View Poll Results: T/A Vote Yes or No
Yes
50
9.38%
No
483
90.62%
Voters: 533. You may not vote on this poll
Yes or No
06-25-2022, 10:27 AM
#61
Has a furrowed brow
Joined APC: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,160
Originally Posted by DashTrash
I cannot remember an airline ever having a second bullet in the chamber. In my memory, it has always taken a significant amount of just to get back to the table. It took Delta a long time, but they recalled their MEC and NC which took extra time. They also got retro pay when they did sign a deal. But they got moderate gains when they got TA2. That’s kind of the history when pilots vote down TAs.
Maybe it should go back? Like I said, I’m really undecided. I was hoping to see some creative approaches to solving some of our scheduling and QOL issues. That’s not in this TA!!! It’s just add pay, add pay, add pay…. The Company will figure out how (if they already haven’t) how to minimize their exposure to paying add pay.
Maybe it should go back? Like I said, I’m really undecided. I was hoping to see some creative approaches to solving some of our scheduling and QOL issues. That’s not in this TA!!! It’s just add pay, add pay, add pay…. The Company will figure out how (if they already haven’t) how to minimize their exposure to paying add pay.
Hey everyone. Delta guy here. While sitting in my house sipping bourbon naked with just my hat on (naturally), I decided to check out what you guys thought in your TA. Wasn’t going to comment, as it’s not mine to vote on. But in reference to our TA 1 in contact 2015, here’s a little background for those unaware.
Our initial TA (known as TA 1) had many gives back to the company. The biggest of which was changing (reducing) our profit sharing formula. We were told over and over, by both our MEC, and management “There is no other deal! This is it. It will not get better than this. Take it or leave it.” Our MEC chair at the time actually said we would have a contract imposed on us by the PEB if we didn’t accept it.
Reviews were mixed at first. Eventually, as the vote got closer, a social media storm doomed that hunk of junk. We voted it down by almost a 70/30 ratio in the summer of 2015.
The MEC and negotiating committee were replaced and sent back to the table to get a deal we would agree on. It took another year, but in Sep 2016, we voted and passed TA 2 that was vastly improved on TA 1 in almost every way.
Just a little background on our own crappy TA and how we dealt with it.
Good luck, and I hope you guys get a great contract. So we can get a great contract. So you guys can get a great contract…it helps all of us.
Now excuse me while I go polish the brass on my hat and yell at people on guard.
06-25-2022, 10:31 AM
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 3,191
Originally Posted by Wolf424
Hey everyone. Delta guy here. While sitting in my house sipping bourbon naked with just my hat on (naturally), I decided to check out what you guys thought in your TA. Wasn’t going to comment, as it’s not mine to vote on. But in reference to our TA 1 in contact 2015, here’s a little background for those unaware.
Our initial TA (known as TA 1) had many gives back to the company. The biggest of which was changing (reducing) our profit sharing formula. We were told over and over, by both our MEC, and management “There is no other deal! This is it. It will not get better than this. Take it or leave it.” Our MEC chair at the time actually said we would have a contract imposed on us by the PEB if we didn’t accept it.
Reviews were mixed at first. Eventually, as the vote got closer, a social media storm doomed that hunk of junk. We voted it down by almost a 70/30 ratio in the summer of 2015.
The MEC and negotiating committee were replaced and sent back to the table to get a deal we would agree on. It took another year, but in Sep 2016, we voted and passed TA 2 that was vastly improved on TA 1 in almost every way.
Just a little background on our own crappy TA and how we dealt with it.
Good luck, and I hope you guys get a great contract. So we can get a great contract. So you guys can get a great contract…it helps all of us.
Now excuse me while I go polish the brass on my hat and yell at people on guard.
Our initial TA (known as TA 1) had many gives back to the company. The biggest of which was changing (reducing) our profit sharing formula. We were told over and over, by both our MEC, and management “There is no other deal! This is it. It will not get better than this. Take it or leave it.” Our MEC chair at the time actually said we would have a contract imposed on us by the PEB if we didn’t accept it.
Reviews were mixed at first. Eventually, as the vote got closer, a social media storm doomed that hunk of junk. We voted it down by almost a 70/30 ratio in the summer of 2015.
The MEC and negotiating committee were replaced and sent back to the table to get a deal we would agree on. It took another year, but in Sep 2016, we voted and passed TA 2 that was vastly improved on TA 1 in almost every way.
Just a little background on our own crappy TA and how we dealt with it.
Good luck, and I hope you guys get a great contract. So we can get a great contract. So you guys can get a great contract…it helps all of us.
Now excuse me while I go polish the brass on my hat and yell at people on guard.
06-25-2022, 10:58 AM
#63
Not at work
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Position: 737 ca
Posts: 293
I was ambivalent hearing we had a TA. I have t heard anything about the company negotiating in practically years as they were stuck. We need a cola to bring us back to 2019 levels, but not with the concessions. They say this is a cost positive deal… where. Every cost is replaced with a direct reduction. Instructors were brought into ALPA to prevent scab training during a strike. My ambivalence ended there. NO!
06-25-2022, 11:12 AM
#64
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2020
Posts: 66
Originally Posted by DashTrash
I am in no way saying that I’m voting yes or no because I honestly am torn. But if we do vote this down, we have to be prepared for what happens next. There will be no quick second offer by the Company. That’s not how this works. If we vote this down, it will be at least 6-9 months before we get back to the table.
After this fails ratification, the MEC and NC will do a post mortem and there’s the possibility of recalls if it fails badly enough. Then another contract survey will be sent out to the membership. Then once we have a NC and direction we can finally engage with the Company, if they want to. If we’re in a recession, we will be negotiating for a while. So if we vote no, there is no complaining!!! We accept our medicine!!!
After this fails ratification, the MEC and NC will do a post mortem and there’s the possibility of recalls if it fails badly enough. Then another contract survey will be sent out to the membership. Then once we have a NC and direction we can finally engage with the Company, if they want to. If we’re in a recession, we will be negotiating for a while. So if we vote no, there is no complaining!!! We accept our medicine!!!
Torn? Then I suggest you look for the things that are no longer in the contract, and how they negatively impact line holders. No more reassignment pay. Seems kinda innocent until you also look at how the existing concept of “visiting reserves” comes into play. The new TA adds financial disincentives to reassign visiting reserve pilots to open flying. The new TA provides financial disincentives from using FSB and SC as well.
So who gets the first look to get reassigned into open trips? Line holders. This TA essentially puts every line holder on reserve once you leave home station. The only additional pay you’ll see is a whopping 1 hour if they cancel your long layover, and you’ll also get the new “overtime pay” if your trip runs long.
This TA just took all the bad things we hated about our current reserve system and sprinkled a convoluted add pay table to reserves, while making reserve work rules and commutability even worse. And it removed several line holder protections that define the very nature of what it means to have an assigned line.
I sincerely hope you see the multitude of QOL degradations this thing brings. And I challenge you to name any significant QOL improvements. Here’s the only 2 I found:
1. Better transparency for reserve assignments
2. Better protections for training scheduling.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
06-25-2022, 11:14 AM
#65
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2020
Posts: 66
Originally Posted by Aquaticus
Can you live with these reserve rules for the next decade? What about significantly less premium pay as a lineholder? What about getting reassigned every trip as a lineholder with zero penalty for the company on a basic trip?
If you give up 10am show on day one of reserve you aren't getting it back EVER. The increases to medical coverage, the lack of fixes to significant qol issues, and significant reduction in premium pay with that 10 am change are things we need fixed now. That premium pay reduction is 100's of millions of dollars going in the wrong direction every year.
More add pay doesn't get you home with the family any more if schedulers are maliciously abusing SCs and field standbys or you have lines built to 89.99 hrs. I want more time at home with better more efficient trips. What we got is a meager add pay offering to accept the abuse. Our priorities for our negotiating committee was solely money when it should have been a mix of money and qol. If you accept this you are sending the wrong message going forward. Being the richest guy with 12 days off a month isn't a goal of mine.
The company wants us to grow and they need this contract to incentivize upgrade/reserve/training positions. I can't imagine what leverage we will have in two years to completely rewrite our reserve rules which is what we need. We will be ridden hard and put away wet for a decade or more if this passes.
If you give up 10am show on day one of reserve you aren't getting it back EVER. The increases to medical coverage, the lack of fixes to significant qol issues, and significant reduction in premium pay with that 10 am change are things we need fixed now. That premium pay reduction is 100's of millions of dollars going in the wrong direction every year.
More add pay doesn't get you home with the family any more if schedulers are maliciously abusing SCs and field standbys or you have lines built to 89.99 hrs. I want more time at home with better more efficient trips. What we got is a meager add pay offering to accept the abuse. Our priorities for our negotiating committee was solely money when it should have been a mix of money and qol. If you accept this you are sending the wrong message going forward. Being the richest guy with 12 days off a month isn't a goal of mine.
The company wants us to grow and they need this contract to incentivize upgrade/reserve/training positions. I can't imagine what leverage we will have in two years to completely rewrite our reserve rules which is what we need. We will be ridden hard and put away wet for a decade or more if this passes.
Actually lines can now be built to 91 hours. This thing is a colossal POS.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
06-25-2022, 11:15 AM
#66
Banned
Joined APC: May 2022
Posts: 411
Straight up annuity
Anything less than
10yrs= 25k
20yrs=50k
30yrs=75k
Annuity plan with no survivor benefit
If ALPA can't deliver that at minimum time to start looking for another union that can get it done.
UPA is sounding better after this emberassing fiasco.
10yrs= 25k
20yrs=50k
30yrs=75k
Annuity plan with no survivor benefit
If ALPA can't deliver that at minimum time to start looking for another union that can get it done.
UPA is sounding better after this emberassing fiasco.
06-25-2022, 11:16 AM
#68
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2020
Posts: 66
Originally Posted by fadec
Vote yes to the current contract. It has many improvements over the TA.
Contract 2012 Highlights vs. TA 2022
-------------------------------------------------
10:00 first day reserve.
Expect massive PPU from training pipeline and reserve rules.
Landings are the company's problem.
50 seat scope makes larger aircraft preferable.
125% add pay for untriggered reassignments.
Less variable line construction rules.
0% raise over 18 months but option to negotiate or strike.
Contract 2012 Highlights vs. TA 2022
-------------------------------------------------
10:00 first day reserve.
Expect massive PPU from training pipeline and reserve rules.
Landings are the company's problem.
50 seat scope makes larger aircraft preferable.
125% add pay for untriggered reassignments.
Less variable line construction rules.
0% raise over 18 months but option to negotiate or strike.
We have a winner here! Contract 2012 never looked so good!
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
06-25-2022, 11:25 AM
#69
Banned
Joined APC: May 2022
Posts: 411
Originally Posted by globetruck
Actually lines can now be built to 91 hours. This thing is a colossal POS.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
