We most certainly don’t get to decide what our careers are worth. If you know anything about this industry’s history, you would know that.

Ultimately, it’s the market who decides. And the market is composed by all pilots, all companies that employ pilots, and even the military. To name just the largest players. What all of these actors do, how many of them there are, and how many of them are needed, will decide how much bargaining power pilots have, which then will yield what this profession is worth in today’s market.

Management is going to negotiate in their best interest, just as pilots are going to do the same.

FYI we had a gluttony of pilots. But a gluttony of pilots, opposite of what you said, actually implies very low wages.

 

Bottom line is more and more are ****ed off AND paying attention. 2020 is going to be fun. Ready!

 

We decide what we are actually worth every time we vote for a contract. We can no more demand a certain level of compensation than the company can. Depending which side of the employee/management fence one sits on, our worth/cost is what we agree to.

 

I assume you meant “no more RJs on the cheap”. Define what that means, please.

I’m 100% in support of bringing 175s in-house, for example. I think today we’re in a critical time that will define whether this will ever happen.

Why? Because the United MEC has already come out and said that reversing all the outsourcing in one contract negotiation round won’t be possible. That puts years possibly a decade until the next round and, in the mean time, United could order the A220 as a NSNB. If they do this, now adding the 175 to fleet means two small narrow bodies and a much more difficult economic problem to negotiate away by the pilots. More than likely, kiss goodbye the idea of taking scope back to 50-seaters and under.

Reversing pilot’s losses from the previous two decades all in one go is one thing. Partially reversing it in the current negotiation round is still a gain, and more realistic. But a partial gain implies also a partial concession. For example, perhaps the 175s can be brought in-house but only with a RJ-scale pay. In future negotiation rounds the remaining issues can be negotiated away.

The benefits of bringing the 175s in house/clawing back at scope are clear. So are the costs, assuming we don’t have the bargaining power to reverse it all at once. But are YOU willing to take negotiations to this level, where gives as well as takes do happen? If we don’t push negotiations to this level, we aren’t trying hard enough, IMO.

 

Every contract has gives and takes. If we decided entirely on our own what we’re worth, there would only be gains.

 

I get that, but our actual worth is defined by what we agree to by voting in a contract.

 

Dave,

You come across as a smart guy.

FAR117 extension.....based on the situation. And never is an acceptable answer if that’s YOU saying I’m not willing to extend the 117 max.

Not picking up, etc. Fine as well. So long as that’s YOUR personal decision.

Please realize the company tracks all numbers regarding open time pickup, SL, and so on.

Me, I don’t extend and rarely fly above my award.

We have folks that play the PP game and pick up all the time.

The nuance is one is a personal decision rather than a perceived union position regarding the voluntary aspects of the UPA.

When/if folks start changing historical behavior on such items, you better believe the company will notice.

The union must make certain any and all communications are taking the high road regarding where we are in negotiations so as not to present an image of signaling a “work to rule.”

Just trying to say we are under the RLA. Status quo is the norm once the contract became amendable.

I say know the contract and fly it. Having worked the hotline for awhile, I can tell you most pilots know very little of the contract or FAR117.

If a pilot wants to take advantage of a provision in the UPA, they are free to do so. Just realize a drastic change in behavior by pilots across the system will be noticed.

We just need to be ready as individual pilots and the union as a whole if characteristic behavioral changes occur.

Folks, read the MEC updates, download the Did You Know documents. Check out the e-library on the MEC website.

Lee

 

The very act of the MEC sending a TA to the pilot group will change pilot behavior. Invariably there will be those pilots who get angry because the TA isn’t what they need and will stop picking up trips, waiving, or what have you. After a TA, pilots will change behavior, It’s a no win.

The company will take that metric and run to the courts to get TRO or some other nonsense because pilots stopped picking up trips.

ALPA will never direct pilots to “work to rule”, don’t look for that message from ALPA because it’ll never come. We’re a year past amendable and each pilot is going to have to make an individual decision about what is in his or her best interest.

 

Thor

Just saying keep comments in the “I” rather than “we” category of should or should not.

No, ALPA will never specifically direct work to rule, but the flavor of any comm will be scrutinized.

As for a substandard TA (actually AIP), I hope it never leaves the room the MEC is meeting in.

Lee

 

Negotiations are just that. Each side wants something. What do the pilots want? What does the co want? If the pilots give nothing why should Dfw company do anything? What they have works. You need a carrot (what you will give on) or a stick - how not negotiating hurts the company. Well I don’t see any sticks around anywhere.