The reason we are not currently petitioning the NMB is the current political makeup of the white house. To say it is anti-labor would be an understatement. My bet is we will have to wait for elections to settle out, then see what the makeup of the NMB will be before we take that route.

 

How did that work when we went 4 years without a contract under Obama? I'll bet you didn't blame the makeup of the White House.

 

Sure, lift the retirement age. But after 65 you can’t be PIC and you’re limited to the continental US. If they really do need the money they’ll stay....

NOPE! Management buys airplanes, not pilots. They’re going to buy what they need regardless, our job is to make sure those airplanes employ US and I’m not willing to make any deal that allows that to be allowed further than it has. No RJs for more of what we already have (and mgmt needs).

I’m speculating here, but I’m guessing the reason we haven’t petitioned the NMB and haven’t herd a peep is because they are actually making slow albeit steady progress.

 

Cal? UAL's contract was amendable in 2010 if memory serves. And we got our JCBA in 2012.

 

Our progress up to this point has no relation to who the President is. It is stalled because we finally got to the scope logjam. They want relief, we don’t, so here we sit.

As far as waiting for the elections to play out, I don’t think that history shows that getting this guy out in 2020 will make a difference. If you look at the history of airline pilot strikes, United, Continental, Eastern, Comair, and Polar all struck under Republican administrations with no interference from the President. American tried to strike and Clinton shut it down immediately. Spirit was left alone under Obama, however he did stop a major railroad strike. The only way any administration will get actively involved in our process is if we were to ever get released into self help (that will never happen, a strike vote is just a public show of unity and not a threat). Hopefully we aren’t stupid enough to enter into binding arbitration just to “get something done”. Mediation isn’t binding, it’s more like marriage counseling. Both sides can listen to the advice, but neither has to follow it.

 

In all fairness, there was a merger in that period. CAL became amendable and it started down the usual 2 year track, then the merger with UAL was announced and we started over. It had nothing to do with politics.

 

[QUOTE=Grumble;2933384NOPE! Management buys airplanes, not pilots. They’re going to buy what they need regardless, our job is to make sure those airplanes employ US and I’m not willing to make any deal that allows that to be allowed further than it has. No RJs for more of what we already have (and mgmt needs.[/QUOTE]

I’d agree about who buys the airplanes and who needs to fly them. My point was that if the union offered a solution that would slightly alter the mix of regional types, however slash the total number of allowable rj’s, I’d listen to what they had to say. My focus is to reduce the regional fleet as severely as possible, shift that capacity back to mainline, and also to protect our widebody flying by prohibiting the alliance system that Delta has. If ALPA can build a better mousetrap, I’ll look at it. I’m not interested in anything that the company is selling though.

 

Striking is not a reality for any of the big three. While it’s in the RLA and still a possibility, none of the pilot groups from the Big Three will be released for self help.

 

I don't think the political make up of the white house or the 3 member panel (2 majority members) makes much of a difference. Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, nor Barack Obama were very friendly to the airline industry.

President's don't really view us as "labor." They view us on par with white collar professionals. If the white house feels joe six pack isn't going to go from Chicago to Orlando on their family vacation due to an impending organized job action then and only then will the white house pay attention to pilot-land.

Getting a release under any administration is somewhere between a long shot and a moon shot. You'd have to have years of well documented, bad faith, downtrodden, down-and-out below the belt negotiations for that to happen.

I wouldn't call the previous administration pro-labor. They were just big government and anti-business. I think of this current government is pro-US economy and less government regulation. In both scenarios labor is simply labor. with 2.5% unemployment I would argue that the current climate is pro labor simply by providing a climate in which companies can survive and thrive.

Whatever gains we as a pilot group hope to gain, we should be looking at ourselves to provide the leverage in order to do the heavy lifting. I wouldn't count on this NMB, our future NMB's to do it for you.

 

I’ll buy that. Say like a 10:1 50 seater to 76 seater conversion?