TA Passes
 

13-7

LCAL reps 8-1
LUAL reps 5-6

Yes it did. It was a recorded vote but not roll called. If it was roll called it only passed by approximately 150 votes. That's what I call a close vote!

Thank God for Continental sanity and good judgement....

Thank God for divisive sentiment and comments...

We are United

Congrats to the 67%, you're legacy of concessionary contracts in non-concessionary environments continues.

I agree. I'm happy the LCAL reps voted to let us make the decision. But they are all our reps now. I probably shouldn't have pointed out the difference in my original post, but old habits die hard.

Well now it appears that we have a decision to make.

Your decision is either to be pragmatic or be a dreamer....

As much as CAL side is predisposed to vote yes (by reputation), the same could be said to UAL side voting no. We need to read it carefully and decide for ourselves now, as a unified group.

Well, lets see the details!

What's a "legacy" rep?

(rhetorical question)

Exactly. The fact that many first reactions to the vote were to break it down by legacy is extremely telling. Why should I expect section 6 success in 6-18 months given the factionalism and snipping that is the hallmark of this pilot group? United indeed...

Interesting sentiment. Unfortunately I agree with some aspects of it.

I wonder if an effective MC could have had an impact?

Dave is that you? Lol

No man, I'm Dave. But I heard he's not here...

The pay table has already been posted what else do you need? All that other stuff really doesn't affect us and takes too long to read and is written by lawyers anyways.

Bingo.
If you are not impressed with what the Union got with 5 items on the table, why would you have faith in what they could do with trying to improve 100 things we want?

I couldn't agree more. It's interesting to see the original author of the thread and several following post boasting are LCAL "legacy". It could causes one to think that maybe the money was their only consideration given past legacy affiliation.

Are their any "CAL repatriated SCABS" on the MEC?

did they officially post pay tables?

Might be hard to read, but....

And, Delta's opener,

Therefore, we propose to improve compensation levels as follows:

· Increase hourly rates by:

o 22% effective January 1, 2016

o 7% effective January 1, 2017

o 7% effective January 1, 2018

· Increase hourly rate for EMB-190/195 equal to B-717

· Increase international pay to $8.00 for Captains and $6.00 for First Officers and delete Alaska/Canada carve-out

· Re-establish night pay of $5.00 for flight time flown 1800-0559 pilot acclimated time

· Establish pilot responsibility pay, e.g., “door pay”

· Retain current book on 3 B. 4. [This “me-too” clause provides for a review and potential hourly pay increase when non-contract employees receive a pay increase]

· Delete expiration date of 3 B. 5. [This “me-too” clause currently requires Delta to provide the same bonus or lump sum payment, other than profit sharing, that it grants to non-contract employees]

In the video attached to the email, Heppner said that they almost walked away from negotiations twice. He then said that they were too far apart on what either party wanted with respect to Reserve Rule improvements. Instead of walking away, he "struck it from the negotiation." So, the list of 5 items shrank by at least one.

It just seems a little devisive. Would he have "walked away" if they didn't get what they wanted for the long haul operations?

I will admit, the pay rates look appealing. I even made an effort to try to look at them last, but failed. I am still voting no. I feel there was a bait and switch..especially regarding the reserve rules:

From the 21 Oct Letter:
undoubtedly affect pay and/or working conditions. This does not affect Reserve working conditions.

Expect more...pay less

An absolutely OUTSTANDING point.

Name a concession?

Apples, Oranges and unnecessary apostrophe's. IOW, BS. :)

Pure assumption and speculation on my part. I assumed super senior guys will fly the ULH routes and benefit mostly from FRMS relief (duty day extensions, etc). Am I incorrect in assuming that these flights will go to very senior line holders? I thought the highly productive long haul trips would be senior. If not, then it's a moot point. I'm not trying to stir the pot.

My main point is that the MEC chair said they almost walked away. Why did he choose to not walk away when agreement was not reached on one of the 5 points. It almost seems that the reserve rule improvement was a pre-known sacrificial lamb.

Please read the 21 October letter again. When I read it again and watched his video released today, I saw mixed messages. I emailed my rep these concerns and he shares the same sentiment.

Again, purely my speculation. That and 50 cents will get you a bag of chips.

Two year extension of current agreement.

Is that the companies or pilots?

Will UAL get those in the "me too?"

From what I understand this was more than one vote...

There was one to accept or reject which barely passed, there was one to endorse or not to endorse which barely passed, there was one to send it to the membership which I believe passed unanimously.

BLAH. BLAH. BLAH. It PASSES. BIG. n'uff said. :cool:

Enjoy your raise.

Each voting member of the MEC had three votes to make today in this process:

1. Accept the agreement.
2. Send this TA to the pilots for Membership Ratification.
3. Endorse this agreement.

That is not a concession...try again.

From my perspective the long haul community enjoys a higher level of immunity to scheduling gamesmanship. It's hard to reassign a pilot who is laying over in BOM or LOS. Sure, you'll get your share of short-calls,but no fake trips and no field standby and your pairings won't turn into a letter K or R due to modifications. Crew rest issues internationally sort of take care of themselves due to FAR 117 and the augmentation factor. Long haul reserve pilots enjoy a higher QoL.

Exactly. Let's disagree like adults.

Except that of course global reserves only have six real days off a month that must be consecutive. I've been reserve on both sides of this equation, give me narrowbody reserve rules any day.

And they spend less time at work. But when they are at work, they are fatigued. When they get home, they are fatigued. Once again, a lifestyle choice. I have made that choice before, maybe i will make it again. Or maybe not.

3.5 to 1 affects them a lot. Vacation paying 3 hours a day affects everyone.

Work rules do affect them, just different.

Isn't everyone on Reserve there by choice unless your a new-hire. Isn't there a vacancy bid that allows anyone who doesn't want to be on Reserve a chance to be a line holder on something else or in a different seat? You guys on Reserve are chasing status or dollars sort of. I choose to work hard and make more on a narrow body. You "NO" voters would rather work for 13% less while on Reserve fighting for better Reserve work rules that would take affect by the time your well off Reserve and you'd rather not have a Delta "me too" clause while doing this (and you have an education?). And somehow better vacation and training pay 3 to 5 years from now will put more in your pocket than the current TA extension? Maybe we should vote this down in order to get an Organic Crew Meal choice! Nobody I know has ever been thrown an extra $30K a year just to extend their current working conditions 2 more years. Which by the way, I bet most of you NO voters were Yes voters for our current contract! I personally like my current contract and I personally would really enjoy the extra money! No brainer! I just flew a 5 minute extension for nothing. On this TA, I would've been paid 2.5 hrs for 5 minutes! Once again, No Brainer!

It's depressing how many pilots are oblivious to past contracts and the QOL they afforded and are willing to extend this (thin) one. A contract that many reluctantly voted for simply due to the games being played at Willis. The way I see it, "we'll get 'em next time" is now, or could be if we flush this and enter Section 6.

Gas is cheap. Our loads are fantastic due to the latest round of mergers. We're awash in profits and have pricing power that hasn't existed since deregulation. We're already much cheaper than DAL and Willis knows it. As DAL pilots reload and shoot for the moon, we're in full Milquetoast mode. Stopping here is idiocy. We can get a raise and improve QOL if we want, but it seems that capitulation is easier. Our union hasn't prepared us to fight for anything and the pilots don't have the will. 13% Yippee!

Suckit.

Its clear that management has our, and certainly Jay Heppners number. They may not do a very good job of running the operation, but they sure do know how to hoodwink this pilot group.

I am sorry to say that you might be right.

So many pilots are blinded by a couple shiny coins and can't see that they have leverage.

If this passes, the company will have all their goals met and see little need to talk to us for years to come. Our next CBA will be many years from now. I will most likely be gone before it is signed.

Sorry but the FRMS is concessionary. We certainly gave in to the company. Also we will lock ourselves into the same poor (concessionary) sick leave, vacation, and other issues that we are last in.

This might be the last opportunity for many years to fix issues that need to be addressed.