Flops pay vs. the economy excuse

[SilverSurfer]

I have thought about it. I'm not sure how you get to 7 or even more years, but for the sake of argument, I'll go with you on this.

If we vote this thing down the next TA is a year away (6 months of cooling off, then negotiations begin again - a year will be minimum). In that time, not only will we NOT have the decent work rules and protections afforded us by the TA now on the table, we'll also be moving backwards in real income. Furloughees will be losing recall rights. Flight Options business will likely suffer due to the continued labor unrest (more furloughs??). Then, if somehow we're offered a TA that is limited to 3 years (which is highly unlikely - there's no support from the company or the mediator for this) and it gets ratified, we're now at roughly 4 years from today. If we negotiate now for what little extra might be gained with another year of bargaining, the company will have no interest in negotiating in a timely manner when the contract becomes amendable. So, by the time we get the contract amended, we could be right back to your 7 year time frame - only now we will have lost the work protections and income from year 1. Assuming we still have jobs, the time-value of money tells me we'll never get that income back.

I'm guessing you and 993 have an awesome Plan "B" awaiting you outside FlOps. Maybe you're both fortunate enough to be collecting military retirement or are living on a trust fund. For the majority of the pilots in this company, given the current state of job prospects, this TA is welcome. Again, it is not perfect, but welcome.

Ok follow me here.

We have a 3 year contract. There is a provision for management to extend the contract up to 2 years at their discretion as long as they do it 181 days or more from the term of the contract. They will do this, and it is probable that this was a management requirement for a TA’ed contract. If this contract is ratified they will have cheap labor locked in for 5 years + years for negotiation for a successor contract.

If the mediator were to park negotiations for 6 months that does not preclude the Union and management form meeting without the mediator. Finding a way to craft a workable contract in as timely a fashion as possible is as much in management interest as it is in ours. If this takes place the mediator can be invited to the meetings and he may or may not accept it. Whether he does or not is irreverent.

Yes we will be without some of the protections afforded in this TA, and we may lose some of the income realized between when this TA being ratified and another one being ratified. To me that income is well worth it to make sure we have a contract worth having. Tell me precisely what additional rights our furloughed pilots would have over right now. I disagree that there will be additional furloughs, the company can’t afford to operate with fewer pilots then we have right now. It will be in the company’s/managements best interest to find a way to bring what is called in the industry, a labor dispute, to as quick a conclusion as possible, without it we will not grow.

I have no problem with a straight out 5 year contract as long as we are properly compensated considering the long term of the agreement. But to be locked into a contract that leaves us at the bottom of the industry in pay and benefits for that term and longer is unacceptable. The biggest sticking point I have with the contract is how we are compensated if and when the company begins to recover and make more money. As is written in the contract now we will not see a cent until the activity “benchmark” as stated in the contract reaches the levels of 2006 & 2007. In other words we will receive nothing from the growth of the company for the next 7 years or IF the company meets or exceeds the levels of those years.

You probably know me, I’m just another throttle jokey on the line and have as much at stake as the next pilot. I don’t know 993 so I can’t speak for him. I want a contract yesterday, but I’m not willing to vote yes for a agreement that I feel is substandard or ill-conceived, motivated by fear of the unknown.

 

[netjetwife]

.... Going forward, Flops needs to compete with these other companies, and those companies all pay their pilots substantially more than Flops management is offering in this TA. The term for this practice is exploitation. Although I don't think I should have to subsidize Mr. Moneybag's cost to fly, No pilot should have to do that. Likewise, is it fair for the pilotgroup to be paid far less than the going rate while your management surely has compensation more on par with their industry peers regardless of the FLOPS performance? a contract with good work rules has value, True and you may be able to strengthen some of them if you tell the parties to make some adjustments to this TA that you guys would be stuck with for a long time. and I am willing to accept slightly less pay than the competition ... Considering how similar the job is the pay should at least be in the same ballpark. 10% less should be plenty, and I would then be happy to let them use the economy as their excuse. I think managers making that excuse should cut their compensation package to equal the sacrifice they're asking from the pilots and their families--retroactive to as long as they've underpaid the pilots. If Flops management can't find a way to be competitive with a labor cost that is 10% less than their competition, then I have no faith in the management team and no long term hope for the company anyways!!! Just my 2 cents.

The pilotgroup's compensation is a cost of doing business. Are the FLOPS telling everyone else they interact with that they will be paid far less than the going rate for their product and/or service? It appears they want to take the easy way out and just balance their budget on the backs of the pilotgroup. Sounds familiar doesn't it? Luckily this time the Flt Ops pilotgroup has a say in the matter. NJW

 

[993_Pilot]

Hey bro the SSP has a benchmark based on 2006 & 2007 company activity. Any one that thinks we will ever receive a cent form this is fooling themselves. The SSP is nothing but smoke and mirrors.

You're probably right , but it's too complicated for anyone to figure out. The only thing that I have been able to figure out is that we get won't get credit for an increase in revenue hours, only an increase in Fractional at Jet Pass hours. That industry is mature and probably won't see a lot of growth, especially over 2006. Jet pass and fractional are about the only thing that will probably be growing, and we only get credit for one, yet have to fly both. The other thing that I can tell you is that nobody that I have spoken with counts the SPP when considering their compensation.

...I have no problem with a straight out 5 year contract as long as we are properly compensated considering the long term of the agreement. But to be locked into a contract that leaves us at the bottom of the industry in pay and benefits for that term and longer is unacceptable....

The contract has lots of room for improvement, but this is the heart of the problem, and is what I have been saying all along. The pay vs. duration equation doesn't balance.

...I’m just another throttle jokey on the line and have as much at stake as the next pilot. I don’t know 993 so I can’t speak for him. I want a contract yesterday, but I’m not willing to vote yes for a agreement that I feel is substandard or ill-conceived, motivated by fear of the unknown.

We all want a contract yesterday. I'm just a line pilot like you, but I won't be motivated by fear of the unknown, nor bullied into voting for this contract because the eboard say to. I truly do respect all the time and effort that they have put in to it thus far, but now isn't the time to roll over and play possum, IMO.

 

[ITFL]

That industry is mature and probably won't see a lot of growth, especially over 2006. Jet pass and fractional are about the only thing that will probably be growing, and we only get credit for one, yet have to fly both.

Ok we get it, you're gonna vote no. Congratulations on your strong will and single-mindedness. But let's get it right on here.

I'm no expert on the supplemental salary, but read the TA, the indices are based on both factional and jet pass.

 

[netjetwife]

I say vote it down. Go back to the table. With regards to pay, I cannot see this as industry standard and cannot be blamed on the poor economy when the business models of the other fractionals allow for a competitive wage.

You're referring to a living wage, one that allows a pilot to raise a family, pay for college, have decent housing in a safe neighborhood and drive reliable transportation. A fair wage that recognizes pilots as professional and compensates them commiserate with their contribution to the success of each flight.

Do Flt Ops pilots really think they are appreciated and valued by their managers? Does this TA reflect that attitude? Or...much more likely...you're seeing a continuation of the disrespect you've been handed for years. There's a very good chance that the FLOPS are betting you guys are burned out and desperate enough to take their lowball offer. What do they have to lose in trying that?

To those who tell you that you can't compare your situation to that of the NJA pilots who were also first offered a subpar TA, I respectfully disagree. The economic climate of the country is different, but NJA was still crying poor because of the money they were pouring into NetJets Europe. More importantly, the relationship, then, was far far less than the cooperation since achieved and there are key similarities that suggest the same lowball attitude, short-term thinking was behind both TAs. The Options pilotgroup has learned that contract negotiations follow a predictable pattern with FUD being a common management tactic. The process also includes throwing the pilotgroup a bone while holding back the meat. If that MO fits your management then sending the TA back with a rejection notice is your only way to get a TA that is fair and balanced. You've been standing up for your right to have a voice in your destiny. If this TA is not what you envisioned let your message be loud and clear. Hang in there! NJW

 

[Flops_Pilot]

No Vote

I am a MIG and while I support our union I will vote NO on March 2nd on this TA due the reasons listed above as well as a few of my own. To say this contract is weak is to put it mildly. What will happen if the contract fails? Union leadership would have everyone beleive the sky will fall, I submit since the company has already notified the owners that this contract is a done deal and they are touting a 5 year contract to them, that management would be very anxious to return to the table and lean just a little further towards the middle.

 

[cougar12]

I am a MIG and while I support our union I will vote NO on March 2nd on this TA due the reasons listed above as well as a few of my own. To say this contract is weak is to put it mildly. What will happen if the contract fails? Union leadership would have everyone beleive the sky will fall, I submit since the company has already notified the owners that this contract is a done deal and they are touting a 5 year contract to them, that management would be very anxious to return to the table and lean just a little further towards the middle.

I agree 100%. Further more the company will essentially use the vote as a survey on how well they did thier job. A 50% + 1 "yes vote" will tell them they were right on in thier assumptions, a 90% "yes vote" the gave way to much. A 40% "yes vote" they need to reevaluate thier assumptions and they will have to calculate how much more they need to give to get that additional 20% + 1. Also, they will not have a year or years to make these decisions.

 

[993_Pilot]

Ok we get it, you're gonna vote no. Congratulations on your strong will and single-mindedness. But let's get it right on here.

I'm no expert on the supplemental salary, but read the TA, the indices are based on both factional and jet pass.

You're right, I meant to say Jet Pass and Charter are the only things likely to be growing, but the SPP is based on growth in fractional and Jet Pass, not the charter. My point was that although the revenue hours may grow, we don't get any benefit from it unless it happens in the segment of the business that has already matured and is likely to remain flat... even then, it's just a quarterly bonus, not a permanent increase to our base.

 

[netjetwife]

To flesh out my bone analogy above (sorry I couldn't resist the pun) a clarification is in order. I'm not suggesting a big thick steak is just waiting on the table. Unfortunately, times being what they are, the cut of meat may well be necessarily lean. But if so, perhaps they can be persuaded by the pilotgroup to dress it up with a more balanced serving of work rules, conditions and duration of the CBA. With a thinner cut it's important not to leave it too long lest the consumer end up feeling stuck before the meal is finished.

If the FLOPS really aren't using the economy as an excuse and/or taking advantage of the situation, wouldn't they have tried to soften the blow by agreeing to a shorter time-frame? It is my own personal opinion that a 2-3 yr max CBA is only fair given the uncertainty surrounding the timing of the recovery and the fact that dragging out the negotiations as they did has clearly been to their unilateral benefit. Sincerely, NJW

 

[brokeflyer]

management has the money.....otherwise they couldnt be called "management"

dont let those crooks fool you. It is undisputed fact that corporate america is what fcked us all into the economy we're in.

they got the money and you guys do all the work. Sometimes you gotta b1tch slap them to understand who really keeps the company operating.