The Signing "Bonus" is the problem
 

Serious question:

What would the consensus among our yes voters be if there was no one-time taxed "bonus" for trading away so much... to be locked into a subpar agreement for the next 5-8 years?

I will go out on a limb and say that if you are a FO and voting yes, it is not because of the bonus. That being said, 350+ FOs are on probation and won't be participating by providing a vote

I would guess around 1500 to 1600 pilots would be eligible to vote. I agree as an FO the signing bonus is a joke.( I am voting yes)

Anything less than 100% retro is a joke. It sends a message to the company that it was okay to drag this out for 3 years.

They get to keep our 43% pay raises for themselves. (Minus the bonus, which makes it about, roughly, approximately, plus or minus, 2 years pay we lose.) That's about 6 figures for nearly every pilot who's been here since early openers.)

Oh, and expect nothing to change in 5 years when we do this all again.

Question 1: What airline has ever gotten "full retro?"
Question 2: How do you figure they keep our pay raise for themselves?
Guys like you come on here and make these outlandish statements like they are facts. If you want to hate this TA fine, but give a good reason. I cannot imagine how you could back up anything you're saying with logic or anything based on reality, but please indulge us...

This is the reality of the RLA. Keep beating that 100% retro drum, but it will never make a difference. It’s unjust from our point of view but reality nonetheless.

Delta got full retro last contract, just FYI.

They did but their % of pay increase was smaller an they didnt negotiate past 12 months of amendable (or somewhere around there)

Nor 43% pay raises, added scope, LTD, a retirement plan, etc... We are so far frickin behind!

Lots of use of “should” on this forum. Is there a more useless word in the english language?