Our own pilots have shown a willingness to violate the contract if it served their own interest. Is that ALPA's fault too?
No, it isn't. Our own pilots were happy to ride the coattails of Delta, United, and Northwest for years. Under an "industry average" system, no one ever gets a raise, and most pilots realized that. But Alaska pilots were happy to not only accept "industry average", but actually only 92% of average. For years. "It's OK, pay me less because I live in Gig Harbor."
So you have a bunch of pilots who have never had to face the possibility of a strike and make the tough decisions asked to stand up and demand a decent contract? Not this group. They did exactly what Kevin Finan said they would: "horse trading" of work rules for meager raises. Those not yet on the property get a retirement plan that is less than United got under bankruptcy. Think about that for a minute.
I was warned not to come here by and old United pilot and now I finally get it. We are going to continue to lag behind inflation and that is just the way it is going to be.
This TA benefits the same people who were happy to live under binding arbitration for years. The same people who knew there was a chance that someday they might get a paycut like they did under Kasher. Now they get to lock in pre-Kasher pay for their pension calculations. For anyone under 50 or so, the option 3 retirement option is a joke. Everyone over 55 will take it.
For the rest of us, the only hope we have to get future raises is that the company is forced to. I used to think that meant a strike, but that will never happen at Alaska. A raise will only happen if no one wants to work here because the pay is so lousy. But even then, they will try to up pay for new hires and FO's, but won't care about captains at that point, which is what I will be by then. Don't like your pay? Quit they will say.
By accepting this TA by 85% we have just told the company that they gave too much. They could have said new hires would get no pension and only 3% in their 401K's and it would have easily passed.
They are pissed that they gave what they did right now and will not forget that in the next round. They know we won't strike and that is all there is to it. "OOooh, you're going to threaten us with a strike vote? Are you sure about that?" A strike vote will have a hard time passing at Alaska even though it is blatently obvious to the average Joe that the vote is largely symbolic and meant to apply leverage.
In 2012 under this TA, our pay will still be below what it was in May of 2001. 85% voted to have their pay lower in 2012 (and 2013 and 2014 at least) than it was in 2001. You have just made it clear to the company that they gave too much. If I was them I would come out with a wage freeze next time and stall until the mediator threatened to release the union. That will waste about 2 years, then you throw a 5-4-3-2-1 % raise over five years at them and dare them to turn it down. By now the reps phones will be ringing off the hook with guys screaming at them to take it because the economy somewhere in the country is bad. Maybe then they can get 50% + 1, which is their goal.
I guess what happened to your own rampers, Midwest rampers, and then their pilots can't happen to you? Lack of a scope clause only helps Mgt and Chabrickury!
