Gents -
Please show support for your MEC Negogiating Committee --- now, and in the future.
Vote "NO" on this particular LOA and give them the leverage (via unity!) they need to get back to the table and fix a few issues --- in writing.
After reading the LOA itself, all the perspectives on the message boards, the MEC e-mails, and the company FCIFs and web-based information, it's very clear to all of us that...
...the LOA is substandard, loosely written in many areas, and sets a bar that will only need to be raised in future negogiations.
(The folks who "support" this LOA will even tell you that)
...BOTH the company and the our Union want our pilots to fly in these FDAs (...go back and read the company e-mails, that's what they are BOTH saying).
Agreeing to this substandard LOA now, with the idea that will fix it in 2010 is a big mistake and will eventually cost all 4,800 pilots (...yep even them 727 guys)
In 2010, when we are looking for cost-of-livinig raises of 3-5% across the crew force, trying to defend the "A fund" (..can you say "cash balance"), trying to keep 60 as the "full retirement" age, etc, etc, the bean counters will calculate the "total cost" of such raises/benefits.
Similarly, when we start asking for improvements to the FDA packages to rectify the acceptance of this weak LOA, a "total cost" will be calculated. Mgmts next move will be to ask us which we prefer --- can't have both now, remember the mantra "...it must be cost nuetral."
Additionally, each aircraft at each location is a seperate FDA --- meaning the STV clocks don't start ticking for the future MD-11 FDA in HKG and the future A300 FDA in CDG until the open in...??? ...2009? ...2010?
I wonder how benevolent mgmt is going to be in "seeking volunteers for STVs" or "limiting STVs to only 30 days" during contract negogiations...??
Anyone venture to guess?
It's true, we have no leverage now IF we pass this particular substandard LOA...and we reduce our leverage and starting position in the future.
We ABSOLUTELY have leverage right NOW (...and can show support for our NC right NOW) if we vote "NO" on this particular LOA.
We can send our NC back to the table with a mandate they can show the company -- "Sorry guys, they weren't willing to do it on the cheap -- let's sit down and look to fix the problems (..in writing) we've now identified and come up with a more equitable package, we believe they will approve"
Once again, we shouldn't expect the platinum or gold version of the LOA, but need not accept a lead version either.
In Unity,
DLax85