Voting opened
12-31-2022 | 04:36 PM
#71
Line Holder
Joined: Dec 2022
Posts: 1,363
Likes: 128
Why would it be three years under CBA 2018? Do you think they agreed to this TA because of the merger?
12-31-2022 | 04:42 PM
#72
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2022
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
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.
12-31-2022 | 05:03 PM
#73
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 462
Likes: 59
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.
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.
12-31-2022 | 05:25 PM
#74
Line Holder
Joined: Sep 2022
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
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.
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.
12-31-2022 | 05:48 PM
#75
Line Holder
Joined: Feb 2019
Posts: 1,226
Likes: 29
From: baller, shot caller
Not sure why that is so hard for some to understand.
12-31-2022 | 05:54 PM
#76
Line Holder
Joined: Jan 2015
Posts: 462
Likes: 59
12-31-2022 | 07:00 PM
#77
On Reserve
Joined: Apr 2022
Posts: 190
Likes: 46
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.
12-31-2022 | 07:41 PM
#78
That/It/Thang
Joined: Aug 2020
Posts: 3,463
Likes: 275
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.
In typical mayo fashion you didn't actually make an argument.
https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/spirit/138796-before-you-leave-3.html
Happy New Years
01-01-2023 | 07:06 PM
#79
On Reserve
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
From: A320 FO
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.
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.
01-02-2023 | 12:36 AM
#80
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2017
Posts: 3,190
Likes: 160
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.
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.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
