United AIP
 

So I'm reading everyone's comments about this AIP. No one knows exactly what the proposed AIP entails. But I will offer my 2 cents on this part.

We as a pilot group should do the following with any proposed TA that comes our way.

1) Never allow a pilot to negotiate a contract. Hire a professional negotiator. We as pilots are button pushers, not negotiators. Keep it that way. Let someone with experience do this instead of a bunch of pilots just because we think we know it all.

2) Restrict anyone from the MEC Negotiating Committee from going to a management position within the airline for either the length of the contract that is forwarded to us or for 10 years. That way the MEC Negotiating Committee has to work under the rules that they pass on to us.

3) Enact a minimum of a 5% raise each year after the contract expires. It'll bring the company back to the table quicker versus just operating without a contract for many years.

Thoughts and advice? I'm open to all options.

Strongly agree.

ANYTHING with united painted on the side should be flown by UNITED pilots period! Bring back scope!

WRT to #3, I've always thought we should have a penalty if management stonewalled negotiations like a 5-10% per year pay increase if a new CBA wasn't competed before the amendable date. My rep said though, that management will never agree to a punitive pay increase like that because then we might be the ones dragging our feet if the pay increase is more than we think we can get from management. Still, I'd rather have the contractual pay increase in the CBA and let management come and get it, rather than have to wait 2-3 years for a new contract.

With record profits and qualified pilot shortage, there's no excuse for not being able to score a contract of a lifetime. Oh wait, we have the "Bad News Bears", aka ALPO, at bat. In regards to hiring "professional" negotiators, your ALPO rep will tell you that we HAVE "professional" negotiatiors until his face turns blue. I say, how's that working out for us thus far?

I think that as long as they (I mean ALPA) gets a high pay rate they could care less because it means more dues money for them. What concerns me most are the work rules and so forth. I'm a quality of life type of guy. That's why I'd like to see a professional negotiator take ALL things into consideration. Hence the reason for my post.

A lot of early chest thumping, but the logic is sound. As far as I understand, this isn't a full contract, only a two-year extension. Assuming it's somewhat palatable (and the 13% rumor is a great start), there's very little to lose.

If this goes through, the benefits are immediate and in two years the leadership starts negotiating again, but from a 13% better starting point.

If it fails, it will still be another two years before they open the contract anyway, there will be 13% less pay until then, and a 13% lower starting point the MEC will have to negotiate back. Not to mention, it will most likely require the replacement of the MEC (reference Delta and Southwest) and put in question the credibility of ALPA's ability to represent it's pilots. The incentive for any new MEC to reach a TA will be shot. Reaching a TA would be the largest threat to union leaders.

There is an enormous amount to lose. We have something they want. They are talking to us primarily because of that. To trade that leverage for 13% is using very questionable SA.

Scott

If I do some quick maths, at around $200,000 for the average UAL pilot (which will be close after the proposed pay raise), you are looking at a 15% raise over the current contract (16-3-2 vs. 3-3). That's about $60,000k per pilot, or approximately $720,000,000 over the life of the extension. That doesn't include the fact that there is an additional 15% added to our 16% BC fund.

Is that enough for the leverage we have? That's for the MEC and potentially us to decide. The MC and the negotiating committee think it is, and since they are the ones with the books open I tend to trust their judgement.

Could we do better by waiting for a full Section 6? Perhaps. But I'm looking around the room and seeing some pretty weak deals offered at SWA and DAL, and NO deal at UPS. All these airlines are negotiating during unheard of profits and operational performance. I just don't know if Section 6 is the open checkbook that some believe it will be. And God help us if the economy changes in the next 2-4 years while we are negotiating it. Then we just squandered $720,000,000+ of pilot money.

I can respect your opinion Scott, that we would be better served by waiting for Section 6. But I don't think those that would ultimately vote for the deal have "questionable SA". Just a different perspective and calculation of how much leverage we actually have. It's a basic risk reward calculation.

I respect your opinion as well, but what I see is a bunch of pilots that are endorsing something they haven't seen as a sure thing and a great deal based on as you said - basic math. That is absolutely questionable SA. It is much bigger than that. We are getting the cart way too far ahead of the horse if we once again look only at pay rates and get a big smile on our faces, disregarding the specifics.

If history holds, the MEC will gloss over the specifics and sell this as industry leading. Maybe it is. Maybe it isn't. But to be endorsing something as substantial as FAR 117 extensions and FRMS changes without fully understanding their ramifications by looking forward to a 13% pay raise is short sighted. We are nothing if not predictable.

Scott