ALASKA PILOTS - Please read!

av8instyle

Above Average Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2002
Posts
427
Total Time
7000
Folks,
Before you vote for this realize that the temporary money fix may be the final salvo at securing your right seat for a LOOONG time.
Points to ponder:
1-VSA and 85 hr lines are lower right now due to no contract and furloughs. You think the fence sitters will keep this position when the ink is on the paper? I'd agrue no way in he!!
2- Reserves are over 5% above the contract required 10% staffing due to insecurity in the schedule. Do you think we'll need these extra reserves when the senior dudes start doing bullet #1?
3- Remember how Prater cornholed us with age 65? Well, what would you do if you were 60 and the new contract said you could freeze your retirement at 100% right now and collect an extra 13.5% into your 401k until 65? I'd have a hard time leaving that. This TA plus the stock market crash will assure everyone over 60 that's able to get a medical will stay till 65. Additionally...if you are 61 your raise will be 11%, 1.5%, 1.5%, 1.8%, retire. If you are an FO after 1.8 you will see ZERO, ZERO, still an FO, still an FO....etc, etc..
4- Using myself as an example, before the reductions started I was 120 numbers from the left seat. I am now about 300 from junior captain. When we start our normal retirement cycle again we will be losing an average of 50/year. So doing the math that is about 4-5 years until the retirements start again and about 6 years of retirements till I get a seat. That's about 10 more years...I've been here 8 already. For those that will argue growth...there are exactly the same # of pilots here now as there were when I was hired...and there were none on furlough.

To sum it up...if you vote yes you will effectively assure several more years of FO pay. Age 60+ers have incentive to stay, dudes will pluss up their lines, VSAers will have a field day with minute one at 150%, and the company will have a stable schedule with no need to staff greater than 10% reserves.

If you are a decent line holding captain it would be tough not to vote for it. If you are anyone else you need to take a hard look at what this temporary pay fix will do to your CAREER.
My opinion only: we'd be much better off career wise to roll the dice at being parked for a year than we would being parked in the right seat for an extra half decade.
I'm voting right now. Guess what it will be.
 

Mamma

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 29, 2005
Posts
2,802
Total Time
+1
Can't argue your points. I am about 50 or so from the bottom so I see myself pounding pavement this fall. This seems to be a very lopsided deal that really hoses the bottom 25% pilots and those that would be nearing upgrade. I have no idea why the company would make it easier for the age 60 crowd to stay around. The most expensive and least productive bunch. I have not flown with a single captain who intends to vote no.
 

Ih8AFYesmen

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Posts
227
Total Time
.02
I have not flown with a single captain who intends to vote no.
One word.... GREED! Fortunately, though they are few and far in between, there are some senior guys out there who will do the right thing by voting "NO". Voting "yes" on this TA may sooth the small sore but it will turn into a turmorous cancer in the long run.

Those who think that the scheduling efficiency will have no effect on future furloughs and growth stagnation should really consider taking their heads out of the sand. Furthermore, by accepting this misley signing bonus, we are essentially giving the company a nod to go ahead and negotiate in bad faith during future negotiations.
 

tico

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 27, 2005
Posts
392
Total Time
4
So here is a thought: Lets say this thing goes down like a spenard hooker......Lots of uproar and we get parked..........Not that it matters but the false economy is in the crapper.....Lots of hand wringing and teeth nashing and we end up with a clean slate.....Time to talk to the vultures on the east side of Seattle/Tacoma highway.....New group and a new day....We approach with the simple concept. Co-operation.....We will put our money where our mouth is if they will do the same. SCOPE....If our brand is most important...ie Altitude sans Attitude then lets sews up this idea and all agree...The Alaska Air Group, Alaska Airlines and Horizon Airlines that we will never, ever, ever, ever have a passenger flown by a pilot that is not on the Horizon Air/Alaska Air seniority system.....They-Horizon kick ass with the best 76 seat turbo-prop ever and we Alaska do the same with the best 111-172 seat comnmon type jet ever......Keep it all in house.....make a commitment to each and every one of us from lavs to finance and from travel to training that if we all throw a shoulder in to this lever we can go out and topple some big rocks...together......For our part...operations types at both airlines we agree to status quo for four more years....No raises, no changes to reserve, to retirement etc......For there part they agree to an iron-clad scope clause and they agree that in four years when we all sit down and talk that there will be penalties(retro that cuts both ways) for poor faith negotiations....We clear the air and refinance the trust bank....They were $hit heads and so were we......What do ya think....can we do it.......we could catch up to SWA in terms of operational performance and using the tortoise and hare approach we can catch up in pay and bebefits as well.....I voted no and hope that this will happen.....We could save the ship together or we can sink it...............Hopefully, Integrity, Honesty and Morality show up to vote and send this whole concept to the bottom.........tick tock
 

Wally

Active member
Joined
Dec 15, 2002
Posts
35
Total Time
6500
If you don't think like me, you're wrong

Good arguments and then this garbage:

Ih8AFYesmen said:
do the right thing by voting "NO"
...Not that it matters but the false economy is in the crapper... ...Hopefully, Integrity, Honesty and Morality show up to vote and send this whole concept to the bottom...
You present false choices.

Each individual gets one vote. Because their vote may differ from yours doesn't make them wrong or dishonest and immoral. If you're trying to win someone's vote over, I'd suggest keeping your points limited to the TA and how it will affect us and drop the silly name calling.

Regards
 

ImbracableCrunk

Unregistered Un-User
Joined
Feb 5, 2003
Posts
1,481
Total Time
6AM
Good arguments and then this garbage:





You present false choices.

Each individual gets one vote. Because their vote may differ from yours doesn't make them wrong or dishonest and immoral. If you're trying to win someone's vote over, I'd suggest keeping your points limited to the TA and how it will affect us and drop the silly name calling.

Regards
Wally, are you saying that there are no moral implications to one's vote?
 

aircowboy

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 8, 2005
Posts
158
Total Time
8000
Junior guys the industry over would be smart to vote in a block. Just think if all of us jump up and grab that ladder and hang on...the old guys will never be able to lift our weight :)
 

AKMD80GUY

Angle Lakes Bitch
Joined
May 3, 2005
Posts
200
Total Time
10,000
Voted no yesterday. For the record I'm an 8 year FO, descent seniority in base and haven't been on reserve in years. I just can't see voting for a contract that effectively screws me and guys junior to me so senior line holding Captains can get a few more years in and a few extra dollars for retirement. But there is more than just that. In fact that is the least of my worries. Ayer has said all along that he wouldn't give retro pay and that this would be cost neutral and he got both. Why would any self respecting professional pilot vote for this. A lousy pay increase and 1.7% average step for a few years? That will all be gone with the increases in health insurance. This is not a good deal. The company is not looking out for us and are not giving us more money in a bad economy to be nice. We are going to get screwed and any pilot that doesn't think so is fooling themselves.

Alpa wants this to start the ball rolling so we can get back to pattern bargaining and get the pilots that get the big money raises so Alpa can get their dues back up. Well last time I checked I pay dues to Alpa to work for me, not the other way around. This is about more than just business. This is a chance for a group of pilots that have had such low self respect for them selves that we were happy being treated like number six so our company could make money year after year and tell us that we are number one. I'm F'n sick of this.

I am perfectly willing to sit for a year or so at Kasher wages than to slowly start cutting my own throat for the remainder of my career. Where does it end? I know I don't have to tell the junior guys that this is not good but if there was ever a time to convince the select few that will benefit from this this is it.

Read this TA for what it is. It is a concessionary contract for the better part of the pilot group. It is a chance for us to voluntarily cut our own throats one contract at a time.

For Gods sake people, take your skirt off and show that we have a pair. It's time to act like a union!
 
Last edited:

Ocity

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Posts
468
Total Time
11,000
voted no. I'm not going to support the never-ending degradation of my career. This contract gains ZERO traction in the right direction. It's another paycut. Sorry. It's going to pass, but not with me onboard.
 

Ih8AFYesmen

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Posts
227
Total Time
.02
Good arguments and then this garbage:





You present false choices.

Each individual gets one vote. Because their vote may differ from yours doesn't make them wrong or dishonest and immoral. If you're trying to win someone's vote over, I'd suggest keeping your points limited to the TA and how it will affect us and drop the silly name calling.

Regards
Point well taken, however I'm not trying to win anyone over. Everyone knows what is right and wrong here. Some just like to lie to themselves to feel better. Just read the TA and if you can't figure it out on your own, then no one can help you. It is clearly a good deal for solid line holding captains and bad for the rest of us. Do the math... it's a cost neutral contract for the company, but that is not what matters to me. If it's cost neutral and good for the MAJORITY, then great! But, it ain't. We need to bury the fear of xxxxx (fill in the blank) and stand up for once. We are about to put Cortizone on a cancerous tumor.
 

Ih8AFYesmen

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 24, 2003
Posts
227
Total Time
.02
What's the use anyway. TA will probably pass. Not too many want to travel the narrow path. Isn't this why we are where we are today - our profession, our economy, our society to just mention a few.
Here's to one more "H*ll NO"!
 
Top