New bases ?
#122
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2014
Posts: 138
I think our anger is better directed at our MEC. United management did a phenomenal job in getting the MEC to vote for an extremely substandard TA. United management also negotiates with many other entities. They seem to drive a tough bargain and that is good for our long term outlook. Our MEC on the other hand...
Management gonna do what management gonna do. As a former business owner of a transportation-related industry, my two biggest costs were labor and fuel. Everything else didn't come close.
SK and gang wouldn't be doing their jobs if they didn't try to get the best deal possible for the company.
Our MEC and NC are SUPPOSED to represent us and try to get the best deal possible for US. Obviously when you have the situation we find ourselves in, too many of those who were supposed to have our collective interests in mind were only worried about the best deal they could get for themselves.
So here we are.
Glad to see we are starting to head in the right direction, but it's gonna take time. At this point, I appreciate the company bouncing us the 5% from the pandemic LOA early, but that may be the last raise we see for a while...and I'm okay with that.
Some will argue about the time value of money now vs. money later, but I believe safety and our work rules are more important than money. Tumi TA was CONCESSIONARY with regard to so many rules currently on the books that we could not allow it to go through.
Section 3 will come eventually, but let's keep our focus on improving work rules/quality of life, not just the almighty dollar.
#124
Line Holder
Joined APC: Mar 2017
Posts: 27
nope.. the company can open and close bases at will so long as it complies with the UPA. The NDPM process is more of a process to collect recommendations from the union, but they don’t have to take any of the advice to proceed.
#125
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2022
Posts: 311
#126
New Hire
Joined APC: Jun 2022
Posts: 3
An idea I heard the other day was that the idea of a new "pilot domicile" could just be a carrot to get us to sign a **** poor contract. The company has done this in the past (possible MCO base that the "union" didn't want). I'm not going to attend any of the company meetings to show the company I could care less. I will wait and see what actually happens. However, personally I hope a new base will benefit all those that live around wherever that base may be!
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-G960U using Tapatalk
#127
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Posts: 122
If im union why wouldn’t I put up a big stink on them opening any new bases till a contract is done. May not be able to stop it, but could maybe effect the ultimate execution of them opening.
#128
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2018
Posts: 432
Because it’s just impotent rage at that point. The pilots who will be affected by it won’t avoid bidding it out of principle. They just won’t. I’ve flown with so many guys that were happy to sell out on RJ scope because they could get an easier jumpsea from KBFE, the union coming out against a (presumably Florida) new pilot base would just further schism the group.
#129
You look like a nail
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 451
The NPDM is a collaborative process although it’s non-binding. See also, ANC, MIA, HNL, SEA
#130
You look like a nail
Joined APC: May 2012
Posts: 451
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post