![]() |
Originally Posted by CAL 73
(Post 1292971)
If it gets voted down 55% to 45%, they will tweak rates and retro to get the 5.01% needed to pass it. That will not take long.
I know we are all hungry and psychologically drained waiting for our contract, but we can not settle on the crumbs they throw off the table. We can't settle on a deal that is not worthy of a contract. Have faith, management needs a deal now more than we do and they will give more if we stand strong. Vote NO Get out the vote, people. |
Originally Posted by freezingflyboy
(Post 1292956)
I'm curious about this as well (I think you are referencing the Aer Lingus tie-up/scope experiment). Has anyone said anything about scope at the bottom end; you know, those pesky RJs?
Disclaimer: I am just a lowly RJ driver and I know this is not my place. But there are a lot of us on this side who are counting on the big boys to hold the line so we have a shot at moving on in this life time. I read somewhere in the explaination section that scope specifically addresses this. Aer Lingus was actually the eg. |
Originally Posted by LCAL dude
(Post 1293152)
If it gets voted down 80-20 they will have to do a heck of a lot more. Time for the 99% who voted for the strike to back it up.
Get out the vote, people. |
Originally Posted by jsled
(Post 1292851)
12:45 between rest periods? That doesn't even make sense. I already answered your post. Yes, a guy sitting at home on short call can be called and given a trip that shows in 10 hrs. How does that dispute the 12:45 rest after blocking in from a flying assignment? You need to educate yourself on this contract, Motch. There is lots of material on the website. Try the CrewsNews. I have read them all. And the Contract Comparison clearly shows yearly rate comparisons, so I am not sure what you are talking about.
Sled |
Originally Posted by SoCentralRain
(Post 1292696)
Bogging down for another 9-12 months? ARE YOU KIDDING ME?
I hope your steel backbone and courage in this regard are carried with you to the cockpit. Bravo. It's better to die on your feet than to live on your knees. SCR Sled |
Originally Posted by Rocketiii
(Post 1293201)
Remember, anything that looks remotely beneficial will be manipulated and abused in ways you haven't seen yet because of improper staffing.
UAL pilots have no idea how this management views a contract. And as this is a completely new one every line is ungrieved virgin territory. They will interpret it in ways you could not imagine and just rope-a-dope us in the RLA grievance process just as they have the negotiations until we just give up from fatigue--just like many feel now. The only hope is to vote this down, in a big way, to get full retro up front, immediate industry leading pay rates, makes some gains on scope, and tighten up the language. It's the only solace we're gonna have for six plus four years. |
True it is a signing bonus but is being distributed proportionally as if it were a retro only smaller. Seems a fair way to go, even though it's short.
|
Originally Posted by APC225
(Post 1293230)
And to save money. For example, are you happy the first class DH survived? Look again. It still says "at time of booking." UAL pilots assume that this booking will still take place, as it does now, when the monthly schedules come when there are still open first class seats. CAL pilots know, since it doesn't say when the booking has to take place, the company will just change the time of booking to 24 hours before the flight, when there are no first class seats left. "Time of booking" not specified in the contract, problem solved. No more pilots in first class.
UAL pilots have no idea how this management views a contract. And as this is a completely new one every line is ungrieved virgin territory. They will interpret it in ways you could not imagine and just rope-a-dope us in the RLA grievance process just as they have the negotiations until we just give up from fatigue--just like many feel now. The only hope is to vote this down, in a big way, to get full retro up front, immediate industry leading pay rates, makes some gains on scope, and tighten up the language. It's the only solace we're gonna have for six plus four years. |
Originally Posted by rogual
(Post 1293236)
True it is a signing bonus but is being distributed proportionally as if it were a retro only smaller. Seems a fair way to go, even though it's short.
Can I borrow $100,000 from you? I promise to pay you $8,000 back 4 years from now and call it even. Still sound fair? |
Originally Posted by CAL 73
(Post 1292971)
If it gets voted down 55% to 45%, they will tweak rates and retro to get the 5.01% needed to pass it. That will not take long.
I know we are all hungry and psychologically drained waiting for our contract, but we can not settle on the crumbs they throw off the table. We can't settle on a deal that is not worthy of a contract. Have faith, management needs a deal now more than we do and they will give more if we stand strong. Vote NO Sled |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:16 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands