Great news guys! Let the interviews commence!

50 pilots didnt vote? 20%???? ***???? JHC....talk about apathy.

They do not have to pay the new pay rates in prorate until the 2nd paycheck in January, but it would be a good show of good faith if they choose to simply pay them proper starting this Thursday. That being said, it is good to see the TA passed. One question I have though, is why did one our of every six pilots choose not to vote?

My hope is that it wasn't apathy. Hopefully it was simply people that did not feel that they could vote yes, but also didn't feel that they should vote no.

Or they didn't follow instructions on that it was a two step process.

That very well may be true...

The voting group included about 50 furloughed FE's who have no chance of recall and all crewmembers on short and long term leave - many of whom due to medical issues will never hold a medical again

Guys in these groups may have thought they had no dog in this hunt

We will get full retro pay to 1 DEC as PER the contract/TA... do you guys not get that they can not just unilaterally implement something...
even with a passed TA... it would require ANOTHER side letter to do as you suggest....

Herc, this is like the KCM question all over again. Best to ignore such questions and let them find out from a union rep.

LOA 00-03 specifically states, "3. The Company shall make payments required by this LOA no later than two (2) pay periods after the date the 2016 Tentative Agreement is ratified."

This means, as I said, that they are required to do so by the second paycheck in January. That being said, the wording does allow them to do so earlier, as it only stipulates "no later than," rather than "on." The company can choose to pay the retro pay for December whenever they want, even in a separate payment, any time before the second pay period after ratification if they wish to. They are simply required to do so no later than the second pay period.

The complication would be whether the union chose to ratify the agreement before going on Christmas vacation, or if they decided to instead wait until they come back in January to do so. In the latter case, the agreement would still not be ratified yet, and the company would indeed have to wait until it is ratified. That could push back the retro pay requirement, as well, if the union waited until after the first pay period of next year before officially ratifying it. I am unsure as to whether the union chose to ratify the vote already, or are waiting to do so as they had said they might do.

As stated above. Ask a Union Rep, not some anonymous person who is perhaps not even a pilot but is sitting in his bathrobe in his Mom's basement! Perhaps after you have done that, you would be good enough to post on here for us all to read
Thank you

Perhaps you haven't had your coffee today, or perhaps you have temporarily lost your ability to engage in a conversation without using personal attacks on the characters of other people. Either way, perhaps you should properly read a post, before attacking the poster. This may be the wild, wild west of the internet, but as you normally seem to post that people should not act like dicks on this board, perhaps you should look introspectively in that regard as to your last post.

The original conversation was from propstrike questioning whether the company would actually pay the retro for Dec. Seeming to indicate that he figured it should show up on this upcoming paycheck (tomorrow) if they did. Herc pointed out, correctly, that the retro is in an LOA that is near the end of the TA that was passed. Herc then pointed out that he would see if they followed through, in the beginning of January. My response was to that issue of conversation.

While the LOA does indeed require the company to retroactively apply the pay and min base guarantee to Dec 1st onward, the LOA does not prescribe that the retro would be paid on a specific date. It simply states that it will be paid no later than the second pay period after ratification. This means three things. First of all, the latest that the company can wait to pay the retro is concurrent with the second pay period after ratification. Second, that there is no restriction, after ratification, of the company choosing to pay the retro before that date, so long as the ratification itself has actually occurred. Third, that there is no requirement that the retro itself is in the same paycheck as normal pay periods are in, it could instead be a separate check, if the company so desires. This is based, not on the opinions of some non-pilot in the basement of his mother's house, but instead on the actual mandate of the third section of the applicable LOA.

Therefore, neither Propstrike's implied thought of the retro pay being in the paycheck tomorrow, nor Herc's implied though of the retro pay being in the first paycheck of January are necessarily correct. It could be as late as the second paycheck in January (unless the ratification was not until after the first January pay period, then it could even be the first pay period in February). At the same time, assuming it would be ratified before the applicable implied pay periods (tomorrow or the first one of January), it is also possible that it could be paid on one of those dates, or at any time between then and the latest allowed paycheck.

Remember, that since the first pay check in January is actually for the min base guarantee portion of the second half of December (pro rated down slightly for pay checks being every 14 days, rather than twice a month), even with the contract ratified, the company would still be within their rights to pay the old contract pay rates on that actual first pay check of January. They would not be required to pay the retro additional hourly pay (and prorated portion of the extra 2 hours of monthly guarantee for the month) until the second pay period after ratification. This means, it is possible that we will get checks in early January that still have the old pay rates on them, and this would be perfectly within the contractual rights of the company, even under the new contract. In such a case, the company would only be required to pay the differential of the retro pay on time per the LOA. That was the crux of my point. The company can, as soon as the contract is officially ratified, choose to pay at the new rates, and avoid having to work out retro rates at the later date at all.

In short, my statement that it would be a show of good faith from the company to do so is due to that last part. If the company pushes off its requirement to pay the retro until the second pay period after ratification, then not only would the paycheck tomorrow reflect the old contract rates, but so too would the first paycheck in January. Despite this being perfectly within their contractual rights, there is a fair chance that there will be a lot of VERY angry pilots on the 5th of January, if this happens. Mostly because most will not likely realize that the first mandated paycheck to be natively at the new pay rates wouldn't be until the second one of January, as that would be the first paycheck to actually include hours that by the new contract itself (and not the LOA retro) are at those new rates. In order for the company to avoid this confusion and anger, it would behoove them to simply implement the new pay rates immediately upon ratification, including the retro (at least for the second half of December's min base guarantee, which is paid in early January). This is also within their contractual rights, so long as they do it after the ratification.

I want my KCM and I want my back pay , and I want my signing bonus NOW!
Eff you all! Its all about ME and ME only.

Whew, thanks for the refill.... I needed that!

I am not even going to waste time reading your post before responding. You may have very valid remarks regarding our TA.

However, you, I, nor any other of the above posters are neither contract lawyers representing the pilot group,or union representatives.

My point is, you are asking a group you do not know, questions about information that they do not have direct knowledge of. Then, you want to argue your points? Why? Just ask your Union Rep. they will be more than happy to either tell you or refer you to the person who knows.

Regarding my being appropriate. Can you argue with the fact that the people who are posting on here may be non pilots who are lying on the couch in their Moms basement? I am not being mean I am being factual. Sorry if it offends you. Merry Christmas.

For the Kalitta guys......what are the new contract terms that are better than what Atlas or ABX has in their old contract.

I know you guys have a tremendous deal on health insurance for instance. Way better than all the other 1224 carriers. Just trying to figure out in what areas 1224 has advanced the cause in regards to pattern bargaining

Well, off the cuff I would say true home basing, 16 day schedule with no junior assignment and new stronger scope protection. Now, I know that high priced lawyers can find holes in any scope deal but our new language should at least protect us from some of the things that have happened to our peers at other 1224 carriers. We can fight all day over the merits of our new pay rates as opposed to some other 121 airlines but I don't think there was much left on the bone unless we wanted to wait another year or more and continue fighting while being under paid the whole time.

Did your min guarantee go up at all?

Monthly Guarantee went up 2 hours, to 64.

And, we now have business or better class travel on legs over 3 hours that begin or end outside the conus. A slight perdiem increase. Better language in the training end of things. Better Hotel language. There are a lot of little improvements which on top of the pay make it fairly palatable. Is it industry leading? NO, but it is better in many areas with no major setbacks.

How about healthcare? From earlier discussions I thought there was going to be an increased cost, possibly significant.

Yes, The healthcare costs went up. Some would say significantly, some would say not in relation to the pay raise. For instance, if you were employed longer than five years, you paid not a dime for our CADILLAC health insurance. So, any increase would mathematically be significant. However, with a substantial pay raise I am ok with the increase.

That being said, most people that are complaining about the new rates have never in their lives paid for real insurance with any other employer (at least not in the last decade or two). The amount we will be paying is FAR less than is normal for other airlines, and in general. The coverage, on the other hand, is on par with the best out there.

Do you personally find yourself going over min? I looked and some posts from 2014 and it was a mix of yes and no.

This is one fairly senior captain on the -400 with NO days off flying included. These numbers are pay hours and not hours flown. There are some soft credits thrown in. In monthly order for 2015; 80;89;98;83;vacay;87; 84; 57; 92; 109; 65; 97.
For 2016; only worked 8 months due medical stuff, 74; 68; 92; 101; 84; 67; 83; 80.
None of this is from calling scheduling and begging/whining and stealing trips.

I don't expect things will change dramatically in the near future.

So what are the new pay rates? Say for 1st year and them 12yr CA and 12yr FO.

Hope this helps you

I would say the health care costs went up very significantly. Plus, that is a door that will never get closed again. Health care expenses will now never not go up. This was a huge loss in my opinion.

We also just got the first indication going above guarantee will be difficult going forward. Staying on our lines will be a bad thing for the paycheck. Granted it may take a while for them to get staffing to the point where we actually will stay on our lines, but doing so will be a big pay hit.

And RESERVE...all I have heard for my SIX years at K4... is "why are they taking me off my line..."....Jesus h christ... guys would ***** if they shoved a golden egg up your backside...

And for the record there were still lines with ABOVE guarantee hours to be had. Frankly... Lets have this discussion in 6 months or a year when everything plays out. Don't forget your bid guarantee doesn't include hours for commuting to and from work..nor does it include RSV soft time or most of the DHing you will do. Frankly I think you are probably right..I am guess avg pay will drop to the 70 hour mark or so.. Id be okay with that.

So how do you get significantly above guarantee if you do not get pulled off your line? Can't get that golden egg shoved anywhere unless you are off your line.

There are two reasons to complain about being pulled off your line. One is about the schmuck who had the horsepower to steal your trip, and the other is what you did after. Either if it got you sat for days, or you ended up in a less than pleasant place. I wasn't happy about being pulled from my HNL flights and put on the painful 7 hour sits in SJU, but it got me paid more. Actually it was one of the few times I ever knew what my line really was. Was looking forward to weekends in HNL.

Wait ... is THAT how you guys get paid???

Gives us a whole new definition of "direct deposit" !

All I am saying is.... I we have heard for SIX years.... I dont understand why I am off my line... blah blah blah... NOW with the realization that the new CP is going to try and KEEP people on their bid lines... people are complaining.. that is all...

Bottom line.. if you are senior you can bid the above guarantee lines.. if you can't.. you will get whats left... Lets see how it really plays out over the next year before making any real judgements.

And yes DC8... it felt like we were getting paid in the rear.... :)

You sound angry.

You never heard complaints about being off a line from me. Aside from the above reasons, I don't know why someone would complain about being off a line.

Angry? NO...I find it hilarious.... Three times in the past couple years I have been removed from a trip so someone could "get back on their line".....

As I said... its not as easy as it sounds...lets re-evalute in a 9-12 months to see how well they are doing.

Here is the new health insurance cost. I don't see this as significant.

Single (Per Pay Period )

DOS. $50
DOS +1 $75
DOS +2 $100
DOS +3 $125


Family ( Per Pay Period)

DOS $125
DOS +1 $150
DOS +2 $175
DOS +3 $200

Exactly!! How can people say the health costs are a significant increase?? I guess if you have paid sweet ******* all for years then yes $10 could be a significant increase. This is nothing especially when compared as a percentage of income. Was looking at the GF's medical the other day. For about the same coverage as me her company's plan was $326 bi-weekly on a $45000 yearly salary, mine $50 on $180,000+. Which do you think is "significant"?????

Same for my wife...if we got comparable coverage thru my wifes company it would be $750 a month... on her 98K salary.

No wonder why you are angry. They stole your trip to keep themselves moving. They just did it in a manner that got scheduling to do it and had you justifying it in your head so you didn't, or couldn't complain as much.

Don't worry. We will get there. Looks like 4 years using your example you will exceed the current cost. And as said before the door has been opened.....

I think your reading comprehension is off... NOT angry.... I find it funny as **** that the same guys who use to complain about being off there line.. are now complaining about BEING on their line in many cases.....Karma will bite their ass's some day... it always does

Our healthcare costs are still WAY below what the vast majority of business's pass on to their employees.... and frankly anyone who thought we would get a significant pay raise without having to start paying some of our Healthcare costs... was just ... well.. fooling themselves. Even in year 4 of this contract for me personally it will be much cheaper than if purchased from my wife's company... and thats assuming no increases on their part.