I will vote no, no matter what, so that should help offset those pathetic 6% also.

 

Yes. The ink on our TA was barely dry. He thinks so little of us he couldn’t wait until after it passed to show us we caved way too early. So much more was left on the table.

Don’t be rushed.

The hourly rates, vacation and 18% DC are an easy match for you. It the work rules/quality of life that matters. Be patient and get those fixed now.

 

All I’m saying is the narrative that “the 5% has already been bought and paid for” is only some thing that a pilot group would buy into. Management doesn’t look at it like that and I truly doubt our negotiators do either. If your minimum threshold for a contract is Delta +5, I don’t think that’s unreasonable at all. If it’s Delta, +10, honestly, the company can afford it. We have leverage, so shoot for the moon. Just don’t be foolish enough to pretend like the narrative we are spinning is something that anyone else buys in to. Whatever we get above Delta has nothing to do with the pandemic raise. Is the idea here that SK sits in his office and says “I’d like to give them Delta +3, but unfortunately, we already agreed to the pandemic Reyes… Darn it?!” So, whatever we get above DAL, it’s just a symbolic buffer that Kirby strategically puts forward, for us, future pilots, and other pilot groups, to signal whatever narrative he puts forth.

Vote YES or NO on what’s put in front of you and let go of the indignant act.

 

Um, I certainly hope the negotiators buy into it because it has. We have a legal document outlining in very clear & binding terms the conditions of that benefit. That money was based on concessions we took during the pandemic that saved the company a boatload of money & has nothing to do with the then still ongoing Section 6 negotiations. There’s nothing nebulous about it.
No, the idea is that he may try to combine the LOA & Section 6 to produce a single sum that barely meets what you’d expect from Section 6 alone- essentially negating the value of that LOA. If we’re talking DAL+10, I don’t think you’ll hear a lot of complaints about the 5%. If it’s a DAL match, expect to. Basically, whatever your personal guidelines for a fair Section 6 raise are (match inflation, match Delta, etc.) add 5%. Otherwise, you’re allowing them to use the LOA as a discount on this contract.Precisely what I advocate & I don’t see where you’re getting indignance. This is a business decision. Either the offer is fair or it isn’t. I’m just resolved that the TA has to meet my expectations without taking that 5% into account & I hope others will do the same. I don’t believe I have the support of your vote which is fine- it seems you may have plenty of company in that regard.

 

If you guys match our rates, dollar-wise, you are getting a 13% raise. No, do not include your previous 5% raise, just like you don't include raises from last contract. You earned that 5%. Get 18% or greater. Don't settle for 13%. You getting 5% over us is not unreasonable. It's payback for your COVID LOA. If you don't get at least 5% above us, you signed that LOA for nothing

 

This is very true but too many pilots I fly with disagree. If we include that 5%, then what was the point of the COVID LOA except to further divide the pilot group. And let’s not start on how it saved jobs. The only reason it passed was because FOs got CA pay for sitting in the right seat.

 

How about Delta/AA +1% then have a snap up to Delta/AA +5%🙂.

 

Hummingbear, I do not think you’re indignant, so I apologize for the lack of clarity there . But a lot of people on here are getting strangely emotional about this.

In an attempt to have a productive conversation, instead of straw-manning me, show me where I’ve advocated that we should ask for anything less than Delta +5. I think we can go a bit higher than that, but I’m just saying that if we manage to do it, it’s not because the pandemic LOA did the heavy lifting, it’s because we have the leverage to do so and should capitalize… literally.

 

The problem with arguing Delta plus X% is determining how that number is defined. Kirby would gladly sign a contract with rates well in excess of Delta if we gave concessions for expensive work rules and soft money. What is the per capita comparison of money spent on pilots when factoring in insurance, retirement, work rules, profit sharing, etc? When looking at the big picture, we could potentially have rates that are less than Delta, yet exceed the Delta plus X% argument through other contractual gains. The company is going to hold pretty firm on the total cost of the contract when comparing our deal to the competition. Knowing that, how do we as a pilot group define what an industry leading contract looks like considering that is a negotiation between two self interested parties, not a situation where we simply send the company a bill? It should be interesting to see where this goes in the upcoming weeks/months.

 

I agree emotion is not helpful. I think there’s a general frustration that comes from the history. First, a bad LOA sold to us under a fear campaign of mass furloughs. Second, our reps ratify TUMI 1, which (until the the AA proposal is released) is initially met w/ what I’d call indifferent resignation. Third, the general sentiment that our LOA 5% is not worth a fight to preserve.

I guess for me, the 5% is sort of a culmination of this general “take whatever we can get without rocking the boat” attitude. While we were seriously considering major work rule givebacks & discussing the idea that keeping our wages current with inflation was a pipe dream, Delta was taking the fight to their management & getting all the things we believed were impossible. That helped change our perspective over here a little, but I think there’s still a general urgency to lock in whatever the company offers rather than fight for what we really want/deserve. I could be wrong, but my sense is that a lot of us would jump at Delta +1 if it were offered to us today.

My expectations for this contract are not astronomical, in my opinion. (No work rule concessions, general QOL gains, & pay that exceeds inflation & keeps us at the top of the industry.) I get discouraged with how frequently that very basic standard is judged as unreasonable. Protecting the 5% is not a hill I want to die on, per se, & I agree too much back & forth on the topic can become semantic. If you’ve decided your number is well north of Delta, I don’t think we need to get too deep in the weeds on where each dollar is coming from. I’ve just made a dispassionate calculation based on that LOA that slid my pay expectations north by 5%. Looking at percentages makes it very easy for me to judge the value of an offer because I can measure it against inflation without any complicated math. Right now, inflation since 2019 is around 18%, so any offer below that would be unacceptable to me. It’s just a simple standard that keeps the LOA separate & makes for easy evaluation.

Again, if you want 25% net, we’re roughly saying the same thing, & too much discussion of the LOA is just a distraction. My frustration is with the folks who are ready to vote in a Delta match, which I would see as sub-inflationary & therefore a concession.