Alaska pilots - please think twice before you vote!

[Ih8AFYesmen]

I agree with mach. All I hear from the naysayers here and on the ALPA webboard is based on fear. And that fear is based on future imponderables.

Read the TA (not the summary and for pity's sake NOT the ALPA webboard), compare the differences with our current contract and make a decision based on how the changes will effect YOU.

In my case, the positives outweigh the negatives. I'm voting YES.

You took the words right out of my mouth regarding fear, except it's the folks who are favoring this TA who fall on the word, "fear" - fear of the bad economy, fear that the mediator will park us, fear that we won't get another TA for years, etc. If you are so fealess, why don't you take a chance and send it back?

I've read the TA twice, cover to cover. I read everything possible concerning this TA, including any web boards. I've heard what our negotiators had to say. I think we are all intelligent enough to make up our own minds and I doubt that the web boards have any effect on how we are going to vote. One important question to ask is, is this TA good for MAJORITY of this pilot group? My answer is, H*LL NO! Let's be honest, this TA heavily favors the 55+ group and captain line holders not in jeopardy of losing any ground. We, as a group, would be selling ourselves very short for some misley short term gains, IMO.

 

[Britpilot]

Of all the rotten, no good, low down, mean spirited, ignorant things to say in front of God and everyone! ALPA would never.....repeat, NEVER.....allow the outsourcing of your job or allow an airline management to degrade this proud profession of its traditionally good pay and QOL. You take that back, you scoundrel!

Yawn...:nuts::nuts::nuts:

 

[Fubijaakr]

One important question to ask is, is this TA good for MAJORITY of this pilot group? My answer is, H*LL NO! Let's be honest, this TA heavily favors the 55+ group and captain line holders not in jeopardy of losing any ground. We, as a group, would be selling ourselves very short for some misley short term gains, IMO.

I respectfully disagree. The work rule changes in this contract are good for all line holders, not just senior pilots. And line holders make up the majority of the pilot group.

Here are but a few of the improvements that benefit EVERYONE:

1. Instant trip trading. Gets Crew Skeds out of the mix.
2. Training bidding.
3. The ability to split/combine trips in trip trading.
4. Elimination of the bank program.
5. MOU for SEA ETOPs base. This will actually require MORE pilots.
6. Retirement program choices. Some guys prefer a 401k retirement option.
7. Increased sick bank cap.
8. Ability to sell vacation days.
9. Ability to pick up trips during trip displacement.
10. Designated premium pay trips.
11. Horrors! VSA pay for all VSA flying not just that over monthly max. Disclaimer: VSA is NOT popular among junior reserve Capts/senior F/Os who see this program as delaying their progression. However, there are plenty of junior F/Os (as well as Capts) who avail themselves of this program to increase their income in complete compliance with the contract.

All of these are good for line holders.

Reserves? Choice of 11 hour or 2 hour callout with pay incentives for "short call".

In fact, you may even see senior pilots choosing 11 hour reserve, especially during holiday months.

So that's just the first DOZEN improvements that come to mind. Improvements for ALL line holders, not just senior Captains.

I guess if your agenda is just to upgrade or get off reserve quickly, you're probably not thrilled with this TA. However, in the long run YOU will spend MORE time as a line holder than in any other status. YOU will benefit from these changes.

However, you have to be able to think and project in a slightly longer time frame than the next 6 months.

 

[mach none]

If there is a furlough, it will be a result of a reduction in flying. Its the economy stupid. The TA will not cause this company to furlough.

I will predict it passes by 75% or more.

 

[Ih8AFYesmen]

If there is a furlough, it will be a result of a reduction in flying. Its the economy stupid. The TA will not cause this company to furlough.

I will predict it passes by 75% or more.

It ain't all about the economy, dumba$$! You guys can defend all you want the new premium pay VSA and the ability to pickup up to 5 hours above the monthly max, but it comes down to GREED, period! This would only be a good deal when there are no furloughed pilots and the company properly staffed. If 50% of the pilots picked up 5 hours above the monthly max, the company would need approximately 40 less pilots. Justify this "flexibility" anyway you want, but it is what it is..... STAGNATION for us junior folks. The company will furlough anyways this Fall if the demand for travel dips below their projections, but with this TA, the number of furloughs will be higher.

I agree with you on one thing. This TA will probably pass because we have a bunch of selfish sheep and whole lot of broke FOs. I hope I'm wrong.

 

[Fubijaakr]

Greed? How about the greed of the whole anti-VSA crowd. The ONLY reason YOU'RE opposed to it is YOU think its impeding YOUR upgrade.

News flash, sport. The Company only uses VSA for 2-3% of the total flying schedule. That's not enough for any upgrades.

So, who is the greedy one? You'll change your tune when you're senior. Remember, it was the PILOTS who introduced VSA to the contract. It was sold as the "Senior Pilot's Pay Raise" during a concessionary contract cycle.

 

[igneousy2]

Greed? How about the greed of the whole anti-VSA crowd. The ONLY reason YOU'RE opposed to it is YOU think its impeding YOUR upgrade.

News flash, sport. The Company only uses VSA for 2-3% of the total flying schedule. That's not enough for any upgrades.

So, who is the greedy one? You'll change your tune when you're senior. Remember, it was the PILOTS who introduced VSA to the contract. It was sold as the "Senior Pilot's Pay Raise" during a concessionary contract cycle.

I had no problem with VSA prior to January 1. Every hour that you pick up on VSA is just a little bit longer that our pilots are going to stay on the street. Justify it in your mind however you want...pick up all the VSA you want...however, just know that you ARE being selfish, you are keeping unemployed pilots from working...and charma is a BITCH!

The company only uses VSA to cover 2-3% of the flying...don't you see that with a pilot group of 1500 pilots 2-3% is 30-45 pilot positions! Would you rather have 80 pilots furloughed (now) or 35-50 pilots furloughed which is where we would be according to YOUR numbers.

Additionally, the point we are trying to make is that it is 'only' 2-3% NOW...but when you make VSA BETTER...it will only INCREASE.

Once everybody comes back from the street...knock yourself out. Until then do your 75 hours and go home.

Unfortunately, I think this vote is going to come straight down seniority lines. If we pass this it will...

1. increase VSA thereby exacerbating the furloughes. Furloughs will be longer and deeper because of this "improved" VSA.

2. Everything will stagnate as the 55+ guys hang out longer trying to get there high-5 up eating up all the VSA they can squeeze into their 20 day off lines. All of the 59-60 year olds will be encouraged to stay beyond 60.

3. The pilot group will forever be divided between the haves and have-nots. The 55+ guys will be long gone by the time this will matter...the junior pilots will be dealing with the repercussions for the rest of our careers - by voting for this TA we will be guranteeing that we will be subject to a freeze prior to us retiring severely reduincg the potential value of our pensions. Don't think this "choice" will be the status quo for the rest of our career. It will come up over and over at every contract for the rest of our careers until 51% don't give a damn about the A-plan...just about the time switching to a DC plan would be a BAD idea for the more junior of us.

I think we are very close to a deal. A little bit of tweaking would make this a pallatable interim contract. Prohibiting VSA during furloughs and allowing new hires the same choices the incumbants have would be a giant step toward me voting yes.

Right now we are better off in the long run with the status-quo.

The pre-kasher 900 wages are about to start falling off the high-5 of the most senior guys making it less and less desirable to hang out. Because of the new ERISA rules, every year the 50% lump-sum is getting smaller and smaller. These are the reasons the senior folks feel under the gun to get a deal done NOW.

Unfortunately, if you are within 10 years of retirement you are better off taking the TA.

If you have anything more than 10 years left we are far better off staying with the status-quo until the "external factors" that everybody keeps speaking about turn more favorable.

I am off the fence and I am a solid NO.

 

[Mamma]

The pre-kasher 900 wages are about to start falling off the high-5 of the most senior guys making it less and less desirable to hang out. Because of the new ERISA rules, every year the 50% lump-sum is getting smaller and smaller. These are the reasons the senior folks feel under the gun to get a deal done NOW.

As I read it, the TA allows the geezers to freeze their A plan and go with the 13.5%. They would reap all the benefits from the A plan and still stuff the 13.5% into their coffers for 5 years. No incentive to leave at all.

 

[Ocity]

Greed? How about the greed of the whole anti-VSA crowd. The ONLY reason YOU'RE opposed to it is YOU think its impeding YOUR upgrade.

Flying VSA when there are pilots are furlough is the ultimate "greed indicator". Have you ever been furloughed? I'm guessing no.

Nobody is upgrading in the next few years anyway therefore I don't think the VSA objections are personal greed. Quite the opposite, it's about reigning in those who rationalize holding the head of their fellow pilots under water to cover 2-3% more flying.

To Each his own.

 

[QCappy]

With this new contract every line holder can give themselves an extra payraise. Drop your line to 75, then volunteer for VSA. Instant 15 hours of 150% pay! What a deal!

Of course, I can't do that I'm on reserve in paradise, I mean Anchorage. Did I say paradise? Must be cabin fever getting to me.:nuts:

 

[Old School 737]

Did anybody hear that CiCi went to Virgin?

 

[Baze]

Yup, it's true.

Did anybody hear that CiCi went to Virgin?

 

[Old School 737]

Guess she thinks that Alaska and the lawsuits/inquiries won't be pulling the plug on them. Wow! How long did she work for Alaska?

 

[Baze]

Guess she thinks that Alaska and the lawsuits/inquiries won't be pulling the plug on them. Wow! How long did she work for Alaska?

She was with ALK for 24 years.

 

[Pilotbob3]

we could "what if" ourselves to death. I am still voting yes.

Dont you know you ALWAYS vote NO on the first TA?!!!! sheesh,

 

[Fubijaakr]

Actually, I agree with you all about VSA while there are furloughs. Personally, I think we should negotiate a sideletter that suspends ALL VSA when there are pilots furloughed.

My point was only valid for normal operations during non-negotiating periods with NO pilots on furlough.

Sorry if that wasn't clear.

 

[Ih8AFYesmen]

Greed? How about the greed of the whole anti-VSA crowd. The ONLY reason YOU'RE opposed to it is YOU think its impeding YOUR upgrade.

News flash, sport. The Company only uses VSA for 2-3% of the total flying schedule. That's not enough for any upgrades.

So, who is the greedy one? You'll change your tune when you're senior. Remember, it was the PILOTS who introduced VSA to the contract. It was sold as the "Senior Pilot's Pay Raise" during a concessionary contract cycle.

If YOU can honestly tell yourself that this TA is good for the majority, then you have done all you can. Just by your quote, "you'll change your tune when you're senior" just voided your credibility. So are you saying that since you are senior, this TA is good for you and the rest of the senior pilots? FYI, I am senior enough that if this TURD passes, it won't effect me too much. Heck, it's even a pay raise.
What I'm saying is this. This TA clearly sells out the young and divides the pilot group. This profession has been like this ever since I can remember and this viscious cycle has to stop, and the time is now. I am not trying to sound righteous. I, too, REALLY need any sort of a pay raise desparately, but not at the expense of our future and our young. We have a chance to make a stand and to me, it's worth the risk. Let's not lose sight of the big picture.

 

[Fubijaakr]

Sorry, but YOU'RE the guys dividing the pilot group by using terms like "sell out". No one is getting sold out. Provide an example, please?

New hires? No A plan? I can make the argument that a B plan retirement program actually keeps the money in the hands of the pilot. UAL and USAir pilots KNOW how trusting the Company with your pension goes.

Upgraders? Every single pilot's upgrade potential is determined by the economic circumstances and expansion timing of the airline he works for. We have people at Alaska who, because of when they hired on, made Captain in 18 months. But that was during an expansion cycle. Likewise, Pan Am and TWA pilots in the '70s could expect a decade on the panel of a 727, 8 years as an F/O and a couple years as a Captain.

No, my friend, the contract isn't limiting upgrades, the economy is. Remeber the campaign slogan, "Its the economy, Stupid." That's where we are. Upgrades stagnate when airlines don't expand. Period.

Line holders? See above post for a dozen reasons why they're not getting hurt.

Reserves? Reserve always has and always will suck. However, its a LOT better now than when I was an F/O on reserve.

So, you let me know who is getting sold out. I don't see it.

 

[PCL_128]

If YOU can honestly tell yourself that this TA is good for the majority, then you have done all you can. Just by your quote, "you'll change your tune when you're senior" just voided your credibility. So are you saying that since you are senior, this TA is good for you and the rest of the senior pilots? FYI, I am senior enough that if this TURD passes, it won't effect me too much. Heck, it's even a pay raise.
What I'm saying is this. This TA clearly sells out the young and divides the pilot group. This profession has been like this ever since I can remember and this viscious cycle has to stop, and the time is now. I am not trying to sound righteous. I, too, REALLY need any sort of a pay raise desparately, but not at the expense of our future and our young. We have a chance to make a stand and to me, it's worth the risk. Let's not lose sight of the big picture.

Don't you have three FO status reps on your MEC? I seriously doubt that three FOs are all "senior," so how exactly have the senior pilots sold out the junior? It was a unanimous vote to recommend the TA for ratification. Sorry, but I've never bought the whole senior vs junior conspiracy theory. Your MEC recommended this TA because they think it's a great deal for the entire group, and they think it's the best you're getting to get. They aren't trying to "sell out" anyone.

 

[Ih8AFYesmen]

Don't you have three FO status reps on your MEC? I seriously doubt that three FOs are all "senior," so how exactly have the senior pilots sold out the junior? It was a unanimous vote to recommend the TA for ratification. Sorry, but I've never bought the whole senior vs junior conspiracy theory. Your MEC recommended this TA because they think it's a great deal for the entire group, and they think it's the best you're getting to get. They aren't trying to "sell out" anyone.

Do you fly for Alaska Airlines? Did you read the 292 page TA? You don't believe in the senior vs. junior conspiracy theory? Just look at the major vs. regional debacle, or the age 65 bull $hit. If ALPA or the senior guys really cared for the junior guys, do you think that we would have such a huge disparity between the regional world and the majors? Fubi just showed his true colors by saying, "you'll change your tune when you're senior". Now, what exactly did he mean by that? Hmmmmmm.
I totally believe that our MEC thinks that it's a great deal for the entire pilot; no doubt. I never said that our MEC/NC sold us out by presenting this TA. What I'm saying is that, IMO, there are things that need to be tweaked and it's no disgrace for the NC to go back to the table. The company and the NC satisfied the mediator by agreeing on a TA. Membership ratification is whole different process. I can't see how the mediator would punish us if we as a group voted this down. The mediator's job isn't to ratify a TA, but to work with both sides to agree on a TA; he did that already. So, to say that the mediator will park us if we don't ratify this TA doesn't make sense.