I really don't understand how we can say, "It's better than what XYZ airline gets, so what's the problem with it?"
What's next? "We have one less RJ subcontracting for us than anyone else!"
If I came to your door and told you to buy this product from me today for 50 cents because tomorrow the government is going to make everyone buy one for a dollar tomorrow would you believe me? (Okay maybe a bad example). I'm sure there are doomsday scenarios you could dream up in every section of every contract, today just happens to be distance learning.

 

A full side by side comparison with our peers distance learning agreements would be nice to see and should bring some clarity to the issue. If this is truly an industry leading distance learning agreement, what would be the benefit of voting it down?

I realize our pay rates, retirement, trip rigs and LTD are awful, but we can't make up for all of those deficiencies with a distance learning agreement. This is a completely separate issue and needs to be handled as such. As was mentioned earlier, all of the training conflicts will most likely be going away anyways. We need to bolster each section of our contract separately and quit trying to make up for all of our deficiencies with conflicts.

I would still like to see a full side by side comparison before I place my vote. If this is an industry leading agreement, I will be voting yes.

 

Data point from an Airways guy:

We get 50% of our hourly rate, and each distance learning module has some length of time assigned to it. For example our last Airbus Winter Ops module had a 4 hour timeline. So you'll end up with two hours of your hourly rate once it's completed.

The actual length of time you take to complete the module is irrelevant. If you fast click through all the slides and answer the quizzes properly and can do all of that in 30 minutes, then fine. You'll still get paid 2 hours. Or if you're missing a chromosome, are distracted by booze and/or hookers and it takes 6 hours - you still get paid for 2.

 

As of 1 Nov 2013, but some may have been updated.

 

For those of us whose are excited about a higher min day in the next cba, could agreeing to 5 hours for training days set a precedent, and make it harder to get better down the road?

 

Forget you Delta! With your profit sharing and direct contribution

We have industry leading Distance Learning pay! 1.8 hours more per year! Whooo

 

Sounds like our pilot group. Woohoo! Delta + 7!

 

I don't think it's any secret that most sections of Delta's contract are far superior to ours, but we certainly aren't going to make up for those deficiencies in our distance learning section. If that's the goal than we're going to need to ask for 500 hours pay per training day.

I still have yet to hear a decent argument as to why this is not an acceptable agreement. Yes, Delta makes more money than we do, but it's certainly not because of our distance learning sections. I understand that an extra couple of hours per year isn't a very big deal, but it's still better than everybody else and we're not making any concessions. Voting no on a potentially industry leading agreement just because we have other weak areas in our contract doesn't make any sense.

We have to also realize that if we save this issue for contract negotiations, it will most likely be neglected in favor of more pertinent issues such as pay rates and retirement. Just seems like it makes sense to take care of this issue now so we don't have to waste negotiating capital on it in August.

 

I have to disagree with the argument that this is not concessionary. Distance learning is of exponential value to the company. While I understand we, the pilot group, are not going to get 100% of that return in our pockets I believe what we are losing is worth more than 2 hours. The previously mentioned return of lost days off (if dropped below min) I would argue is reason alone. Sitting at min days off and having 2 days worth of computer work doesn't sound like fun.
I really don't like the fear-mongering argument that if we don't take this the company will force worse scenarios on us. I wasn't here in 2010, but from the stories I've heard this sounds familiar.

 

I was here in 2010. It is familiar.