![]() |
Originally Posted by DFWLECNOW
(Post 2520198)
This is laughable. We all have different risk tolerances. I'm not willing to vote no over someone else's 'perceived' QOL loss. How will your QOL be if you go out on LTD here the day after this fails?
|
Originally Posted by DFWLECNOW
(Post 2520198)
This is laughable. We all have different risk tolerances. I'm not willing to vote no over someone else's 'perceived' QOL loss. How will your QOL be if you go out on LTD here the day after this fails?
Fair enough. So vote yes. If you really think it’s the best option then do it but don’t cry and moan when you’re sitting in a dumpy hotel next to an airport for 17 hours and your contract basically states “scheduling can do what they want”. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by UNSUBSCRIBE
(Post 2520193)
A lot easier to vote no as a DAL or SWA pilot when you arent light years behind in compensation, LTD & Retirement.
Leverage? Really? The TRO is still in place, next meltdown, we end up in court, NMB will never release us, classes are still happening and don’t forget about all the heros who will drop all their plans for MUP Just remember how often folks spoke of American selling out work rules for money, because it sounds like you’re about ready to live it. The next meltdown is on the company for not being able to staff the operation appropriately (which truly was the original issue at hand). This is ever more obvious since the pilots are playing nice and doing all that’s within their power, but it’s still not enough. Not to mention not enough showing up to class or leaving mid training. |
Originally Posted by NKSpilot
(Post 2520196)
As I said before, let’s fight these other fights when the opportunity cost is $10/hr and not $50-70/hr.
Intestinal fortitude or hubris and stupidity? |
Originally Posted by TrojanCMH
(Post 2520202)
Fair enough. So vote yes. If you really think it’s the best option then do it but don’t cry and moan when you’re sitting in a dumpy hotel next to an airport for 17 hours and your contract basically states “scheduling can do what they want”.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by FlyingOkra
(Post 2520203)
Typical ALPA rhetoric.
|
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 2520205)
Why would it be a dumpy Hotel?
Read the long stay vs short stay changes. If you enjoy hanging out across the street from the airport then I guess it wouldn’t be bad. But most neighborhoods around the airport in the cities we frequent aren’t exactly the most sought after destinations. Just one of the small things that irks me to be honest. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Originally Posted by DFWLECNOW
(Post 2520197)
That's a much easier thing to say and do when you're already at or nearly at the top of the industry in compensation and have real LTD when you vote down TA1.
|
Originally Posted by TrojanCMH
(Post 2520207)
Read the long stay vs short stay changes. If you enjoy hanging out across the street from the airport then I guess it wouldn’t be bad. But most neighborhoods around the airport in the cities we frequent aren’t exactly the most sought after destinations. Just one of the small things that irks me to be honest.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
Lincoln Osiris and Feng
Originally Posted by Lincoln Osiris
(Post 2520211)
So all of our short stay hotels are dumpy now? And you do realize the 18 hours is between flights not show times and block in. So the difference is only 1.5 hours from current I believe.
So what. Why do we even feel the need to concede something so pedestrian as this? It’s not like they’re offering to pay us industry leading rates and offering profit sharing for conceding all this... That’s what bugs me about this TA. All these small little things that they threw in there add up to the point where it’s somewhat insulting. If the union were to came out and say “we got everyone above industry average pay, above industry average retirement, some form of profit sharing or stock purchase options, and locked down the scope language but... we had to give all this up to get it” I’d be fine with it. I understand we have to give a little to get a little. But instead they’re saying “we have to give all this up now to get below average rates, below average retirement, LTD that only looks good if you pay your own money into it (and we won’t tell you what that amount is), and scope that is anything but iron clad.” Not to mention the scheduling section that you have to choke down that has so many vague paragraphs and loopholes that even the lawyers who thought it up are confused. That’s this TA. The rates are fine. PBS is fine. Just don’t try and screw me on all the little things that they’re trying to hide behind the curtain. I’m a reasonable person but meet me in the middle. I’m not smart but I’m smart enough to know when I’m getting a garbage deal... Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:14 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands