velosnow

Yeah I had a good chuckle on the timing of TG's email.

clearprop

Vesting schedule and insulting hr/ increase for those here longer than 2 years is why this should go down in flames. Everyone just needs to grow a pair...

rickair7777

The company wants you to vote no. Then they can drag the whole thing out another 18 months.

Vote Yes! (at the next union drive).

skypilot35

I agree in part. I do believe the company would prefer a no vote on the current offer. I also believe that a "yes" vote for a union would not improve anything. If a union were voted in today, I imagine it would be years before a contract was in place. Meanwhile, the current work rules and pay rates would remain in place.

Once the union and new contract were in place, what then? Do we have a seat at the table when contracts are being negotiated with Delta, United, Alaska, or American? I doubt it. A union would do nothing but provide a grievance process.

Unions are functional at the majors because the MEC negotiates directly with the management team that matters. Unions at a regional are pointless because the MEC is negotiating with the middle man not the HMFIC.

I do believe that a REGIONAL UNION that represented regional pilots would have some teeth. That topic has been discussed ad nausea and it will never happen unless laws are re-written.

In truth, I think OO is a good place to be comparatively speaking, but there are improvements to be had for sure. I think the pay offer is ridiculous. The issues that need to be addressed are MDG, JM pay, Duty Rig, Trip Rig, and the impending timing out of pilots. IMHO.

WesternSkies

There is nothing here worth voting yes for. Attractiion of new hires is important, 40k not 30k would be more respectable but that is companies problem, not mine. Why would fo's vote in a vesting schedule for themselves.

HappyCrew

Skyworst SUCKS.......

clearprop

[QUOTE=WesternSkies;1865536]There is nothing here worth voting yes for. Attractiion of new hires is important, 40k not 30k would be more respectable but that is companies problem, not mine. Why would fo's vote in a vesting schedule for themselves.[/QUOTE]

Because they are earthbound misfits sickened with SJS and kool aid




VOTE NO!

HappyCrew

People should just walk away from the Mormon cult called SkyWorst.

HappyCrew

Yeah, thats right it is 4/20...

Nevets

Definitely value! Just to give you some reference, at xjt it's 4% for anyone less than 5 years, 5% for anyone between 5<10 years, and 6% for everybody 10+ years. This does not include the company contribution.


I thought I was the only one who says this on this thread.

Just the status quo will help you. It will set all current policies and their current interpretations into stone. They would no longer be able to change interpretations, apply it arbitrarily or discriminately, add, remove, or chance policies until you get a new contract. Which does provide some incentive for management to negotiate. And like you said, it does provide for a neutral third party to decide disputes.

The argument that you wouldn't get a contract for years anyway is like saying you don't want to go to SWA because you'll be on the bottom half of the seniority list for years. You have to start somewhere and the longer you wait, the longer it takes to start.

Also, of course you won't negotiate with mainline management. But that doesn't mean there is no value in being at the table with your own management. At xjt, we have over four dozen LOAs and MOUs because the union came to a win win solution for both sides that added value for each. Without a union, the middle ground is not in the middle, it's more towards management's side of not all the way there.