Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Please read before you vote >

Please read before you vote

Search

Notices

Please read before you vote

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-07-2023 | 03:46 PM
  #41  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Apr 2018
Posts: 399
Likes: 49
Default

Originally Posted by 89Pistons
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.
how in the world is he allowed to represent Denver pilots when he’s Newark based ? I hope Denver pilots recall the guy…I mean you can’t even be bothered to be where the the people you represent are. What a joke
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 04:25 PM
  #42  
NuGuy's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,100
Likes: 86
Default

FWIW, the vacation comparison to DAL was wrong on at least one point….there’s no bifurcation of pay & credit. DAL vacay is always pay/credit, there is no pay only component.
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 05:44 PM
  #43  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 20,871
Likes: 189
Default

Originally Posted by NuGuy
FWIW, the vacation comparison to DAL was wrong on at least one point….there’s no bifurcation of pay & credit. DAL vacay is always pay/credit, there is no pay only component.
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.
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 06:28 PM
  #44  
NuGuy's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 4,100
Likes: 86
Default

Originally Posted by sailingfun
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.
It’s full credit for line construction, which with PBS is what provides time off, which is what vacation is supposed to do.

Further, the staffing formula is based on days of unavailability, so the staffing vacation days counts towards pilots required.
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 06:37 PM
  #45  
ReadOnly7's Avatar
Slam-Clicka
 
Joined: Dec 2019
Posts: 1,571
Likes: 85
Default

Anything less than trip-touch vacation drop for line credit is complete dog $hit.
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 06:45 PM
  #46  
ugleeual's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 47
From: 767/757 CA
Default

Originally Posted by 72944
I agree. From the last LEC meeting I went to I got the feeling it was all posturing. I have doubts about it working out for him.
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."
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 06:59 PM
  #47  
On Reserve
 
Joined: Dec 2022
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by ugleeual
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."
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.
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 07:21 PM
  #48  
Line Holder
 
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 819
Likes: 2
From: 756 left
Default

Originally Posted by ugleeual
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."

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.
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 07:26 PM
  #49  
ugleeual's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 3,042
Likes: 47
From: 767/757 CA
Default

Originally Posted by dailyops
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.
Actually I wanted a deal when the contract became amendable… but now is as good a time as ever. For the record, I only work on average 6-9 days per month now… so I’m guessing about the same days of work for more pay (normal and add pay) once this goes into full effect… win/win.

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?
Reply
Old 09-07-2023 | 07:27 PM
  #50  
Chowdah's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: May 2022
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Default

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
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Coffeepilot1
FedEx
79
06-30-2023 03:08 PM
EWRflyr
=> United Contract 2022
132
10-18-2022 10:40 AM
White Cap
Cargo
49
09-26-2019 06:11 PM
MtEverest
Delta
64
06-30-2015 04:27 PM
JetJock16
Regional
75
09-24-2007 03:24 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices