Jason, cumulatively it does put pressure on them. Any savings all added up puts pressure on them. So lets see, Distance Learning TA I would have put into the new contract and not a TA. Emergency Relief I would have voted no unless they can produce a TA that is worth something. Cheaper Hotel closer to the airport, again I would only put that into a new contract, if we can get something for it.

You are right, one thing doesn't put pressure on the company. All of these things do. Lets stop giving the company everything they want. Just my thoughts.

 

You do understand that some of our longest drive hotels cost twice as much as a comparable hotel that's shorter distance and has the same amenities in the surrounding area? We also spend another $100 round trip per crew on private transportation. So yes our 40min drive does put some pressure on them and that pressure is cost. It's a bit unnerving that a voting MEC member doesn't see something this simple.

 

You are both right. A $50 van ride puts $50 if pressure on them not $50,000 of pressure. For those that think a $50 van ride will force them to the table, you are dreaming .

 

I'm not saying it's forcing them to the table but changing any contractual language now that would benefit them is crazy even if it means we have to continue sitting on the van for 40minutes. Btw, my understanding is that it's about $10 million a year not just 50 bucks. Not just the transportation specifically but changes to the hotel section that would maintain or improve the pilots qol and save the company $10m a year. I don't think this is the place to discuss those specifics though. And that number only grows as the pilot group grows so yes I do believe we a good about of leverage in this category.

 

No more concessions, no more deals, no more letting things slide.

 

You think the difference between long term and short term hotels is $10 million. Really?
And you think waiving that language is worth $10 million to us. Really?

 

I think what he's saying is we shouldn't bend on anything in the contract now that mgmt seems to be playing hard ball. Anything.

 

I guess that is OK as long as you are not the guy in the van for an hour just to be next door to a Starbucks

 

I didn't necessarily say it was long vs short. I said there is $10m a year in the language that could be changed with no affect on pilot qol and maybe an improvement for most. If the company realizes those savings you could see a reduction in distance in many cities. The thing is that we shouldn't give them $10m just for a shorter van ride which could be done right now. We have to see some/most of that put back into our compensation. That requires a new contract. So for now you will continue to ride 40min and like it. They know you don't like going out there and would gladly put us some place closer but a shorter van ride is not a fair trade for $10mil. Your discomfort is their leverage. Ours is $10mil/yr. who has more leverage? Suck it up.

We gave them a 1% staffing reduction (read much more than 10million) to get an iPad we would have gotten anyway. We should have seen that in more compensation in the contract. Don't make the same mistake because you don't like a few long van rides for the next few month(s)/year(s).