term sheet a kick in pants
02-12-2024, 03:48 PM
#112
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2023
Posts: 174
Originally Posted by Nightflyer
Probably on the advice of his lawyer after he was placed in NOQ status.
This used to be called "hostage taking", and the union leadership used to inform the crew force of the situation and state that no TA would be approved until the hostages were released.
Of course, we hear crickets from the current leadership. I wonder way?
This used to be called "hostage taking", and the union leadership used to inform the crew force of the situation and state that no TA would be approved until the hostages were released.
Of course, we hear crickets from the current leadership. I wonder way?
Originally Posted by Tuck
You can't be this obtuse.
ALPA Legal did NOT approve it - nor has he ever said they did...publicly. There's a reason for that. They didn't - his supporters like to say it was approved by legal with zero evidence whatsoever.
He posted tons of information he got only off of company data - LCA list (not public ever), phone numbers and names from VIPs - full names were not initally used and CT got them from a backwards search off of VIPs well either he did or someone else got them from VIPs for him - but he posted it. Yes he clearly violated Company rules.
The idea that this is some sort of management ploy to punish this guy is just absurd.
ALPA Legal did NOT approve it - nor has he ever said they did...publicly. There's a reason for that. They didn't - his supporters like to say it was approved by legal with zero evidence whatsoever.
He posted tons of information he got only off of company data - LCA list (not public ever), phone numbers and names from VIPs - full names were not initally used and CT got them from a backwards search off of VIPs well either he did or someone else got them from VIPs for him - but he posted it. Yes he clearly violated Company rules.
The idea that this is some sort of management ploy to punish this guy is just absurd.
I think it's kind of a stretch (dare I say obtuse?) to say that he violated company policy by posting publicly available info and that he deserves to be NOQ, when the people he exposed are clearly being protected by the company because they aren't NOQ yet. I guess harassment here is ok as long as you're doing to help the company?
Originally Posted by max8222
I viewed the TA as a whole, The pension bump has been needed for a long time. We gave up a lot to keep the A plan in place and not have a separate retirement for new hires in 2015. I did not like the give ups on training lines, and other give backs that should not have been included. The R 24 to R 16 was not that big of an issue. The scope all of a sudden became a big boogy man. I do not think many pilots here really understand scope and how it really pertains to our operations.
The A plan was improved for all pilots on the seniority list in the TA. No one on the seniority list was going to be forced out of it. However the MCBP was woefully lacking in funding by the company. When I fly with pilots that do not want an A plan they cannot even give me the numbers of it's value plus the how our current 9% B fund works. Can't give me IRS caps for both either. They just say they want Delta 18% and cash over cap. They would be giving up a lot of money taking that.
They want control over the MCBP, by law it is a pension and tax deferred and the company has to manage it. Otherwise it would be just like the B-Fund.
I could go on and on but the biggest problem with our crew force is the lack of knowledge on our contract and how the different areas affect us. I just flew with a guy that has been here 6 years and didn't know the difference between a hard time trip and a trip rig or how our block over 8 and ten is paid out and what is included in the original trip BLG and what you need to fly to get the rest.
So you can lecture me and say I don't know what the TA was about and how it affected the different groups. I think I have a lot better understanding of it than a big portion of the keyboard warriors.
The A plan was improved for all pilots on the seniority list in the TA. No one on the seniority list was going to be forced out of it. However the MCBP was woefully lacking in funding by the company. When I fly with pilots that do not want an A plan they cannot even give me the numbers of it's value plus the how our current 9% B fund works. Can't give me IRS caps for both either. They just say they want Delta 18% and cash over cap. They would be giving up a lot of money taking that.
They want control over the MCBP, by law it is a pension and tax deferred and the company has to manage it. Otherwise it would be just like the B-Fund.
I could go on and on but the biggest problem with our crew force is the lack of knowledge on our contract and how the different areas affect us. I just flew with a guy that has been here 6 years and didn't know the difference between a hard time trip and a trip rig or how our block over 8 and ten is paid out and what is included in the original trip BLG and what you need to fly to get the rest.
So you can lecture me and say I don't know what the TA was about and how it affected the different groups. I think I have a lot better understanding of it than a big portion of the keyboard warriors.
R24 to R16 was a massive give. Scope was a massive give. No more A plan was a massive give. 100% vacation buyback was a big give. The other gives were quite notable too. The fact that you think that those gives are/were inconsequential shows you have a serious FYIGM attitude.
Originally Posted by max8222
When you say an the A plan even with the bump will not be worth anything in 20+ years, lets ask some questions. Do you think that $130K a year now is worthless now? We have had the same number for 26 years. So move the $169K a year 25 years ahead. Do you think it will be worthless?
The value that needs to be captured in sunsetting the A plan is in the bump for current pilots and the true value of its replacement. The replacemnt needs to be as good or better than the A plan plus our current 9% B fund. My rough numbers value those two together at 31% contributions by the company in the MCBP. Starts to get difficult for wide body captains because you reach caps and start to pay a lot in taxes.
When you start making over $600K a year taxes become a big problem. We are W-2 earners and get crushed. I have a few business and go for every deduction I can and I still get hammered. I use one of the top CPA firms on the west coast so they know what they are doing and capture everything they can for me.
Our peer groups were in a better bargaining position than we are currently. Their companies needed contracts to keep the planes moving. Ours not so much.
The value that needs to be captured in sunsetting the A plan is in the bump for current pilots and the true value of its replacement. The replacemnt needs to be as good or better than the A plan plus our current 9% B fund. My rough numbers value those two together at 31% contributions by the company in the MCBP. Starts to get difficult for wide body captains because you reach caps and start to pay a lot in taxes.
When you start making over $600K a year taxes become a big problem. We are W-2 earners and get crushed. I have a few business and go for every deduction I can and I still get hammered. I use one of the top CPA firms on the west coast so they know what they are doing and capture everything they can for me.
Our peer groups were in a better bargaining position than we are currently. Their companies needed contracts to keep the planes moving. Ours not so much.
Originally Posted by CactusMan
I didn’t say worthless…I said worth crap. I’ll rephrase and simply say a $169K FINAL bump is insufficient, and we know it’s a final bump because splitting all new (and some current) pilots to a different plan essentially guarantees it never gets revisited.
$130K adjusted for inflation of only 3% (optimistic) in 20 years would be $235K. How do we get there from here? Several options exist - FAE cap raise annually (even if it isn’t tied to CPI, I’d listen to 2% bump a year), B-plan increase, buyout - I’m sure there’s are other creative options. They were not presented to us, though. What we got was a sweetheart deal for the company, which they then valued at a zero dollar net change and used it to squeeze dozens of concessions out of PM.
$130K adjusted for inflation of only 3% (optimistic) in 20 years would be $235K. How do we get there from here? Several options exist - FAE cap raise annually (even if it isn’t tied to CPI, I’d listen to 2% bump a year), B-plan increase, buyout - I’m sure there’s are other creative options. They were not presented to us, though. What we got was a sweetheart deal for the company, which they then valued at a zero dollar net change and used it to squeeze dozens of concessions out of PM.
Originally Posted by Maddog64
I was at that meeting, they were on the ballot for recall.
Originally Posted by Maddog64
They did. Every one of those QOL givebacke were costed out and the value taken out to get to 3.8 Billion. Alpa National has a group that is the gold standard of costing contracts. Even non Alpa carriers come to Alpa to have their contracts valued and costed out. our MEC didn't like the number so they hired another firm and they came up with the same number.
Like it or not our failed TA is valued at Delta +30%. That is the number that the mediator and the company are working with. We are going into a situation where we were offered the most money in the industry and we said no. What do you think is going to happen when we ask for another Billion or more? TC described it as moving the deck chairs around. What he failed to say was the company was moving the deck chairs on the Queen Mary not on a pontoon boat.
Like it or not our failed TA is valued at Delta +30%. That is the number that the mediator and the company are working with. We are going into a situation where we were offered the most money in the industry and we said no. What do you think is going to happen when we ask for another Billion or more? TC described it as moving the deck chairs around. What he failed to say was the company was moving the deck chairs on the Queen Mary not on a pontoon boat.
Moving deck chairs on a sunken ship is moving deck chairs on a sunken ship - it doesn't matter what size the ship is/was, it's at the bottom of the ocean where it belongs.
Time to build a completely new ship from different and better blueprints.
Originally Posted by CactusMan
Precisely. The rumor that it was assigned a zero dollar value has come from many sources - conversations with MEC reps, cockpit chatter and, yes, online. I’m aware that not all rumors are true, but our MEC has a bad recent history of negative rumors (concessions, inflation-lagging pay rates, SM shenanigans, etc.) being true.
The reason I’m convinced we got zero dollar credit specifically for the A-plan sunset is BECAUSE the MEC refuses to address it after it’s been brought up so many times. The silence speaks volumes.
The reason I’m convinced we got zero dollar credit specifically for the A-plan sunset is BECAUSE the MEC refuses to address it after it’s been brought up so many times. The silence speaks volumes.
Originally Posted by Maddog64
Simple math says 39,000 X 4 = 156,000 X 5808 (number of pilots on MSL) = 906,048,000. Our aplan increase cost 900 Million bucks. Delta and United got a 2% increase in their retirement. They got a huge increase in Pay and a small increase in retirement, we got a huge increase in retirement and a half of their increase in pay.
In my opinion as a 23 year fedex guy, if you want Delta payrates we need to take money out of retirement.
In my opinion as a 23 year fedex guy, if you want Delta payrates we need to take money out of retirement.
Originally Posted by 100 Continue
Still don't know why said individual got NOQ'd?
Originally Posted by threeighteen
If you ever find out, there’s a lot of interested people that would like to know.
02-12-2024, 06:19 PM
#116
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Posts: 600
I participated in a Union Focus group today and we covered all the items and more you referenced aboveand a lot more. I highly you sign up for one. It was about two hours long and was very informative and great to hear perspectives from fellow pilots on TA 1 and where we should go for TA2.
So I do not want to write a book to explain everything to you. Go to the source and quit believing all the bad information from the angry few.
So I do not want to write a book to explain everything to you. Go to the source and quit believing all the bad information from the angry few.
02-12-2024, 07:00 PM
#118
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2023
Posts: 18
[QUOTE=threeighteen;3767068]Back in November I made a post exposing the existence of a newly created WhatsApp group that was publicly scheming to create a “kill list” of pilots that they wanted to deny jumpseats to.
Threats were made to myself and others, and unfortunately a pilot who was a vocal no voter was placed on NOQ status in a “shoot him first, find the reason why later” manner. That pilot unfortunately ended up resigning to take a job elsewhere instead of dealing with a kangaroo court here.
Something isn't adding up here. It appears you know the guy who resigned based on your earlier post. So he was placed in NOQ status, but you don't know why? There has to be more to the story. He didn't just get placed on NOQ for no reason. If "said vocal no voter" just left to avoid dealing with a kangaroo court, then perhaps the company had something on "said vocal no voter?"
There seems to be several folks in NOQ status right now related to social media posts and processes. I am just trying to understand what they allegedly did. The Block 5 rep is still NOQ. There have been a lot of "likely" and "I believe" comments about him coupled with many crew bus rumors. Has anyone actually talked to him to get the facts as to why he is NOQ? Did he take the post down from JF due to legal advice or did he have second thoughts and did it via his own free will? One of his vocal supporters is NOQ as well. Was it misuse of VIPs perhaps? Seems like a lot of finger pointing and conspiracy theories in all these actions but absolutely ZERO accountabily.
Threats were made to myself and others, and unfortunately a pilot who was a vocal no voter was placed on NOQ status in a “shoot him first, find the reason why later” manner. That pilot unfortunately ended up resigning to take a job elsewhere instead of dealing with a kangaroo court here.
Originally Posted by threeighteen
If you ever find out, there’s a lot of interested people that would like to know.
There seems to be several folks in NOQ status right now related to social media posts and processes. I am just trying to understand what they allegedly did. The Block 5 rep is still NOQ. There have been a lot of "likely" and "I believe" comments about him coupled with many crew bus rumors. Has anyone actually talked to him to get the facts as to why he is NOQ? Did he take the post down from JF due to legal advice or did he have second thoughts and did it via his own free will? One of his vocal supporters is NOQ as well. Was it misuse of VIPs perhaps? Seems like a lot of finger pointing and conspiracy theories in all these actions but absolutely ZERO accountabily.
02-12-2024, 07:36 PM
#120
On Reserve
Joined APC: Dec 2023
Posts: 18
Originally Posted by max8222
What kind of threats were made and what was the basis for these threats?
Great question and I would be interested to know that as well.
Last edited by 100 Continue; 02-12-2024 at 07:52 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
