Flight options new pay

[993_Pilot]

Your making my argument for me here. Again, given that the union's leadership has more information than we do, including information about the companies financials and is recommending we vote to ratify this TA. Who are you to try to persuade pilots to reject it, unless of course you have some information they don't. Other than your own opinion and speculation, what more/different information do you have than they do and what is it?

I am a MIGS since day one, and someone who will be affected by this contract for many years to come, if it passes. I have every right to voice my opinion about this contract, here or anywhere else I choose. I can't believe that you would even suggest that that I don't have the right, simply because I disagree with the eboard. The eboard is emotionally vested in this TA and they worked long and hard to get it. I am sure that they feel that they did the best that they could, and I would imagine they are more ready to be done than anyone. Not that I don't appreciate their effort, but that doesn't require me to vote yes. In 2004 the netjets board said the same things about their TA that our eboard is telling us now. "Management doesn't have the money", "We got all we could", etc. That contract got strongly voted down and 9 months later they raised the bar and set new industry standards with the TA that was ratified in 2005. I don't expect that we're going to set industry standards, or that we should even try get NJ wages or work rules, but perhaps our eboard is too burned out to continue? I won't blindly follow any leader and would suggest that you have a responsibility to question them too. If you won't do that, then at least think long and hard before putting blind faith in anything.

The basis of your argument here, is that the companies cost of extending the contract is 3%. If fact what the language in Section 30 of the TA says, "If the Company exercises the unilateral option set forth in subsection 30.3, then effective [first day of the fourth year of contract], 2013, the rates of pay in the salary tables set forth in subsection 27.1 shall be increased by three percent...". So the 3% is on top of the 3.5 percent longevity increase, set forth in Section 27, for a total of 6.6%(considering compounding), which is well above traditional inflation. And if the company exercises it's option to extend to a fifth year, the average pilot will see an additional 6.6% applied to the fourth year rate.

Let's not add any confusion here. I never said that any pilot will only get a 3% raise in years 4 and 5, I simply said that there is a 3% penalty for the company to exercise their option to extend the contract. That is true. Please don't try to twist my words to make me look like I don't know what I'm talking about.

Are you still sure the company will exercise their options to extend?

I thought I made that clear. YES, I'm pretty confident. We will still be so underpaid compared to our competition, and aside from the 3% increase to the pay tables, they will be putting off paying Ford & Harrison for another 2 years. That savings alone would probably be larger than the 3% increase to the pilots!

With all respect, don't you think you should at least be familiar with the TA, let alone what went into negotiating it before you advise people to vote it down?

I am familiar with the TA and I appreciate the effort that went in to it. It has been a long, arduous process, and we are all ready to be done with it, but that doesn't mean that I have to like it. Although the work rules could definitely use some improvement, overall, they're not bad for a first contract. The huge disconnect for me is the pay vs. duration equation... They are not proportional. If the pay sucks (and it does), this needs to be a shorter duration to have my support. If the duration is important to management (and we know it is), then they need to bring up the pay to something closer to industry standards to have my support. Simple as that!