Duct Mon

I’ve got 12 years left in this industry. I’ve only been at F9 for a year and half.
I AM A NO VOTE!
Here’s why;
LTD is not even close.
DC 401K is a good start but not there yet.
Health insurance needs to be improved.
Loose language regarding the creation of pairings by the company with only input from the union.
No override for 321’s
No override for red eyes
Per diem is way too low
No international override in pay or per diem
While DH company will provide window or aisle, stretch or exit row. What happens if they can’t? What’s the penalty?
I wanted to see improvement in commuter policy. Not just if your pairing starts with a DH
18 hours for a “Long stay” hotel? Should be shorter like 14-16
No improvement on hotel qualities.
I could go on as I read more. This is just scratching the surface.

Biffsteritis

^^^^^^^^^^^^
This!

No PBS rules? Seriously!?!
Haven’t we seen enough of this management to know this language is way too weak!

ReserveCA

Does the voting group include enough dung beetles to eat this turd?

RustyChain

Oh please. They have a plan "B", you dont get to where they are without contingency plans if your original plan falls through.

PulledBreaker

I tried to remain neutral. I listened to the webinar, read the TA, slept on it, and read it again.

I can't, as a self respecting professional pilot, accept this TA. We are giving up too much, to gain soo little. There is no way anyone can vote in favor of this and retain any form of dignity.

If you think this deal is worthy of a yes vote, you are either broke or on the verge of retirement.

ColdWhiskey

Amen!! And very well said!

I would rather have my self respect and dignity than embrace this TA that just doesn't measure up.

Wheelswatch

Oh I'm broke, but somethings are more important than not being broke. NO WAY! I've made so little for so long in this industry, you can't hurt me. It's going to be a contract worthy of a major airline pilot or bust.

RockyMntAV8R

During the entire process of trying to secure an industry standard contract there has been a common theme. The company has not negotiated in good faith. We prevailed in arbitration confirming this fact, although it didn't change the mindset of the NMB and provided no reward. With these facts why would anyone vote yes on this TA when there are few agreements related to the biggest QOL item, PBS! If you vote yes you are agreeing to negotiate with the same people who have only done so in bad faith. If this negotiation fails we will put our fate in the hands of an arbitrator. PBS is going to change many things for us, don't you think we should at least know the rules and language of the agreement before we vote. I can't believe we are going to approve this substandard TA with out this information. When ALPA requested a proffer from the NMB we would never have agreed to binding arbitration, instead opting for self help. Now we are suddenly ready to settle and agree to binding arbitration if we can't come to a negotiated agreement with the Pat Ryan's of this company. Think about it!

sMFer

From a guy at a different major, you guys deserve more and better. I was at RP during Bedford’s experiment and now you’ve been through the ringer with Indigo.

We’re all watching and hoping you get a TA that respects your past as well as your future.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

dracir1

here’s the part I REALLY don’t understand...

The company agreed to pay $75 million in “back pay” or compensation for when we supposedly should have had been making more but weren’t. Is this not true?

Arguing the point about whether that is enough or not is one thing, but thinking that if we vote NO, vote in a new MEC, obtain new NC members and renegotiate some if not all of this contract and still just get the SAME $75 million is another.

Part of the next NCs job will be to obtain a greater compensation for time lost. Time doesn’t “stand still” in terms of the offer from the company for back pay. If the time to get a TA is longer, the back pay amount is increased. Another 6 months of negotiations should mean an additional $25 million (or whatever). Another year would be $50.

This “calculator” of the time cost of money makes no sense...

When SW and Delta said no, did their compensation for lost time stay the same?