![]() |
There must be 300 pages of all the details you’re looking for on the United forum. Enjoy.
|
Originally Posted by Caveman;[url=tel:3451330
3451330[/url]]This should be read and reread.
The reality is we're gonna get a turd. Because we're weak as a whole. We were supposed to get a rewrite. That's obviously not happening. Why? Enough folks aren't asking there Reps. Why isn't there a rewrite. Rah rah rah sep process thousands of data points past practice secret company employee manuals grievances stacking up like cord wood rah rah rah need to get new language with a whole rewrite. And then. Umm well, not so much. Hence. Turd. Enroute. |
Originally Posted by Dirkkdiggler
(Post 3451861)
There must be 300 pages of all the details you’re looking for on the United forum. Enjoy.
|
Originally Posted by BLAHBLAHBLAH
(Post 3451938)
I don’t care enough to read through more than the couple pages I looked at trying to find it. Just wondering if anyone had seen a bullet point put out about the TA.
|
Originally Posted by usernamehere
(Post 3451913)
CM addressed the rewrite thing in the swapa podcast not that long ago.
|
I thought he was pretty clear about the end goal. While we proposed a full re-write, and the company is negotiating from current book, his hopes are two fold: 1) get new notes on the bargaining process that reflect conversations about the language in 2022 so they don’t have to go back to bargaining notes from 1984 2) Have a final agreement which may not contain all new language, but incorporates the new re-write as well as perhaps some of the old language that fits within said re-write where appropriate. That seems like a reasonable goal.
|
Originally Posted by usernamehere
(Post 3451913)
CM addressed the rewrite thing in the swapa podcast not that long ago.
Yeah, and I don't want to be naïve. We're not going to pass something across and the Company go, "This is awesome." The Company says they want to work from current book. We say we want to work from a complete rewrite. We're going to end up somewhere in between I'd say, the degree to which a new TA will feature elements of the rewrite we, as SWAPA pilots, want or it will retain language from the current contract like the company wants will depend on how effectively we wield the leverage available to us. Why we aren't currently doing everything we can to cultivate as much leverage as possible is beyond me. A complete rewrite with gains in work rules, disability, retirement, compensation, and hotels will require a ton of leverage. It's not like, under the RLA, you can enter mediation and instantly have leverage. It's like planting seeds. You can't plant seeds one day and expect to reap a windfall harvest the next day. You plant the seeds. Then you have to wait for the seeds to sprout, grow, and mature. The RLA is similar. Because of the way the RLA works, we will have to spend a significant amount of time in mediation before we begin to have credible leverage under the RLA. We haven't even planted the seeds yet. It's not rocket science. |
SWAPA is right where it wants to be.
It'll take the Turd for the light to come on me thinks. |
Originally Posted by Caveman
(Post 3452121)
SWAPA is right where it wants to be.
It'll take the Turd for the light to come on me thinks. |
Originally Posted by Tenacvols
(Post 3452169)
I’m not so sure. I watched the recording of the SWAPA town hall and it seemed we are close to filing for mediation from the comments of the NC chair on the direction that the board is leaning based upon the company dragging their feet…
Filing for mediation closes zero doors. It is virtually zero cost. Yet we approach it as if it contains kryptonite. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 08:55 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands