Alaska TA is out. Pay Rates.

[Ih8AFYesmen]

mamma,

I'm going to the road show. I've already had a long talk with our rep(s). From the bottom of my heart, I really appreciate their hard work and their personal sacrifice, but none of their explanations enlightened me. But yes, I will go to the road show so that when I vote "H*LL NO", atleast I wil know that I've done all that I can to convice myself otherwise.
Reality is this: the economy sucks, therefore the jobs are scarce. Do you think that there won't be more furloughs after this summer if the economy stays this way or gets worse? This TA gives the company more efficiency than what we have now in exchange for a slap in the face pay raise. You say we will be the second highest paid 73 pilots. Have you seen the Continental and Delta 73G payscales? We maybe the second highest paid 73 pilots for about 8 months and these carriers even haven't started negotiations yet.
As for B.T., can't you see the "good cop, bad cop" here? In any case, I'm willing to take the chance. This TA has the perfect ingredients for dividing this pilot group, through fear and greed. No thanks!

 

[Mamma]

mamma,

I'm going to the road show. I've already had a long talk with our rep(s). From the bottom of my heart, I really appreciate their hard work and their personal sacrifice, but none of their explanations enlightened me. But yes, I will go to the road show so that when I vote "H*LL NO", atleast I wil know that I've done all that I can to convice myself otherwise.
Reality is this: the economy sucks, therefore the jobs are scarce. Do you think that there won't be more furloughs after this summer if the economy stays this way or gets worse? This TA gives the company more efficiency than what we have now in exchange for a slap in the face pay raise. You say we will be the second highest paid 73 pilots. Have you seen the Continental and Delta 73G payscales? We maybe the second highest paid 73 pilots for about 8 months and these carriers even haven't started negotiations yet.
As for B.T., can't you see the "good cop, bad cop" here? In any case, I'm willing to take the chance. This TA has the perfect ingredients for dividing this pilot group, through fear and greed. No thanks!

Do you think we are going to get a TA that prevents furloughs? I hope Delta and CAL can get a larger payscale than us. We are first. They have nothing right now. If they can build on us then I am all for it. We will get a go next time around to build on what they get. I just don't see how voting no for is going to get something positive for you. I do not love this contract and its efficiencies for the company may end up with my furlough, but I honestly believe this is the best we could get right now.

 

[Ih8AFYesmen]

Do you think we are going to get a TA that prevents furloughs? I just don't see how voting no for is going to get something positive for you. quote]

To answer your question, IMO, the guys/gals who are at risk of being furloughed have a better shot staying employed under the current contract than the TA. I say this because of the scheduling section in the TA. Just look how efficient the company will be with this TA, with the ability to pick up 5 hours over the monthly max and limitless VSA. Don't think for a second that many of the greedy geezers won't sell out the young to fatten their pockets. Under the new contract, people will feel less guilty for flying extra or VSAing now that they have a new contract. Just look at what's going on now with people building their lines up to 85 hours in step trading. Very few have stuck with flying 75-78 hour lines. Do you think for a minute that people are going to drop down to 75 hours since we got the misley 11-16% pay raise. You watch, greed will take over and they will fly 85-90 hours; it's human nature. They will justify that it's okay since they now have to make up for the past losses. So, let's do the math. If 50 percent of our pilots (roughly 650 pilots) decide to fly 90 hours every month,that is 3,250 hours each month. Assuming an average line is worth 80 hours, that is 40 less pilots. Mind you, these are very conservative figures; this is not counting VSAers, vacation and training hour fallouts. I know this is very rough math, but you can't argue the fact that the company is gaining efficiency. You can also look at it as flexibility in scheduling, benfitting the pilots, but have you thought about this? If the company truly cared for this "flexibility", why did they not offer us the ability to drop down to say, 40 hours a month?
You ask, how will voting this TA down get us something better? It may or it may not happen. I can't say, but I believe we have a very good shot. You've mentioned the time value money. You are absolutely right... we probably won't see that time value money made up if we were to reject this TA, atleast not in the term of this contract. The way I see it, if we accept this TA, we are setting a very bad precedence for our future negotiations. Why? Because of the Retro Pay/signing bonus figure. We would have essentially given up our leverage with the company because we already showed them that we'll bend over once again. You think the last 2 years seemed long? Need I explain more on this subject of retro pay?
We are trading away so much for the misley pay and slap in the face signing bonus just for a short term gain. The writing is on the wall; open your eyes and see for yourself. Can you say STAGNATION for junior captains and FOs? So, you think that the mediator and the company will want us to be parked if we turn this TA down? Want and business are two different things. That's the million dollar question? Has the MEC said that this is what is definitely going to happen? If so, is it their opnion or something out of the NMB legal manual? Would it benefit the company to park us when they are looking at complete stability with all of the labor groups? Will it not benefit them more than us to settle quickly? If you think for one minute that B.T. and B.A. care for your well being and that is why they came to the table willing to settle, think again. I don't know how much airline experience you have. For me, this is my first airline after leaving active duty. I had a hard time swallowing the pill that ALPA fed me. I couldn't believe the animosity between ALPA and the company. Over the years, I've witnessed the brutality of this company. Trust me, they don't give a ratt's a$$ about you and me. They will bend you over and take what they can in a nano second. It's all about $$$ in their pocket. Though I have some hope in B.T., I would approach that subject with extreme caution and a 10 foot pole.
I love our MEC and I appreciate all they've done. In the end, it's business and professionalism that matters. One fatal mistake was to approach the company with a low payscale. If you don't believe me, ask them yourself. It's a done deal and water under the bridge, but we still have the chance to make it right. Just because we vote this TA down doesn't mean that we are "dissing" the NC/MEC. It just means, go back to the table and fix it. If anyone has to use fear and sugar coat to sell this TA, we owe it to ourselves and to our furloughed brothers and sisters to ask WHY. It's not who wins or who loses; it's about doing the RIGHT THING, no matter how difficult and narrow the road may be.
I'm tired of typing. I don't think I have ever typed so much on flightinfo.com. General Lee would be proud. I think this will be my last post until the vote results are out. God be with us all.

 

[Going2Baja]

seriously, weren't you the guy calling BS a ******************************bag a few weeks ago before the ta was even out??? I guess now that you got what you want (back to lax) you are all hunky dory...that's pretty funny...

Mookie

Wow - Talk about left field. Yeah, I do think BS is a ....bag, but what does that have to do w/ what I think about the TA? I think a group of us got sold out the the MEC to save a few furloughes, ok - I get it and I did my month in SEA @ my own expense. I'm back and stoked - So what?

The MEC went to bat for us and got the April effective bid upheld, and that wasn't easy. CM screwed her job so royally that all of us were going to ahve to wait an iddition month for the move, but the contract was enforced. Good.

As for the TA - for the last time....I'll wait for the road show and hear how the MEC is going to explaine most of the topics brought up by us.

I'm leaning "yes" for the above reasons...but we'll see.

Baja.

 

[bubbers44]

Sad you guys have to lead the way to the new pay scales. We are having a problem dealing with airlines that are now dealing with rock bottom pay scales. Nobody is willing to go on strike any more... Hopefully sometime this will change.

 

[SRMairlines]

Do you think we are going to get a TA that prevents furloughs? I just don't see how voting no for is going to get something positive for you. quote]

Very few have stuck with flying 75-78 hour lines. Do you think for a minute that people are going to drop down to 75 hours since we got the misley 11-16% pay raise. You watch, greed will take over and they will fly 85-90 hours; it's human nature. They will justify that it's okay since they now have to make up for the past losses. So, let's do the math. If 50 percent of our pilots (roughly 650 pilots) decide to fly 90 hours every month,that is 3,250 hours each month. Assuming an average line is worth 80 hours, that is 40 less pilots.

At the volunteer roadshow yesterday, the MEC/NC was very quick to address these so-called gains in productivity(trade to 90, VSA, etc...). As a result of our TA the staffing model remains the same as addressed in the Vacancies section of the contract. Also, circadian low, 1 extra reserve day, the implementation schedule, and bonus work rules all impede the companies ability to staff based on any gains in productivity you see. Any reduction in pilots will come from a reduction in overall flying (like last fall/win) that is more than the normal seasonal adjustments. The union touched heavily on this and will probably do the same at tomorrows roadshow.

They also touched on the Furlough grievance. None of the ALPA attorney's thought it could be one, except for the posting of length of furlough. The award would have been small... such as (the company shall immedeately post the length of furlough after the settlement) Personally I would have been the hard headed one to say F@#$ You and take it to the end. The union believes that NO LANGUAGE in section 23 would have been improved at all if that happened. Section 23 per line has the most clarifications (not necessarily improvements) of all the sections. I still believe the furloughees should have had more of a say in the matter though.

 

[Fubijaakr]

And lets not forget the Company wants a SEA ETOPs base. That alone will significantly cut into staffing.

I know the furloughed guys are bent. I also EVERYONE is concerned with career stagnation. But to give in to fear that more will be furloughed is just plain wrong, IMHO.

Again, just MHO, but I think that once this contract is approved, the 60 "hostages" will be returned to the property. If we reject the TA, they'll just continue to hold them for ransom.

 

[SRMairlines]

There is an LOA as part of the TA that addresses the SEA ETOPS base. All this LOA says is that ALPA is open to talk about it. This was drafted out of the fear this would change staffing. The TA does not allow a SEA ETOPS base without ALPA approval still.

 

[Fubijaakr]

If you know the history of "base within a base" this is a SIGNIFICANT issue. This LOA is a groundbreaker.

 

[QCappy]

And lets not forget the Company wants a SEA ETOPs base. That alone will significantly cut into staffing.

Why would that cut into staffing? Any new base requires more reserves. Even a special qualification base. All it does is give the company less flexibility with their reserve coverage, if written properly.

The issue would be; do the ETOPS resreves only cover Hawaii flying or would they cover other flying as well. There are real consequences depending on how the language would read.