Please read before you vote
#41
Line Holder
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 399
Likes: 49
Andy, I think your prediction won't come to fruition. Most negative comments are coming from folks that are outside of the council. Most of whom have never been in C33 or to a C33 meeting. Mario did a great job with helping remove two of the biggest proponents of the TUMI TA. And has not deviated from council direction since becoming VC.
I know emotions are high and many want to get the TA done and view Mario as a roadblock to that. And that many disapprove of his letter. A majority of comments regarding him have been on the personal level, which comes with the position, instead of disputing what he wrote. Some have disagreed with the timing and that's fair. But he's doing his job. I can tell you with confidence that he isn't out for "street cred."
There have been a lot of posts that certain reps will vote no over and over again. We need that in order to keep things in check. To point out what folks may miss. Regarding this TA, I don't think anyone can genuinely say that Kirby did not slipped a handful of mickeys in our drink (TA). This part of the the process is to not only champion the good parts, but to recognize the bad. If the TA can withstand that, then the majority of pilots will decide that it is acceptable. I am sure that that will end up being the case.
I know emotions are high and many want to get the TA done and view Mario as a roadblock to that. And that many disapprove of his letter. A majority of comments regarding him have been on the personal level, which comes with the position, instead of disputing what he wrote. Some have disagreed with the timing and that's fair. But he's doing his job. I can tell you with confidence that he isn't out for "street cred."
There have been a lot of posts that certain reps will vote no over and over again. We need that in order to keep things in check. To point out what folks may miss. Regarding this TA, I don't think anyone can genuinely say that Kirby did not slipped a handful of mickeys in our drink (TA). This part of the the process is to not only champion the good parts, but to recognize the bad. If the TA can withstand that, then the majority of pilots will decide that it is acceptable. I am sure that that will end up being the case.
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,871
Likes: 189
Delta vacation is pay no credit. The amount of vacation hours you are due in a month is applied to your PBS bid and counts toward the max award. Once the bids are closed vacation is strictly straight pay zero credit and you can pick up well above the normal max. If you have a week of vacation paying 26:15 and the cap is 80 you can pick up to 80 hours pay and credit and receive the 26:15 on top of that for 106:15 in total pay. This is sadly essentially a back door to selling your vacation back to the company.
#44
Delta vacation is pay no credit. The amount of vacation hours you are due in a month is applied to your PBS bid and counts toward the max award. Once the bids are closed vacation is strictly straight pay zero credit and you can pick up well above the normal max. If you have a week of vacation paying 26:15 and the cap is 80 you can pick up to 80 hours pay and credit and receive the 26:15 on top of that for 106:15 in total pay. This is sadly essentially a back door to selling your vacation back to the company.
Further, the staffing formula is based on days of unavailability, so the staffing vacation days counts towards pilots required.
#46
"When the acceptance vote is less than unanimous and at the request of any MEC member on the opposing side of the acceptance vote, pro and con statements with rebuttals will be prepared by MEC members, or their designees, and mailed to the pilots within 15 days of the MEC vote."
#47
On Reserve
Joined: Dec 2022
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
I was trying to figure out why the prep e-mail leaking to the group using his LEC blast emails… and now I have a hunch why. The NO vote opens up the bigger opportunity he really wanted… a platform to speak to the entire pilot group and not just the small DEN pilot group. He is definitely trying to get some street creds for something else bigger then the LEC? This was cut/pasted from the MEC email…
"When the acceptance vote is less than unanimous and at the request of any MEC member on the opposing side of the acceptance vote, pro and con statements with rebuttals will be prepared by MEC members, or their designees, and mailed to the pilots within 15 days of the MEC vote."
"When the acceptance vote is less than unanimous and at the request of any MEC member on the opposing side of the acceptance vote, pro and con statements with rebuttals will be prepared by MEC members, or their designees, and mailed to the pilots within 15 days of the MEC vote."
You've been crying about wanting a deal NOW for a year+, well here you go. Hope the retro check and some add pay for working on your days off was worth it.
#48
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 819
Likes: 2
From: 756 left
I was trying to figure out why the prep e-mail leaking to the group using his LEC blast emails… and now I have a hunch why. The NO vote opens up the bigger opportunity he really wanted… a platform to speak to the entire pilot group and not just the small DEN pilot group. He is definitely trying to get some street creds for something else bigger then the LEC? This was cut/pasted from the MEC email…
"When the acceptance vote is less than unanimous and at the request of any MEC member on the opposing side of the acceptance vote, pro and con statements with rebuttals will be prepared by MEC members, or their designees, and mailed to the pilots within 15 days of the MEC vote."
"When the acceptance vote is less than unanimous and at the request of any MEC member on the opposing side of the acceptance vote, pro and con statements with rebuttals will be prepared by MEC members, or their designees, and mailed to the pilots within 15 days of the MEC vote."
Super-sleuth? That's from the MEC Policy Manual. It's been part of the process in every ratification since before we got here. The vote was 18-5. Anyone having aspirations beyond the LEC would have to align with the majority of the other 22 votes in order to have enough support to ascend.
The process is working. This won't be the first time you've seen pro and con statements. It's in membership's hands now and this will all be over in three short weeks. It'll be ok.
#49
Why with all the conspiracy theories? Is it so inconceivable to you that a TA that is sub-standard and filled with concessions would be voted NO by some members of the MEC? There is a good chunk of information that is vastly different or completely missing from the original AIP that was voted unanimously for. Either you don't care to actually read what is in front of you or just want a quick payday before you retire, probably a combination of both. The MEC is not there to rubber stamp any document that is placed in front of them. That is why almost all the previous MEC were recalled for the Tumi TA.
You've been crying about wanting a deal NOW for a year+, well here you go. Hope the retro check and some add pay for working on your days off was worth it.
You've been crying about wanting a deal NOW for a year+, well here you go. Hope the retro check and some add pay for working on your days off was worth it.
So here’s a simple question for you since you’re obviously a no voter… how do you explain the 18-5 vote in favor? Other 18 who voted YES were idiots and the 5 who voted NO are geniuses? Or maybe, just maybe, based on all the briefings they receive (that we don’t) led them to believe this deal is a good one? That ever cross your mind?
#50
I wouldn’t call it industry leading. But it’s a pretty good contract. It closed some scheduling loopholes, financially disincentivized the company to reassign us the way DAL/AA do and should have me netting quite a bit more than I do now.
Unlike the TUMI, I think if we vote this down, TA3 would be a shuffling of the beams, rather than a 12 billion dollar agreement. Maybe I’m wrong.
I don’t see a good reason to vote no
Unlike the TUMI, I think if we vote this down, TA3 would be a shuffling of the beams, rather than a 12 billion dollar agreement. Maybe I’m wrong.
I don’t see a good reason to vote no
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



