[JOKE]Wasn't that in the last SPAMEC Update?[/JOKE]
Just messing with you.

Definitely a great opportunity. One of the weakest things I've seen of this and past MEC's is their ability to realize when they have the upper hand in negotiations. If the company wanted to put 10 planes on quickly, no doubt they would have sold the "growth far outweighs the concessions" angle to the MEC. The MEC may have been able to give temp "help" to the company, while getting 10 permanent airplanes, PLUS a little sweetener on the side. If they got a hot deal on 10 planes, they probably would have been willing to pay up a little for any temp relief.


BTW, anyone know if Tiger is back up and running yet?

 

........as of the 19th, no.

 

Ahhhhh, some things never change, do they?
You can't please everybody... but in a "democracy", all that's needed is the MAJORITY.
Have a few for me at Southport Matt, and good luck!


(BTW, the "Lawman" reference WAS funny. LOL!!!!!!!!!!!)

 

OK, which part did you think I was serious about? Law being a guest speaker, or the nametag thing? Or maybe it was the three smiley faces at the bottom that was too serious? Come on dude.

I completely agree. I, too, do not agree 100% with the MEC every time. I form my own opinions, as should each and every one of us.

FWIW, I heard(unconfirmed) that the company wanted permanent concessions from the pilots, and the concessions were major. They wanted big time increases in productivity to allow us to fly the additional jets with little increase in staffing. My personal opinion...why should we even consider GIVING the company anything to "allow" the company to grow? That carrot has been dangled in front of this group so many times I think we have all lost count. If they want to grow quicker, GREAT. That growth should NEVER be financed in whole or even small part by the pilot group....EVER! They could have gotten those airplanes if they wanted them. If its a staffing issue, there are thousands of qualified pilots looking for work. Hire them. I personally was insulted when I heard the company came to us for concessions in exchange for a few new airplanes.

 

But you DID hear about it. We didn't, and that is wrong.
To borrow from Robin Williams, MEC's, like diapers, need to be changed often, and for the same reason.

The devil is in the details. This company doesn't do much unless they can get a really good deal on it. To argue whether or not a deal should have been made is futile, unless we are given the facts. Not until then can a useful dialog occur. FOScott gives the company's opener (as he heard it), who knows where meeting in the middle would have gotten us.

Growth should NEVER be financed by the pilots? REALLY? Explain the 90 hour line build...

Ironic the day the U.S. space program ends, we are stuck in an information vacuum.

 

I dont have to explain it, I didnt write it. And if you are suggesting that we have already funded the growth of the company, then why in h*** should we give more?

 

Careful Scotty, you're starting to sound like a 26%er!

 

Well, that cost me and other F/O's an upgrade and thousands of dollars in our pockets! Thank you MEC for at least sending something out about it requesting some sort of membership feedback! NOOOT! Taking 10 aircraft quickly would require some temporary relief on some contract items for the sake of growth. MEC, what do you think? Again, thanks for telling us, the LINE PILOTS, about this....

 

Well, our favorite number "26" is part of CaptScott's screen name...

 

ten airplanes quickly???? They would need A LOT more then just pilot concessions to make that happen: The FAA, I'm sure would love for us to grow 25% quickly with our "crack" maintance dept... and I use the tern "crack" loosely. BTW: where would they put 10 more airplanes anyway? Food for thought.