Block 1 Rep, DR, SPOT ON!!!
From DR
You may be saturated—tired of reading TA comms. I get it. Unfortunately, several comms from various sources have been published recently that, perhaps in an effort to bolster support for ratification, have led to further questions and the need for clarification. I will try to make this as short as possible while still fulfilling my commitment as your elected representative to ensure that the information you have is as accurate as possible.
I assure you that it simply does not matter to me on a personal level which way you vote. I've said it many times: your vote is yours alone, and my only goal is to provide information and viewpoints you're not getting elsewhere so that you can make a more informed decision. I have always been an advocate of our Union's democratic processes, and come next Tuesday morning my marching orders, as always, come from you. It's my duty to implement your collective decision.
SIGNING BONUS (Retro): Your negotiating committee recently published updated figures for the signing bonus. First, understand that this isn't "extra money" over the total amount previously announced. We have always known that the retro payments would be revised upwards once we got tighter demographic data from the company. The total remains at $134 million and is still 10% (or $13.3 million+) short of the amount it should have been ($147.3m+) to make you whole for 3% pay increases since the amendable date (and by the way, that missing retro affects your retirement benefit accruals as well by an additional $1 million or so).
Given the new data, let's expand upon the miscalculation/shortfall of the signing bonus and compare the real retro (what you should receive) to what the TA would actually provide, as follows:
Real Negotiated
Retro Amount - Retro Amount = Shortfall
W/B Captain $43,900 - $39,000 = $3,900
N/B Captain $36,300 - $33,000 = $3,300
W/B First Officer $28,600 - $26,000 = $2,600
N/B First Officer $24,200 - $22,000 = $2,200
COMPARISONS OF THIS TA TO THOSE AT DAL AND AA ARE INVALID: Watch this brief video clip to refresh your memories regarding claims made by your negotiating chairman as he compares this TA to those at DAL and AA. Supposedly, this TA is worth $60k/pilot/year while those at DAL were only worth $30k and $25k, respectively. Sadly, these comparisons are as absurd as they are invalid.
First, the goal of the AA Negotiating Committee was merely to break even, negotiating a cost neutral contract that merged two airlines; meaning that the $25k/pilot/year gains for AA's pilots was essentially gravy, over and above their stated goal of...zero dollars. Why compare our TA to one that wasn't even supposed to have gains? Might as well go beat up the neighbor's kid and brag in the bar tonight about some guy's butt you whipped. Makes as much sense.
Second, the DAL TA failed. Again, what's the point in comparing our TA to...a failure? A TA that didn't become an actual contract? Never mind beating up the little kid next door. Now you're just swinging away at his imaginary little friend.
Third, neither AA nor DAL had an amendable period, as we did, meaning that their TAs were achieved prior to their current CBAs becoming amendable. The DAL TA was achieved early, while ours TA's date of signing would be 2.7 years past the amendable date. That's absolutely critical because no amendable period means no large "catch up" pay raise to inflate the calculations. Here is a simple comparison:
Airline A gets an "on time" TA worth $30k/year/pilot over a 4-year contract. $120k/pilot total over that 4-year period.
Airline B's negotiations get dragged out over 4 years, then they get the exact same $30k/year/pilot 4-year TA that airline A got, plus an additional $30k per year for each of the 4 years it took to negotiate the contract. $240k/pilot total over an 8-year period. If the negotiators tell the membership that the TA is worth $240k/pilot over a 4-year contract there's a false perception that airline B's TA has twice the value of the one from airline A.
As you can see, the 2.7-year amendable period matters. So why, then, is your Negotiating Committee dividing the value of this contract by 6 years rather than 8.7? As stated in my previous comm on this topic, the true value of this TA is $45k/pilot/year, NOT $60k.
Claiming $60k/pilot/year and comparing that to one TA that failed and another that wasn't targeted to have ANY gains is . . . what. Credible?
DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE RETIREMENT THING. IF WE JUST PASS THE TA NOW WE CAN FIX THE RETIREMENT LATER! That's what some have begun to say, so let's get this straight. When the TA was first announced, everyone pointed out the most obvious flaw, which was the retirement issue. The immediate excuse given was that infamous "line in the sand." Then the real backlash started. Ratification started to look pretty shaky. What happened next? The coordinated talking point among some reps suddenly became, in essence, "Don't worry, if you just vote 'yes' now we will fix the retirement part later!"
Right . . . so . . . there's a line in the sand but if we pass a TA that contains miscalculated pay raises, miscalculated retro payments, an increase of thousands per year in your health care costs, a myriad of efficiencies buried in the language that we haven't even begun to uncover yet...and after the company locks this in we will somehow have the leverage to fix the retirement...later? Not without taking a whole lotta something from some and giving it to others, we won't. But, we don't need to do that anyway. There's plenty of $$ left on the table if we don't capitulate for having bought into a "line in the sand" narrative.
A REFRESHER ON THE VALUE OF THE GAINS IN THIS TA—FROM THE AMENDABLE PERIOD THROUGH THE NEXT SIX YEARS—AS COMPARED TO . . .
. . . FedEx's overall revenues; 1/2 of one penny per dollar
. . . FedEx Express's revenues; 8/10ths of one penny per dollar
. . . FedEx Express's total salaries and benefits; 2%
. . . FedEx Express's operating expenses; 1%
. . . FedEx Express's $20 yield per package; 15 cents per package
So, tell me again please about lines in the sand, and how the only way we can fix our retirement is to pass this TA?
Fraternally,
DR
Block 1 Rep
Council 7 Chair