Then let's start the fight now instead of kicking it down the road 2 years. Rip the bandaid off and get it over with.

 

Yes. Do you really Munoz during his week"s"-long tenure would have concocted such an offer? This was month's in the planning and probably dates back to the spring when the MEC killed JH's grand giveaway. They know exactly what it's going to cost them and the dollar benefit derived from the agreement.

I find it amusing how you see this as an opportunity. A 13-0-2 with no extension is an opportunity. That might convince me that Munoz is in charge. If the leaks (other than pay) prove to be true, I don't see this as an opportunity but rather a self funding prophecy.

 

I respectfully disagree, but I understand that we are both merely speculating. I just can't believe that 1) our contract extension offer, 2) mechanics TA, 3) offer to stop outsourcing IAM jobs and open early, and 4) including LCAL FA's in profit sharing all occurring at the same time and shortly after a regime change is a coincidence. I've taken an informal poll of everyone I've discussed this TA with and you're the first person that has suggested that we would have had this deal if Jeff was CEO.

Typically one of the most frustrating things about Section 6 negotiations under the RLA is time. SWA and UPS would agree. There just isn't enough horsepower under that act to give pilots much traction. But this deal changes the equation. Every day that Section 6 negotiations go beyond the amendable date it does so at 15% higher wages plus 15% to the B/C fund. It makes the number required to get to an "acceptable" wage much less difficult to obtain. There is a value to time in this case. It's a 13% raise a year early, and it extends until we reach a new deal (plus another 2%). That has real value if we take 3-5 years to reach a deal. If we go to Section 6 next year at present wages, and it takes 3-5 years to settle, I can't possibly imagine that we will find enough value from a company that you admit is stingy with the purse strings to compensate for giving that up. It's roughly $360,000,000 a year for this pilot group. Take it out 3 years of negotiations and you have to add approximately $1 billion in improvements just to BREAK EVEN over this deal.

 

There are a few work rules that could use an enhancement. A little better on the trip rig, more hours per vacation day. But for the most part, our work rules are pretty good, and better than they were for a long time. Pre-bankruptcy, we never had M5D. Our reserve system is better than pre-bankruptcy.

lUAL has lived under 25-40% below industry wages for 15 of my 20 years. This TA is a no brainer. 13% now, plus 3-10% more, or whatever DAL negotiates. This takes the pressure off of us during Section 6. When we are underpaid for 2-4 years, we end up voting in a crap contract because it is just costing us too much money. With the, economic pressure is off of us.

I predict the highest percentage of yes voters, maybe ever at UAL. I have yet to talk to an actual pilot that thought otherwise, except a few very vocal ones on APC.

 

+1

If the MEC kills this without letting the membership see it, they all need to be replaced immediately.

 

I told the MEC what I wanted along with thousands of other pilots through surveys. If it's not what we want then it should fail at the MEC level. I'm already ****ed it didn't address the reserve rules that were promised, and for that reason it should fail.

They will be in much more trouble presenting a sub par TA that we didn't ask for. Talk about losing confidence in those that represent you....

 

100% agree. I am already suspicious that this was initiated by the company and that we have a very compressed timeline. It has all the signs of an attempt to throw one by us.

In the current environment we shouldn't have to entertain any concessions whatsoever.

 

No. It's their job to do this. We weren't even supposed to have any changes in the contract until this one ended, so we are no worse off. They will weight the concession of the economic loss of the extension as well as the other concessions to the company in exchange for the rumored 13/0/2 percent raises. If they don't think it's worth it, they'll vote to kill it and I'm totally fine with that. If they send it out we can look and decide, but we all know it will pass if the MEC passes it. The "send it to us" crowd that are promoting that agenda are the "yes no matter what" voters. They are painfully obvious. Just see who's posting the opinion letters that promote that viewpoint and who supports it. I'm a "wait and see" but if it's good I'll vote yes.

In any case we all find out today.

 

I was one of the thousands who were surveyed & I said I wanted reserve rule improvements. Those apparently aren't in the TA, but some other things we wanted (improved pay, pay parity with Delta, furloughed pilot remuneration) are. If the MEC wanted everything, they should have told the Negotiating Committee to walk away if we didn't get everything. The NC didn't walk & we wound up with an AIP. I don't buy this garbage of some super secret reason the MEC should vote against sending the TA to the membership.

If the MEC doesn't send it to the membership, they should be voted out because 1) they're incompetent for not providing sufficient guidance to the NC in drafting an AIP; or 2) they're playing politics and not allowing the membership the opportunity to see the TA.

OBTW, it's insulting to insinuate adults with college educations charged with safely operating airliners are too foolish/stupid to make a measured decision about their employment's future. We don't need a nanny...

 

Ehhhhhhhhhh, it's not like pilots haven't needed to be saved from themselves in the past. Although I get what you're saying.