AirTran T.A. = Vote NO

[LearLove]

as someone that has been in the US Air system for 8 plus years now I beg you guys not to let anything, especially 70+ seaters be contracted out. Please please don't let it happen.

The only reason I have the job I have now is some guy with more years and exp. either lost his job or didn't want to come back to what was left - and i am in no way proud of it. Don't let this happen at your company.

scarlet - not sure where your point is but if you think that by allowing flying to be contracted out that you'll see growth??? You better think again.

I bet if aitran is allowed to contract out 70 seaters (or bigger 175/190 size) that they will see something along the lines of:

the 717's go away and be replaced with 737 but this will be 1 for 1 no growth. The only growth will be whatever contract carrier gets the flying.

Please - for the sake of the career no more outsourcing of flying.

 

[Lear70]

Why do you have to tell people how to vote?

I apologize if I come across aggressively, I don't mean to, although I do feel very strongly about this T.A.'s concessionary nature and, evidently, most pilots here tend to agree with me.

What I'm doing is normally defined as "persuasion": you tell people the TRUTH about the issues, lay down WHY you think a "No" vote is in order, and urge them to do the same.

You don't "coerce"; you don't "threaten"; you don't make unsubstantiated claims of "doom" as follows:

You are not part of their family and some people do need this company to continue to grow . That is great if you want to just keep moving from company to company.=Leave if you are not HAPPY there are SO many other companies that will be happy to pay you 200k a year !!!

First, only about 5% of the pilot group here will EVER make $200k a year. I certainly won't anytime soon (I make about 25% of that) until I upgrade AND become a check airman. $181.22 * 1000 hours a year credit = $181,220.00 MAX pay per year at year 15 pay scale (I'll be 50 then). Look it up.

Second, I never said I DIDN'T need this company. I work here, too. I have a family, too. So why should a "No" vote automatically equal "moving from company to company"?

The WORST that happens is we continue under our current T.A. which, according to their math, is cheaper by around $14 Million per year than what is proposed.

So how is that going to force ANYONE to "move from company to company"?

Logic, please. Not emotion. Explore *reasonable* possibilities, and I'll be happy to debate them with you. Who knows, you might even convince me of something; the NC changed my mind about 2 of the issues. Another pilot changed my mind about a 3rd. That leaves about 25 or so issues outstanding...

 

[-9Capt]

Lear,
How's the revised TA2 rebuttal coming along?

 

[Lear70]

Lear,
How's the revised TA2 rebuttal coming along?

Slowly. Done with everything thru Section 4 and half of Section 5.

There's some very small language changes here and there that I have to slow down and really read it line by line. Most of it has very little impact, one or two things are MAJOR changes hidden in there very nastily without being disclosed.

Hoping to have it done tomorrow evening or halfway through the day on Labor Day.

 

[Ty Webb]

You are not part of their family and some people do need this company to continue to grow .

What growth? Sounds like you haven't read the Scope section of this TA2.

A "Yes" vote for this agreement gives them the ability to outsource YOUR flying. Talk to someone at Frontier, and ask them how they feel about your potential for growth if this thing is voted in.

If you don't even understand what it si you are voting on, maybe you should spend a little more time reading the thing and a little less time worrying about what others are posting on this board.

 

[Lear70]

You'd think they'd have gotten this thing proofread this time before they put it out.

I'm up to 4 complete screwups or omissions, including Scope, Section 1.C.3. It's missing the entire last sentence where it restricts the company to 86 seat RJ's.

It cuts off half-way through the sentence where it says our scope restrictions don't apply to carriers operating turbo-jet aircraft for the Company, so long as such carriers do not..."

Then nothing. The 1st T.A. language said the above, plus "... operate as part of such sub-service aircraft with more than eighty-six (86) seats." as the completion of that paragraph.

Not in there. Just missing.

Genius!

 

[Island Hopper]

1. Poor scope language
2. Higher insurance costs
3. Terrible work rules

JUST VOTE NO
it is just that simple

 

[rasold]

A letter from Bob Fornaro

bob says to vote for the TA in a letter addressed to pilot and family.

 

[Spidey]

Lear,
I commend you for your endless research and viewpoint for all of us pilots...and Ty Webb has used my pic without permission...next, please let us know your experience that you have at THE TABLE...this is one of the most pressurized points on Earth...and hot as hell for weeks/months/hell for years here...and a skill much unrecognized...but tried by many...you've alluded to filling shoes, not yet taken off...proceed forward NOW, if you plan to, some of us are kinda busy doin other stuff......and we gotta talk about your jetway etiquette...if you have a vision, show us, past the blog phase...if you have experience, tell us...

 

[The Victors]

Why do you have to tell people how to vote?

You are not part of their family and some people do need this company to continue to grow . That is great if you want to just keep moving from company to company.=Leave if you are not HAPPY there are SO many other companies that will be happy to pay you 200k a year !!!

You ARE the problem with this industry, not the solution with that mindset!!!!!!!! Listen to what lear70 says!!!