JetBlue Latest and Greatest
06-25-2018, 06:15 PM
#6831
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by BeatNavy
Why wouldn’t I go to a roadshow? Just because I can identify deficiencies in bullet points and discuss them doesn’t negate my desire (or duty) to go to a roadshow, or read the full thing, or at least most sections, several times before I vote. Let me ask you this. How involved are you with this process? Are you a P2P guy? Have you talked to the NC for hours asking questions on the phone and in person at union meetings? I have. And just because many of us can identify and discuss weak areas doesn’t mean we are auto no votes.
You keep touting this “go to a roadshow and read the full TA” to anyone who says anything negative about the TA. Are you implying that with the 3 page bullet points, 18 page bullet points, implementation bullet points, and updated CCG, you can’t see about 95% of where this contract lies in its totality, and enough to debate the pros and cons? There won’t be anything cosmic in the full language or at roadshows. The majority of the details are out. The hundreds of other pages will expand on the bullet points, but most likely won’t make them any better or add value. They are vitally important, because loose language is where the company can exploit us, but don’t count on 200-300 pages of language adding any value to this TA over what the bullet points list. Yes, go to a road show and read all of the TA. But thinking either will magically make this TA any better is crazy.
5 members of the MEC who read the whole thing, spent quality time with the NC and other ALPA SMEs, voted no. That’s significant.
You keep touting this “go to a roadshow and read the full TA” to anyone who says anything negative about the TA. Are you implying that with the 3 page bullet points, 18 page bullet points, implementation bullet points, and updated CCG, you can’t see about 95% of where this contract lies in its totality, and enough to debate the pros and cons? There won’t be anything cosmic in the full language or at roadshows. The majority of the details are out. The hundreds of other pages will expand on the bullet points, but most likely won’t make them any better or add value. They are vitally important, because loose language is where the company can exploit us, but don’t count on 200-300 pages of language adding any value to this TA over what the bullet points list. Yes, go to a road show and read all of the TA. But thinking either will magically make this TA any better is crazy.
5 members of the MEC who read the whole thing, spent quality time with the NC and other ALPA SMEs, voted no. That’s significant.
I'm reading this turd with the eyes of a lawyer and I see it as not just bad, but actually dangerous. Look at how the Commuting section outsources authority to "the Dependability Policy". I have now lost 100% faith in B6 ALPA. I could've done a lot better than them and I'm not an expert in this, just someone who has done contracts before. I am deeply concerned about what's not in this language and how vague it is. This contract sells us out. Of course guys like Bozo have to block me because now they have their foot up their arse but it doesn't change the fact that this TA is entirely unacceptable.
I'm voting no and I want better people put into B6ALPA.
This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.
06-25-2018, 06:19 PM
#6832
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by PasserOGas
Would there be any TA, no matter how terrible, that these arguments couldn't be made? You aren't saying it's good, or great. You are playing on fear.
"Anything is better than nothing!"
You are Ford and Harrison's wet dream.
"Anything is better than nothing!"
You are Ford and Harrison's wet dream.
Ford & Harrison are a law firm. They might be marketed as "union busters" but in reality they are there to perform triage. F&H knows they can't stop employees from unionizing, so instead they use legal language in order to contain the problem (us). F&H wrote this horrible TA and used time as a weapon in order to get us to accept anything they write. We should've never stopped the informational picket and we should always have our eyes set on a strike because otherwise F&H wins.
This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.
06-25-2018, 06:25 PM
#6834
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by Baba Yaga
Keep hoping.
The NO wall just keeps getting taller and taller, page by page.
This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.
06-26-2018, 05:32 AM
#6837
Banned
Joined APC: Dec 2016
Posts: 1,132
Originally Posted by Bozo the pilot
Have you finished reading Baba?
Maybe a roadshow can explain the TA- I know its complicated.
Maybe a roadshow can explain the TA- I know its complicated.
Maybe it's too complicated for you Bozo.
This communique is for entertainment purposes only. It does not implicitly or explicitly acknowledge employment with any air carrier nor is any relationship implied. This communique does not represent the opinions or policies of ALPA or JB ALPA and does not represent the collective pilot group, ALPA, nor does it imply collective bargaining, advocacy, or workforce actions intended to disrupt operations.
06-26-2018, 07:49 AM
#6838
Banned
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,445
Originally Posted by Bozo the pilot
Not fear, just caution. Do you believe in caution?
And answer that 200 mill question- You seemed to ignore that.
Whats the best case scenario? What would you vote yes on?
Id actually like to know what the auto-No voter is looking for.
Give me the pie-in-the-sky dream sheet and then realistic expectations.
And answer that 200 mill question- You seemed to ignore that.
Whats the best case scenario? What would you vote yes on?
Id actually like to know what the auto-No voter is looking for.
Give me the pie-in-the-sky dream sheet and then realistic expectations.
06-26-2018, 08:01 AM
#6839
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: A320 Right Seat
Posts: 309
Originally Posted by PasserOGas
Market rate. This is not even close to that in pay, work rules or scope. I want all 3.
I'm relatively neutral at this point until I can ask some questions and get some elaboration at the road shows.
06-26-2018, 08:11 AM
#6840
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2013
Posts: 2,594
Originally Posted by PasserOGas
Market rate. This is not even close to that in pay, work rules or scope. I want all 3.
You’ve heard of Envoy Pinnacle and SkyWest? They fly planes with AA/DAL and UAL painted on the tail. Won’t happen here.
I know you either don’t want to see it or don’t understand them, but where in section 25/pairing construction do you see anything less than Standard? Point out the above standard stuff too- just to keep you honest.
Pay could be higher, I agree.
Now address Scope and Work rules directly and then we’ll move to health care and profit sharing- where I’m sure you’ll be delighted to point out shortcomings.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
