![]() |
We have leverage right now. I hope we, as a union, us that leverage. Will we have the same leverage in 2 years? Who knows.
I hope we choose to keep moving the ball forward now, instead of hoping and dreaming that we can move it forward in 2-6 years. |
Originally Posted by Probe
(Post 2014218)
We have leverage right now. I hope we, as a union, us that leverage. Will we have the same leverage in 2 years? Who knows.
I hope we choose to keep moving the ball forward now, instead of hoping and dreaming that we can move it forward in 2-6 years. +1... Agreed |
So when would this 2 year extension become amendable? 2 years from this January or 3 years from this January which is 2 years from original amendable date?
|
I
Originally Posted by Pro2nd
(Post 2014249)
So when would this 2 year extension become amendable? 2 years from this January or 3 years from this January which is 2 years from original amendable date?
No extension no raise no 100 seat jet !!!!! They will meet again around March 1st 2016 for a full blown section 6 negotiations! News will be known by the end of business day today! I take this as great news!! |
Extension or not, they can get a 100 seat jet. They don't need us to agree to an extension for that.
|
Originally Posted by El Guapo
(Post 2014258)
Extension or not, they can get a 100 seat jet. They don't need us to agree to an extension for that.
Granted, they may be interested in firmly establishing a CS100 rate as the UPA only specifically mentions the CS300 but there is an existing mechanism in the UPA to do that outside of a full contract negotiation. IMHO, the company obviously wants something else and a new small jet is just a shiny object to divert focus and dangle in front of the more gullible. It's probably not a coincidence that there was a CS100 parked in the UAL MX hanger in ORD yesterday with small UA decals stuck on the side. |
Rumor control post. I Heard the union caved on reserve rules. (No penalty for SC's and FS's greater than 2 for a 13% DOS and 3% next 2 years. Essentially removing LC reserve from the equation. I am sure this is a small part of the whole deal, but if this is remotely true, it is a no vote here. If anyone can shed more light, it would obviously be welcomed. Thx...
|
Originally Posted by SteelerNation
(Post 2014292)
f anyone can shed more light, it would obviously be welcomed. Thx...
|
If true,that by any definition is a concession...
|
Originally Posted by cadetdrivr
(Post 2014297)
If true, that would certainly be the opposite of "Reserve assignment process improvements," IMHO.
I am sure there are some that will take the increase in pay in exchange for it. (The ones that don't sit reserve). |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 12:16 AM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands