You really need how to learn how to read. Once the TA is rejected the TA is no longer considered a Tentative Agreement(TA) by the NMB, or either party. There is only the blueprint for both parties to hopefully work to a solution. Accepted past practice no longer takes precendent in negotiations. Hence Section VI (the clauses and definitions pertaining to regressive positions or "bad faith bargaining" as defined by the NMB, the courts, and generally accepted by both party's) of the RLA do not apply.

Here is a benign example:
9E mgt states they want to reopen Insurance section of contract. While currently maintaing status quo under current contract they propose a 75% increase in deductibles, and 150% increase in insurance copayments for the new contract. Regardless of past positions (let's state for the example that previously agreed TA section had 5% increase in deductible and 10% increase in copayments) and while its dirty pool (in my view) this cannot be considered bad faith bargaining.


Both parties in this case would go back to mediation.

 

Has the TA been sent to the pilot group to view yet?

 

SE says this afternoon we should have something to read.

Also, PNCL stock 7.11 up almost 5 dollars in a month.

 

Hate is bad for the soul Selcall. Learn to let go of the hate.

 

That is a terrible attitude to have, you might need to live with this contract for 10 years. Even if it takes a few extra months or even a year to get right you should get it right. There are other regionals that pay more than your airline, you should be striving to meet the top pay scales or better, not settling for something that is industry average. Aim high and try and set the bar high, don't settle for something medicore just to get money a few months earlier.

You've been fighting for years for this new contract, what's a few extra months to get it right?

 

I do not know how long it would take to re-negotiate the TA for a "new" one. Honestly- I won't even put out an idea. I would put out that from talking with people who can quote the RLA verbatim and have studied past contract history, things typically get lumped into a couple of items.

For example (hypothetical):
Let's say we DO vote this TA down by a strong majority and the MEC reconvenes and says, "ok, here are the problem areas".

1. No trip/duty or min day (scheduling)
2. 401K match is far below everyone (retirement)
3. payrates are too low (compensation)
4. perdiem too low compared to peers (compensation)
5. Healthcare costs rising (insurance)
6. only 10 days off instead of 11/12.


That's 6 things in this hypothetical. We would prob only get 2 items fixed, so you would "lump". Scheduling would need at least a duty rig and min day (there's 1). 401K, payrates, extra day off, perdiem, and insurance costs= how much does that equal a month?

Well....
401K is off by 3%
extra day off? well that's at least the cost of a min day ($$ terms)
Perdiem- well that's $.10/hr
Insurance- well that's $1/hr more for an average family (just throwing a random number, but not too far off if I did some calculating).

Add it all up and it's about 6% of compensation- so let's put it on the payrate only.

Now you would have a rig, min day, and good pay rates- which is a "bandaid" and still keeps the average down in other areas for other carriers AND our negotiations down the line, but add 5-6% to our pay rates and a basic rig/min day and I guarantee pilots would change the tune. I am not a negotiator and this is a hypothetical. Of course I would LOVE to open up every section that isn't great, but then the company will open up the things that we are already thrilled with (yes, there are some positives).

There will never be a contract that everyone thinks is great- even at the industry leaders (major and regional) pilots complain about areas that lack, but we ARE labor and we really can't become ubber expensive because it ruins the business model. That being said we CAN and SHOULD be on par with our peers in overall compensation, QOL, and safety (scope/insurance/leaves). It is up to management and the labor groups to ensure performance. We will still have issues with vacation slide, min day off, 401 match, no profit sharing, DH pay, etc.

Think big picture. There is a time value to money for everyone- a $2 raise now would need a $4 raise in 6 months to recoup in a year to even, numbers grow as time under the 99 contract continues. That being said waiting 6mo for a contract and getting 5-6% more pay overall, at 5 years (with compounded COLA increases) the overall compensation is a MAJOR difference for a positive and increases the industry for even higher gains in 5-10 years when the next deal is done.

When the TA becomes available, read it all. I will be posting on the company board the specific differences (both positive and negative) for Retirement/insurance and leaves to also show where we compare with the industry. Many pilots here have never even looked at these sections and may not even understand what they are reading- it can be difficult to understand. Facts are very important to use as YOUR starting point when looking at the contract. The message board will have each person with a personal bias- which is fine, but get your own base line.

 

it is safe to say to renegotiate a whole new t/a (keeping only the sections that don't need to change) should take at least 2 years. Some sections the company and the union agreed to quickly, I can see that happening a second time. It will come down to probably 9-12 sections that will have to be brought back for tweaking.

You have to remember, Nonconnah now answers to the BOD and the stock holders. They have a risk as well, it is not like '99 where they only had to answer to NWA.

It should be interesting over the next week or two how the pilot group accepts the TA and how the road shows pan out. The most entertaining road show should be DTW with both rep's voting the TA down.

 

I think the most intersting will be MEM where both reps voted yes and the CA rep. is in the middle of a recall. Both have said they woudn't run again anyways, so their repersentation of the MEM group will definatly create some fireworks.

 

I may be off, but aren't both MEM reps CA's anyway?

 

Attitude Nah just a realist. Look at the climate of the economy. I'm not settling. I do want to read it. The thing that I'm pointing out is that we can assume anything , but until we look at it then decide. No attitude behind it just open minded.