Hawaiian Hiring up to 30 more
02-23-2017, 09:44 PM
#663
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,396
Like any TA there are positives and negatives. What struck me during the roadshow was the percentage of widebody airplanes as opposed to narrowbodies.
We don't have a large fleet, but the widebody/narrowbody ratio here is significantly higher than compared to other legacies.
We don't have a large fleet, but the widebody/narrowbody ratio here is significantly higher than compared to other legacies.
02-24-2017, 06:42 AM
#664
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by Rowerpilot1111
Is there anything about a commuter clause in the TA?
As someone that's not sure how much longer I'm going to be able to keep my family on the islands, I could find myself commuting in the next couple of years and raised this question myself to my union rep..
We don't need a commuter language based on past practice at this airline. Management for the most part in modern history has been very friendly, and accommodating with commuters.
Should this all of a sudden change, we would have a legitimate case for a grievance that would more than likely be upheld. The logic is we could actually restrict ourselves by trying to put something in black-and-white when what we have right now works perfectly. I can't argue with that. It's not broke, so let's not try to fix it. When explained to me this way, I actually agree with the logic.
Since someone else asked, yes, HNL is our only current base. At least for right now, there is nothing else on the radar. If and when the 321s start showing up, that may change, but I would not hold my breath.
02-24-2017, 08:17 AM
#665
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2016
Posts: 271
Originally Posted by Hawaiian 5O
We don't need a commuter language based on past practice at this airline. Management for the most part in modern history has been very friendly, and accommodating with commuters.
Should this all of a sudden change, we would have a legitimate case for a grievance that would more than likely be upheld. The logic is we could actually restrict ourselves by trying to put something in black-and-white when what we have right now works perfectly. I can't argue with that. It's not broke, so let's not try to fix it. When explained to me this way, I actually agree with the logic.
Should this all of a sudden change, we would have a legitimate case for a grievance that would more than likely be upheld. The logic is we could actually restrict ourselves by trying to put something in black-and-white when what we have right now works perfectly. I can't argue with that. It's not broke, so let's not try to fix it. When explained to me this way, I actually agree with the logic.
02-24-2017, 02:04 PM
#666
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 205
Originally Posted by CaptainDooley
Can you explain what the current commuter policy is?
Since this is a public board that's all I'm comfortable saying. If you work at HAL, email your rep or the NC for clarification. If you don't work here, sorry, that's all I'm willing to say on a wide open internet board.
02-24-2017, 10:24 PM
#667
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 28
Originally Posted by Hawaiian 5O
Do you work for us? If so, have you actually read the TA or been to a road show?
<-- Still not 100%, but probably voting yes. Here's why. I went to a road show, and have talked to several people "in the know". Here is my take. No, I'm not drinking the koolaid.
Can you please ask these several people "in the know" to provide the HAL pilots with an industry standard contract? I have read the TA cover to cover and will be attending a road show prior to making my final decision. The TA in it's current form is not industry standard and it is clear to me that management is executing the most obvious tactic....divide and conquer. This TA alienates, First year probation pilots, 767 pilots, and B plan retirement pilots. This is not by chance, and sadly it is working. Pilots on hangar talk and FB are ripping each other apart over these and other issues, very sad and unprofessional.
Do you know that since the DAL/SWA deals there is a nw President that will more than likely change out the existing NMB? Yeah yeah yeah. DAL voted one down, SWA did it too. So?
Yes, there is a new president, that happens every 4-8 years. Changing out the NMB is a completely normal process. If I am understanding you correctly, it appears you believe HAL has a better chance with the current NMB? If this is the case, I would urge you to immediately contact your union rep, other MEC members, and the NC committee to fully understand the dynamics that currently exist with the current NMB and our current state of affairs with regards to negotiations. You may be making some false assumptions. Comparing DAL & SWA negotiating to our situation is apples to oranges, I agree with that sentiment. The negotiating environment is a fluid one not static.
That was under a different president with soon to be a different NMB. It's big talk just assuming we're going to get a better deal if this one is voted down. What makes one think that we'll ever be released now?
Again, refer to my comments above concerning contacting your Rep, MEC, & NC. Ask them what the current NMB's position is with regards to negotiations between HAL and management. You may be surprised.
The current NMB like the rest of the people in DCA aren't going to do anything until they know what's going to happen to their organization. If they are all scrapped, they are going to have to be replaced and there will be a significant spool-up time. Do you think a new NMB member appointed by Trump that worked in non-airline business is going to know how to decipher a trip rig, or understand scope? Do you know this changeover under the current rate could take months if not a year or more.
Please refrain from using (or repeating) these types of irresponsible scare tactics. No one can say for certain how prepared or unprepared a Trump NMB will be with regards to the airlines until that NMB is on property and up to speed. Yes, there is a risk factor, like everything in life. The world could experience a catastrophic natural or man-made disaster that could negatively impact airline travel for the next ten years which could reset the pilot industry circa 9/1/1. My guess is every NMB has a learning curve to overcome just like any new job. It is ALPA's job to get them up to speed and educate them. This isn't ALPA's first rodeo. I certainly hope that pilot TA voting decisions will be made evaluating the facts, not influenced by conjecture. Risk assessment presented in an unbiased manner is one thing, but presenting information in a "act now or else" lacks credibility and merit in my humble opinion.
The company put real money on the table now. More than most thought that they would.
The company put real money down for certain factions of the pilot group, not the entire pilot group.
If we vote this down, the retro clock probably stops. Lets say it's at best six months before we start mediated negotiations again and another year before we get a deal. the odds of more retro is slim, as are the odds of getting much more money. If it takes a year to get a new NMB seated (look at how fast appointments are moving right now), we could be looking at 1.5 to 2 years for a new deal.
Again, please refer to my above comments regarding scare tactics. Nobody has a crystal ball. Yes, there is a probability that the process may unfold as you outlined, however, in your haste to make the short term money grab you forgot that perhaps your doing it at the expense of meaningful long-term gains. And by the way, it's "Ratification payment" not "Retroactive payment". The terminology matters.
If we vote this down, we could simply end up with very little improvements forcing the union to just move existing money around. This could cost every single pilot here thousands of dollars in lost earning potential. Lets say for example, it takes another year and we barely make any improvements with little to no new retro... For the 330 ohana, I'm talking an annual number of lost wages like 50k for CA's and 25k for FO's. Scare tactic? No. I think it's real risk.
If the TA gets voted down we will regroup and execute this contract appropriately, not on the backs of the smaller factions of the pilot group (767 pilots, 1st year pilots, Plan B pilots). Interesting that you chose to use the phrase "330 Ohana," I like to use the term "pilot group". Ohana is an inclusive word not an exclusive word. I think of all Hawaiian Airlines employees as my Ohana, not just the A332 pilots. I also believe it would be unconscionable to cash my ratification check knowing that other pilots on property who contributed to the companies success were not appropriately compensated. It's been my experience that people who say they aren't using scare tactics, are using scare tactics.
If you do work here, you know how significantly far behind the rest if the industry that we are. While not perfect, this TA will at least bring us in line with our peers when looking at the entire package.
Exactly! HAL is significantly far behind the industry and will continue to be until the pilot group stands in unity and says "If not now, when?" I honestly believe most HAL pilots do not expect a "perfect" contract, however, I do believe HAL pilots expect an industry standard contract. This TA is not industry standard.
We are still slightly lagging in some areas, average in others, but came out ahead in places such as scope, overall retirement and health care.
I'm not sure how you can make this assessment unless you are thoroughly familiar with the scope, overall retirement, and health care of similar carriers. I will have to research this more thoroughly. I did note that there are negligible QOL changes as compared to similar air carriers. A lot of sections addressing QOL and work rules were not even addressed.
If anyone thought we were going to beat Delta... I want some of what you are having.
As I said before, I believe most HAL pilots want an industry standard contract, which is what our strategic plan was based on. But just out of curiosity, do you believe you should receive less money than any air carrier pilot that fly's the same (or similar) equipment and the same (or similar) routes? If you do, there in lies the problem. And remember, our CEO is in the top 10 airline CEO'S in terms of financial earnings. You think our CEO is not trying to make more money than the Delta CEO? Look it up, you just might change the manner in which you have approached this post you crafted.
This deal is not perfect and there are a few tings that tee me off like ramp-up for credit under rigs, but the pros far number the cons. I'm hearing a lot of "that's not fair" type of stuff on the FB page. Well, life is not fair. You don't get what you think you deserve or what you think is right. You get what you can negotiate based on the market at the time.
<-- Still not 100%, but probably voting yes. Here's why. I went to a road show, and have talked to several people "in the know". Here is my take. No, I'm not drinking the koolaid.
Can you please ask these several people "in the know" to provide the HAL pilots with an industry standard contract? I have read the TA cover to cover and will be attending a road show prior to making my final decision. The TA in it's current form is not industry standard and it is clear to me that management is executing the most obvious tactic....divide and conquer. This TA alienates, First year probation pilots, 767 pilots, and B plan retirement pilots. This is not by chance, and sadly it is working. Pilots on hangar talk and FB are ripping each other apart over these and other issues, very sad and unprofessional.
Do you know that since the DAL/SWA deals there is a nw President that will more than likely change out the existing NMB? Yeah yeah yeah. DAL voted one down, SWA did it too. So?
Yes, there is a new president, that happens every 4-8 years. Changing out the NMB is a completely normal process. If I am understanding you correctly, it appears you believe HAL has a better chance with the current NMB? If this is the case, I would urge you to immediately contact your union rep, other MEC members, and the NC committee to fully understand the dynamics that currently exist with the current NMB and our current state of affairs with regards to negotiations. You may be making some false assumptions. Comparing DAL & SWA negotiating to our situation is apples to oranges, I agree with that sentiment. The negotiating environment is a fluid one not static.
That was under a different president with soon to be a different NMB. It's big talk just assuming we're going to get a better deal if this one is voted down. What makes one think that we'll ever be released now?
Again, refer to my comments above concerning contacting your Rep, MEC, & NC. Ask them what the current NMB's position is with regards to negotiations between HAL and management. You may be surprised.
The current NMB like the rest of the people in DCA aren't going to do anything until they know what's going to happen to their organization. If they are all scrapped, they are going to have to be replaced and there will be a significant spool-up time. Do you think a new NMB member appointed by Trump that worked in non-airline business is going to know how to decipher a trip rig, or understand scope? Do you know this changeover under the current rate could take months if not a year or more.
Please refrain from using (or repeating) these types of irresponsible scare tactics. No one can say for certain how prepared or unprepared a Trump NMB will be with regards to the airlines until that NMB is on property and up to speed. Yes, there is a risk factor, like everything in life. The world could experience a catastrophic natural or man-made disaster that could negatively impact airline travel for the next ten years which could reset the pilot industry circa 9/1/1. My guess is every NMB has a learning curve to overcome just like any new job. It is ALPA's job to get them up to speed and educate them. This isn't ALPA's first rodeo. I certainly hope that pilot TA voting decisions will be made evaluating the facts, not influenced by conjecture. Risk assessment presented in an unbiased manner is one thing, but presenting information in a "act now or else" lacks credibility and merit in my humble opinion.
The company put real money on the table now. More than most thought that they would.
The company put real money down for certain factions of the pilot group, not the entire pilot group.
If we vote this down, the retro clock probably stops. Lets say it's at best six months before we start mediated negotiations again and another year before we get a deal. the odds of more retro is slim, as are the odds of getting much more money. If it takes a year to get a new NMB seated (look at how fast appointments are moving right now), we could be looking at 1.5 to 2 years for a new deal.
Again, please refer to my above comments regarding scare tactics. Nobody has a crystal ball. Yes, there is a probability that the process may unfold as you outlined, however, in your haste to make the short term money grab you forgot that perhaps your doing it at the expense of meaningful long-term gains. And by the way, it's "Ratification payment" not "Retroactive payment". The terminology matters.
If we vote this down, we could simply end up with very little improvements forcing the union to just move existing money around. This could cost every single pilot here thousands of dollars in lost earning potential. Lets say for example, it takes another year and we barely make any improvements with little to no new retro... For the 330 ohana, I'm talking an annual number of lost wages like 50k for CA's and 25k for FO's. Scare tactic? No. I think it's real risk.
If the TA gets voted down we will regroup and execute this contract appropriately, not on the backs of the smaller factions of the pilot group (767 pilots, 1st year pilots, Plan B pilots). Interesting that you chose to use the phrase "330 Ohana," I like to use the term "pilot group". Ohana is an inclusive word not an exclusive word. I think of all Hawaiian Airlines employees as my Ohana, not just the A332 pilots. I also believe it would be unconscionable to cash my ratification check knowing that other pilots on property who contributed to the companies success were not appropriately compensated. It's been my experience that people who say they aren't using scare tactics, are using scare tactics.
If you do work here, you know how significantly far behind the rest if the industry that we are. While not perfect, this TA will at least bring us in line with our peers when looking at the entire package.
Exactly! HAL is significantly far behind the industry and will continue to be until the pilot group stands in unity and says "If not now, when?" I honestly believe most HAL pilots do not expect a "perfect" contract, however, I do believe HAL pilots expect an industry standard contract. This TA is not industry standard.
We are still slightly lagging in some areas, average in others, but came out ahead in places such as scope, overall retirement and health care.
I'm not sure how you can make this assessment unless you are thoroughly familiar with the scope, overall retirement, and health care of similar carriers. I will have to research this more thoroughly. I did note that there are negligible QOL changes as compared to similar air carriers. A lot of sections addressing QOL and work rules were not even addressed.
If anyone thought we were going to beat Delta... I want some of what you are having.
As I said before, I believe most HAL pilots want an industry standard contract, which is what our strategic plan was based on. But just out of curiosity, do you believe you should receive less money than any air carrier pilot that fly's the same (or similar) equipment and the same (or similar) routes? If you do, there in lies the problem. And remember, our CEO is in the top 10 airline CEO'S in terms of financial earnings. You think our CEO is not trying to make more money than the Delta CEO? Look it up, you just might change the manner in which you have approached this post you crafted.
This deal is not perfect and there are a few tings that tee me off like ramp-up for credit under rigs, but the pros far number the cons. I'm hearing a lot of "that's not fair" type of stuff on the FB page. Well, life is not fair. You don't get what you think you deserve or what you think is right. You get what you can negotiate based on the market at the time.
-sp
02-25-2017, 09:26 AM
#669
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 239
Thanks 50 for the well thought out post.
And SP for the differing opinion.
The pressure side of a sales job is from the no voters in my mind. Trying to blow this thing up to get 'more'. They can't tell you what or how or when, just more. While losing the TVM making it impossible to make up for it.
Want to add better vacation credit, great me too. It may add a couple thousand a year to your paycheck and get you an extra day off or two.
Willing to give up 100k a year while you wait for it? Nope, me either.
The industry standard argument is great, on the items that are less than. What about everything that is above? You can bet your retro the company wanted every item that is over.
Be glad to have some that are still.
It's not a perfect deal, I don't think any are. But it's in your hand now and not a year from now.
And SP for the differing opinion.
The pressure side of a sales job is from the no voters in my mind. Trying to blow this thing up to get 'more'. They can't tell you what or how or when, just more. While losing the TVM making it impossible to make up for it.
Want to add better vacation credit, great me too. It may add a couple thousand a year to your paycheck and get you an extra day off or two.
Willing to give up 100k a year while you wait for it? Nope, me either.
The industry standard argument is great, on the items that are less than. What about everything that is above? You can bet your retro the company wanted every item that is over.
Be glad to have some that are still.
It's not a perfect deal, I don't think any are. But it's in your hand now and not a year from now.
Last edited by ridinhigh; 02-25-2017 at 09:43 AM.
02-25-2017, 01:25 PM
#670
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2014
Position: E145 FO
Posts: 117
Originally Posted by Rama
Like any TA there are positives and negatives. What struck me during the roadshow was the percentage of widebody airplanes as opposed to narrowbodies.
We don't have a large fleet, but the widebody/narrowbody ratio here is significantly higher than compared to other legacies.
We don't have a large fleet, but the widebody/narrowbody ratio here is significantly higher than compared to other legacies.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
