2015

[imacdog]

And the worst part is, WE KNOW IT'S COMING AND CAN'T STOP THE TRAIN!

We KNOW it will include an extension in the term.

We KNOW it will do little or nothing to improve QOL on the road.

We KNOW the leadership and their browbeating surrogates will sell the crap out of it (they have already started).

And we KNOW it will include just enough crumbs to get more than half to sell out and vote yes.

BOHICA

If the IBI goes any way other than the above, then I will be truly shocked.

 

[rajflyboy]

If the IBI goes any way other than the above, then I will be truly shocked.

I agree also

 

[realityman]

"Why are you guys angry? Your Union is working on deal to get you better NOW - years early and if you don't like what they come up with you can vote no.

Flex Options is kind of dealing with the opposite issue. Even the perfect MCBA will be a **** sandwich but it's a stepping stone to what will be incredibly long and vicious section 6 bargaining for better.

Your Union is attempting to avoid all that. Perhaps in part by understanding the **** storm that is coming to section 6 negotiations in the fractional world with more and more ricci influence. You should be thanking your Union for paying attention to more than just your little NJA world."

Bingo!

I have reasons to want to read what comes out VERY carefully. They didn't sell me on the 2015 CBA, and they won't sell me on this. The only thing that will "sell" me on the results of this IBI is if what's presented is actually good for the group and a good value for whatever we'll be giving to the company. For me, an extension of the CBA had better be accompanied by something VERY BIG in return. I'm not sure we'll see that, but I'm willing to wait before passing judgement.

Meanwhile, we actually have a pretty decent CBA as far as QOL. While I agree wholeheartedly and 180% that we can always look for improvements to QOL, the ability to create decent QOL already exists in our current CBA.
RAJ has good points about the long days, but he doesn't mention anything about calling fatigued. Going on duty at 0330 with 13+ of duty planned for the day? Ha! It's a nice plan, but if he's too tired to carry it out guess what? Call fatigued. Done. Over. No negative repercussions to him for doing so. What's the big deal? They can make PLANS all day long (and they will), but that doesn't mean they'll work out. And that's not our problem.

Just last tour they had me start the first day at 0430. It meant I had to get up at 0230. It ended up being a 14-hour day. As it was my first day, I was starting refreshed, so it worked out. Most of it was just airlining to the other side of the country anyway. But, the next day they had us starting very early out of SFO and flying a pax trip to PHL. No big deal. I ordered a crew breakfast so i could skip the hotel breakfast and take the extra few minutes of sleep. Reasonable, yes? Well, I go to the airport and by the time our pax showed up my food still hadn't come. Guess what? Our CBA allows me to set the brake until I've got the food situation figured out. I would've taken a meal deviation and gotten some food to go from a restaurant except there aren't any restaurants anywhere close to the FBO at SFO, and nothing open that early anyway. So, I opted to wait for the crew catering to show up instead. Yes, I explained it to the pax and told him we'd be waiting. The F/A's looked at me like I was nuts, but it's my right to do just that. Luckily, the food didn't take too long to be delivered after that, but the point is, our CBA gives us the ability to create, to a limited extent, a decent QOL while on the road in spite of what the company may want.

It does take a tiny bit of intestinal fortitude to delay a pax while waiting for your own food, but not much. That's EXACTLY why we have a CBA and a strong union to back us up when we choose to use the CBA in situations that the company frowns on.

Does scheduling have us scheduled for 6 legs with short turns in between? Okay, that's fine, but I have an operational pace I follow no matter how many legs are planned. I go when the crew is ready. Not before. If I have an MEL that needs written up, the FAR's say I HAVE TO do it when I discover it. If it delays the next leg, so be it. If my pace means they have to find another plane for the last leg or two, so be it.

There are some very legitimate complaints we have about QOL. I don't deny it. But I do wonder how many could be mitigated simply by doing what we're contractually allowed to do.

I don't know what's coming with this IBI. I really don't. I have no problem voting no. There's nothing so pressing I feel the need to sell out to the company for crumbs in return. But you're correct in your assessment that our union has a responsibility to explore all avenues that should open up before us to make improvements. As you said, they are working to make things better NOW. So many screaming that the 2015 CBA didn't get enough, then when we have an opportunity to fix some things, a bunch of folks are screaming we should tell the company to go pound sand. It makes no sense. They don't trust the company. They don't trust our union. So maybe we should just never try for any improvements ever. I can't see any other way to go if those folks had their way.

 

[gutshotdraw]

We'll talk again in about 60 days....

I'll do my best not to say "I told you so."

 

[realityman]

We'll talk again in about 60 days....

I'll do my best not to say "I told you so."

If it's crap then I'll vote no. What's the big deal?

If the majority votes it in, I may not be happy but I signed up to work in a union shop. Majority rules.

Meanwhile, things really aren't that bad. My gosh, listening to some people you'd think we're indentured servants or slaves. We have options to right now to make things better for ourselves. Sorry, I have little sympathy for someone who says the company started them super early with a really long day planned and it's just so UNSAFE! Jeez, just call fatigued when you're too tired to safely continue on. It's honestly not that hard.

This job isn't perfect. We can improve a lot. QOL can be much better. But when looking at the big picture, we have it pretty good. And I'd be massively angry at our union if an opportunity came up to improve things and they said they'd pass. That's crazy.

 

[gutshotdraw]

They would have actually had a chance to really improve things if the union leadership had said "NO" when first approached with the phrase "cost neutral." The company would have been back pretty quickly with a better offer. I'm massively angry at my union for THAT. Among other things...

 

[rajflyboy]

Reality is that most pilots are type A and get the job done folks. Many will not call in fatigued no matter what. Same folks who will vote yes for a small raise and no QOL improvements.

They will vote yes for a bonus or slight change in OT whilegiving up more work rules and scheduling issues to the company.

it's the way it is and I don't see that changing.

Sit it back and watch the train in action. We can easily predict the results now from our armchair QTB.

- - - Updated - - -

They would have actually had a chance to really improve things if the union leadership had said "NO" when first approached with the phrase "cost neutral." The company would have been back pretty quickly with a better offer. I'm massively angry at my union for THAT. Among other things...

Well

you know how it goes

this is all the money we got and we are going broke if you dont sign right here on the bottom line

PT Barnum was right

 

[rajflyboy]

Only way going forward is to have a strong NO vote to send the message that the employees want to have a great job and be part of a solid team effort on a daily basis

it will never happen. Enough money will be in the deal to get the magic 51%

 

[gutshotdraw]

And now, it turns out our vaunted Negotiating Committee got TOTALLY TAKEN on the language in at least a couple of sections of the last contract and had to give up past practice that will cost members THOUSANDS over the life of the contract.

Yeah, I want to trust these schmucks again. Especially the lead schmuck...

 

[Bjtdrvr]

And now, it turns out our vaunted Negotiating Committee got TOTALLY TAKEN on the language in at least a couple of sections of the last contract and had to give up past practice that will cost members THOUSANDS over the life of the contract.

Yeah, I want to trust these schmucks again. Especially the lead schmuck...

I would blame that on lawyers