|
Originally Posted by Southerner
(Post 2622094)
Love. It.
..... |
Originally Posted by queue
(Post 2621928)
It was written by people who have never read a real contract before.
Originally Posted by RiddleEagle18
(Post 2622059)
You understand literally everything you have complained about tonight is Industry standard.
Or The things you want added are not in any airline contract in existence. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk I haven't finished reading it yet, but so far these are the things that stand out to me that I don't like. First and foremost, the word "AVERAGE" for daily credit in pairing constructions has irked me since they released the AIP, and my fear has come to realization. I've been saying we need 'MINIMUM' daily credit, not 'AVERAGE DAILY CREDIT'. In the TA there is a trip example that has a 30hr layover. If you use only the block time as determining credit for this example, then the 4 day trip would pay 18ish hours based on our current system. With this new average, the 4 day trip is now 20hrs of pay thanks to the average daily. Seems good right? Well, no, because we're leaving 5+ hours on the table. Days 1 and 2 in that example block 7.3 and 8.8, with day 3 off and day 4 blocking 1.8, for a total 17.9. That day 3 layover should be a MINIMUM of 5 hours pay, and that last day of 1.8 block should be a MINIMUM DAILY of 5 hours, turning that 20hr trip into a 26ish hour trip. This is how it was done at my regional, there's no reason it shouldn't be done here. Your 7-8hrs of credit on day 1 or 2 is watered down because it's all averaged out to meet the 5 hour average daily requirement. There will still be lots of trips with 30hr layovers and heavy flying loaded up in the first days, that should pay a minimum of over 20 hours but we won't see it because of the "AVERAGE" language. If I'm reading/interpreting any of that incorrectly, please let me know, but you can look at the example yourself in Section 4.B.1 Next, in Section 1, why are non-jet blue pilots (Barring manufacturer pilots) allowed to touch our airplanes? Paint shop, mx etc flights should be conducted by JetBlue pilots only. The entire idea of a part 91 pilots flying our stuff is ridiculous IMO. Those are hours that some of us would want and can earn. The QOL stuff seems pretty good though, but I'm only getting into the meatier part of the TA this morning. There are a lot of things I like, but there are still many things, especially the things above, that I don't like. |
Originally Posted by AYLflyer
(Post 2622213)
:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:
I don't think Q actually understands how negotiations work. I haven't finished reading it yet, but so far these are the things that stand out to me that I don't like. First and foremost, the word "AVERAGE" for daily credit in pairing constructions has irked me since they released the AIP, and my fear has come to realization. I've been saying we need 'MINIMUM' daily credit, not 'AVERAGE DAILY CREDIT'. In the TA there is a trip example that has a 30hr layover. If you use only the block time as determining credit for this example, then the 4 day trip would pay 18ish hours based on our current system. With this new average, the 4 day trip is now 20hrs of pay thanks to the average daily. Seems good right? Well, no, because we're leaving 5+ hours on the table. Days 1 and 2 in that example block 7.3 and 8.8, with day 3 off and day 4 blocking 1.8, for a total 17.9. That day 3 layover should be a MINIMUM of 5 hours pay, and that last day of 1.8 block should be a MINIMUM DAILY of 5 hours, turning that 20hr trip into a 26ish hour trip. This is how it was done at my regional, there's no reason it shouldn't be done here. Your 7-8hrs of credit on day 1 or 2 is watered down because it's all averaged out to meet the 5 hour average daily requirement. There will still be lots of trips with 30hr layovers and heavy flying loaded up in the first days, that should pay a minimum of over 20 hours but we won't see it because of the "AVERAGE" language. If I'm reading/interpreting any of that incorrectly, please let me know, but you can look at the example yourself in Section 4.B.1 Next, in Section 1, why are non-jet blue pilots (Barring manufacturer pilots) allowed to touch our airplanes? Paint shop, mx etc flights should be conducted by JetBlue pilots only. The entire idea of a part 91 pilots flying our stuff is ridiculous IMO. Those are hours that some of us would want and can earn. The QOL stuff seems pretty good though, but I'm only getting into the meatier part of the TA this morning. There are a lot of things I like, but there are still many things, especially the things above, that I don't like. |
No major has daily minimum.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Has the requirement to blue turn while non-reving been done away with?
|
Q is probably banned from car dealerships and any international marketplace. Can you imagine his buyers remorse?
The TA certainly has some faults, but there’s no doubt that we’re in desperate need for a CBA. No pay raise in 2018. No COLA 2018. Lucky we got 8% in 2017. (Management Gift) Look at he language we live by in today’s PEA. Bozo wants a better deal. Better pay rates. Better language. Well, that will be 4 years of no votes. 4 years of new negotiators and mediators. It’s time to start the clock. Begin our lives under a CBA and figure out what works and doesn’t work going forward. We don’t know what Aircraft or plan the company has in store for us, but we do know we have no say in what that will be. We never have. Delta pilots didn’t vote on getting the A350 and I’m sure the Delta Forum version of Q was railing about the language which states “the subsequent purchase agreement must herein lie to the discretion of this said management in consideration of the whiny little bi7ches who are paid to make them go up and down” Now Q will say we’re settling and Bozo will say oh who knows. Let’s find out. -Bubs |
I know I have a reserve line in July. 31 days. 12 days off. That sucks. TA fixes that to 15.
-Bubs |
P3, are you drunk?
Isn't the TA 13/14 days off for reserves? 8% raise in 2017, management gift? ARE YOU FOXTROT KIDDING ME? That "raise" cost me ALL of 8% in profit sharing the next year, AND EVERY SUBSEQUENT YEAR OF THIS NEW "CONTRACT"! We lost probably 70-100k over the life of our new TA due to that awesome 8% management "gift". And 4 years to renegotiate 3-4 fixes? You are definitely drunk, or worse. And I'm not even sure I'm gonna vote NO, but wow. |
Originally Posted by Bluedriver
(Post 2622272)
P3, are you drunk?
Isn't the TA 13/14 days off for reserves? 8% raise in 2017, management gift? ARE YOU FOXTROT KIDDING ME? That "raise" cost me ALL of 8% in profit sharing the next year, AND EVERY SUBSEQUENT YEAR OF THIS NEW "CONTRACT"! We lost probably 70-100k over the life of our new TA due to that awesome 8% management "gift". And 4 years to renegotiate 3-4 fixes? You are definitely drunk, or worse. And I'm not even sure I'm gonna vote NO, but wow. |
One of the first things I looked up in the TA is if they fixed the AM/PM bidding for reserves. They would now have 4 "silos" that can be bid for with seniority
Silo RAP start window (Base local time) A 01:00-06:59 B 07:00-11:59 C 12:00-16:59 D 17:00-22:00 HOWEVER, it also states: "RAP start times within a silo shall be awarded in seniority order beginning with the earliest RAP start time." It appears that people with the earlier RAP start times would still get called first for short call-outs and, thus, the most senior guy within the silo is the guy to get called first! (legality permitting) This is something I harped on in every survey. I can't see a benefit for the company in having it written this way, so why on earth was this not fixed?? Also, I don't see any language on how the required numbers for each silo should be determined. They wouldn't be able to give us a RAP start time before 1000 on the first day but you could still have 5+ days of reserve left and they put you on a RAP with a start time of 0300 while everyone with less days start later than you (and you frequently get an early assignment in this situation.) I find it hard to keep reading the TA after seeing the highlights and seeing this. That, and the pay cut I'll take initially with losing PTO sellback (E190) as well as the vulnerability we'll have with them getting 195E2's under that same pay rate. I'm still going to try to read the whole thing but I dunno.... |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:25 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands