Any negotiation rumors?
11-08-2022 | 06:08 AM
#176
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2018
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
From: Airline Employee
11-08-2022 | 07:14 AM
#177
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 4,629
Likes: 15
From: blueJet
It wasn’t the last contract, it was LOA 17.
Company: “We need to rewrite this scope section because otherwise the NEA would be in violation. We’ll give you 2% plus furlough relief.”
MEC: “Hey guys, vote for this scope relief. Because 2%! If we vote no, the company can’t do the full NEA and we get nothing. Plus furloughs!”
Pilots: “We’re allllllllmost convinced… but no. Not just no, but HELL NO. And 49% yes.”
MEC: “That’s right! We’re worth way more than 2%! Hell no!”
Company: “Sorry you feel that way. I guess we’re going to violate your scope. You give us no option.”
MEC: “Wait… you can do that? Grievances!”
Arbitrator: “So, what do we have here?”
MEC: “They said they needed us to change scope because the NEA violates it. We voted no, and they did it anyway.”
Arbitrator: “Is this true?”
Company:
MEC: “We even have fourteen memos, nine bulletins, three Q&A sessions, and five pocket sessions where the company says that exact thing.”
Company: “Those were never official company announcements. Besides, we’d like to activate our “We can break the contract as long as it makes more money” clause.”
Arbitrator: “There’s no such clause.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “I’m required by law to make my ruling within 30 days. So you guys take up to a year… and talk this through.”
Company: “2% is our first and final offer.”
MEC: “The pilots of JetBlue have spoken. It’s going to take a lot more than 2% for us to let this violation stand. Plus we see how much money Jetblue is making with the NEA - and the pilots deserve a bigger chunk of that. 2% is a pittance.”
Company:
MEC: “Not good enough.”
Company:
MEC: “It’s a clear violation. You are not even in the ballpark.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “Are you ready for my decision?”
Company: “3%”
MEC: “3%? We’ll take it! Home run baby!”
Pilot group: “3%? We’ll take it!”
Company: “Interesting. Well, on that note, let’s talk Section 6 openers…”
Company: “We need to rewrite this scope section because otherwise the NEA would be in violation. We’ll give you 2% plus furlough relief.”
MEC: “Hey guys, vote for this scope relief. Because 2%! If we vote no, the company can’t do the full NEA and we get nothing. Plus furloughs!”
Pilots: “We’re allllllllmost convinced… but no. Not just no, but HELL NO. And 49% yes.”
MEC: “That’s right! We’re worth way more than 2%! Hell no!”
Company: “Sorry you feel that way. I guess we’re going to violate your scope. You give us no option.”
MEC: “Wait… you can do that? Grievances!”
Arbitrator: “So, what do we have here?”
MEC: “They said they needed us to change scope because the NEA violates it. We voted no, and they did it anyway.”
Arbitrator: “Is this true?”
Company:
MEC: “We even have fourteen memos, nine bulletins, three Q&A sessions, and five pocket sessions where the company says that exact thing.”
Company: “Those were never official company announcements. Besides, we’d like to activate our “We can break the contract as long as it makes more money” clause.”
Arbitrator: “There’s no such clause.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “I’m required by law to make my ruling within 30 days. So you guys take up to a year… and talk this through.”
Company: “2% is our first and final offer.”
MEC: “The pilots of JetBlue have spoken. It’s going to take a lot more than 2% for us to let this violation stand. Plus we see how much money Jetblue is making with the NEA - and the pilots deserve a bigger chunk of that. 2% is a pittance.”
Company:
MEC: “Not good enough.”
Company:
MEC: “It’s a clear violation. You are not even in the ballpark.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “Are you ready for my decision?”
Company: “3%”
MEC: “3%? We’ll take it! Home run baby!”
Pilot group: “3%? We’ll take it!”
Company: “Interesting. Well, on that note, let’s talk Section 6 openers…”
11-08-2022 | 07:36 AM
#179
Line Holder
Joined: Oct 2017
Posts: 436
Likes: 14
It wasn’t the last contract, it was LOA 17.
Company: “We need to rewrite this scope section because otherwise the NEA would be in violation. We’ll give you 2% plus furlough relief.”
MEC: “Hey guys, vote for this scope relief. Because 2%! If we vote no, the company can’t do the full NEA and we get nothing. Plus furloughs!”
Pilots: “We’re allllllllmost convinced… but no. Not just no, but HELL NO. And 49% yes.”
MEC: “That’s right! We’re worth way more than 2%! Hell no!”
Company: “Sorry you feel that way. I guess we’re going to violate your scope. You give us no option.”
MEC: “Wait… you can do that? Grievances!”
Arbitrator: “So, what do we have here?”
MEC: “They said they needed us to change scope because the NEA violates it. We voted no, and they did it anyway.”
Arbitrator: “Is this true?”
Company:
MEC: “We even have fourteen memos, nine bulletins, three Q&A sessions, and five pocket sessions where the company says that exact thing.”
Company: “Those were never official company announcements. Besides, we’d like to activate our “We can break the contract as long as it makes more money” clause.”
Arbitrator: “There’s no such clause.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “I’m required by law to make my ruling within 30 days. So you guys take up to a year… and talk this through.”
Company: “2% is our first and final offer.”
MEC: “The pilots of JetBlue have spoken. It’s going to take a lot more than 2% for us to let this violation stand. Plus we see how much money Jetblue is making with the NEA - and the pilots deserve a bigger chunk of that. 2% is a pittance.”
Company:
MEC: “Not good enough.”
Company:
MEC: “It’s a clear violation. You are not even in the ballpark.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “Are you ready for my decision?”
Company: “3%”
MEC: “3%? We’ll take it! Home run baby!”
Pilot group: “3%? We’ll take it!”
Company: “Interesting. Well, on that note, let’s talk Section 6 openers…”
Company: “We need to rewrite this scope section because otherwise the NEA would be in violation. We’ll give you 2% plus furlough relief.”
MEC: “Hey guys, vote for this scope relief. Because 2%! If we vote no, the company can’t do the full NEA and we get nothing. Plus furloughs!”
Pilots: “We’re allllllllmost convinced… but no. Not just no, but HELL NO. And 49% yes.”
MEC: “That’s right! We’re worth way more than 2%! Hell no!”
Company: “Sorry you feel that way. I guess we’re going to violate your scope. You give us no option.”
MEC: “Wait… you can do that? Grievances!”
Arbitrator: “So, what do we have here?”
MEC: “They said they needed us to change scope because the NEA violates it. We voted no, and they did it anyway.”
Arbitrator: “Is this true?”
Company:
MEC: “We even have fourteen memos, nine bulletins, three Q&A sessions, and five pocket sessions where the company says that exact thing.”
Company: “Those were never official company announcements. Besides, we’d like to activate our “We can break the contract as long as it makes more money” clause.”
Arbitrator: “There’s no such clause.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “I’m required by law to make my ruling within 30 days. So you guys take up to a year… and talk this through.”
Company: “2% is our first and final offer.”
MEC: “The pilots of JetBlue have spoken. It’s going to take a lot more than 2% for us to let this violation stand. Plus we see how much money Jetblue is making with the NEA - and the pilots deserve a bigger chunk of that. 2% is a pittance.”
Company:
MEC: “Not good enough.”
Company:
MEC: “It’s a clear violation. You are not even in the ballpark.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “Are you ready for my decision?”
Company: “3%”
MEC: “3%? We’ll take it! Home run baby!”
Pilot group: “3%? We’ll take it!”
Company: “Interesting. Well, on that note, let’s talk Section 6 openers…”
This is gold.
11-08-2022 | 11:12 AM
#180
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Oct 2012
Posts: 3,274
Likes: 55
From: 190 captain and “Pro-pilot”
It wasn’t the last contract, it was LOA 17.
Company: “We need to rewrite this scope section because otherwise the NEA would be in violation. We’ll give you 2% plus furlough relief.”
MEC: “Hey guys, vote for this scope relief. Because 2%! If we vote no, the company can’t do the full NEA and we get nothing. Plus furloughs!”
Pilots: “We’re allllllllmost convinced… but no. Not just no, but HELL NO. And 49% yes.”
MEC: “That’s right! We’re worth way more than 2%! Hell no!”
Company: “Sorry you feel that way. I guess we’re going to violate your scope. You give us no option.”
MEC: “Wait… you can do that? Grievances!”
Arbitrator: “So, what do we have here?”
MEC: “They said they needed us to change scope because the NEA violates it. We voted no, and they did it anyway.”
Arbitrator: “Is this true?”
Company:
MEC: “We even have fourteen memos, nine bulletins, three Q&A sessions, and five pocket sessions where the company says that exact thing.”
Company: “Those were never official company announcements. Besides, we’d like to activate our “We can break the contract as long as it makes more money” clause.”
Arbitrator: “There’s no such clause.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “I’m required by law to make my ruling within 30 days. So you guys take up to a year… and talk this through.”
Company: “2% is our first and final offer.”
MEC: “The pilots of JetBlue have spoken. It’s going to take a lot more than 2% for us to let this violation stand. Plus we see how much money Jetblue is making with the NEA - and the pilots deserve a bigger chunk of that. 2% is a pittance.”
Company:
MEC: “Not good enough.”
Company:
MEC: “It’s a clear violation. You are not even in the ballpark.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “Are you ready for my decision?”
Company: “3%”
MEC: “3%? We’ll take it! Home run baby!”
Pilot group: “3%? We’ll take it!”
Company: “Interesting. Well, on that note, let’s talk Section 6 openers…”
Company: “We need to rewrite this scope section because otherwise the NEA would be in violation. We’ll give you 2% plus furlough relief.”
MEC: “Hey guys, vote for this scope relief. Because 2%! If we vote no, the company can’t do the full NEA and we get nothing. Plus furloughs!”
Pilots: “We’re allllllllmost convinced… but no. Not just no, but HELL NO. And 49% yes.”
MEC: “That’s right! We’re worth way more than 2%! Hell no!”
Company: “Sorry you feel that way. I guess we’re going to violate your scope. You give us no option.”
MEC: “Wait… you can do that? Grievances!”
Arbitrator: “So, what do we have here?”
MEC: “They said they needed us to change scope because the NEA violates it. We voted no, and they did it anyway.”
Arbitrator: “Is this true?”
Company:
MEC: “We even have fourteen memos, nine bulletins, three Q&A sessions, and five pocket sessions where the company says that exact thing.”
Company: “Those were never official company announcements. Besides, we’d like to activate our “We can break the contract as long as it makes more money” clause.”
Arbitrator: “There’s no such clause.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “I’m required by law to make my ruling within 30 days. So you guys take up to a year… and talk this through.”
Company: “2% is our first and final offer.”
MEC: “The pilots of JetBlue have spoken. It’s going to take a lot more than 2% for us to let this violation stand. Plus we see how much money Jetblue is making with the NEA - and the pilots deserve a bigger chunk of that. 2% is a pittance.”
Company:
MEC: “Not good enough.”
Company:
MEC: “It’s a clear violation. You are not even in the ballpark.”
Company:
Arbitrator: “Are you ready for my decision?”
Company: “3%”
MEC: “3%? We’ll take it! Home run baby!”
Pilot group: “3%? We’ll take it!”
Company: “Interesting. Well, on that note, let’s talk Section 6 openers…”
and that is a bingo
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
