Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3562749)

Hey, that’s me! ✋

If you haven’t heard when it’s going to “happen,” I honestly don’t know what else to say. The path has literally been laid out.

This is a 2 year deal, wasting at least 25% of the duration for probably no increase, while opportunity costs of this contract, can’t do.

But sometimes you have to walk down the hill and screw all the cows vs running down to screw 1.

Originally Posted by Tranquility (Post 3562695)

Not all of us want to be instructors to make decent bank…. That said, I am grateful those punks will finally have to bid their own seniority and not be able to cherry-pick trips…

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3562746)

This was all made clear during the road shows.

Union said they want 72 hours and first year pay for training.

Company said “fine, that’s on your side of the table, so it’s a cost the union incurs.”

NC said “child please”

Company said “we don’t have problems attracting pilots, regardless of APC lore, we have issues retaining pilots”

NC says “you do you, boo, but we are already getting hit with $90m over 2 years in just the first year pay increase, we are not subtracting from other areas to add”

The company said they believe this will get enough pilots to staff the 500 they need next year, the met their hiring needs this year and plan to hire over 1000 to meet their 500 for next year.

Why line pilots seem more concerned with the number of apps on file when we don’t even see the stack, and they do, I just still don’t get it.

But feel free to vote no if you think the company will come back and offer more for training while not sticking with the cost being carried by the pilot side of the deal. That’s a fools errand for me.


Something else to ponder;

Even IF the company comes back and wants to talk. And even IF we get a new deal and it’s approved for vote, road shows etc, you have to ask if you think the new TA2 rates
will be more than TA1 DOS+1 rates. Because that’s pretty much how the timeline would be close to ending up.

Originally Posted by LongHornFlyer (Post 3562815)

The entire goal of this TA is to fix attrition…it will not do that. Whether this is voted yes or no, they will be coming back to the table within a year. Why not get paid more in the meantime?

Originally Posted by LongHornFlyer (Post 3562815)

The entire goal of this TA is to fix attrition…it will not do that. Whether this is voted yes or no, they will be coming back to the table within a year. Why not get paid more in the meantime?

Originally Posted by Irishblackbird (Post 3562839)

But a lot of the goodies in the TA doesn't even take effect for another year. Flight pay, red eye over-ride, increased Direct contribution, etc.

Vote it down now and they'll be back to the table in 3 months when they realize they will be scaling back our spring and summer schedules again to avoid meltdowns (wink, wink, short staffing issues). I know four guys, one a jr CA, who accepted their CJOs as a result of this TA.

Question,
If you're a prospective pilot for either Jblue or NK, why would you even come here? Right off the bat you'll get better pay and SLI when the merger happens if you go with JB. But hey, if you come here you'll get a snazzy new uniform paid for! 😆

Originally Posted by Irishblackbird (Post 3562839)

But a lot of the goodies in the TA doesn't even take effect for another year. Flight pay, red eye over-ride, increased Direct contribution, etc.

Vote it down now and they'll be back to the table in 3 months when they realize they will be scaling back our spring and summer schedules again to avoid meltdowns (wink, wink, short staffing issues). I know four guys, one a jr CA, who accepted their CJOs as a result of this TA.

Question,
If you're a prospective pilot for either Jblue or NK, why would you even come here? Right off the bat you'll get better pay and SLI when the merger happens if you go with JB. But hey, if you come here you'll get a snazzy new uniform paid for! 😆

Originally Posted by SSlow (Post 3562745)

It seems like there is this big change in attitude that we keep procrastinating, but oh it's going to happen, just not today.

But when does it though?

Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3562862)

I doubt raising first year pay that much will stop or slow attrition. While I know there is attrition at the first year level it’s not a majority of the attrition. Wasn’t it posted that a majority is coming from years 3-4?

Raising first year pay may slow down attrition from first year. But imo it’s about keeping classes full. Won’t do anything to stop people in years 2+ from leaving.

Originally Posted by LongHornFlyer (Post 3562815)

The entire goal of this TA is to fix attrition…it will not do that. Whether this is voted yes or no, they will be coming back to the table within a year. Why not get paid more in the meantime?

Originally Posted by FahQ2 (Post 3562944)

If the company didn’t think this was important to do, there wouldn’t be any offer at all. Think about that again for a moment.

What other reason would they have to offer any kind of raise at all if they did not want this?

People keep talking about how the company won’t come back to the table and we will be “stuck” with current rates and that this is “free money” (it isn’t).

If first year relief wasn’t something they really wanted, they would have stalled all negotiations until the merger, not put a $400 million offer on the table before the amendable date.

Don’t be so scared.

Originally Posted by FahQ2 (Post 3562944)

If the company didn’t think this was important to do, there wouldn’t be any offer at all. Think about that again for a moment.

What other reason would they have to offer any kind of raise at all if they did not want this?

People keep talking about how the company won’t come back to the table and we will be “stuck” with current rates and that this is “free money” (it isn’t).

If first year relief wasn’t something they really wanted, they would have stalled all negotiations until the merger, not put a $400 million offer on the table before the amendable date.

Don’t be so scared.

Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3562962)

I think most people realize they probably would come back to the table but the question is how long will it take to get something to vote on again. Most think it’ll be 6+ months till we have something new implemented. The economic gains from waiting may only make sense in this was a longer contract. Assume an average of $30 gains on this ta over 6 months comes out to about $13,000. If it takes 6 months to renegotiate that’s $13,000 lost potential income and if we negotiate $15 more per month it’ll take 12-13 months to recoup that $13,000.

So the big unknowns are how long will it take to have something to vote on and how much more would we gain. How long does it take to recoup the money lost while renegotiating. Big if but if what I said above came to be that puts us a year and a half from now till that renegotiation becomes worth it, close to what would have been the expiration of the ta up for voting now. We could be negotiating for pay parity within that time frame too

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3562859)

SLI for anyone hired after the merger notice will be integrated DOH, as it always is done for those hired after constructive notice

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3562964)

It’s more than the 6 months lost. Even IF you get a deal in 6 months, it’s not 6 months lost at DOS rates, it’s 6 months longer to get to the new TA DOS+2 rates.

So the loss of wages also has to be figured with taking longer to get to DOS2 rates. So any TA2 rates would need to smash DOS2 rates as well.

If it takes a year to get TA2, not only did you lose all of the year with the raise, but now the new TA2 has to best TA1 DOS2 rates. Makes no sense when we are dealing with a 2 year deal.

Originally Posted by Irishblackbird (Post 3562971)

Then why is the negotiation committee, and MEC so insistent we take this TA if it will be integrated by DOH only. Their angle is we do not bring enough equity to the table during the TPA if we lag behind so far in hourly rates. My understanding is it will be DOH, and relative seniority determined by perceived equity and career expectations. The last of which we will have very little with the TA and even less without it. Therefore I believe a new hire would fare much better at JB. Is this wrong?

Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3562973)

Yeah I’m trying to assume a best case scenario there we can get $15 added to every rate dos and dos+1. I don’t see us having something to vote on again in just a month. Union has to poll the group sort through the result schedule meetings with the company and begin negotiating. I think 6 mo is realistically the earliest we could have a new deal. 9-12 mo is conservative.

Just looking at this financially you have to consider the opportunity cost of holding out. I think if we were considering a long term contract it makes sense to hold out, I think if we weren’t merging where we will be negotiating pay parity right after this it makes sense to hold out.

Originally Posted by Aero1900 (Post 3563036)

Frontier guy here.

I have read almost all the posts on the TA threads here and on the JB section.

I just wanted to say that I feel bad for you guys. I think this vote is a really tough call. Before the JB TA, it seemed like a Yes. Take the money and go back to the table in 2 years. But after seeing the JB TA it's a tougher sell.

From a selfish standpoint as a Frontier pilot, I'd love to see you guys vote it down and get more on TA2. But I understand that the short duration makes the time value of money a tough sell on waiting 6 months when the JCBA is only 2 years away in all likelihood.

I wish you guys the best! You guys are really our only true peer group.

Originally Posted by Aero1900 (Post 3563036)

Frontier guy here.

I have read almost all the posts on the TA threads here and on the JB section.

I just wanted to say that I feel bad for you guys. I think this vote is a really tough call. Before the JB TA, it seemed like a Yes. Take the money and go back to the table in 2 years. But after seeing the JB TA it's a tougher sell.

From a selfish standpoint as a Frontier pilot, I'd love to see you guys vote it down and get more on TA2. But I understand that the short duration makes the time value of money a tough sell on waiting 6 months when the JCBA is only 2 years away in all likelihood.

I wish you guys the best! You guys are really our only true peer group.

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3562990)

The NC has made the case, correctly, that if JBLU is $80 more an hour than we are, the argument will be made that because NK benefits so much from contractual gains, it needs to be considered when deciding on an integration methodology for the pre merger hired pilots.

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3562588)

Ding ding we have a winner

Company is so concerned about first year pay that they did NOT flat increase it in this TA when they could, union wanted to. They also didn’t move training pay much at all

Doesn’t seem like they are half as concerned as some pilots are.

Bank the money, move on to the next fight

Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3562973)

Yeah I’m trying to assume a best case scenario there we can get $15 added to every rate dos and dos+1. I don’t see us having something to vote on again in just a month. Union has to poll the group sort through the result schedule meetings with the company and begin negotiating. I think 6 mo is realistically the earliest we could have a new deal. 9-12 mo is conservative.

Just looking at this financially you have to consider the opportunity cost of holding out. I think if we were considering a long term contract it makes sense to hold out, I think if we weren’t merging where we will be negotiating pay parity right after this it makes sense to hold out.

Originally Posted by fumeevented (Post 3563058)

the company is playing you like a fiddle. They didnt raise 1st year as high as they need because it would make the rest of the pay scale look ridiculous in comparison. They'll raise it to what they really wanted the second the TA passes.

Either get more money up front or make them remove the blank check on 1st year pay. Either way, this one has to be a no.

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3562964)

It’s more than the 6 months lost. Even IF you get a deal in 6 months, it’s not 6 months lost at DOS rates, it’s 6 months longer to get to the new TA DOS+1rates.

So the loss of wages also has to be figured with taking longer to get to DOS1 rates. So any TA2 rates would need to smash DOS+1 rates as well.

If it takes a year to get TA2, not only did you lose all of the year with the raise, but now the new TA2 has to best TA1 DOS+1 rates. Makes no sense when we are dealing with a 2 year deal.

Originally Posted by Noisecanceller (Post 3563086)

Why would a new deal reset DOS+1 and +2 necessarily.

We could negotiate DOS + 6mo. JetBlues TA has their raises over an 18mo period. Doesn’t have to always be a year after DOS.

Saying this is a two year deal also puts a lot of faith that this merger is going to happen. I think it will but there is always a possibility it doesn’t and we will be living with this for a very long time if it doesn’t.

Originally Posted by fumeevented (Post 3563078)

It only took 3 months to start from scratch, but polishing it up a bit is going to take 6 months.....ok.

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3563087)

Ah, and there it is. If it doesn’t happen, how long do you think a full section 6 will take, average is 3 years.

So if the merger fails and we head to section 6, you want to be at 2018 rates for 3 years or TA rates for 3 years?

Originally Posted by Noisecanceller (Post 3563092)

Why would it be three years under CBA 2018? Do you think they agreed to this TA because of the merger?

Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3563093)

The point is if this gets voted down we have no idea what happens next because it’s the companies decision. They could decide not to come to the table till the amendable date. They could decide to scrap the current ta and start from scratch and negotiate a new short term ga. They could decide to go into section 6 and do the whole thing either now or at the amendable date. There’s only one scenario where they come back immediately and renegotiate starting with the current ta and we really have no idea what would happen next. The idea is if we don’t have this TA and go to tpa or full section 6 would you rather go through that at our current rates or the new ones. There’s no guarantee the company comes back to play ball right after a no vote.

Originally Posted by Lakeaffect (Post 3563106)

I think Noisecanceller’s point is that it won’t take 3 years under c2018 as evidence of the record timing TA that was offered to us, which was not out of kindness or upcoming merger, but purely necessity to stop the bleeding of pilots.

It will be a much shorter negotiating section 6 after a failed merger with a C2018 vs this TA. Higher rates under the TA will make it easier, but it’ll probably take longer.

Originally Posted by Noisecanceller (Post 3563092)

Why would it be three years under CBA 2018? Do you think they agreed to this TA because of the merger?

Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1 (Post 3563115)

You’re probably right. There’s just a whole lot of unknowns. If this fails. A whole of of what ifs and risk involved. Each person really has to look at what’s presented and decide themselves.

Originally Posted by CincoDeMayo (Post 3563085)

Cool. Brought to you by the same guy who claimed the displacement bid would go away as soon as the F9 merger died. Sorry but I don’t trust your insight or instinct.

Must be the fumes.

Happy New Year. Enjoy the $50k extra in 2023, brought to you by Yes voters. 😃

Originally Posted by fumeevented (Post 3563146)

You either have a bad memory or are lying. I said the displacement never would have happened without the F9 merger. You must have imagined the rest. Or you just have a hard on for me ever since i proved you wrong about the CBA not preventing the company from stalling the JCBA as long as possible after an F9 merger.

In typical mayo fashion you didn't actually make an argument.

Originally Posted by azboy (Post 3563582)

The way I see this, it’s like getting a raise at the start of negotiations while we negotiate real pay rates.

For example, if we weren’t in an impending merger and the company comes to us in March when the contract becomes amendable and say we will offer you a raise now while we negotiate the real pay rates. Instead of being stuck at current pay rates while we negotiate for 2-3 years we get a nice raise, who would say no to that?

This is basically what’s happening, we are getting a raise all the while having more rounds of negotiations coming in the next couple years with the merger. And we will be then negotiating with B6 who have at least shown they are willing to pay. And if the merger doesn’t go through we go straight back to the table negotiating.

Just my two cents.