Boggles the mind how someone could watch that union presentation today and come away being a yes vote. I was truly embarrassed for everyone on that stage. Came in undecided, left as a hard no.

care to explain?

Lots of bird in the hand Blah and other FUD.

Agree with you.

Yeah there’s no way United, Delta, or American pilots would be okay with this negotiating committee and chairman. Absolute embarrassment. They’d be recalled immediately at real airlines with real unions. I now have even less faith in them for the JCBA, which is hard to believe because it was already so low. It’s quite amazing. Recap of every negotiation in B6ALPA history: jetblue says no, and they don’t even fight it. They just move on to the next item. And the fact that this deal doubled in value after the delta TA came out is absolutely dumbfounding. This deal as is puts B6 pilots behind Alaska pilots. So before deltas TA, the MEC and NC was going to push a deal that was far less than Alaska’s?

all this NC ever does is catch up to the bottom of the peer set, and anything on par with the leaders of the peer set are “outliers” and unobtainable until everyone else in the peer set has it.

I wonder if that Q&A was an attempt to accelerate attrition. If I was newish at jetblue and saw that, there’s no way in hell I would stick around with those guys negotiating my future. As a mid-seniority captain the math is a little tougher, but my Lord that was astonishing. And the real concern is that 69% of this pilot group probably doesn’t see the problem.

What a joke B6ALPA is. May as well just dual hat Warren Christie and make him the MEC chairman as an additional duty to his EVP duties. He’d probably be better for the pilot group than these clowns.

It’s funny to me how different people view things.

As I said, I’m a yes vote. Everyone I’ve talked to in person is voting yes. But when I come on the message board everyone is saying they are a no vote.

honest question, why would you vote no?

If we vote no, the company likely will just pursue regular negotiations—- giving up a ton of short term financial gains and would likely result in no agreement until the JBCA.

I think the union did a good job answering why they didn’t push profit sharing. Sounds like the snap up clause might actually trigger as well.

interestingly, and please correct me if I’m wrong, but many of the vocal no voters on this sight very vocal no voters for the CBA?

lots to unpack here…..

1) I think more than 69% are going to vote yes. But we will know next week.

2) United and AA’s unions are a mess. Recalls, agreements being pulled, etc…… and they still don’t have a TA. Lots of money being lost in the chaos.

3) pattern bargaining is a thing. I think we, as pilots, get jelous when we see other pilots making more than us. I’m happy to see other people making more than us, since it will effect the MRA and will help us tremendously in the JBCA.

4) I don’t think the union cares about attrition. The attrition problem here is a company problem, not a union problem.

5) sorry you feel you are poorly represented. That sucks. The great news is that it us a great time to be a pilot. Don’t know where you commute from, but you can go to a legacy and upgrade fairly quickly (within a year). Don’t know if that changes your math.

6) as the union said in the Q&A, if this fails, the company isn’t going to come back immediately and say “what do you need?” The union said they wouldn’t restart negotiations until at least April and probably at the 1 meeting a month pace. this would leave tens of thousands on the table (not to mention the 1 time payout).

no matter what, thanks for your viewpoint. I certainly don’t agree, but it’s nice to see where you are coming from.

This is 1) speculation and 2) probably not the case, though I forgive you for thinking its fact since the union keeps spewing that talking point. My (2) could be considered speculation, but ask yourself this: why did the company agree to a narrow scope extension in the first place? They didn’t have to. This short term agreement was still achieved in section 6. They could have said no, we want to continuing negotiating line by line and just waited until JCBA (ironically the same threat the union keeps giving out and gets parroted here and in real life).

If it gets voted down, the whole thing could open up, or they could just revisit the same sections. And if a labor dispute were called, and other levers pulled, given attrition and the current applicant pool, there is not a chance in hell this company would delay til JCBA. They couldn’t get through the next 7 months, much less 2-3+ years. As the union said today, JCBA talks will likely begin by the end of the year. That’s plenty of time for CBA ext. v2.

That they’d say nah not negotiating until JCBA is pure FUD. They are required to re-engage in section 6, in what we capacity is agreed upon. If the company said full CBA, no more extension, they’d be so bogged down with negotiations at that point, and a labor dispute, and attrition, they couldn’t handle a merger at the same time. They want this done and over with. They’ve said so. But they would have to continue negotiating a CBA in good faith and deal with a labor dispute, and JCBA negotiations, and a merger, the whole time? That’s the leverage we have right now. They can’t NOT reengage. They can’t afford it. Meanwhile, I can afford to wait another 6 months.

sounds like you are frustrated and whole heartedly disagree with the unions’ strategy. Have you told your rep how you felt? Since it was a unanimous vote, if this is voted down, the whole MEC and NC would likely need to be recalled….

I think you are dreaming if you think we could do a recall, send out new polling data, get a new NC and have another TA in 6 months…..

I agreed with the union’s strategy, right up until they agreed to a very substandard agreement (which failed to achieve one of the main pillars “because they said no, again”) right on the cusp of pulling one of the multiple remaining levers, right before Christmas. And yes, the reps and the NC absolutely know how I feel, but they assure me they will get them next time.

I don’t think a recall would be necessary (although it’s needed, I’d support them staying in place thru this extension). All they’d need to do is make a better contract comparison guide (one with profit sharing), re-poll, raise some numbers, and re-engage. Education/polling could be done by end of feb. Maybe into March. March/April/May is plenty of time for a very limited agreement.

Some reps would (and should) resign…those special elections could be done thru feb and March.

Chris Kenney would hopefully be recalled and replaced, and that could happen in feb-March, but union business could continue in the meantime.

Even if a shakeup were to occur in feb/March/April, it’s such a a limited negotiation that it could easily be done in 1-2 sessions. There aren’t many items to discuss. It’s just numbers being handed back and forth across the table. When there’s a deadline, they work really quickly. This last agreement didn’t take hours and hours of haggling until the last day or two. It was meet, exchange proposals, get a response a week or two later, evaluate, exchange another proposal, etc. They had until holiday time to get something done (basically the line in the sand when the labor dispute was to occur). Summer starts in June. That’s the next part in the timeline it would be done by (or not). And I’m 99% confident the company wouldn’t take it into the summer.