Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Discussion on AirTran T.A. - STAY ON TOPIC

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
Register   Log in
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!
 
XRMEFLYER said:
40% yes vote with nearly unanimous no vote from FOs = 80% yes vote from captains.
Click to expand...




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:
 
Ty Webb said:
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:
Click to expand...

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'... ;)
 
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.
 
Last edited:
Lear70 said:
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'... ;)
Click to expand...

That was just the interim election. There was a full election a year ago when he got elected by the entire group.
 
PCL_128 said:
That was just the interim election. There was a full election a year ago when he got elected by the entire group.
Click to expand...
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?
 
Lear70 said:
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?
Click to expand...

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. ;)
 
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.
 
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.
 
Ty Webb said:
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. ;)
Click to expand...
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... :rolleyes:

p.s. Quiet Flight,,, nice avatar. :cool:
 
XRMEFLYER, it was tongue in cheek. Sort of. :p

And Lear, you cannot tell me Office Space is not a great movie worthy of an avatar tribute!
 
Last edited:
Lear70 said:
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. :cool:
Click to expand...

I don't remember if he had served on any previous committees, but even if he had, I still wouldn't hold it against him. :laugh:
 
edited because Steelers Fan looks good waving a terrible towel out the cockpit window of Ravens One.
 
Last edited:
GO STEELERS! (nice job, Saints)
 
Murphy said:
edited because Steelers Fan looks good waving a terrible towel out the cockpit window of Ravens One.
Click to expand...

No one ever looks good waving a terrible towel.

Just kidding Steeler Fan. ;)
 
PCL_128 said:
No one ever looks good waving a terrible towel.

Just kidding Steeler Fan. ;)
Click to expand...

I'm stirring up a lot less trouble talking about Steeler Fan and his team than the TA.
 
Here is one of my favorite gems of our TA:

INTL PAY

Capatains shall be paid $4 hr override for international operations
First Officers shall be paid $2 hr override for internatonal operations

For the puposes of this section operations to and from Canada, Mexico and the Bahamas is considered Domestic.

WTF!!!! So our company and union leaders have all agreed that Canada, Mexico and the Bahamas are part of The United States of America. Total clowns running this show.
 
Lear70 said:
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.
Click to expand...


Those payrates are technically only correct for 107+ seats to longhaul narrowbody. Then they change:

Ie.
A E-190 would be a 16% reduction for each of those rates.
A 757/737-900 would be a 13% increase. Widebody is +28%


So if you think the <4 year FO and <8 year Captain was bad or inline with 190 rates at Blue... think again. I am gambling it wont matter like most of us.
 
Muppets said:
Here is one of my favorite gems of our TA:

INTL PAY

Capatains shall be paid $4 hr override for international operations
First Officers shall be paid $2 hr override for internatonal operations

For the puposes of this section operations to and from Canada, Mexico and the Bahamas is considered Domestic.

WTF!!!! So our company and union leaders have all agreed that Canada, Mexico and the Bahamas are part of The United States of America. Total clowns running this show.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, it states the same thing with the international per diem . . . we'll never see those increases that our MEC touted.

WTFO . . . are our guys clueless, or asleep at the wheel, regardless, none of them should ever again be allowed in a negotiating position.
 
The only reason we have a deal is the company needs one. That is why they have decided to negotiate. Voting this down they will be back in 3 weeks or less.

Did your Union lie to you. Yes several times... its ALPA standard.
1. Really good scheduling section. Negotiated months ago... LIE
2. Scope is ahead of the industry by binding the holding company... LIE (it blows but does bind the holding company.
3. The NMB was a factor in the companies decision to negotiate... LIE (they didn't have to... they could run out the clock. So ask the question why did they come with an offer)

Finally I'm not sure this was negotiated by pilots. It sucks that bad. Vote NO
 
Do you guys really think that new scope can be applied after the fact to this transaction? ( ie "binding the holding company" )
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom