AirTran TA2

[labatt]

MNBOYEV,

Everyone has issues with this TA. Just for discussion, I took a look at my crewtime report fot July. Only had 6 legs where I was over block. Granted I flew mornings, had good weather, and never saw ATL. Of those 6, my average push time from the door being closed was only 2 minutes. The rampers are more than happy to give you a 20' shove to get the ontime. I've had several ramp controllers in ATL in fact tell me to do just that.

Regardless of when we get a TA, from a negotiating standpoint, I'm willing to let this one slide. It only affects us over block and I don't see the girls in any rush now to get that door open when we pull in. If they didn't throw the 5 minute rule at us forget it.

I'm mostly concerned with MERGER PROTECTION, SCOPE, WEAK LANGUAGE, and FO pay.

Hope the walleyes are biting.

 

[NuGuy]

And there will be people you never can convince, they're just too happy to have a job and be in the left seat making six figures.

Heyas,

Lear is right on the mark on this. No matter which track you've gone through (mil or civ), I'm sure you've known a pilot or two that is just one of those guys/gals where it is ALL ABOUT THEM.

In any gathering of pilots larger than 5, you can be assured that at least one or two will be like this.

They usually come in two flavors...the pilots who openly admit this, and they are easy to deal with. You know the score with them, and while you might not agree, you can at least plan around and/or avoid them.

The REAL turds in the punchbowl are the guys who scheme and manipulate the process to benefit themselves, all the while telling you (who they just jacked) what a "great deal this is for you". These guys would sell their own mom down the river, and make you pay the shipping.

Nu

 

[Lear70]

MDW and Labatt, you're talking about Par 5.L.5.

That wording was changed during the LAFO #2 that came out (one of the 3 things we resolved in 3 days in D.C.), clarifying that it was only intended to apply to "green-on-green" FAR limits and it states so in that paragraph now.

The wording has been changed to read:

5.L.5 - A line will be awarded to Pilot according to their seniority unless restricted by Paragraph Z of this section.

Paragraph Z reads: Rules governing newly-qualified pilots (pilots with less than 75 hours in equipment).

z.1 - Pilots with less than 75 hours in his equipment/seat may not be awarded or assigned to a trip with an existing pilot who has less than 75 hours in his equipment/seat.

One less thing to have to work on...

The NPA claimed the retiree medical benefits were fixed but it's still an issue. Right now, current practice is continued of keeping existing co-pay rates for 5 years or Medicare, whichever comes first. The new T.A. says that, ON the amendable date, unless we come to a new agreement, the retirees will revert back to Cobra rates. Again.

They just keep making health insurance worse and worse when it was one of the top 3 issues for pilots for a new contract. Even worse, it gives them a stick to hold over our heads when we're approaching our amendable date. GREAT job, Negotiating Committee!

Just another reason to vote NO.

 

[Flash]

"Regardless of when we get a TA, from a negotiating standpoint, I'm willing to let this one slide"

Why,Why,Why? Why should we let anything slide? I will not let anything "slide" from what we currently have. I agree that major issues are scope, merger protection, reserve, language and f.o. pay but we should not be giving anything back that we currently have unless we get something much better in return! This is how a normal union and labor force usually operate. Am I missing something here?

 

[EMBATP]

for everyone that says.."oh, thats not that big a deal", or "i can live with that" or " i say this concession is okay"....remember this...

this company was willing to spend $400 million plus to buy another airline...

this company is opening new cities/expanding service..

this company is hiring in virtually every department to keep up with growth..

this company has been posting profits, and according to the industry "experts" will continue to do so...

this company is buying new aircraft..

this company violates the contract anytime they can....

and most importantly..

THIS COMPANY CAN AFFORD IT...

NO CONCESSIONS...PERIOD....WE DONT HAVE TO GIVE UP ANYTHING...ITS THE MANAGEMENT AND THE NPA THAT TELLS YOU THAT YOU HAVE TO....

JUST SAY NO AND CONTINUE TO SAY IT UNTIL THIS PILOT GROUP GETS WHAT THEY WANT AND DESERVE....NOTHING LESS


FORTUNE FAVORS THE BRAVE!!!

 

[PCL_128]

MNBOYEV,

Everyone has issues with this TA. Just for discussion, I took a look at my crewtime report fot July. Only had 6 legs where I was over block. Granted I flew mornings, had good weather, and never saw ATL. Of those 6, my average push time from the door being closed was only 2 minutes. The rampers are more than happy to give you a 20' shove to get the ontime. I've had several ramp controllers in ATL in fact tell me to do just that.

Regardless of when we get a TA, from a negotiating standpoint, I'm willing to let this one slide. It only affects us over block and I don't see the girls in any rush now to get that door open when we pull in. If they didn't throw the 5 minute rule at us forget it.

I'm mostly concerned with MERGER PROTECTION, SCOPE, WEAK LANGUAGE, and FO pay.

Hope the walleyes are biting.

I agree that door close isn't a big issue, especially since we're about the only major that has it, but in an environment with record profits, we should be getting something in return for giving it up. We've made concessions in all of the areas that Lear70 has pointed out, but what did we get in return? The proposed rates don't even keep up with inflation, so we didn't even get a pay raise to compensate for these concessions. We shouldn't be willing to give up anything, including door close, unless we get something even better in return.

 

[SLEDNECK]

Please don't forget about the SAP process. Right now you can't trade anything after the schedule goes to scheduling because of the reserve requirements which is what the TA.3 does to both SAP I and II, which will make it just like it was after the SAP II LOA, absolutely worthless. Whether you're senior or junior, losing control of the SAP is a HUGE QOL give back. We can always work on a dollar issue, but you will never get back work rules and QOL issues.
THere is absolutely no reason to be giving ANYTHING back at this point. Is the only argument to vote yes is that we're going to have wait "X" amount of time to get anything better? That's the NPA's fault for sending this turd when they did and an clear indication of how far detached they are from the people they supposedly represent. They should be asking for a cooling off period right now instead of trying to polish this thing to get the 51%. The fact that company is happy to have 49% of their pilot group pissed off should tell you something. Where are the guys saying that the orignal TA was the best we were going to get? Are they the same guys saying that THIS one is the best we're going to get? A tiny raise with a lot of strings attached? Come on guys and gals, the better contracts out there didn't get there without a fight. We're not asking for that much, and to even consider accepting this crap is an insult to yourself and your profession.

 

[maxblast72]

From the roadshow this morning, AP is saying that the ALPA economic guy valued our contract at $55 million over current book for the 4 years. That comes out to about $13-14 million per year. For a company with total revenue of about $2.5 billion, that $13-14 million gain is only about 0.5% of total revenue.

It is setting up to be a senior vs junior fight. I bet 50% of that $55 million increase goes to the top 25% of the seniority list while our FO's still average less than 70K a year. Not to mention that the reserve guys gave up a couple million as well.

 

[bendover]

This TA will fail. The FO's will vote it down. The pay for FO's is in in the BOTTOM 20% of the industry. The NPA doesn't respect the FO's. Its apparent in the way they structured the pay increases and the signing bonuses as well as the reserve rules, which will affect almost ALL the FO's at some point. Last time I checked everyone has one vote to cast and I can almost guarantee that MOST of the FO's will vote NO.

 

[FlyFastLiveSlow]

After flying w/ an "undecided" CA, I am guessing that they will vote yes b/c they can not get pass the hourly rate. That is why the rates were the main emphasis b/c they know there are a few uneducated people who can not read past the chance for an extra buck. Mention scope, RJs, unlimited turbprops, loss of credit, emergency bank and there reply is well we are not Southwest and we got to keep from going under. Then you ask about the record profit w/ the current contract and you realize they are just plain dumb and you are better off playing w/ the grime light than trying to talk facts.
"Well I am not on reserve, I am too senior to be put on an RJ, AAI does not want props, When I was a new hire. The credit system is stealing... Who wants stand-ups? F everybody I want my money."
I told him to reserve a phone booth for his retirement party b/c he won't need anything larger. Then I landed w/ the auto power off to watch him freak out.

I think I flew with him 3 weeks ago.

 

[humveedriver]

Page 2 of 208 TA2, Sec. 0 "definitions":

Duty period guarantee:

It references section 4.M.3.a and a 4.5 average day. I don't see how it relates to the above section, and why do we have a reference to average day, if average day is gone? Its either sloppy editing from the LFO or I am confused by the definition. Can someone explain?

 

[craigdash8]

Lear70,

You've done ALPA work, right?

 

[Lear70]

Lear70,

You've done ALPA work, right?

Yes. Just shy of 5 years of it.


Humvee, I think it's just sloppy editing.

I'm SO appreciative that they scanned IMAGES of the T.A. to pdf instead of the actual document in .doc format. Have to print out an extra 60 pages at .20 cents a page to get a printed copy of it. Last time I was able to resize the font down to 10 and get it into a much smaller footprint...

Nice of them to not print copies again for us. That pretty much tells me they expect it to die, when they won't spend the money that every OTHER union in existence spends to give members readable copies to study...

 

[Flyarcticcat]

When is D Day when does it go to a vote?

 

[humveedriver]

Ahhh...found it. In the LFO 4.T.3.a is the average day reference. Not 4.M.3.a. Which evidently got looked over in the editing process, and is still in TA2. After two and a half years we are turning this into a rush job. Why?

 

[Lear70]

Are you talking about the D's on the girl on the right in your avatar?

I'm sorry... I'm distracted. What were we talking about again?

Oh yeah, the T.A.

No vote date yet, they're doing roadshows this week and next.

Humvee, they're rushing it because they know they're likely on the way out. Last stab at something they can attach their name to, especially since they will be in that upper pay category, unaffected by Scope or 100-seat jets in all likelihood, and want to "cash out".

 

[Ty Webb]

I think I flew with him 3 weeks ago.

That dumbass sounds like Scott G. It has been proven scientifically that he is dumber than a box of rocks, and, if he and that FA wife of his ever reproduce, it will be a sad day for aviation, and a real shame. Probably the stupidest pilot ever to burn Jet-A, at least on-purpose.

Thankfully, there are only a few of his ilk left here.

I don't know personally of ANY Captains who are voting "yes" . . . . my numbers could be slanted, though, since I refuse to associate with the brain-dead, the scabs and, at the sake of sounding redundant, any of "Noel's Trolls".

In other words, no one with a brain or a conscience would vote for this concessionary p.o.s.

TW

 

[Dashcaptain]

The vote is supposed to open on the first and close on the 21st, according to AP at the road show today.

 

[Lifter]

That dumbass sounds like Scott G. It has been proven scientifically that he is dumber than a box of rocks, and, if he and that FA wife of his ever reproduce, it will be a sad day for aviation, and a real shame. Probably the stupidest pilot ever to burn Jet-A, at least on-purpose.

Thankfully, there are only a few of his ilk left here.

I don't know personally of ANY Captains who are voting "yes" . . . . my numbers could be slanted, though, since I refuse to associate with the brain-dead, the scabs and, at the sake of sounding redundant, any of "Noel's Trolls".

In other words, no one with a brain or a conscience would vote for this concessionary p.o.s.

TW

TY Please, make sure when you reference someone's name that there isn't more than one person with the same first name and last initial on the senority list. Unless you are talking about me. If you are talking about me, please contact me directly and voice your concerns. I have the same signin name on BD's web site. But I haven't married a FA, H*ll, I haven't seen any here that are even worth sleeping with let alone reporducing with.
Thanks Scott G. hopefully not the one you are referencing.

 

[Ty Webb]

TY Please, make sure when you reference someone's name that there isn't more than one person with the same first name and last initial on the senority list.

Look at your knuckles. If they're not scraped up from dragging on the ground, you ain't him.