CMRoutlaw,
What do you mean I don't seem to realize that? What you are really saying is that I must not realize that because I disagree with you.
I have already stated that, in my opinion, the unity of the Comair pilots is our greatest asset in this and in all other decisions that we face together. It is also my opinion, based on your posts, that you do not share that view.
No, it isn’t because you disagree with me.
It is because you support your position with words that clearly indicate to me that you would like to accept this proposal at face value because you perceive that it will be beneficial to your segment of the pilot population. Yes, I think that is divisive.
From my perspective any changes to our CBA that “we” accept should not focus on benefits to any one segment of our group.
Either it benefits all of us (at least some of the time) or it benefits none of us (most of the time). The cost/benefit equation is NOT measured exclusively by the hit to my pay rate or by the opportunity for you to upgrade and get off reserve. In my view, both are inaccurate yardsticks.
I'm not saying we should say yes because it would help me more than others...
OK, if that is not what you’re saying then why mention the upgrade or the reserve status? As long as we exist as a pilot group there will always be people on reserve and people waiting for upgrades. What will you say when the 400 new hires that might result from this proposal begin to demand that you should give up your pay so that they can upgrade or get off reserve?
Will we make another concession at that point? Will you support it for that reason?
I think we should say yes because I truly believe it is in the best interest for all of us 5 to 10 years from now.
OK, so you truly believe that. I accept your opinion but not your premise. I do not think that your opinion is based on the facts available to you because there are no facts. It is all conjecture at this point.
What exactly would we be saying “yes” to? You don’t even know the details of the proposal yet you are apparently willing to give up our contract for a
promise,
made by a man that doesn’t have the power to keep it? Come on man, think!
I did not say that we should say no, and I did not say that we should say yes. If you bothered to really read what I said, instead of just jumping on your reserve/upgrade bandwagon you might have noticed that all I did was point out some flaws in the now infamous “proposal”, some holes in the concepts, and ask some questions for us to think about. I also suggested that this “proposal” was just that, a proposal and nothing more; not a mandate, not a take-it- or-leave it gauntlet.
If it is a gauntlet, then it is more than a proposal, it is actually a proposed threat. If it is a genuine “proposal”, then it is subject to modification and there is nothing preventing us from analyzing it, in depth, and making a counter proposal that is better for all of us.
Why, please tell me, do we need to panic and just accept whatever Buttrell “proposes” as though it were the saving grace from God himself? Even he did not ask us to do that in his memo. Why are you asking us to do that via an instant “yes”?
Tell me what that will get all of us, as opposed to what you’ve already told me it will get you. I’m more than willing to listen to whatever you have to say, but all I’ve heard so far is that you (and a relatively few others) will get off reserve or upgrade and that the rest of us will be doomed if we do not accept this proposal at face value. I do not understand how you expect me to agree with that thinking and I can’t. Sorry, but there is more to negotiations than that, much more.
Blindly accepting a concessionary proposal that no one understands completely does not equal “growth”. But, it does have the potential of equaling suicide (in the extreme) and stupidity in the norm; possibly both.
How can we just say “yes” to something that we do not understand completely, the details of which were deliberately vague, the outcome of which is in no way guaranteed and that has no clearly defined end? That’s ludicrous. That’s what you are willing to risk dividing this pilot group over? Sorry, but that makes no sense to me.
What you and others don't seem to get is that the consequences of saying no could be FAR GREATER for the FO's and junior people at this company. If this company continues to stagnate or shrink, we are the ones who will be affected the most while the senior pilots will barely be scathed. So you can't say this is all equally about us when you are happy with the status quo while others are not. Some of us can't help but wonder if a lot of senior folks are really motivated at protecting their wallets while nicely dressing up their arguement all in the name of "protecting the profession". You see I think that's just as short sighted as some senior FO just wanting an upgrade and I will fight with equal passion against it.
With all due respect, there you go again. YOU have decided that “the senior pilots will barely be scathed”, that “a lot of senior folks are really motivated at protecting their wallets” and that “the consequences of saying no would be far greater for the FO’s and junior people at this company”. In your mind “we” should therefore rush to say “yes”, (to something that none of us clearly understand) so that the category to which you just happen to belong will reap the rewards that you imagine will flow. If that is not divisive, pray tell what is.
In fact, you have no idea what will really happen if we say “yes” or if we say “no”, and neither do I. That is why I suggested that we should all take a deep breath, look carefully at this “proposal”,
consider alternatives, and talk about it with the Company. What’s wrong with that?
Speaking only for myself, I could never agree to give up the contract that I know we have in hand, in exchange for a blind-sided proposal that I and no one else fully understands. Your knee-jerk “yes” to pie-in-the-sky is just that, i.e., the equivalent of a “final answer” to a question that you don’t even understand.
Maybe the concept is old fashioned but it is still true that “a bird in hand is worth two in the bush.”
I'm not saying the RFP decision was the wrong decision...I was not happy with the way it was handled by our MEC.
By the same token, I did not say that taking this proposal would be the wrong decision.
I did say that I didn’t like the way it was handled by our management. There was no need for an end run bypassing our MEC and direct negotiations with individual pilots. We have chosen leaders to represent our collective interests and they must be dealth with not bypassed to deal under the table with you or with me. That is bargaining in bad faith and I do not see it as confidence inspiring with respect to this new manager. Actually, I see it as dirty pool.
If you do not really believe that the RFP decision was the wrong decision, then all your rhetoric about how the MEC arrived at the choice is moot and irrelevant.
In many of my posts in this thread I have made it clear that if the pilots are not satisfied with the MEC, we should replace its Officers. I’m not “happy” with everything the MEC does either. However, I do not believe that the RFP decision was wrong nor do I believe that the MEC went about it in the wrong way. What I do believe is that your objections to the MEC (over the RFP) are for the wrong reasons.
While I might be able to think of many reasons for a change in MEC leadership which I will not discuss in a public forum, and might support the same, the RFP decision or how it was done is not one of them. That was the right reaction to a bogus offer from a bogus management and it needed to be rejected, just as it was.
Times have changed and we must change with them. However, we must not overlook reality in doing so.
The current “proposal” does NOT come from a more credible source. In fact it comes from the same source, with just a name change.
There is no logical reason to believe that Buttrell has suddenly fallen in love with the Comair pilots merely because he was demoted to the presidency of Comair. This is the same Buttrell than only a few weeks ago was the architect of the end to Comair’s growth. Why do you want to accept him as the instant Messiah?
Do the savings that Buttrell anticipates from his “proposal” suddenly equal the growth that he promises? Will the concessions that he asks pay for the growth that he promises, or is this just another example of voodoo economics? What is the real impact of these concessions on Delta’s bottom line? If you know the answer please tell us all for I certainly do not, and I would like to learn. If you do not know then what is your justification for an immediate “YES” without due diligence?
This is not about your ego and it is not about mine. The ramifications, regardless of whether we say yes or no, are likely to be far reaching and they will affect all Comair pilots. Therefore, I argue that we need careful analysis of these Buttrell concepts before we take any definitive position. That is what continued unity will produce.
I’m not asking you or anyone else to say no, and I’m not asking you to say yes.
I AM advocating that WE remain united in a decision to carefully review everything that this proposal says and especially all the things that it does NOT say, before we even begin the debate of pro vs. con. That is what I have asked but apparently you and several others find that unacceptable to your preconceived “yes syndrome”. Why? Oh yes, I remember now, you’ll get off reserve and upgrade. Please, I hope you’re not serious.
