Thank you.

I’m confused about what the argument is here. One week of vacation generally gets me 3 weeks off in a month. With proper bidding between months, 4 weeks off is pretty easy to do. How is this not at the top of the industry? And what else are you looking for? One month off per vacation week?

No it’s the amount of pto/vacation time accrued

That is soo APC. And BlueJet in general.

You can not overlook the 35 hours credit. Yes we bid vacation weeks but our schedules are built via credit.

We get more days off total with our vacation(especially the first 5 years) than other airlines, however we just have to take those days is 2-3 bigger chunks rather than 3-4 smaller ones.

If you prefer the 3-4 smaller ones fine, but the amount of days off is the same or more with our system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1 in 4 agree with you.

Jetblue pilots have to live it to understand it.

The loss to market place allocation table of the almost 2,000 peak period slots will be felt next year. All of them will be gone in the first pass. Instead of pass two and three.

A few months ago a junior FO was so excited that he got summer vacation for the first time ever. He was, "see the CBA is great". It will be his last time ever. He just did not believe it when explained to him. I was, "bitter". No, its math!

He will have to live it first.

Just like health care. The change was sold and bought as no big deal.

Then it was.

We have to be 5 years behind the learning curve just to feel good about ourselves.

I don't understand the healthcare comment. Our healthcare sucks, I get that, but its always been bad. Are you saying we needed stronger language and a "Cadillac plan?"

not trying to be augmentative, just really don't understand.

The amount of days argument falls apart for the group as the group increase longevity. You look at you. The company looks at the group.

When a sensitivity analysis is performed in year DOS +1, +2, +3 the group loses time/days/credit to a market place allocation table. Ours is flat, others like UAL is steep. Very steep.

Plus Jetblue pilots are mostly commuters. Concentrated time off does not help. Every 12-19 year pilot I have spoken to would rather have more slots. Vacation every other month to ease the life of a commuter.

But we were surveyed about only wanting to keep 35 hours. Not the context of keeping it at the cost of fewer periods.

The NC did not explain to the pilot group OR the LEC that 35 hours would result in fewer slots and 1 round for 0-10 years of longevity and 1 1/2 for everyone else.

So we got a blended table and effectively no rounds for 1/2 the group.

A Frankenstein.

When we went from Crewcare 1, 2, and 3 to Green, Blue and Orange most of the pilots in our group yawned. They looked at the color presentation and said it looks the same. CC1 looks just like the Green Plan and the Blue seem better than CC1 because we can save more money and take it with them when they retire.

Super!

Trouble was the company like the NC only provided information that they wanted you to see. Not the entire picture.

Hence the pilot group has to live it, to learn. The hard way, again.

Based on what?

The TA vote.

Which from my experience was: "I need the base pay now!".

I guess 3 of 4 are super duper pleased with and wanted no profit sharing too!!!

Reminds me of Andrew Dice Clay when Jack and Jill went up the hill both with a buck and a quarter .... jetblue pilots came down with two fifty ... 'cause Jetblue pilots needed the money (so they took it up the bluejet).

Voting “yes” for a contract and being “super duper pleased” with a contract are two very different things. But you know that and it doesn’t illiterate your point. Stay angry, that’s productive.

It was in response to the tart "1 and 4 disagree" post! To which someone else asked: Based upon what? To which I added my post!

The "1 in 4" post was a drive-by that warranted a snarky response that started with "I guess ..." which alludes to sarcasm which I will admit is one of the lowest/simplest forms of humor and then added the Andrew Dice Clay reference!

Sarcastic + humor does not equal anger.

But you knew that!

But nope! I'm sooooo angry!

Classic "stop it, you are scaring me" response.

Ahhh, my mistake carry on!

Ironic, because the base pay wasn't even industry standard.

74% that voted yes for the CBA.

You act like it got voted in by 50% plus one. The majority wanted this contract for (enter their reasons). Now the minority yells from the pulpit.

Looking at numbers and only numbers the 190 was above. It can't be that bad you fly in the left seat of the 190.

190 rate was set to buy votes.

NC said as much.

3 of 4 voted for no profit sharing.

That that mean they okay with this too!

Probably not.

What does that mean to you?

Are you saying the 74% liked having 2 weeks Vaca for 0-10 years?

Are you saying 74% liked getting 0.2% profit sharing?

I'm just saying that a Yes vote doesn't mean what you think it means bud.

There's lots of grey in the real world. That 74% was primarily a vote against the terrible status quo that existed and not an enthusiastic vote for a disappointing TA.

This........

Read into nothing I am merely stating a fact of how the vote went. To have an opinion on why and how each pilot voted one would have call each of them up and ask them. The rest of the opinions on here about that 74% is nothing more than a guessing game right?

Each pilot has reason or a combination of reasons they voted YES or NO. Profit Sharing may or may not have been one of them.

Historically many of the big companies that have had massive profit sharing have also had massive furloughs (in the blink of an eye) in the past.....

Whoa wait a sec. It appears you are implying companies that have large profit sharing programs are more prone to furlough? Is that correct?

Do I really need to point out to you that when times are bad, ie when there’s no profit, profit sharing costs the company nothing? If companies aren’t making profit, and therefore aren’t giving out profit sharing, how can you possibly imply that profit sharing leads to furloughs?

Correlation does not equal causation.

Also, delta started in what, 1924? They had proudly never furloughed. Until they did. In what was it, 91 or so?

To imply jetblue is somehow superior, immune from, or less prone to furlough (and link it to industry lagging PS) is simply ignoring the cyclical nature of this industry, and ignoring where jetblue falls on the growth/maturation scale of any company, much less an airline, as well as the fact that businesses change, the economy changes, as do a whole other multitude of factors that affect furloughs. Profit sharing isn’t really one of those factors. So, to link them is ignorant at best.

Profits cause furloughs.

That is a new one.

That guy’s posts are based only in emotion, not reality. They’re good for a good facepalm or eye rolling moment but not for an honest debate.

It’s so sad that some people here take any criticism (constructive or otherwise) of JB or the CBA as a personal attack. I suppose we should just be happy with whatever we get and if we want to make it better we should LEAVE! :p

Profits do not cause furloughs...
Not at all.
And i think you know that’s not what he’s saying.

Delta. The “gold standard” of PS has a profit sharing model that was negotiated in BK. During a time of many furloughs. They were able to maintain that PS in the last round of negotiations due to a no vote and renegotiation.

Times are different. Companies are different. We could have voted no until we got every single thing we wanted. Every one. We’d never leave negotiations.

He is absolutely linking PS to furloughs. And they are absolutely not related.

AA/US furloughed a lot: bad PS.
SWA hasn’t furloughed: decent PS
JB hasn’t furloughed: used to have good PS

PS has zero to do with furloughs. And HB said they do. I called him out.

I see you changed your post, but you are still somewhat conflating my statement that PS/furloughs aren’t related with a yes/no/74%/negotiations argument. My stance on my post you replied to is purely debunking a PS-furlough correlation/causation argument that HB made. And if you don’t see he clearly said that...well...sorry for ya, but a back and forth about something unrelated won’t be productive. If you want to start a separate thread on yes vs no or 74% or how we got shafted with our PS and how DL got theirs, then fine. But this has already gotten off topic, I just wanted to set the record straight for ol hyper that us getting PS is in no way related to us getting furloughed, as he implied in his post.

I agree with everything you said James. But I think his point was that many of the companies that have some of the best PS now, Had that PS negotiated during a BK. That also included a furlough. There is no correlation for current times.

Maybe if we’d have voted it down we’d have gotten better PS? Maybe better signing bonus? Maybe if we had voted in JBPA back in 2009 we’d be in a better position? Maybe if we’d have voted in ALPA 1.0 we’d be in a better spot.
We got what we got when we got it.

Ya know it sucks we couldn’t get it all in the first run. We asked they said no....
We’ll get em next time...
Frankly I’m a hardline union supporter.
But this is a marathon. Not a sprint. And it’s certainly not a one shot one kill deal. I don’t think you’ll find many guys who think it shouldn’t be better. They’re out there. But there’s not many. But Rome wasn’t built in a day and we’ve got a long row to hoe.

I mostly agree. I just don’t see HB’s position being what you described...if that’s what he meant then fine, it was just poorly worded imo. I also don’t agree with the notion that good PS has to be negotiated in BK or during a furlough, or any other hard times, as PS is directly tied to the current financial state of the company. Doesn’t even require a concessionary contract to pay $0 in PS in the bad times. That said, I’m also a rates over PS kind of guy (for that reason). But I think from an operational standpoint PS would help the company (fuel burn/efficiency) and help the abomination that mgmt/labor relations has become. It was a shortsighted money grab by the c suite to pay for the CBA while getting murdered by Wall Street. Lastly, I do hope JB pilots do get them next time and get a much better CBA, with PS, in 2022.

I know I am way junior to many of you who post here, and get derided for my easy-going attitude, but I have not talked to one single pilot, in either seat, who thinks we got a good deal. Not one who thought we could have done better. But I have talked to a bunch who wanted SOMETHING concrete from which to work and move forward with. A contract that could be enforced.

Those who whine about "next time" seem to think that we should have stuck to our guns and demanded more. But the attorneys who have been negotiating contracts longer than many of us have been flying for JB said that the gains in a delay would have been minimal. And it seems 3/4 of the pilots agreed with them.

We are WAY past the point of arguing the merits of CBA 1.0. It is DUN, done. Can we focus on the path ahead? How to improve the CBA, what we want to see for the next round of negotiations?

It may be fun to point out how bad our CBA sucks (for some people), but the reality is that it DOESN'T suck all that much, even according to our 19 year CAs. But it CAN be better, and we need to work towards that. Attacking one another on APC does zero towards achieving a CBA #2 that will improve our QOL.

Edit: This wasn't directed at CoolHand. Just a general observation.

And JB took away our "better" profit sharing formula during GOOD times. And AA management, just a few years ago, and while not in negotiations, gave their employees/pilots a much better profit sharing plan. Again, during good times.

..........

DALPA profit sharing was negotiated in BK ... and it went up or down?

You and the MEC implied it went up. But it went down to its current form and then preserved thanks to the no vote and subsequent agreement ratification.

Except I never said that. Your BFF BlueDriver did. Put blame where it is best served, not where you wish it could be.

My message to him was that he COULD be happy with his station in life, if only he tried. But he refuses, and I have far too much to do to help guide him further. He can try to make fun of me all he wants to make himself feel better, but it doesn't affect me. I am happy with my life.

Our CBA can get better, and I certainly hope it does. But b1tching about it on APC resolves nothing. Those who do so are the minority in this company, and only have (somewhat of) a voice here on APC and BP. Not saying that all the opinions posted are whining, but some are. Yours and BD are at the forefront, though you probably don't want to hear that. Fighting for a better CBA is a good thing. Trying to put people down and demean them because they are more satisfied with their lives than you is a bad thing.

For the record, and much to the discredit of BDs psychic abilities, I am not a management hack. I am just a poor FO who happens to enjoy flying here, and I refuse to be miserable because some anonymous poster on APC tells me this job sucks. I've worked jobs that suck, and this isn't one of them.

Wow, you really stepped in it again.

Which doesn't surprise me coming from a guy who thinks our compensation peers are people who think a high end wall-oven is a fire pit on top of a boulder in Somalia.

Anyone who really knows me would laugh, out loud, at the suggestion that I am unhappy in life.

how far west does the e190 go? Chicago? Dallas? or does it make it all the way to Minneapolis?

DFW and AUS is as far west it goes. MSP as well during winter/off peak times.