU thing like that.....Not a whole lot of pilots benefit from consistently bidding LCA's every month and no one should ever use that as a long term strategy for making money because the seniority landscape changes month to month depending on the desires of people senior to you. I

No one...no one has had their retirement taken from them.....it has only been improved. We've been told by previous NC that the FAE WOULD NEVER GO UP....FedEx couldn't afford it.... but it did. I think everyone would be better served by ignoring 40% student lines that make up a very small percentage of the main body and work like hell to improve this TA in the next round. Theres a higher likelihood that you could negotiate a higher FAE in the next contract as the financial liability to the company to pay for that is greatly reduced...not saying it would happen but it would be worth a shot as you approach Geezerhood. It is certainly likely that you would improve Cash Balance plan because this TA provides the framework.

By promoting current book.....you are going to retreat off a hill and abandon ground that you won because you looked left and right and saw someone has what you perceive as a bigger hill, or the fact you think there might be a higher ground on that hill. (Neglecting of course visual illusions, curvature of the Earth, etc)......This is your landscape, this is your pilot group.....voting this down is essentially retreating down this hill.....leaving the dead up there and regrouping and trying to take the same hill to get to marginally higher ground. In the meantime, more people every month will retire with less than what you say you want "In Unity", and If there is a 4A2B-C, the junior among us will have to work at reduced payrates.....

Why not keep this hill, and go find a higher hill and take that one too?

Rejecting increased pay because someone else has more and willing to enter in to a Quixotic quest to get "at least what they got" no matter the cost is not a sign of financial savvy but is better described as Envy.

It wasn't me that said...."IF the contract has any trace of (fill in blank here)...Then I am an AUTOMATIC NO Vote"

It was a lot of the brain trust of this echo chamber that said: "I'm going to vote No on the first contract no matter what"

The previous NC meant that the FAE would never go up with everyone staying on the A-plan. If they were willing to sunset the A-plan, along with the other concessions in this TA they could have made it happen. They weren't willing to divide the pilot group.

Regarding furlough comments, you guys do realize FDX is the only airline not hiring currently. Let’s say in the chance they actually did, FDX would instantly lose all their future aviators (likely not coming back). Next they would have to open another bid along the 2 other open bids and begin in to re-align the airline more. Remember Fo’s are on every fleet, not just the 75. They can do what they want but seems like a lot of work to go through and they just report “green shoots revenue growth” by the end of the financial year.