Retro Pay vs Signing Bonus: Attn B3's
 

Don't buy into the BS of lower taxes by calling it a "Signing Bonus" instead of the 100% Retro Pay. By calling it a Signing Bonus and giving ALPO a lump sum to distribute as they see fit, this allows the MECs to give the gummers most of the "Signing Bonus", and screw the junior pilots again.

Think it won't happen? It's happened before!!


We all got Full Retro at our Regional Airline contracts, don't buy into the senior **** who have already given up fighting and are willing to vote Yes on the first offer, again!!!!

C'mon man! Why all the negativity? This is going to be a ground breaking contract. Retro, signing bonus, door prize, call it what you want. I can't wait to vote yes and resume my position as a leader in the profession.

Then I will enthusiastically await the results of the sli. A sli born from the iron clad language and forethought of ALPA merger policy.

Blue skies ahead....

"Get up offa that thing, and dance till you feel betta...."

LCal...
Just me writing, but I will say this-
IF there is no "amount" listed in the TA, it's a "NO" Vote immediately.
Meaning- if they say it's going to be 400 million (which in itself, is a NO Vote) to be divided up as ALPA see's fit... nope!

On the other hand, if they say it's..
400 million divided up by 11000 pilots, and then split where Capt's get an extra 10 grand and FO's lose 10 grand ($47363/$27363).. Nope!

We should all have a minimum number in our head. That number should include what you feel you were owed due to lose wages for the 3 years (CAL) that our CBA has been amenable.
On top of the lose wages, you probably need to add what you lost in B Fund contribution, loss of buying power, loss of QoL (due to PBS, company staffing issues, training on days off..) and finally what sort of 'penalty' you feel is right.

Everyone's numbers will (and should) be different. I have mine. If that number is not reached, it's a NO Vote.

Just my opinion~
Motch

I think they'll call it retro rather than a signing bonus and retro is distributed based on earnings not seat position.

pure conjecture....nothing to see here...

exactly right

One senior Yes voter outed.....

I have always preferred an equitably distributed lump sum by seat/longevity versus a retro based on credit hours flown during negotiations.

It keeps the open time whor#s who have been "helping the company":rolleyes: from profiteering. It also might discourage a few pilots from ho'ing themselves out in the next round, knowing they won't get any extra from being "helpful".


The key is making sure that the amount is spread equitably.

The "ho's" will keep "ho'sing" the rest of us, imo.