copy

Yes, that’s when Warren said they are going to proceed anyway with the deal. But he didn’t say to what extent (ie only IAW LOA12, or what LOA13 would provide). Also, neither they nor ALPA answered the real question of, will they go back to the table and try for more. But, in their defense, they can’t say that. If the company admitted they’d go back to the table, that’s telegraphing there is more left on the table, and would tank the vote even more. My analysis anyway.

feltf4

makes sense. Thanks for the cliff notes.

Boomer

First off, don’t take my interpretation as inclusive. Watch the videos.

That said, here’s how they addressed that question...

Management - NEA will happen anyway, but not “Great” NEA, just “Good Enough” NEA. Pilots won’t get furlough protection or the 2% raise. No mention of going back for round 2 on the LOA.

MEC - We will continue forward, NEA is already underway. We won’t have “the protections” offered by LOA 13, nor the 2% raise. If/when the company violates our Scope, we will immediately file grievances. Section 1.I, which requires Scope violations to be ruled on in 60 days, may not be possible because it may take months just to get our case seen in COVID world. Will company renegotiate? Coin toss. Maybe, maybe not.

ALPA National - Salty old dude that once handled Orville’s grievance against Wilbur says that in the hundreds of these LOAs he has handled, sometimes the company comes back and sweetens the pot. Sometimes they come back to the table but if the industry circumstances have worsened, the deal is worse than the original one. And sometimes the company takes their ball and goes home.

SaintNick

I would much rather lose the 2% in a heart beat then accept the gutting of scope loa13 would give the company. And I might get furloughed. My wife asked why would I vote no and get furloughed maybe, I said it’s better to have a good job to come back with a good contract then what loa 13 gave us.

YOU NEVER GET SCOPE BACK ONCE YOU GIVE IT UP!

Bluedriver

Nah... Now's a better time for me Warren.

WhistlePig

The salty old dude is a *******ing legend in airline labor law. He’s also correct: that’s impossible question to answer. Also, anyone who still thinks this a vote on whether to execute the NEA or not, does not know what is going on right now. Good NEA without LOA 13, Great NEA with LOA 13 is the company position. Whether Scope relief plus 2% and limited job protection is fair value for Great NEA is our question. I don’t think it is, but I also think the NC took every crumb that was being offered and now the membership can decide. It’s not worth splitting the pilot group against itself however.

Bluedriver

Right. The company didn't offer more, because they didn't THINK they NEEDED to.

A NO vote will likely change that, or they can just have a "good" NEA. There choice, and I don't need 2% bad enough to gut our FC scope or give up any leverage to look at profit sharing.

As for PS I'm the NEXT CBA, remember negotiations START soon, during a bad time in aviation financials. They won't END for many years, and we will likely have NOTHING in terms of leverage to try and push an industry competitive Profit Sharing plan over the goal line.

No thanks, now's a good time to talk PS Warren.

Desdi

I can’t wait for the first time this pilot group votes NO on something, anything! If only to watch the awakening of some of our brothers when mgt comes back to the table and offers more in short order. That eduction hopefully comes with LOA 13! Learn when u have leverage and when u don’t..... we have leverage now, not to rake the company over the coals but to get compensated accordingly for relieving scope and tightening the language up to a comfortable level. That’s fair!

pilotpayne

i did like warren saying we are offering a 2% raise when other airlines aren’t. Yeah that’s because you want something from us it’s not out of the goodness of your heart. I agree with you and WP. I sure the negotiating committee got everything they could. The company offered very little because it doesn’t think it needs to. We always say yes, hopefully that changes soon.

Desdi

Exactly! This pilot group always votes Yes..... Mgt knows that.... we have yet to show any spine and drive a hard bargain. Let’s make this the first time.... let’s at least demand tangible benefits from date of signing..... but only after tightening up the language. If they didn’t NEED this relief they wouldn’t have approached the MEC....do the YES voters really think they’d b going through this if this relief was just “nice to have”. We (apparently and without membership input) granted LOA 12 based on good will..... the good will stops there, now we should demand solid protections and COMMENSURATE financial compensation..... not the 2% we already would have hopefully demanded retroactively in the CBA2 signing bonus.