B6 PEA Amendment

[Ski-N-Fly]

To sign or not to sign.......thoughts?

 

[Blue Dude]

To us as individual pilots, it probably doesn't make much difference, at least in the short term. The problem is that the long-term wisdom of signing or not signing depends entirely on what the company does in the future. We could get screwed either way, which means the contract language is poorly drawn, insufficiently vetted, and inadequate to protect the pilots. The company already has what it wants, which is to keep its options open while restricting ours - whether we sign or not.

 

[$$$4nothin]

It won't matter if you sign it or not. The next PEA adjustment will have a pay raise on it, and you will have to sign to get a pay adjustment. Sign now, sign later, but eventually you will sign.

 

[Blue Dude]

It won't matter if you sign it or not. The next PEA adjustment will have a pay raise on it, and you will have to sign to get a pay adjustment. Sign now, sign later, but eventually you will sign.

Not necessarily. Pay rate amendments have typically been standalone changes to the pay table, not all-inclusive of past amendments.

However, it *could* be an all-inclusive amendment, and we'd have to take it or leave it. This is just one of many possible ways the company can maintain control of its options while restricting our own.

 

[Lake Alice]

The only reason to sign is for a future merger/aquisition. The PEA is one giant loophole, no one disputes that(except the BoBs). But when we are purchased having everyone on the same PEA will make it easier for us to claim joinder, much like 3A, instead of the acquiring airline arguing that all of us are on different contracts.
We're are going to get fooked regardless, it's the Jetblue way, so I want to be able to point to something written saying they were supposed to take care of me.

 

[mejorgy]

I`m not signing anything.... that includes the declination form!

 

[Fins Up]

I'm not planning on signing. The documents are weak and I just don't want to put my name on a piece of garbage like that.

 

[Fubijaakr]

.... acquiring airline arguing that all of us are on different contracts. We're are going to get fooked regardless, it's the Jetblue way, so I want to be able to point to something written saying they were supposed to take care of me.

Unless your agreement has some pretty bulletproof successorship language, an acquiring airline is not required to recognize it.

Sorry.

 

[Ski-N-Fly]

Unless your agreement has some pretty bulletproof successorship language, an acquiring airline is not required to recognize it.

Sorry.

Our PEA's in any form are far from bulletproof. I am skeptical on signing. Has anyone had an attorney look at this? If so, please share your thoughts. I have yet to see a compelling reason to sign, other than having some poorly written merger language over "none whatsoever" (pun intended). Even so, does anyone know if the company can actually protect one group of its pilots more than the other (signers vs no signers) in case of M&A?

 

[Flyby1206]

Our PEA's in any form are far from bulletproof. I am skeptical on signing. Has anyone had an attorney look at this? If so, please share your thoughts. I have yet to see a compelling reason to sign, other than having some poorly written merger language over "none whatsoever" (pun intended). Even so, does anyone know if the company can actually protect one group of its pilots more than the other (signers vs no signers) in case of M&A?

Any lawyer who has passed the bar exam (and even those who just spend too much time at the bar) can tell you that the PEA isnt worth the paper it is written on.

The only thing I wonder about is your 2nd part of the post, about the company giving preferrential treatment to those who sign as opposed to those who dont. Because lets face it, all the company men will sign it and they are sure to come out smelling like a rose when the poop hits the fan.

 

[linepilot]

Not signing those ridiculous documents.

 

[B6Busdriver]

Any lawyer who has passed the bar exam (and even those who just spend too much time at the bar) can tell you that the PEA isnt worth the paper it is written on.

The only thing I wonder about is your 2nd part of the post, about the company giving preferrential treatment to those who sign as opposed to those who dont. Because lets face it, all the company men will sign it and they are sure to come out smelling like a rose when the poop hits the fan.

Yet you voted no to representation!?

 

[Flyby1206]

Yet you voted no to representation!?

I wasnt eligible to vote, too wet behind the ears

If I was eligible to vote at the time I would have chosen No to ALPA

If the vote was today I would have a different outlook and vote Yes.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

Our PEA's in any form are far from bulletproof. I am skeptical on signing. Has anyone had an attorney look at this? If so, please share your thoughts. I have yet to see a compelling reason to sign, other than having some poorly written merger language over "none whatsoever" (pun intended). Even so, does anyone know if the company can actually protect one group of its pilots more than the other (signers vs no signers) in case of M&A?

From the other board...

Last week, several PVC members were interviewing law firms down in the DC area to place on retainer by the newly formed merger and acquisition committee. Out of that meeting, EVERY LAW FIRM said that our lack of union under a CBA put us at a disadvantage AND that our section 15 was poorly written.

Word is that no law firm was willing to be placed on retainer because they felt that there was no way to defend 2100, individually contracted pilots against a unionized pilot group that operates under an industry standard CBA. Further, Alleghaney-Mohawk allows our management to make deals for us and we cannot do anything about it.

So, to recap-- previous lawyers hired by the company to support the PVC have told us section 15 was weak. ALPA has warned us that our individual PEAs are poorly written and during a T/E, the other pilot group's CBA will trump ours because of how poorly it is written AND because CBAs contain specific, industry-standard language that have precedence in merger, acquisition, and integration negotiation, mediation, and arbitration. SWAPA and APA MEC members have told us on the side we are vulnerable-- yes, they have reviewed our contracts over the last two years. Yet, our management and our company lawyers (and of course, the BoBs) keep telling us that our contracts are industry leading and afford us better protections than unionized pilot groups.

What will it take to convince this pilot group that a non-unionized, 2100+, individually contracted bunch of pilots has no chance against any unionized group out there in a T/E? When will the 1190 wake up and understand the difference between a legally binding contract and a legally binding contract that has been validated in court?

 

[Fins Up]

From the other board...

Last week, several PVC members were interviewing law firms down in the DC area to place on retainer by the newly formed merger and acquisition committee. Out of that meeting, EVERY LAW FIRM said that our lack of union under a CBA put us at a disadvantage AND that our section 15 was poorly written.

Word is that no law firm was willing to be placed on retainer because they felt that there was no way to defend 2100, individually contracted pilots against a unionized pilot group that operates under an industry standard CBA. Further, Alleghaney-Mohawk allows our management to make deals for us and we cannot do anything about it.

So, to recap-- previous lawyers hired by the company to support the PVC have told us section 15 was weak. ALPA has warned us that our individual PEAs are poorly written and during a T/E, the other pilot group's CBA will trump ours because of how poorly it is written AND because CBAs contain specific, industry-standard language that have precedence in merger, acquisition, and integration negotiation, mediation, and arbitration. SWAPA and APA MEC members have told us on the side we are vulnerable-- yes, they have reviewed our contracts over the last two years. Yet, our management and our company lawyers (and of course, the BoBs) keep telling us that our contracts are industry leading and afford us better protections than unionized pilot groups.

What will it take to convince this pilot group that a non-unionized, 2100+, individually contracted bunch of pilots has no chance against any unionized group out there in a T/E? When will the 1190 wake up and understand the difference between a legally binding contract and a legally binding contract that has been validated in court?

I don't surf blupilots anymore. If what you said above is accurate, that is HUGE. I'd like to get some confirmation on all that. Think the PVC will send us an email detailing these lawyer meetings? I doubt it.

 

[B6Busdriver]

I wasnt eligible to vote, too wet behind the ears

If I was eligible to vote at the time I would have chosen No to ALPA

If the vote was today I would have a different outlook and vote Yes.

Thank you for your honest answer. I understand some of the emotional heartache attached to ALPA. I've been a member twice and I've seen the good, bad, and the ugly. We'll need your help next time, please talk to a friend in your relative seniority today(and your stick buddy)!

 

[Fubijaakr]

Seriously, I feel so sorry that you guys are swimming against the tide. At least a goodly number of you now recognize the folly of working for a non-Union Company in this fluid industry.

Too bad you can't pass YOUR experience on to everyone who considers interviewing at Virgin.

 

[1678]

I wasnt eligible to vote, too wet behind the ears

If I was eligible to vote at the time I would have chosen No to ALPA

If the vote was today I would have a different outlook and vote Yes.

And in here lies the problem for JB pilots not being represented at this time.

The company hired over 200 pilots and, like you stated, you would not have voted for ALPA at that time......

Why don't you also ignore your sim instructors recommendations and guidance also, I'm sure they don't know what they are talking about either. Makes much more sense to do it your way.............

Thanks for putting off being a PROFESSIONAL and recognized pilot.....Id&%*

 

[Flyby1206]

and in here lies the problem for jb pilots not being represented at this time.

The company hired over 200 pilots and, like you stated, you would not have voted for alpa at that time......

Why don't you also ignore your sim instructors recommendations and guidance also, i'm sure they don't know what they are talking about either. Makes much more sense to do it your way.............

Thanks for putting off being a professional and recognized pilot.....id&%*

???

Gfy

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

I don't surf blupilots anymore. If what you said above is accurate, that is HUGE. I'd like to get some confirmation on all that. Think the PVC will send us an email detailing these lawyer meetings? I doubt it.

OC guy...who knows..FWIW>>