No one left behind!
#11
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2023
Posts: 80
That’s great and all, but what about the 5800 that still have to work under the rest of the contract sections, most of which weren’t even addressed in TA1 openers, that are by far industry worst? Industry worst seat lock language, system bid frequency, lack of true min day, no hotels for recurrent/ ITU, unlimited operational emergency usage by the company to extend to FARs, etc, etc.
What is troubling for me is that the conversation is, and always will be about retirement. It’ll never be about making this a good place to work while we’re actually doing it, and that’s troubling.
What is troubling for me is that the conversation is, and always will be about retirement. It’ll never be about making this a good place to work while we’re actually doing it, and that’s troubling.
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2015
Posts: 751
Until the A-plan is tied to 401(k) compensation limits, that will continue to be the case. One of the big issues with the traditional A-Plan.
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2023
Posts: 299
Why would we want the A plan tied to 401(k) compensation limits? If we want Delta+ pay rates, the A plan compensation limit for 2023 would be $330k while the top compensation would be over $417k.
#14
... the rest of the contract sections, most of which weren’t even addressed in TA1 openers, that are by far industry worst? Industry worst seat lock language, system bid frequency, lack of true min day, no hotels for recurrent/ ITU, unlimited operational emergency usage by the company to extend to FARs, etc, etc...
First order of business for new NC is climbing out of the hole that PM dug us into by playing "fast and loose" (his words) with all the initially TA'd sections and saying Yes to the company for SMU, saying Yes to them for R16, and saying Yes for BLG required for AVA/VLT/DRF and Selling VAC.
If you think a new NC should be leading us to TA2, make sure to explicitly state it in the survey, which has no question directly asking the obvious: should the NC be replaced for TA2? Not even in one of those mulitiple annoying "rank in order of importance the next 20 answers, and make them add up to 100". Survey brought to you by: the same guys who brought you TA1 and seem intent on bringing you TA2 before there is time to reorganize with new leadership.
#15
There is funny rumor going around that we will attempt to do only 3 things to squeeze out a TA1.5 before 31 Dec 2023. The 3 things are increase pay rates, increase retro and soften scope language. I feel confident that if our strategy resembles this funny rumor there will be enough NOs waiting again.
You know what is not funny, the 300 sisters and brothers that in unity our ALPA leadership did not take care of with a retirement improvement. The choices we make reflect what we value. TA1.0 said if you are close to retirement during section 6 there is a high chance that you will receive a value of zero. There is no business speak that sets this right. As this number grows I hope you will realize this as an inadequacy of TA1.0.
You can’t preach unity to us youngsters when we will discard so many and treat it as a suitable outcome.
We talked about being 700 overmanned and furloughs to be had. Here is a better number to discuss: 300 turns 500 next year!
Until then don’t forget to fill out your surveys and leave some room for no pilot left behind. This is a negotiation not a holdup.
To the 300 retirees (and those about to join their ranks), you can put your hands down. Let’s GO!
You know what is not funny, the 300 sisters and brothers that in unity our ALPA leadership did not take care of with a retirement improvement. The choices we make reflect what we value. TA1.0 said if you are close to retirement during section 6 there is a high chance that you will receive a value of zero. There is no business speak that sets this right. As this number grows I hope you will realize this as an inadequacy of TA1.0.
You can’t preach unity to us youngsters when we will discard so many and treat it as a suitable outcome.
We talked about being 700 overmanned and furloughs to be had. Here is a better number to discuss: 300 turns 500 next year!
Until then don’t forget to fill out your surveys and leave some room for no pilot left behind. This is a negotiation not a holdup.
To the 300 retirees (and those about to join their ranks), you can put your hands down. Let’s GO!
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jan 2017
Posts: 261
That’s great and all, but what about the 5800 that still have to work under the rest of the contract sections, most of which weren’t even addressed in TA1 openers, that are by far industry worst? Industry worst seat lock language, system bid frequency, lack of true min day, no hotels for recurrent/ ITU, unlimited operational emergency usage by the company to extend to FARs, etc, etc.
What is troubling for me is that the conversation is, and always will be about retirement. It’ll never be about making this a good place to work while we’re actually doing it, and that’s troubling.
What is troubling for me is that the conversation is, and always will be about retirement. It’ll never be about making this a good place to work while we’re actually doing it, and that’s troubling.
I have 3-4 contracts left here and want this place improved as well. The thread is called “No One Left Behind”. We are going in the same direction.
Let’s GO!
#18
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
Exactly, we cannot allow this CBA to become worse in any of these sections where we are already among industry worst. We need to protect our junior flying too, and improve it.
First order of business for new NC is climbing out of the hole that PM dug us into by playing "fast and loose" (his words) with all the initially TA'd sections and saying Yes to the company for SMU, saying Yes to them for R16, and saying Yes for BLG required for AVA/VLT/DRF and Selling VAC.
If you think a new NC should be leading us to TA2, make sure to explicitly state it in the survey, which has no question directly asking the obvious: should the NC be replaced for TA2? Not even in one of those mulitiple annoying "rank in order of importance the next 20 answers, and make them add up to 100". Survey brought to you by: the same guys who brought you TA1 and seem intent on bringing you TA2 before there is time to reorganize with new leadership.
First order of business for new NC is climbing out of the hole that PM dug us into by playing "fast and loose" (his words) with all the initially TA'd sections and saying Yes to the company for SMU, saying Yes to them for R16, and saying Yes for BLG required for AVA/VLT/DRF and Selling VAC.
If you think a new NC should be leading us to TA2, make sure to explicitly state it in the survey, which has no question directly asking the obvious: should the NC be replaced for TA2? Not even in one of those mulitiple annoying "rank in order of importance the next 20 answers, and make them add up to 100". Survey brought to you by: the same guys who brought you TA1 and seem intent on bringing you TA2 before there is time to reorganize with new leadership.
PM played "fast and loose" - in his words - please expand about this statement.
He said "yes" to R16? We proposed the changes in long call reserve - Company would have loved to keep R24 with base hotel stby like it is - they don't want to change it, R16 was the compromise.
There were changes to DFT? Did you even read the TA?
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Position: MD11 FO
Posts: 1,109
So kind of weird that the campaign statements for block reps don't appear to include a guarantee they will only back a TA that offers full retirement benefits to amendable date. Probably a good thing as that is very unlikely to ever get passed - like saying I won't support any TA that doesn't have $900/hour pay - just another way of saying you will always vote NO. And there are quite a lot of people that do always vote NO and advertise it here regularly.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post