TA discussion
#531
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 3,674
As for the medical freedoms section I’m not putting to much energy there. I don’t think there is a snowballs chance in hell of the vaccine issues happening in this contracts term and even if they tried, the airline would have to shut down because so many would just not work.
#532
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,256
I'm a no vote because I know that if we turn this thing back, the gains we could attain would not be marginal gains. If SWAPA and the pilot group played their RLA hand correctly, the gains we could achieve would be substantial - even "generational." That's the power we have available to us THIS cycle. Our power to achieve massive gain may be greatly curtailed next cycle.
Unfortunately, while the company's only REAL threat to us is that of scabs, what has proven to be their most POWERFUL threat to us achieving a "life-changing" contract is our collective ignorance of the power we could wield. It's simply sad that 99% of pilots don't take a couple of days once in the span of their 20-to-40-year careers to do a deep-dive into the law and case history that determines so much of their quality of life both on the day-to-day level and in the long-term.
So many on these forums talk about not being "sheep." They like to think of themselves as "lions not lambs." They talk about how they don't listen to the MSM - how they're "independent thinkers." But when it comes to the process of forging a new contract, since they don't know any better, since they never put in the hard work of learning the subject, since they're not willing to delay gratification, like sheep, they allow themselves to be guided by the allure of easy answers and charismatic leaders." It's kind of the opposite of what James Madison once said, "And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." It's more like believing that plants thrive on Brawndo because "it's got electrolytes" despite the obvious crop failures.
#533
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2023
Posts: 346
Turd? If this is a turd your expectations were unrealistic. Perfect no but certainty a turd. Baring any shocking information at a roadshow I haven’t been able to pick apart enough to sway me to vote no.
As for the medical freedoms section I’m not putting to much energy there. I don’t think there is a snowballs chance in hell of the vaccine issues happening in this contracts term and even if they tried, the airline would have to shut down because so many would just not work.
As for the medical freedoms section I’m not putting to much energy there. I don’t think there is a snowballs chance in hell of the vaccine issues happening in this contracts term and even if they tried, the airline would have to shut down because so many would just not work.
Same old BS, SWAPA taking credit for getting a pay rate that was already going to happen anyway.
#536
Gets Weekend Reserve
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,668
Kind of, yeah. Doesn't make it wrong though.
I don't know that I'd call this TA a "turd," but it is substantially less than we could achieve in terms of rates, work rules, benefits, vacation, retirement, etc given the current environment. Historically, the only real weapon management in airline pilot disputes has had avaialable to it to combat the credible threat of a legal strike from labor (us) is the use of scabs. In other times, that has been a very real and very potent deterrent to the ability of pilot groups to pose the credible threat of a legal strike. In this environment, it's simply not feasible that the company could recruit enough scabs to counter the credible threat of a legal strike. In five years, it might again be very feasible. The window is open for us now. In five years, it very well may not be.
I'm a no vote because I know that if we turn this thing back, the gains we could attain would not be marginal gains. If SWAPA and the pilot group played their RLA hand correctly, the gains we could achieve would be substantial - even "generational." That's the power we have available to us THIS cycle. Our power to achieve massive gain may be greatly curtailed next cycle.
Unfortunately, while the company's only REAL threat to us is that of scabs, what has proven to be their most POWERFUL threat to us achieving a "life-changing" contract is our collective ignorance of the power we could wield. It's simply sad that 99% of pilots don't take a couple of days once in the span of their 20-to-40-year careers to do a deep-dive into the law and case history that determines so much of their quality of life both on the day-to-day level and in the long-term.
So many on these forums talk about not being "sheep." They like to think of themselves as "lions not lambs." They talk about how they don't listen to the MSM - how they're "independent thinkers." But when it comes to the process of forging a new contract, since they don't know any better, since they never put in the hard work of learning the subject, since they're not willing to delay gratification, like sheep, they allow themselves to be guided by the allure of easy answers and charismatic leaders." It's kind of the opposite of what James Madison once said, "And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." It's more like believing that plants thrive on Brawndo because "it's got electrolytes" despite the obvious crop failures.
Were you around this industry when Delta and United got their "generational" gains in 2000? I was.... and I was in awe. Then I watched the aftermath...
I don't know that I'd call this TA a "turd," but it is substantially less than we could achieve in terms of rates, work rules, benefits, vacation, retirement, etc given the current environment. Historically, the only real weapon management in airline pilot disputes has had avaialable to it to combat the credible threat of a legal strike from labor (us) is the use of scabs. In other times, that has been a very real and very potent deterrent to the ability of pilot groups to pose the credible threat of a legal strike. In this environment, it's simply not feasible that the company could recruit enough scabs to counter the credible threat of a legal strike. In five years, it might again be very feasible. The window is open for us now. In five years, it very well may not be.
I'm a no vote because I know that if we turn this thing back, the gains we could attain would not be marginal gains. If SWAPA and the pilot group played their RLA hand correctly, the gains we could achieve would be substantial - even "generational." That's the power we have available to us THIS cycle. Our power to achieve massive gain may be greatly curtailed next cycle.
Unfortunately, while the company's only REAL threat to us is that of scabs, what has proven to be their most POWERFUL threat to us achieving a "life-changing" contract is our collective ignorance of the power we could wield. It's simply sad that 99% of pilots don't take a couple of days once in the span of their 20-to-40-year careers to do a deep-dive into the law and case history that determines so much of their quality of life both on the day-to-day level and in the long-term.
So many on these forums talk about not being "sheep." They like to think of themselves as "lions not lambs." They talk about how they don't listen to the MSM - how they're "independent thinkers." But when it comes to the process of forging a new contract, since they don't know any better, since they never put in the hard work of learning the subject, since they're not willing to delay gratification, like sheep, they allow themselves to be guided by the allure of easy answers and charismatic leaders." It's kind of the opposite of what James Madison once said, "And a people who mean to be their own Governors, must arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives." It's more like believing that plants thrive on Brawndo because "it's got electrolytes" despite the obvious crop failures.
#539
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2018
Posts: 1,256
Okay, then. What's good for the goose is good for the gander, no?
Yes, I was around. As you know, it's a different time. How is it different? In several ways. Particularly, germane to this issue, though, we've all witnessed in real life how the industry was affected by a black swan event over the last few years. We don't have to imagine or guess.
While not exactly the same (no two situations ever are), the airline industry experienced an arguably even more devastating blow than the 9/11 attacks when the pandemic hit in March 2020. A HUGE difference was the government bailout of the airlines that ensued after the respective events:
When adjusted for inflation, the $15 billion assistance in 2001 is roughly equivalent to about $26 billion in today's dollars. In other words, the financial support airlines received following the COVID-19 outbreak was over three times greater in real terms than what was provided after 9/11.
You seem to be advocating a Maginot Line approach to assisting SWA (the company) in staving off bankruptcy in the event another black swan event occurs by downscaling and diluting our demands in anticipation of the possibility of it happening. You're focused on strategies that may have been effective in the past, 20+ years ago. As the French found out, though, times had changed. More recently, Blockbuster and Blackberry made similar mistakes.
Maybe we should have agreed to that 10% pay cut Carl wanted back in 2020 after the pandemic kicked off. Would have made bankruptcy that much less likely. Job security, am I right?
Our strategies and demands, while keeping in mind the past, should be based on the present economic landscape, labor market, and government policy trends, rather than outdated models.
While not exactly the same (no two situations ever are), the airline industry experienced an arguably even more devastating blow than the 9/11 attacks when the pandemic hit in March 2020. A HUGE difference was the government bailout of the airlines that ensued after the respective events:
The total aid from the government related to COVID-19 [was] in the ballpark of $80 billion, including tax relief, grants and loans. After 9/11, by contrast, government support consisted of $5 billion in direct grants and $10 billion in loans.
You seem to be advocating a Maginot Line approach to assisting SWA (the company) in staving off bankruptcy in the event another black swan event occurs by downscaling and diluting our demands in anticipation of the possibility of it happening. You're focused on strategies that may have been effective in the past, 20+ years ago. As the French found out, though, times had changed. More recently, Blockbuster and Blackberry made similar mistakes.
Maybe we should have agreed to that 10% pay cut Carl wanted back in 2020 after the pandemic kicked off. Would have made bankruptcy that much less likely. Job security, am I right?
Our strategies and demands, while keeping in mind the past, should be based on the present economic landscape, labor market, and government policy trends, rather than outdated models.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post