Originally Posted by UnusualAttitude

Two things working against your argument. The first is that in December of 2022 the pilots at Delta reached a TA that set the standard for pay and QOL. One major statement caught the attention of those paying attention, “NO CONCESSIONS.” They did not give up a single QOL item for the pay rates in that agreement. The second fact that I think many take issue with here is that the very work rules that were touted as benefits to seniority, like no student lines, and that were enjoyed for decades by pilots nearing retirement, are the work rules we are being told by that same group of pilots “don’t matter.” For decades ALPA has slowly given away work rules in exchange for pay rates while doing nothing to improve the A plan. It’s a lie to say that retirement hasn’t improved since 1999 as the B plan has gradually increased. All that to be said, amazing that suddenly when faced with impending retirement we are told that job protection, work rules, and pay are all things that don’t matter and we should be focused only on retirement. Why didn’t you guys decide to do that 20 years ago? Makes little or no sense to me.

For the record, student lines are industry average at most carriers now in some form or fashion. So is premium pay getting 200%-300%. We are giving up industry leading for less than market value.

What I have seen so far does not tip my vote one way or another. I’ll look at the total value of the deal, once we see it, and if it meets the threshold to get my yes then I’ll vote yes. I didn’t want to vote no on the TA in 2023. I didn’t feel like I had a choice because the deal was so bad.

So far I’ve seen some strike outs, a few solid doubles, and a single or two. Waiting for 1, 3, and 28 to be shown and then we will see. 3 better be a solid home run. That would mean 3 must be industry pay rates with a snap up since the missteps of ALPA has cost us an entire negotiating cycle.

Originally Posted by PanelApe

The notion that senior guys enjoyed all of these quality of life issues up until now….and suddenly as they approach retirement are willing to give it away is absolute folly. Every single contract we have signed at FedEx has had some things given away that we didn’t like…..Lie Flat Seats, Separate Per Diem Checks, Accepted fares, the list is long. We have never opened a TA and felt overwhelming joy because we got everything we wanted and the company got nothing. That isn’t reality.

Why wasn’t retirement important until now? Retirement was an issue on EVERY contract….we wanted improvements to retirement on each and every one of them. There was not a single contract negotiated where that item wasn’t challenged. We got some improvements - the B fund, improvements to the B fund. Did we get the bump in the Defined Benefit Plan….nope. FedEx has been clear that they don’t want to be in the DB business. They still don’t want to have DB.

it’s a negotiation…….not a summary list of our demands to be litigated while the company gets nothing. That’s the reality. My money is on the fact that when we do indeed get a contract…..it will leave a bad taste in our mouths and very few people will be overwhelmed with joyous celebration. Just like the last 3 I’ve seen here.

Originally Posted by Anderson

Pay rates and retirement shouldn’t be a negotiation in the context of inflation. The DB plan loses value every year, and now many of us have accepted the notion that we have to negotiate/concede other contract items simply to maintain value/purchasing power.

Originally Posted by PanelApe

Any contract negotiated between two parties involves some concessions…..we just need to decide if the gains are worth the concessions.

Originally Posted by Anderson

Pay rates and retirement shouldn’t be a negotiation in the context of inflation.

Originally Posted by Merle Haggard

The above idea seems lost on a great many people. The DB and the pay scales should always track inflation (the priced to ship a package certainly does) prior to a single item being negotiated. Doing otherwise is a concession.

Originally Posted by Anderson

Pay rates and retirement shouldn’t be a negotiation in the context of inflation. The DB plan loses value every year, and now many of us have accepted the notion that we have to negotiate/concede other contract items simply to maintain value/purchasing power. Essentially the company is making gains every contract cycle, and we, at best, are maintaining the status quo in some areas and making concessions in other areas. It’s ridiculous.

And if you think every contract requires concessions, then explain how Delta negotiated a TA with no concessions.

Originally Posted by UnusualAttitude

Not sure that any of this has a point? How they got there really doesn't matter. We live in a world of pattern bargaining and expectations because we have the same job and are represented by the same labor union. There is a market for our skillset, period.

Originally Posted by P-3Bubba

Sure and the market rate was made on TA23. Gains in DB, pay rates and B plan. It failed cause guys heard this charge of scope and student lines and they pushed the NO vote. So here we are and the market has driven up cost of living 30% and we kept our pride. I’m glad we got ICED into 3 more years of not participating in a record breaking 401k market while inflation continues to soar and we keep feeling the CHILL of 4a2c!

NEVER TA FOR ME!!!

-Bubs

Originally Posted by P-3Bubba

Sure and the market rate was made on TA23. Gains in DB, pay rates and B plan. It failed cause guys heard this charge of scope and student lines and they pushed the NO vote. So here we are and the market has driven up cost of living 30% and we kept our pride. I’m glad we got ICED into 3 more years of not participating in a record breaking 401k market while inflation continues to soar and we keep feeling the CHILL of 4a2c!

NEVER TA FOR ME!!!

-Bubs

Originally Posted by Iwa Washi

Absolutely, 100% incorrect. TA23 failed first and foremost due to pay rates and a "bonus" which were below industry standard and flat out insulting. Most "No" voters had already made up their minds before even leaving the "Compensation" section, and started diving into all of the concessions - which only reinforced their decision and belief that TA23 was a retirement improvement at the expense of everything else.

Originally Posted by Iwa Washi

Absolutely, 100% incorrect. TA23 failed first and foremost due to pay rates and a "bonus" which were below industry standard and flat out insulting. Most "No" voters had already made up their minds before even leaving the "Compensation" section, and started diving into all of the concessions - which only reinforced their decision and belief that TA23 was a retirement improvement at the expense of everything else.

You sound more and more like a management hack and company sympathizer with each and every post.