Thanks for the perspective. It's good to hear the thoughts and concerns of both sides.

I should have been more clear... the airplanes in question are the 150 that are coming in August and beyond to directly replace the L-UAL 757's, not the ones that you folks have coming now. What I see as different from the scenario you pose above is that in this case the new aircraft order wasn't generated to "sell" the TA. It has already occurred, and has been announced as all replacement airplanes. I think I can speak for all of us and say that nobody is happy about flying a 737-900 vs. a 757. Well, maybe a few.... I don't see that as a carrot dangling in front of us.

Personally, I am voting YES for this TA because I think in this economic, political, and global environment, it's a good TA. It may not be sexy with full retro and DAL payrates right away, but the overall value of the TA to me is very high. Stuff like 5/Day and Leg by Leg pay are HUGE wins. The more I read about it, and the rationale from the JNC of WHY they structured it the way it was structured, the better it looks to me. Yes there is definitely a risk for the L-UAL pilots to voting "no" with the TPA, but it goes beyond that for me.

I was under the impression that the SLI was mandated to take 180 days or less? I guess we could pull a USAirways East and pull out of the union if we don't like the arbitration, but I haven't talked to ONE pilot at UAL that wants that to happen... on either side. I look at DAL firing on all cylinders, and think the faster we can get on board with each other, the better.

 

Well, for one I would rather be represented by a one headed snake and see 1 vs. 1 a lot more advantageous than 1 vs. 2

 

I don't see the unity getting better.

 

Well said. While disappointed that we really never put any real pressure on the company,I cast a less than enthusiastic yes vote for all the same reasons. When you look at the T/A in totality, and if you have a shred of belief in your negotiating committee, from a purely business stand point there is no way you can come to any other conclusion than yes. If you are making your own interpretations without reading/watching videos/ talking to you P2P reps, or you are of the school of "always vote no on the first deal" (ridiculous) You are voting uninformed, no excuse for that as educated professionals, especially when such huge career implications are potentially on the line. If this deal is voted down, I will live with the majority. I hope however, that it is ratified and we can all get on with our careers in rightful fair seniority order.

 

We never had "unity" in the first place at either airline. We are just putting two fragmented groups together, and making one bigger fragmented group.

 

Unity isn't about hanging out at BBQs together. It means that the up and downside potentials are the same for the entire group. This vote isn't about having new buddies to go to the ball game with.

 

Wow thanks for pointing that out to us a320.

 

Show me the facts . . .

a lot of words that sound really terrible, but show me a careful analysis that backs this up.

 

Pennies on the dollar? It's the largest lump sum payment in the history of the NMB and ALPA that's not tied to bankruptcy exit.

 

I guess you're back to a yes vote?