CFIT:
I can only speak for me, but:
(1) Management's table offer is basically current book (ignoring rediculous 1/4 of 1% pay rate increases), plus the improved section 13. [As a SLOA - Performance Plus is offered in exchange for Pref. Bidding (which I do not want, but if we secure 4% in Perf. Plus and some growth, I consider it a wash) You can still bid your off days around your vacation and more pilots would be off reserve under a Pref. Bid. IMHO the CNC taking the right course that we will consider Pref. Bid, but need to do it thoughtfully and not rush into anything]
(2) Management has said they need the current offer to provide them with "security" that going forward ASA will have a competitive cost structure which allows them to maintain flying, grow and bid.
(3) Scope offers employees the same security management says that they want to secure with the current pay structure.
As I understand it, the logic behind the Fabulous 4's run is very similar to what I'm thinking. That the contract is 80% done (thanks to the heavy lifting by ALPA and our CNC) and that scope should be obtained by providing management the security they want, while providing employees with the security they want. If we secure growth, a fleet guarantee, then that growth will more than make up for the nearly nothing in pay rates through the stope pipe effect (FO's upgrade and get 40% raises, Captains go to the 700/900 and get 15%, reserves hold lines, and so on....)
Ultimately, our Representatives will do their best to represent the will of the pilot group, as indicated by Wilson Polling and the pilots who voice their opinions. It is my hope that ALPA National will support that process without using our pilot group to set a precedent. Whether it be Jackson and Lee, or Utley and Tomlinson, our representatives should represent the pilots. I think the 90 day deadline is not a good idea, in that the resposibilities of a status Rep go far beyond this contract into every other part of an airline pilot's interaction with ALPA and the Company. Just as a deadline for withdrawal for IRAQ is not a good strategy, a deadline for a vote of confidence on your Status Rep is rash.
One tough nut to crack is the training department. We have some of the best IP's around and I think we should keep our IP's and Standards guys in place. Current book is higher than industry average, but we do get what we pay for. Perhaps there is some room to outsource more while keeping our guys in place at the top of the IP food chain. After all, the current stagnation and fleet re-allocation is very inefficient. SkyWest admitted in the conference call that the 900 & 700 re-allocation was increasing SkyWest's costs. Growth would do a lot to cure the cost problem. Also, the current IP rates were a reaction of a desperate ASA management to keep IP's lat time hiring got hot. All indications are that hiring will get hot again, maybe in 2007, and if that is the case, ASA might once again need to retain IP's by paying them a good wage for their work.
So that is "my" position. Even better, we should use our scope (and SkyWest's lack of scope) to secure flying, at least the airplanes that were ASA's, including firm orders, when we were bought. More than retro pay, I want the airplanes, upgrades and quality of life back. If SkyWest wants to play too, then they need to join the union.
My fear is that ALPA might just fight their way into a better contract, but not secure scope, resulting in a ever shinking airline with fewer Capt. slots and lower QOL. We can not count on our friends at SkyWest to build on the foundation we make. In fact, many seem happy to take what they can from us while blaming us for not doing more to prevent their taking.