Don't listen to DP he is just a madman and JL just doesn't get it yet. I wasn't here at the time but they tried that fear tactic with Contract 2010. This LOA is a no-go for numerous reasons that have been elaborated. Think of this as a reality check for the NC, MEC as well as the company.

 

Let me make sure I got is right, this extension learning is essentially for recurrent training, most other training is a once and done training.

We're talking about two days once a year, right?

 

So the best reason to vote yes for this LOA is because of scare tactics?

What has stopped the company from making us do ground school in the crew room before iPads? There are many computers in the dfw crew room.

Would love for the public to hear about our one day a year training if we run a jet off the side of a runway.

What about upgrade training? So we have cut off two days for that as well? What about Bruce? Lets stick up for our own and make sure he is covered too.

This training is a tacky add on to this LOA. It should only contain what we need to use iPads for Jepps and replacement when and if you break one. Oh yeah the company has already bought them and they are "in a closet" somewhere. The riddle interns are making forts out of them.

Voting No!

 

This guy gets it ^^^^

 

Stating the obvious...
In Economic terms, Technology benefits capital by increasing efficiency and decreasing labor.
The company invested on technology to save $, by decreasing our labor cost.
Has it been established that it can, and will, be forced upon us to use the already purchased technology? If so, there is no going back to classroom.
What will the company gain by making us physically present at our domicile for training, other than a scare tactic for leverage?
While the company's monetary gains are substantial, what are we gaining in return?
Do we want to make the point that financial gains should be partially shared?
OUR company has been exceptionally profitable, and is forecasted to continue to be.
Have we reaped any benefits from those gains?
It may be defeatist to expect to maintain the current benefits associated with training scheduling.
Isn't it speculative to predict what may, or may not, be forced upon us, if we vote NO.
Are we gaining anything substantial with a YES vote?
Would this be an appropriate time for NK management to show their commitment to "good faith negotiations" as a prelude to this summer?

 

Yes. AFAIK 2 days of recurrent ground (annually) and 1 day to learn how to use the device (once, I assume).

 

The scare tactics wouldn't be the reason for a yes vote. The question should be what puts us in the best situation come contract negotiations in August. What are you expecting to get in August when we try to negotiate distance learning along with massive gains elsewhere in our contract (trip rigs, pay rates, retirement, LTD)? Do you really think distance learning will be a priority? If you do and you think we can get them to give us 9 hours per day, 5 extra days off and a pony than I'll join in on the no votes.

I am not saying there is a right or wrong answer on this, it's just that sometimes it seems that a lot of guys vote no without really weighing the options and the reality of the situation. Trust me, I'm no compromiser. I'll be the first to vote no on our next contract unless it is industry leading. This however, is not our next contract. It's an agreement regarding a specific section of our contract that does not currently exist, and compared to our peers, appears to be a step above.

 

Well that sounds like you are voting emotionally. Ever do crew scheduling a favor? They were quick to repay the favor when you needed one right?

We are unionized hourly workers, lets not sell ourselves short for no reason.

 

I'm not sure how this relates to the distance learning agreement we are currently discussing.

 

Vote no. I will sit in crew room for two days. Guaranteed I will get my two days back. Paid.