Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

Welcome to Airline Pilot Forums - Connect and get the inside scoop on Airline Companies

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ. Join our community today and start interacting with existing members. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free.


User Tag List

Post Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10-30-2012, 07:03 AM   #1  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 217
Default I'm ready to vote on the TA.

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.
Mitch Rapp05 is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 07:14 AM   #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
IADBLRJ41's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2008
Position: 756 FO
Posts: 319
Default

Mitch,

Good post. I am not a CAL or UAL pilot but if this TA fails what is your expectation that the pilots could go back to the company and fix these areas to acceptable terms? Do you think/believe this would occur quickly or is this headed UsAir and America West of 7 + years.

Just curious because I think the No voters (I hear you and think your reasons are solid) should also understand that an unknown delay might be out there for "X" amount of time.

My 2 cents.
IADBLRJ41 is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 07:16 AM   #3  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: 777
Posts: 1,628
Default

Voting no is one thing. Voting without seeing the actual TA and an informed membership is another.

I too have reservations about the leaked info, but let's wait and see if the rumors are true. I have found UAL rumors to rarely be true, even iron clad leaks.

My reps know exactly where I stand on the rumored pay rates and scope. That should be the basis for their support or lack of during the MEC reviews. Have you contacted your LEC and told them your views?
Dave Fitzgerald is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 07:20 AM   #4  
SLI best wishes!
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: B767 Capt
Posts: 399
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mitch Rapp05 View Post
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.
Scope, work rules and compensation in that order for me.
The big question is, will we be parked by the NMB or will UCH come back to the table soon after the big NO vote? Fear will be a factor with this vote, the MEC knows it and IF the TA gets release to the line with a recommendation, it will pass. They will sell it and scare you at the same time.
LeeMat is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 07:24 AM   #5  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

I believe people need to have a definitive idea of what they want in a contract before a TA is presented. Don't wait for external forces to shape your opinion. If this means writing down section by section what you expect and revisiting your expectations when the TA is presented, then so be it.

Wanted or not, we are going to hear all kinds of opinions. Mine being an example here. I hope that we can filter out the noise, remember what we gave in the past, and make a rational decision about our future based on fact and not suppositions.
SpecialTracking is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 07:27 AM   #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeeMat View Post
Fear will be a factor with this vote, the MEC knows it and IF the TA gets release to the line with a recommendation, it will pass. They will sell it and scare you at the same time.
Well said Lee.
SpecialTracking is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 07:39 AM   #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Dave Fitzgerald's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: 777
Posts: 1,628
Default

If the contract is turned down, the results won't necessarily depend on who gets elected, or how the economy is recovering.

It will be more dependant on the board and whether or not Jeff's job is in jeopardy. His job should be on the line for nonperformance, stock price, and investor confidence. Anyone up for some lack of synergy and a side of bonus?
Dave Fitzgerald is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 08:13 AM   #8  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Posts: 217
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dave Fitzgerald View Post
If the contract is turned down, the results won't necessarily depend on who gets elected, or how the economy is recovering.

It will be more dependant on the board and whether or not Jeff's job is in jeopardy. His job should be on the line for nonperformance, stock price, and investor confidence. Anyone up for some lack of synergy and a side of bonus?
Great points Dave. Also, since the one of the cornerstone sections leaked and confirmed to be true is well below industry leading then shouldn't that be enough to vote no. Unless MPG is 130 I can't see how these pay rates are acceptable. And add the fact that we are getting a measly signing bonus should be even more compelling.
Mitch Rapp05 is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 08:14 AM   #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
A320's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 545
Default

Don't make a decision without seeing the actual agreement.
A320 is offline  
Old 10-30-2012, 08:29 AM   #10  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by A320 View Post
Don't make a decision without seeing the actual agreement.
I will add you never walk in to purchase a car without having an idea of what you are willing to pay for it.
SpecialTracking is offline  
 
 
 

 
Post Reply
 



Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes


Related Topics
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Polar Strike Vote Results RockBottom Cargo 1 07-13-2005 11:02 AM
UPS Strike Vote Results - Amazing Freighter Captain Major 2 05-12-2005 11:45 AM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:56 AM.