JetBlue Latest and Greatest
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 918
lots to unpack here….
I think it’s safe to say you and I are on very different sides of this vote. Not trying to change your mind or your viewpoint, but rather give you insight into the mind of a yes voter. Despite 47% of us voting yes, very few of us actually are willing to be public about it.
My few points to give everyone insight into my thought process-
1) why do you consider this LOA a back stabbing for selfish reasons? Aren’t all our gains selfish? Isn’t it selfish that I want the highest pay possible? Look— I wanted this LOA to pass for one specific reason: growth. More airplanes, more pilots, more block hours— with added protections to not roll back numbers. Selfish or not, this is good for us as a pilot group. More upgrades, more new hires, and more VDA’s if that is your thing.
2) ........
I think it’s safe to say you and I are on very different sides of this vote. Not trying to change your mind or your viewpoint, but rather give you insight into the mind of a yes voter. Despite 47% of us voting yes, very few of us actually are willing to be public about it.
My few points to give everyone insight into my thought process-
1) why do you consider this LOA a back stabbing for selfish reasons? Aren’t all our gains selfish? Isn’t it selfish that I want the highest pay possible? Look— I wanted this LOA to pass for one specific reason: growth. More airplanes, more pilots, more block hours— with added protections to not roll back numbers. Selfish or not, this is good for us as a pilot group. More upgrades, more new hires, and more VDA’s if that is your thing.
2) ........
FC to FC: We would fly all of those, if company wants more frequency, We fly it. Not codeshare it to AA (which does nothing for our growth). Sounds like growth would still be there.
FC to international: if company wants to fly somewhere within our aircraft capability, WE would fly it, then they can still codeshare to AA for the further distances to which our current aircraft cannot reach. Sounds like growth for us would still be there.
So without LOA 13, the NEA can still go on within the scope of the CBA. The NEA wouldn't stop, growth wouldn't stop, and if the NEA never existed we still would continue with the planned growth on recovery. This is why I can't fathom your reasoning of saying you voted yes due to growth.
And yes we get nothing much from LOA 13, actually nothing.
Look back at the arbitration of the APA vs AA scope violation in 2007. Interesting outcome and I expect the same playbook to be run here, especially with negotiations opening soon.
FWIW, it took 6 years for that ruling.
The REAL Bluedriver
Joined APC: Sep 2011
Position: Airbus Capt
Posts: 6,887
Do you have a link to the APA vs AA?
We'll see I guess.
Oh I see what you're saying. We supposedly had guys do something similar with big drops. I got my shots on my days off long before these agreements were in place - that'll teach me!
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2019
Posts: 985
lots to unpack here….
I think it’s safe to say you and I are on very different sides of this vote. Not trying to change your mind or your viewpoint, but rather give you insight into the mind of a yes voter. Despite 47% of us voting yes, very few of us actually are willing to be public about it.
My few points to give everyone insight into my thought process-
1) why do you consider this LOA a back stabbing for selfish reasons? Aren’t all our gains selfish? Isn’t it selfish that I want the highest pay possible? Look— I wanted this LOA to pass for one specific reason: growth. More airplanes, more pilots, more block hours— with added protections to not roll back numbers. Selfish or not, this is good for us as a pilot group. More upgrades, more new hires, and more VDA’s if that is your thing.
2) several of you have stated we are handing over scope “for essentially nothing.” First off, it was a limited agreement that the union can still quash after 5 years. Still no RJ’s in JetBlue paint. I respect your position, but I think scope is a trigger word for many of you. I’d invite you to look at the risks given the wording, the extent scope is being given away, and the union’s ability to take back said scope.
3)I’m sorry you felt “demoralized” by my voting yes. I assure you, I voted yes for the same reason you voted no— I want what is best for the pilot group.
I think it’s safe to say you and I are on very different sides of this vote. Not trying to change your mind or your viewpoint, but rather give you insight into the mind of a yes voter. Despite 47% of us voting yes, very few of us actually are willing to be public about it.
My few points to give everyone insight into my thought process-
1) why do you consider this LOA a back stabbing for selfish reasons? Aren’t all our gains selfish? Isn’t it selfish that I want the highest pay possible? Look— I wanted this LOA to pass for one specific reason: growth. More airplanes, more pilots, more block hours— with added protections to not roll back numbers. Selfish or not, this is good for us as a pilot group. More upgrades, more new hires, and more VDA’s if that is your thing.
2) several of you have stated we are handing over scope “for essentially nothing.” First off, it was a limited agreement that the union can still quash after 5 years. Still no RJ’s in JetBlue paint. I respect your position, but I think scope is a trigger word for many of you. I’d invite you to look at the risks given the wording, the extent scope is being given away, and the union’s ability to take back said scope.
3)I’m sorry you felt “demoralized” by my voting yes. I assure you, I voted yes for the same reason you voted no— I want what is best for the pilot group.
I’m going to do my best to sum up my thoughts. Weeks before this vote took place, the whole landscape of the recovery was changing. Go read my comments before this vote. New admin who had the support of the Senate and the House; we knew big stimulus packages were on the horizon. Vaccines were being rolled out in mass numbers. Domestic lockdowns were starting to end. The spring and summer expectations were changing rapidly. Bookings were skyrocketing.etc etc. Recovery and growth were happening without the AA deal. Now, the AA deal was going to add 20-25% additional growth. Great. But the company needed scope relief to achieve it. And they wanted it bad. That’s called leverage. It’s not personal; it’s just business. Instead our MEC handed it over for a 2% raise, completely useless furlough protection, and some vague bullish!t Flica usage promise.
Imo, this deal is going to happen. It’s just a matter of what we can get for it, and my ask is a heck of a lot more than what’s been offered. I sent in my survey with what it would take for me. I hope y’all did the same. Some are hard No’s on scope period. I get that. I just don’t think that’s realistic at this point.
This seems like a roadmap to a merger honestly. I have no basis for that....purely tinfoil hat theory. I hope I’m wrong.
Lastly, what I think has ****ed me off more than anything about our MEC is their inability or unwillingness to look back and see where they possibly made some mistakes. Mistakes I can handle; the inability to recognize and learn from them I can’t. I don’t know if it’s ego, arrogance, stupidity, or a combination of the three. I do like where the 191 council is headed. Seems like it’s divided between them and the rest now. Hope they can collectively come together and get the best possible deal for us.
I have much more to say, but I’m just gonna leave it there. Again, I appreciate your respectful tone seekingBlue.
...The bigger question is not if the NEA will stand or not. I do not see any arbitrator canceling it, under any circumstances, IMHO...
...The question becomes, if the NEA is happening, regardless of our thoughts, hopes, and wishes— where is your line in the sand?...
Am I looking at this the wrong way?
...The question becomes, if the NEA is happening, regardless of our thoughts, hopes, and wishes— where is your line in the sand?...
Am I looking at this the wrong way?
lots to unpack here….
...2) several of you have stated we are handing over scope “for essentially nothing.” First off, it was a limited agreement that the union can still quash after 5 years. Still no RJ’s in JetBlue paint. I respect your position, but I think scope is a trigger word for many of you. I’d invite you to look at the risks given the wording, the extent scope is being given away, and the union’s ability to take back said scope...
...2) several of you have stated we are handing over scope “for essentially nothing.” First off, it was a limited agreement that the union can still quash after 5 years. Still no RJ’s in JetBlue paint. I respect your position, but I think scope is a trigger word for many of you. I’d invite you to look at the risks given the wording, the extent scope is being given away, and the union’s ability to take back said scope...
Think of it this way - What if the company came to ALPA with an innovative plan to survive the COVID downturn. In exchange for furlough protection and a one-time 2% raise, all pilots would go to First Officer pay scale for five years. If certain growth and ASM metrics are met, the company can extend the deal to 10 years.
ALPA puts it out for ratification. Pilots vote it down. Company puts everyone on FO pay anyway, and in response ALPA takes it to arbitration.
ALPA argues that the CBA is being flagrantly violated. Company argues that even though they are violating the CBA, it helps the financial bottom line and should be allowed to continue.
So my question is this - from the arbitrator’s point of view, how is the current situation any different than this hypothetical situation?
ALPA puts it out for ratification. Pilots vote it down. Company puts everyone on FO pay anyway, and in response ALPA takes it to arbitration.
ALPA argues that the CBA is being flagrantly violated. Company argues that even though they are violating the CBA, it helps the financial bottom line and should be allowed to continue.
So my question is this - from the arbitrator’s point of view, how is the current situation any different than this hypothetical situation?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post