|
Originally Posted by Sunvox
(Post 3639633)
I just want to put a fine point on your comment as regards the company's initial offer. I would not characterize it as "current book".
|
Originally Posted by hummingbear
(Post 3639782)
Fair enough. I’m using a little poetic liberty, here. “Current book” is my shorthand for an offer that in my opinion, largely remains status quo. Case in point, notice how “no RSV assignments before 10am on Day 1” is being sold as a bargaining gain. Um, already have that one- thanks, though.
/s/ |
Originally Posted by Sunvox
(Post 3639633)
Just to be clear I am 100% behind the union, wear my lanyard, don't do "dog & pony shows", and generally try to work as little as possible (but then that wasn't new :) ). I also still think we get an offer by the end of Q2 which obviously now means the next 3 or 4 weeks. However, I just want to put a fine point on your comment as regards the company's initial offer. I would not characterize it as "current book". From the first comprehensive update here is a list of items which were already agreed upon in the first month and which mostly are gains albeit small gains, but gains none the less. I would also note that subsequent communications indicated several sections have now been closed. Presumably this means the company agreed to some of the "open" items from the 4/3 list.
Agreed:
Even at Frontier, they were strictly forbidden from ever extending you into a day off, AND any reassignment had to be within the original footprint of the trip. Lacking that should be an absolute NO VOTE for anyone. And with all the guys who have come from ULCC's with good work rules, it likely won't pass unless that is addressed |
Originally Posted by dailyops
(Post 3639824)
Yeah but it now being a contractual requirement instead of just an 117 requirement is a huge improvement!
/s/ |
Originally Posted by Sunvox
(Post 3639633)
Just to be clear I am 100% behind the union, wear my lanyard, don't do "dog & pony shows", and generally try to work as little as possible (but then that wasn't new :) ). I also still think we get an offer by the end of Q2 which obviously now means the next 3 or 4 weeks. However, I just want to put a fine point on your comment as regards the company's initial offer. I would not characterize it as "current book". From the first comprehensive update here is a list of items which were already agreed upon in the first month and which mostly are gains albeit small gains, but gains none the less. I would also note that subsequent communications indicated several sections have now been closed. Presumably this means the company agreed to some of the "open" items from the 4/3 list.
Agreed:
this is still seriously lacking significant work rule improvements |
Originally Posted by Sunvox
(Post 3639633)
Just to be clear I am 100% behind the union, wear my lanyard, don't do "dog & pony shows", and generally try to work as little as possible (but then that wasn't new :) ). I also still think we get an offer by the end of Q2 which obviously now means the next 3 or 4 weeks. However, I just want to put a fine point on your comment as regards the company's initial offer. I would not characterize it as "current book". From the first comprehensive update here is a list of items which were already agreed upon in the first month and which mostly are gains albeit small gains, but gains none the less. I would also note that subsequent communications indicated several sections have now been closed. Presumably this means the company agreed to some of the "open" items from the 4/3 list.
Agreed:
|
Global reserve needs to die.
FDO needs to die. FSB needs to die. Unlimited short call conversions....well, you get the point. although, I would be open to voluntary SC/FSB that paid extra (add pay only) regardless of whether you were used. |
Originally Posted by JTwift
(Post 3639884)
Global reserve needs to die.
FDO needs to die. FSB needs to die. Unlimited short call conversions....well, you get the point. although, I would be open to voluntary SC/FSB that paid extra (add pay only) regardless of whether you were used. 100% agree. If the MEC votes in anything that does not meet this conditions as well as many of the DL terms for reserve QOL, then they need to be recalled. The argument of “global reserve is a part of the business model” is a copout. Fix it or be prepared to defend against your recall vote. |
Originally Posted by Justabusdriver1
(Post 3639271)
there’s a lot from the management and business side I don’t particularly like or agree with about united lately. Digging their heels in to keep outdated work rules that frankly most airlines abandoned years ago is only one aspect.
I’m a business major and have done several deeps dives, enough to know what I like and don’t like. That’s more personal. But if pilots are basing their future on what United is today and what cards management is showing and the direction they’re going it’s not a good look. Can’t bank on an unknown future and the direction they may or may not go. All you have to go on is their philosophy and direction they’re currently headed. I know you’ll get a good contract, hopefully sooner than later. You deserve it. Just hate seeing mgmt stall and delay when the current pilot climate doesn’t suggest they should Hey look guys we got a BUSINESS MAJOR here! |
Originally Posted by TFAYD
(Post 3639867)
the majority of this is $ and not quality of life items.
this is still seriously lacking significant work rule improvements I totally agree, just making the point the company wasn't starting at zero. They have offered some things, and actually I think one line is potentially huge.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:53 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands