It may be that the company wants to avoid scope protections so they can wet lease (or other similar solutions) when they can't find pilots if/when the pilot shortage truly rears its ugly head.

I didn't and that's why I'm worried less about PBS and more about SCOPE, LTD, RETIREMENT.

Thanks
I hope we can all agree on one thing:
Without ironclad solid SCOPE there is no CBA.
It's worthless

Con:

New hire training pay is the same.

That’s astonishing and laughable

Con is the entire pay table

Dilly Dilly

And why are any of us surprised by this??? I’m sure it will still be hard to overcome the instant gratification that most will receive in the form of a pay increase and a “bonus” for signing such garbage. Insert carrot dangle here.

At first glance looks like there is no signing bonus (in section 3) for ratification like there was in the 2010 contract.


Edit:
Strike my last comment....

I see my error.

I had a copy of the old contract on one ipad and a copy of the new contract on another ipad comparing them side by side and the old contract had a section on signing bonus where as the new contract it was totally removed.

So there is a LOA addressing the signing bonus I hadn't gotten to yet. Just looking at section 1, 2 and 3.

It would be better to just look at the markups instead of comparing the two contracts side by side.

Because its not there, because its based on longevity and seat, not a flat amount like 2010.

You have to go to the calculator to see your amount

Where is this calculator? I couldn't make hands or tails of the language itself, since I'm not very smart.