Originally Posted by Bolo (Post 1365805)

I do not disagree with what you are saying, but if the company is willing to give the FO's a pay increase(which they did about 6 months ago) knowing that you are underpaid, WITHOUT having to give anything up then you should have taken it! You would be here now with a $5 dollar hour increase at the same juncture.
You would be $5 dollars an hour richer and you will most likely vote no on this LBFO where QOL, cancellation pay, minimum duty day and overtime pay are concerned.

Originally Posted by PiperPilot03 (Post 1365276)

Karma, are you a CA or FO?

Originally Posted by flyguy23 (Post 1364339)

If you're married and on reserve, try explaining to your wife why you only got paid 20 hours for a given month even though you were available to work every day scheduled.

Originally Posted by flyingreasemnky (Post 1364112)

Honestly, I don't believe its a typo based on everything else that they put in the contract. Karma you are incorrect and flyguy is spot on.

Originally Posted by Karma (Post 1365967)

Technically I'm still an FO for a few more days until I finish oe.



The LBFO has guarantee, it was a typo.



The company just released a statement saying it was a typo. They are fixing it and sending a revised copy out.

Originally Posted by Karma (Post 1365967)

The company just released a statement saying it was a typo. They are fixing it and sending a revised copy out.

Originally Posted by gazoo34:1364169

I read on another forum about the "angry pilot group" at Republic it seems the Captains are pretty happy with status quo but the FOs are taking it in the shorts. I'm age wise split between the Captain generation and the FO generation but I understand both. The FOs are getting shafted plain and simple so here is what I posted on the other forum....

An angry pilot group is one thing but an angry pilot group that takes action is a completely different thing. Until the pilot group decides they have had enough of the NMB, corporate and the union nothing will change and from what I've heard the Captains are fine with status quo and they drive the union. My father was a teamster for 47 years, his father was a teamster they both were involved in numerous strikes including "wildcat" strikes and one thing they said was talking does nothing action is what changes things.
This is the bio of the NMB Chairman, he is a political appointee his job is to ensure the current administration is never brought into question about supporting the "workers". So how do you support the workforce yet prevent a work stoppage that will have a dramatic effect on the industry and cause a burp in the economy? You tie the workforce up in mediation that will maintain the status quo. The NMB Chairman has a Bio that says he should support Pilots but he is political appointee....

Biography of Harry R. Hoglander

I'm on a soap box about this issue not for me but for my kids and grandkids, how do I tell them they can be pilots but it will cost them $150,000 for a 4 year degree and 250 flight hours (CWU Flying Program) when starting in August they will need 1500 flight hours to get a $22/hr job. The garbage men is Seattle (Teamsters Local 117) signed a 6 year $96K wage and benefit package, it took them to force the companies hand with a strike but they are now getting more money than a pilot, good for them but it begs the question why spend $200,000 (even with CFI money) to get a $22/hr job?
I love flying it is a passion but economically it doesn't make sense. Especially given the roller coaster ride called the airline industry.

I hope republic changes and the pilots get some compensation given they just reported an 800% earnings increase last year, yes that is correct 800%. the reference in on the other thread. I really feel for the pilots but until the pilots (Captains included) decide to take action nothing will change.

See you on the line....maybe

Originally Posted by WeaselBoy (Post 1365861)

But, we do believe we would be giving up something by allowing the Company to only increase FO pay to attract new hires...bargaining leverage. The inability to attract new hires is one of the few things keeping WH at the table.

Originally Posted by FAULTPUSH (Post 1366534)

If you had accepted it, you would have removed the major incentive for the FO's to vote yes on the LBFO.

Originally Posted by WeaselBoy (Post 1366646)

I've not talked to a single person who is planning to vote yes on the LBFO. I don't know any of the very junior FO's (less than a year on property), so a few of them might be tempted into it. But, I will be extremely shocked if less than 90% vote no.

Originally Posted by zoooropa (Post 1366692)

And then what? Your Local President has told you that the NC speaks for me (except when IBT National has something to say) and the Company can't modify their LBFO.

What are you guys going to do when he's proven wrong once again?