Feng, you use reasonable logic, so let's use some logic here...After a TA is reached, and a new payscale is put in place. What is the airline obligated to do under RLA obligation for those employees that worked under an expired contract? Retroactive pay (as it relates to the new payscale). Who would have to pay? The company. So why do you thinks it's pilot's that are the only party concerned about the paying out of lump sums of money? Spirit WILL have to pay the difference and though it may be subject to a payment plan, it will cost the airline-so it is a planned expense that is being taken into account. Why would you think otherwise?


1) You misunderstand, the term ULCC is slang. The term budget carrier/ULCC/LCC etc have always related to the customer's purchasing power. Southwest airlines was the first 'low cost carrier'...but have they operated their business around your alleged core principal of "low labor cost"? Perspective; Retail shops like the Dollar Tree& The dollar store are budget suppliers that cater to consumers with optional or decreased buying power...does that mean they pay their employees less than minimum wage or less than a comparable convenience store employee? Of course not. The flaw in your logic may be that you haven't realized that historical FACT.

2) Don't infantilize yourself by mentioning how little you could care less about this outcome. It's inflammatory (which you have every right to be), but more importantly, it negates the point you've tried to make. Are you an adult pilot? Do you fly for a living? If so this outcome will affect you. Regardless of the outcome, this NMB will set a precedent for future labor disputes (the same way past NMB's have set legal precedent). What is truly asinine is that you have come to a forum that is filled with uncertainty and you try to make a point with sarcasm and cynicism. Do you realize that? Guys telling you to go away are no match to the self-inflicted negation of your own attitude. Really is weird.


Once again, you are completely wrong in this sentiment. It is void of any historical fact. First off, not every industry falls under the provision of the RLA. A coal miner's labor dispute isn't an RLA labor dispute. Additionally, just because a past TA included wording for a release of liability of a retro check, does not mean retroactive pay isn't dispensed. The TA will address this issue in addition to the NMB prior to the TA. Secondly, where are you getting your information from? It definitely seems that you are making your reply up out of thin air. "The amounts were small"-no, lump sum checks of thousands of dollars are pretty normal. To quote Walter Sobchak, "you're out of your element".


Yeah here we go, you are clearly just pulling this stuff out your ground-hole. The RLA has established a timeline. It isn't upto the NMB to determine if a strike is allowed or not. They just report to the President what the labor situation is and their findings to prevent a disservice to the American people. The labor group will be allowed to strike so long as it respects the timeline of the RLA. I highly suggest you read...anything...just read anything, because the thought of you being a functional and coherent adult pilot (even at COMM/CFI level) is concerning. "Good moral character" suggests support of a fellow pilot group from jump-seating to NMBs.So why troll pilots that are going through a rough patch under the guise of offering an opinion? Dumb, plain old dumb. If I didn't know any better, I'd say your content suggests your a jealous flight attendant.

Damn the fight is on!

Negotiating down to 12.

Thanks. Good to hear!

Sorry Pedro, it's not my job to financially support the business model. That's your job to figure out, just like it's not my job to track down paperwork. That's ops job. Shame they suck at. Oh well, not my problem.

Wow. Feng. I don't even work for spirit, and reading his "asinine" (see what I did there?) posts annoys me.

There is no way he's an airline pilot since he speaks to undercut the industry. (Maybe a corporate pilot/teachers pet/management wannabe for some Fortune 500 big shots though). He's probably not spirit management, because that would be too obvious, and an unacceptable risk given that this page has been used as evidence in court. No, he's a lawyer. He uses good words. He's good at painting you the picture he wants you to see. I'm guessing he's F&H, but not assigned to spirit, or a staffer at some other union busting law firm, and he's just on here to get his jollies by poking some union pilots in the eye. His concepts come directly out of the F&H union busting playbook for what it's worth. I say the best response is quit feeding the troll, just ignore him and walk away. Every time you reply, it gives him another chance to reply.

I sincerely hope you guys get a great contract.

Great post... Thx dude

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

HOLY COW!!!

Never have I been acused of being so many things in a single paragraph. A corporate pilot, a ?teacher's pet?, middle manager at a F500, works for FH, staffer at a FH competitor, a lawyer...but not Spirit management. And definitely not an airline pilot.

Thanks for the kind words sir, but have you considered that I use "good" words simply because I'm not a half wit?

Your smart....****

Sent from my SM-G950U using Tapatalk

.....sigh.....