AirTran negotiations update

[mnboyev]

I got my new boat...too bad for u.....!!! pleeeeez ...this is not the majority...heck...I can't even do the FMS WB??..We need u man !!!

 

[Lear70]

All I can say is that 95% of the CA that I fly with say that FO rates are a deal breaker. Which makes me feel proud to be a part if this pilot group.

Ditto! :beer:

 

[Murphy]

It's all speculation until the fat lady sings.

I flew with a Captain who had the attitude that "you'll be senior a lot longer than you'll be junior." If I was a Captain, I might have been able to stomach that statement, but as an FO it definitely rubbed me the wrong way.

With possible upgrade delays, slowed deliveries, midwest merger, no more options to buy additonal aircraft after the current order, I am very interested in FO pay rates year 3 to year 7.

It's not too late to email the negotiating commitee and give them your dealbreakers.

 

[STL717]

Agreed.

I don't want to see ANY farmed-out flying... I'd fly an RJ for current 717 rates if it means a quicker upgrade, a better domicile, or the lines are drastically better.

A 100-seat aircraft could be our 717 replacement. 96 seats in a Business Class configuration with our current seat pitch is only 21 seats less with an operating cost rumored to be 30% less than the 717.

Now that JB has the MX kinks worked out of it, they're finding it to be a great workhorse and very efficient. I have a couple buddies on it there at JB and the company plans to get as many of them as they can. I think that aircraft would be fantastic on our DAY, CAK, MLI, types of routes.

BIG mistake to lose them, even for a trial period. The aircraft has already proven itself at 2 majors plus JB.

The current 717's could be the 100 seat plane. TWA ran 717's with 100 seats.

 

[FlyFastLiveSlow]

It's not too late to email the negotiating commitee and give them your dealbreakers.

Not too late, but pretty pointless. They only hear what they want to.

 

[75M]

The current 717's could be the 100 seat plane. TWA ran 717's with 100 seats.

Kinda. the TWA configuration was 16+95 in a two class deal. The 100 seat confuguration was 12+88 put into use as part of the American "More Room Throughout Coach" campaign that was immediately reversed post 9/11.

But more on topic. I'll vote no for anything that doesn't treat all of us fairly. I don't want this contract to be used to fracture this pilot group.

Besides, if the company wants to get a handle on FO attrition, they'd better start paying you guys, and I think they know that.

 

[Ty Webb]

One blissful mo' 'fo.

Not too late, but pretty pointless. They only hear what they want to.

Judging from your posts, it seems to me that you want to believe that. It must feel all warm and fuzzy to you. I'm sure it helps you feel justified in not helping out, not being willing to picket, not getting involved. Your ignorance must be blissful.

.

 

[FlyFastLiveSlow]

Judging from your posts, it seems to me that you want to believe that. It must feel all warm and fuzzy to you. I'm sure it helps you feel justified in not helping out, not being willing to picket, not getting involved. Your ignorance must be blissful.

.

Here we go again. There are a LOT of pilots that feel this way. There are a LOT of pilots that feel that the Board has there own agenda and not that of the general pilot group. I'm not alone in that. I'm just calling things like I see them. If they listen, then shouldn't the concerns, even if they might happen to disagree with the Board, or the NC be addressed with an explanation as to why? That's all I'm saying. When communication TO the Board or the NC goes IGNORED, and UNANSWERED, it does not exactly establish a trusting relationship, now does it?

You seem to think that I am anti-NPA. Wrong. I just don't feel like they really care to listen to people who don't agree with EVERYTHING they do. As far as helping? We've discussed that. Picketing? Striking is one thing....but informational picketing is a waste of time. The public DOES NOT CARE! It makes the pilots look far worse than management.

Ignorance is not being able to see both sides, and using emotional, name calling arguments, Ty. Are you the ignorance pot or the kettle?

 

[Lear70]

For what it's worth, in my talks the last couple days, I actually asked when the last time the Wilson Polling specifically gathered data about F/O wage goals among the F/O's. Didn't get an answer.

I suspect it was the last time they fully polled the pilot group about contract goals (approx 2 years ago), back when upgrades were firmly in the 2 year mark, the major carriers were still in bankruptcy, and people were still concerned about the company's profitability to a certain degree.

I also suspect that if the same polling were done again amongst the F/O group currently looking at 4-7 year upgrades in a good economy, a good, recovering aviation marketplace where even SWA is talking about raising fares this summer, and the company poised to make their largest profit ever according to their own SEC filings, you'd get a completely different answer.

Problem is, it would require them to start over with most of the compensatory sections of the contract; my personal belief is they're not willing to do that UNLESS they get a NO vote sent back to them.

So I'll wait and see what they come up with. If it's not what I believe it should be, I'll vote NO and campaign as many people as I can convince to do the same. They'll be forced to do another series of Wilson Pollings to see why, and we'll start over again with Section 4, 5, 11, and 14.

So what if it takes a couple extra months. Worth it for the extra money it will make you for the next many YEARS of making a livable wage as an F/O.

 

[T3700]

I'm very disappointed that the target rate for F/O's is so incredibly low. There's no way on God's green earth that the Wilson Polling data supports that low of a contract opener.

2 1/2 years and I've never been polled. Maybe if you don't ask many FO's their opinion, you get the answers you want.