Discussion on AirTran T.A. - STAY ON TOPIC

[Muppets]

Its just so sad watching our pilot group fold like a French prize fighter. Look beyond the compensation page people!

 

[CatfishVT9]

So you vote no. Then what? Yes I would have like to have seen better pay rates, but a no vote is cutting off your nose to spite your face. If the TA fails, we are done. No more negotiation, we are parked. Period. Bob ads millions to the company coffers and his bonus thanks to you.

We are screwed for the next 10 years if it passes and the SWA deal fails????? Come on, MAN!! (in Ditka voice) In 5 years, I'm up $45 per hour. Did you only look at the current year? Seems to me those out year rates improve our "career expectations" argument.

Our leverage was gone and the negotiators followed the direction of the pilot group, not the blowhards on the ALPA forum. I saw Sean the day they were headed to DC. He spoke with a group of about a dozen of us in the crew lounge and solicited input. Not one person said to fight to the end.

So go ahead and vote no if you think you gain something by that. I personally think that is a win for management and a stupid choice.

 

[justin15e]

Has anyone posted the gains from AT on this TA?

What are the new payrates?

Any new rigs?

Min days off?

International or night overrride?

Premium pay?

I haven't seen anyone post any details on any meat in the TA.

What gives?

 

[Ty Webb]

So you vote no. Then what? Yes I would have like to have seen better pay rates, but a no vote is cutting off your nose to spite your face. If the TA fails, we are done. No more negotiation, we are parked. Period. .

I don't believe this for a minute. We actually have more leverage now than ever before, the problem is that this pilot group in general, and its leadership in particular, is not willing to capitalize on it.

I'm not willing to "hold my nose and vote yes". This thing will pass, but I won't enable it.

 

[Lear70]

The pay rates are in the other T.A. thread but I'll re-post them here:

Section 4: Compensation

Captains

Years 12/1/10 12/1/11 12/1/12 12/1/13 12/1/14

1 $106.36 $107.47 $109.47 $127.68 $130.08
2 $122.86 $123.98 $126.30 $138.15 $140.75
3 $127.51 $128.64 $131.06 $141.20 $143.87
4 $130.09 $131.23 $133.69 $144.35 $147.07
5 $134.49 $135.64 $138.19 $147.55 $150.34
6 $136.33 $137.49 $140.08 $150.91 $153.77
7 $138.31 $139.49 $142.11 $154.37 $157.29
8 $149.01 $150.89 $153.74 $158.13 $161.12
9 $153.03 $154.21 $157.13 $162.17 $165.24
10 $155.06 $158.19 $161.18 $166.93 $170.10
11 $156.17 $161.32 $164.37 $170.63 $173.86
12 $161.72 $165.02 $168.16 $174.97 $178.29
13 $162.22 $166.91 $170.08 $177.46 $180.82
14 $162.72 $168.82 $172.03 $180.03 $183.45
15 $163.22 $170.77 $174.02 $182.68 $186.32

First Officers

Years 12/1/10 12/1/11 12/1/12 12/1/13 12/1/14

1 $42.75 $42.75 $43.13 $43.56 $44.00
2 $67.07 $70.07 $71.41 $77.67 $80.44
3 $76.29 $79.59 $81.09 $83.44 $85.01
4 $86.03 $86.59 $88.23 $90.90 $92.61
5 $91.01 $92.57 $94.32 $97.30 $99.15
6 $92.50 $95.21 $97.01 $101.38 $103.30
7 $93.22 $97.24 $99.08 $104.56 $106.54
8 $95.08 $99.19 $101.06 $107.15 $109.18
9 $96.55 $100.71 $102.61 $109.87 $111.95
10 $98.75 $102.97 $104.92 $113.15 $115.29
11 $99.50 $103.73 $105.69 $113.93 $116.08
12 $100.78 $105.03 $107.01 $115.28 $117.46


There were no improvement to trip or duty rigs like we were initially seeking.

We obtained better merger & acquisition language and bound the holding company, but at the cost of giving up more Scope.

Scheduling language is vastly improved, with good gains for the reserve pilots, however build-up lines went away and you can't drop reserve days so the pilots who now can bid long call have less control over their build-up schedule.

No international or night override that I've found yet.

It's basically current book with major changes in the Scheduling section and Section 1, small tweaks in other sections, better pay rates, and a small bonus check to hold us until the Southwest takeover, with some good jumps in years 3-5 in case the SWA deal doesn't go through.

 

[jonjuan]

So you vote no. Then what? Yes I would have like to have seen better pay rates, but a no vote is cutting off your nose to spite your face. If the TA fails, we are done. No more negotiation, we are parked. Period. Bob ads millions to the company coffers and his bonus thanks to you.

We are screwed for the next 10 years if it passes and the SWA deal fails????? Come on, MAN!! (in Ditka voice) In 5 years, I'm up $45 per hour. Did you only look at the current year? Seems to me those out year rates improve our "career expectations" argument.

Our leverage was gone and the negotiators followed the direction of the pilot group, not the blowhards on the ALPA forum. I saw Sean the day they were headed to DC. He spoke with a group of about a dozen of us in the crew lounge and solicited input. Not one person said to fight to the end.

So go ahead and vote no if you think you gain something by that. I personally think that is a win for management and a stupid choice.

Let me guess-you're a CA who upgraded in 3 years or soon looking to upgrade? How would you feel if upgrade went to 10+ years? Recent new hires may be looking at this (especially if the merger fails). 10 years at a major to finally get to $115/hour ain't awful liveable.

 

[XRMEFLYER]

It is a little bit ironic to hear an AT captain bitching about "subsidizing" the FOs pay raises out of their pockets when that is precisely what the FOs have done there for the last nine years. Kind of petty frankly.

Voting yes.

 

[RIDETHELIGHTING]

Xrmeflyer
You called that. I have been thinking the same thing.

 

[AFcitrus]

It is a little bit ironic to hear an AT captain bitching about "subsidizing" the FOs pay raises out of their pockets when that is precisely what the FOs have done there for the last nine years. Kind of petty frankly.

Voting yes.

And that is exactly why we captains voted "NO" to the abysmal TA2 - because of how it did not help (and quite frankly hurt) FO's and Reserves. We could have voted for TA2 and you, my friend, would be effed right now.

So please step down off your throne and realize that we are a team here. We want the company to subsidize all of us and if that doesn't happen then we should vote down the TA - just like we did for you three years ago.

 

[Kharma Police]

It is a little bit ironic to hear an AT captain bitching about "subsidizing" the FOs pay raises out of their pockets when that is precisely what the FOs have done there for the last nine years. Kind of petty frankly.

Voting yes.

Good old class warfare!, works every time!

I for one am happy the FOs get a raise. They deserve it, they have been woefully behind in pay for way too long.

 

[XRMEFLYER]

You are right it has been way too low for way too long. Snarky comments about "subsidizing" that gap being closed is petty plain and simple.

Yes the last TA was a bad deal for FOs and reserves and was rightly voted down. It is curious though how every captain I speak to claims to have made a no vote when 75-80% of them obviously did. Quick enlisted Army guy math but heres how I got there:
40% yes vote with nearly unanimous no vote from FOs = 80% yes vote from captains. Anyway, they voted for what was right for them at the time and I'm not mad at them for it. I take you at your word that you were one of the 20% or so who did vote against it and will simply say thank you.

Oh and Citrus, I will "get off of my throne" when I have finished giving birth to another shavetail zoomie lieutenant and these things can not be rushed!

 

[Ty Webb]

40% yes vote with nearly unanimous no vote from FOs = 80% yes vote from captains.

Give some of us skippers some credit. The FO's did not unanimously vote "No", far from it.

Hell, look at how many FO's voted for MH to be their Status Rep.:laugh:

 

[Lear70]

Give some of us skippers some credit. The FO's did not unanimously vote "No", far from it.

Hell, look at how many FO's voted for MH to be their Status Rep.:laugh:

In all fairness, MH was elected by just the members present at that particular LEC meeting, as was JS. The entire pilot group didn't get to vote on it.

I'm just sayin'...

 

[XRMEFLYER]

Look, it is not my intent to suggest that there were not a lot of captains who selflessly voted no on our last crummy offer when they would have in the end been better off voting for it and again to those who did, I will simply say thank you. Although I'm not really sure what I'm thanking you for because I've lost more than I'll make now on this deal too by having voted it down. I guess that's my point. That we should take what we can get and move on.

There were however, many more who for their own reasons did not and that is OK too. My estimate of the percentages is just that, an estimate offered for no other reason than to illustrate that a significant number of pilots did vote for the last agreement because they felt it was best for them and theirs to do so at the time. To now imply that FOs who have been so grossly underpaid for all this time should forego an opportunity to more or less close that gap because someone feels that they are "subsidizing" (his words not mine) our raise is just, well petty.

 

[PCL_128]

In all fairness, MH was elected by just the members present at that particular LEC meeting, as was JS. The entire pilot group didn't get to vote on it.

I'm just sayin'...

That was just the interim election. There was a full election a year ago when he got elected by the entire group.

 

[Lear70]

That was just the interim election. There was a full election a year ago when he got elected by the entire group.

Yeah, forgot about that; was so focused on upcoming arbitration I wasn't paying attention and didn't even vote (first time I haven't done that in a rep election). Didn't a complete unknown run against him and it was fairly close, like 60/40?

 

[Ty Webb]

Yeah, forgot about that; was so focused on upcoming arbitration I wasn't paying attention and didn't even vote (first time I haven't done that in a rep election). Didn't a complete unknown run against him and it was fairly close, like 60/40?

I'm not sure I would call him a "complete unknown". I believe in college he held some sort of record in the "naked beer slide" event . . . :laugh:.

Actually, it was MC, a good guy and the only one who bothered to submit a position paper. Of course, no good deed goes unpunished.

 

[Quiet Flight]

Comparing the TA rates at AT to say, oh I'll just pick a random airline...SWA. And using the hourly conversion applied to SWA's rates. it looks like the following is true:

- In the five years it will take to reach the max pay rates in this TA, a TWO yr SWA capt will still make more than a 15 year AT capt? (BTW, who the hell came up with a 15 year pay scale? Ridiculous.)

- In the five years it will take to reach the max pay rates in this TA, a FOUR yr SWA F/O will make more than ALL of the F/O's at AirTran? (+/- $2)

Not to mention SWA F/O's (still) making more per year, in some parts of the scale, than AT captains.

You guys should vote no and go back to the table.

 

[XRMEFLYER]

Easy for you to say. Somehow I get the feeling we will achieve something very similar to your payrates pretty soon one way or another.

 

[Lear70]

I'm not sure I would call him a "complete unknown". I believe in college he held some sort of record in the "naked beer slide" event . . . :laugh:.

Actually, it was MC, a good guy and the only one who bothered to submit a position paper. Of course, no good deed goes unpunished.

Oh yeah, forgot about that. Had MC served in any committees or been publicly visible doing union work? Makes a difference when running against an incumbent.

Interesting that the incumbent couldn't even be bothered to write a position paper for his own re-election...

p.s. Quiet Flight,,, nice avatar.