Originally Posted by SpecialTracking

I would define one way of losing your dignity is by allowing others to drive your vote with non-factual information and irrational thought, emotions included. Once you buy it, you own it. Regret is a lonely way to live.

The majority of your post is based upon your belief which only Jeff, his right hand, the Mec, and Mitt can verify. I am confident we will hear many platitudes in the future to drive the vote. Much light will be shed if and when the TA is released and contract comparisons are made.

You are correct when pilots should be smart and do the math. They also should not check their brain at the door when they go to a roadshow or talk to The Great Swami across the center console.

Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp05

One cornerstone has been leaked (Compensation), Retro pay is no longer on the table, and multiple reps have confirmed that scope is worse than current CAL and similar to Delta's. That is more than enough for me to vote NO! The entire concept of having four cornerstones means those four sections take priority and they must each be industry leading. Two out of the four have proven to be sorely lacking. For that reason (and no retro) there is no need to even see the rest of the TA to decide on my vote.

More importantly, we must understand that the when the company needs a contract they will pay up. I believe that that time is now, meaning if we reject this insult of a TA we should see a more realistic counter from the company soon thereafter.

What is everyone else thinking? Respectfully, if you are still undecided please explain. Thanks.

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking

I will add you never walk in to purchase a car without having an idea of what you are willing to pay for it.

Originally Posted by oldmako

Why do I need to read the entire document if;

1. SCOPE SUCKS and I'll be on the street, or will stagnate my career.

2. RETRO isn't FULL retro. Irrespective of what it's called or how structured.

3. THE WORK RULES ARE CONCESSIONARY. I'm not bending over MORE to raise CAL's work rules. Sorry guys. We all deserve better than UAL's rules.

4. FORCED JUNIOR MANNING.

5. THE PAY IS SUBSTANDARD.

6. PAY BANDING.

I'll read the whole thing, but I won't need to if the above are inadequate.

7Billion in unrestricted cash. Record load factors. Best route structure of US carriers. Record Management compensation.

WE ALREADY BOUGHT THIS. That 7B is OUR money from the last two crappy concessionary contracts.

Originally Posted by SoCalGuy

(For the record, this Capt is NOT a sCAB)

I have been troubled by the ongoing delays and maneuverings of management, and have decided to re-send my former e-mail from June 1st, with additional thoughts in blue added for your consideration. To the MEC members that receive this, please consider carefully the 4 cornerstones, and the true will of the pilots you represent. Do not take an attitude of, "I will let the pilots decide" in an attempt to wash your hands or your conscience of this weighty decision; because that will turn the TA over to the will of another 7,000 pilots with different motivations and different histories. Especially, do not be swayed by the soothing and eloquent speech of the Chairman, who is very talented with words and speech. Do not accept, "good enough." This TA must meet the demands of the four cornerstones, and must harness the collective will of the pilots who have sacrificed and been patient, obeying the will of the NMB and other parties holding our leash. If the clear and concise demands of this pilot group are sacrificed on the altar of compromise, then no leash will hold us back, and the anger will be felt for a long time, and will be levied squarely at the representatives that let it happen. This is not a threat, but a warning to hold fast to the course, and do not give an inch. Your conscience commands it. Your union duty demands it. And your personal commitments to this pilot group compels it. DO NOT FAIL.

Obviously, it has been several months since the so-called June deadline, and the frustration only increases. Management got through the summer with some problems, but didn't suffer a labor meltdown, forcing them to really negotiate. We carried them . . . again. In July, we voted overwhelmingly for strike authorization, a moment of surprising solidarity, but were never released. No surprise. We almost got to see the TA, but fear of the NMB prevented even that. The operation imploded from it's own weight in July, with 56% on time, yielding an Agreement in Principle in early August. Our operation then dramatically improved in August, but then we languished in ongoing delays, in language writing in September. No surprise. We are told weekly, to just be patient we are almost there, but then a dispute over this or that emerges. Now we are being told that maybe this week, or by November 5th, or whatever. Tired yet?

Most of us by now have seen the "leaked pay rates," and have a good idea on many of the details of the forthcoming TA. We are told by our Chairman to be patient, to ignore the elephant in the room, and wait to read the entire TA. Really??? I'd say that elephant took a huge dump right in front of us and I don't need to see his big floppy ears, to know something stinks! The pay rates are well BELOW Delta rates, with NO rates for 70, 90 or 100 seat aircraft. There is compromise and concession on SCOPE. And there ARE NO AUTOMATIC INCREASES beyond the amendable date. (Do you REALLY need to read the whole TA when these critical components are missing???) E-mail the reps now, and tell them that what you DO know of the TA is unacceptable. Tell them, do NOT vote to send it to the pilot's. Do NOT waste our dues dollars with fancy brochures and roadshows to try to convince us, "this is the best we can get." Send it back . . . NOW.

Keep in mind, that L-United has the majority of pilots, and clearly the pay rates benefit them more than us. (A320 pilots will gain a $50/hr increase; 36%). If this TA goes to the pilots, we risk it being voted in by a slim margin of 56%, carried by the United guys. And then we will ALL be ticked for the next eight years, kicking ourselves for falling for another bad contract. I wish that weren't a possibility, but we ALL have "negotiation fatigue," and want this over with. However, it is always a bad idea to make a life-altering decision when tired. So we need the reps to hear loud and clear to send it back. As you know, either MEC voting NO, will force the TA back to negotiations. So contact ALL the reps, not just yours. We have 11 voting reps, and it is easier to convince 2 than it is to convince 2,000.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 1, 2012

Fellow Professional Aviators . . .

Well, the negotiations are heating up, and perhaps within a month we will see the first offer. I say "first offer" because we, the pilots, will be contemplating something that we have never seen, no little to nothing about, and will be asked to "just trust the negotiators", or the MEC or Jay Pierce; (how's that workin' for us so far?) As I said before, I will be shocked if we actually see a TA (with language), by June 15th. The company will stall, like they always do. So we must realize this is OUR first offer. Don't fall for the first thing passed across the table. We have done with three contracts, and EVERY time we were duped, and money was left on the table. NEVER AGAIN!

Therefore, since we were not allowed to know what is being negotiated for at the table, and therefore could not influence the negotiations, let me give my 3 point litmus test for the TA. Of course, you will be told to "read the whole contract," before you make a determination, which is impossible. However, these three key points are the 3-legged stool,that I will evaluate FIRST . . . then and only then will I burden my attorney to analyze the rest, and you will need an attorney.

Regarding, "reading the whole contract," . . . no one is going to do that, nor will anyone be able to digest all of the nuances and legal machinations of every complexity of the JCBA; or the potential loopholes which management could exploit. Fred Abbott himself said that the Scheduling section has taken on such complexity and references so many other sections of the contract, that our brains will begin to bleed if we try to put all the pieces together. Jay Pierce, in his last two updates, pleads with the pilot group to "hold off judgement" and that we just "have to see the whole thing," . . . or "read the whole book, before deciding." Right!!! I can tell by the back cover, and the first chapter, whether a book is going to be worthy of my time. Jay, don't insult the pilots with below-industry pay rates, (one of our cornerstones), and then tell us to wait to see the rest. In BOTH of Jay Pierce's last blastmails, he clearly states he will do everything he can to get this TA to the pilot group. No, Jay, that is NOT YOUR JOB. The MEC decides whether a TA meets the minimum standards laid out by their constituencies and their own conscience, and they will decide. I have decided, I will only need to read these sections: 1 (Scope), 3 (Compensation), (Retro Pay), and 25 (Duration) and I will be looking for the following:

1) Scope: ANY compromise in SCOPE . . . VOTE NO... In fact, Scope should be strengthened to include the potential of using 90 seat turboprops, already in development, or preventing the regional's use of 90 seat aircraft with 76 seats. Anything above 50 seat jets, must be flown by mainline. DO NOT be fooled by the argument that 50 seaters are no longer economical so "don't worry about it." Hey, I worry about everything that is not in writing. If 50 seaters aren't a threat or 70 seaters or whatever, then management should have no problem putting it in the contract. We cannot rely on the perceived economics at the moment and the false good will or good intentions of management. They have proven their intent, and it is not to protect you or your career. If you don't see an EMB170/190/195, CRJ700/900 B717 pay scale on OUR TA, VOTE NO.

We now know that SCOPE in the TA has been compromised, and it does allow 70 seaters or perhaps even 90 seaters to be flown at Express/Skywest. (Scope is capped at 450 regional aircraft: 120 50 seaters, 300 70/76 seaters, and 30 70 seat turboprops). To a UAL pilot, that's an improvement, since they have ZERO restrictions. But to us, that is a huge compromise from a Scope that was 274 50 seaters and ZERO 70 seaters. Skywest recently contracted with Delta to fly their "scope compromise," and will be flying the CRJ900 (90 seater) with 76 seats. (see how long it takes to bump those to 90, or for those 90 seaters to end up "code shared" on our routes.) It will never happen, you say? It already did with Skywest flying to IAH . . . remember that "expedited arbitration?" The Pay Tables, which most have seen by now, do NOT have EMB190/195, CRJ900, or B717 rates. That is a BIG mistake. If the rates are not even contemplated in the contract, we have sacrificed our potential legal recourse to convince a judge or arbitrator that they were supposed to be flown by United pilots only. This is a huge oversight, and has opened the door wide for management to fly those aircraft at Express and then tell us "to go ahead and grieve it..."

2) Retro: If it does not include 100% RETRO PAY . . . VOTE NO! This MUST be to the amendable date of December 2008 for CAL and January 2010 for UAL. PERIOD. Also, it cannot be called "signing bonus/lump sum distribution" or anything else; it must be called "RETROACTIVE PAY." It is obvious that words in a contract are important. And the word, "retroactive" is important because it sets a precedent and a clear intent that payment on future contract agreements must be retroactive to amendable dates to prevent the continuous pattern of airline management letting the negotiations linger on for years, while they reap the ongoing financial benefit. We must, through specific language, incentivize management to reach agreements with the pilots BY THE AMENDABLE DATE or earlier. PERIOD! IS THIS CLEAR? If it is allowed to be called a "Signing Bonus/Lump Sum," you set a precedent, which by its own technical language, becomes arbitrary, undefinable and leaves it to management to come up with some figure to THEIR liking to buy off just enough pilots to get it passed. I'm looking at you greedy pilots. (Note: I have been assured by Jay Pierce that it is called "retro pay", and it is to our amendable date. We will see if he speaketh with fork tongue.)

He did, and he does. We now know that 100% Retro Pay is NOT in the TA. In fact, it is about half of what it should be, and management has been able to get the negotiators to accept a partial payment up front, with the difference at seniority list integration (SLI). (250 million at signing, and 150 million at SLI). WHAT!! Management owes us RETROACTIVE pay NOW . . . not in some distant future, that is tied to us and our UNITED brethren "playing nice" and working together. We know the United pilots are already demanding 70% of the retro pay total, and this fight will be a big one. It will be like two starving 3 legged dogs, fighting over a scrap of meat. Management knows that and again used it to their advantage to keep the two groups fighting with each other. Additionally, the distribution method and amounts must be in the TA, otherwise the battle over ANY distribution will be relegated to negotiation, arbitration, and eventually the courts. United pilots believe they are entitled to 70%. DO NOT believe Pierce when he claims that disagreement can be settled in a few days.... That will be a drawn out battle, and it will tie up ANY DISTRIBUTION for a year. We will NOT see one penny of that retro/bonus, and management will gain the interest and advantage every day the arbitrator/judge deals with the case. They are saying there is a "process agreement" that is being voted on by the MEC to determine the distribution." Huh? Is this like the "Transition and Process Agreement" that was NOT voted on by the MEC, back when we merged in the first place . . . two years ago?

3) Post Amendable Date Increases: If there is not AUTOMATIC increases of at least 3% per year beyond the amendable date . . . VOTE NO... I say again, we must stop this stupid cycle of pilot negotiations dragging on for years, while management reaps the reward. The time value of money produces an ever increasing pay cut for EVERY year you go without a contract. It does not matter if you are at year 2 or year 12; the lost compensation, retirement, investments, etc, put you behind. We must stop this. It is not the Railway Labor Act, it is our failure to negotiate these terms of automatic increases into the contract. Some will say the RLA precludes contractual automatic increases after the amendable date of an airline contract. This is simply untrue. The RLA mandates the continuance of the contract indefinitely (status quo), and it clearly allows for any part of that contract that specify increases to be followed by management. If they do not, they are IMMEDIATELY in violation of status quo, and this certainly accelerates the options for Mediation, and of course my favorite, SELF-HELP. Management relies on the RLA and the pilots being handcuffed to their own contract to extend a 3 year contract into 7. This happens every time, and we fall for the same old rhetoric from the union or management saying, "It's only 3 years . . . yada yada yada." (Thanks Tom Stivala and Jay Panarello for Contract '02.) (Of course, we all know Contract '02 negotiating chairman, Tom Stivala, and the other negotiating committee member, Rick Muir, are enjoying the management positions they earned...on our backs.)

We now know that the TA does NOT inclue ANY increases beyond the amendable date. Did you get that? NO INCREASES BEYOND THE AMENDABLE DATE. IT is NOT in there. Every time I have asked Jay Pierce about this, he refuses to discuss it. So, if you vote for this contract, you will be accepting the anemic end-rates for at least 3 - 4 years beyond the amendable date, December 21, 2016. This means your rate, and your earning power will decline during those years while management stalls negotiation, just like the last four years. Also, do not fall for the "time value of money" analysis by the negotiators trying to convince you why you need to sign now -- (to avoid losses for a couple months while we re-negotiate) -- when they don't even consider the time value of money at the end of the contract with flat income and no raises for FOUR YEARS!!! As you will see, the TA is a 4 year contract, amendable on December 31, 2016.

Let's look at Compensation. Most everyone has seen the pay rates . . . (and they are accurate).

Jan 2013 - Captain (12 years) First Officer (6 years)
UAL-TA Delta UAL-TA Delta
A319 181.24 197.29 (+$16) 112.81 122.80 (+$10)
A320 188.97 197.29 (+$ 9) 117.67 122.80 (+$ 5)
737-700 181.24 204.47 (+$23) 112.81 127.32 (+$14)
737-800 188.97 204.47 (+$15) 117.67 127.32 (+$10)
737-900 188.97 205.53 (+$16) 117.67 127.91 (+$10)
757-300 195.82 213.22 (+$18) 120.92 131.66 (+$11)
777 234.78 254.74 (+$20) 146.20 158.63 (+$12)

So much for Delta plus $1. How about Delta minus $15 ?!! If that would have been presented a year ago, it would have been laughed at. Now our JNC, and our Chairmen seem to think that's ok. "Hey, look at the whole contract," right? Are we going to accept rates well BELOW Delta?!! And are we going to ASSUME that at the end of 2015, when Delta's contract becomes amendable, they will not have ALREADY secured a new contract with additional increases? Their history shows that Delta management understands the intrinsic value of the pilot, and has signed two contracts in the time we have not even negotiated ONE! They will do so again, in 2015, and we WILL BE WAY BEHIND . . . AGAIN!!! Additionally, don't be fooled by variable compensation or Profit Sharing being added in to inflate your W-2 wages. This is never guaranteed, and all it takes is a "one-time charge," or a little hiccup in the Middle East, (like an attack on or by Iran, maybe?) to change the profits of United to zero.

Earlier, I said 3 legged stool, but I decided to add a fourth: It is simple . . . Just VOTE NO . . . Look, we have been suckered into signing the FIRST OFFER THREE TIMES, and every time, we leave money on the table, and management laughs all the way to the bank. The last time, Contract '02, we stabbed our fellow workers in the back, yet the Flight Attendants voted NO without us anyway, negotiated for a few more months and reaped several improvements. Don't be fooled again. The slick talk and fancy Powerpoints are going to attempt to convince us, just like the Tom Stivala road show in '05. But we are smarter, stronger, more unified than ever, and the guys that wanna "save the company" are NOT GOING TO CARRY THIS VOTE, or ANY vote ever again. You will hear some of these "pilots" claim that the company can't afford a pay raise of this size . . . BALONEY! This pilot group has got to stop negotiating with ourselves before management even makes a proposal. So . . . JUST SAY NO.

Don't fall for the first thing passed across the table. We have done it three times, and EVERY time we were duped. NEVER AGAIN!

Final Thought: Dear MEC; Don't waste my dues dollars, and my fellow pilots' dues dollars showing us a TA with key components demanded by every survey, and every pilot, conspicuously missing. Don't waste my money developing DVD's and fancy full-color brochures, and powerpoints, only to play to the fatigue and greed of a few. Don't fall into the "negotiator trap" of feeling like, because you worked so hard, this is the best you can get. Remember, management is only showing you their first deal; the one that their professionals have determined will convince 55% of the pilot group, based on exhaustive demographic analysis. You can do better; we can do better, and the company knows they have a second deal already completed, ready to go. Don't be naive and do what we have done every time....fallen for the first offer.

THE TA NEEDS TO BE REJECTED, AND YOU KNOW IT IN YOUR GUT . . .

Sincerely, Fraternally, and Professionally

*** Per the Author: "Feel free to reproduce any or all of the above and pass it along" ***