JetBlue: Below average and it's going to stay that way.

[Fins Up]

Fellas, did you read the whole email? You're probably going to have to sign away your premium pay to get the "raise". If that is the case, at my current payrate, and calculating for an 85 hour line, I would take an overall 2% pay cut.

 

[BLUE BAYOU]

Fellas, did you read the whole email? You're probably going to have to sign away your premium pay to get the "raise". If that is the case, at my current payrate, and calculating for an 85 hour line, I would take an overall 2% pay cut.

Congratulations on trying to make a negative out of a positive once again! I wish I could collect a dollar for all the "probablies" you guys spin-- I'd be a millionaire!!!

 

[Fins Up]

Fellas, did you read the whole email? You're probably going to have to sign away your premium pay to get the "raise". If that is the case, at my current payrate, and calculating for an 85 hour line, I would take an overall 2% pay cut.

Congratulations on trying to make a negative out of a positive once again! I wish I could collect a dollar for all the "probablies" you guys spin-- I'd be a millionaire!!!

It would be nice if I am wrong, but I doubt it. Maybe premium will only go down to 125%. There probably won't be anything to sign for another month or so anyway so there is plenty of time to debate.

 

[curtaindriver]

Fellas, did you read the whole email? You're probably going to have to sign away your premium pay to get the "raise". If that is the case, at my current payrate, and calculating for an 85 hour line, I would take an overall 2% pay cut.

I doubt it this time around, but definitely feel they are trying to change the process. I don't think they are getting rid of premium, just want to spin a way to stop having us keep up with average. I for one would be willing to get rid of premium for the right base increase.

CD

 

[milehigh6080]

It would be nice if I am wrong, but I doubt it. Maybe premium will only go down to 125%. There probably won't be anything to sign for another month or so anyway so there is plenty of time to debate.

That's not what the email said, and where are you getting the 125% from? The email is clear that we are getting the 2.21% this year and that they want to revisit it and potential adjust the peer set and premium trigger next year. When you don't have the confidence in your argument's effectiveness to stand on its own with factual, real points and attempt to augment those points with made up facts and speculation, it has the opposite effect that you're looking for- it makes your audience assume that all your facts are skewed based on the ones that obviously are.

Here's an example- what is your general opinion of mainstream media's reporting on aviation issues? As professionals in the industry, we know that they get almost everything wrong because they couldn't be bothered to get the real facts straight before their publication deadline. As a result, you immediately discount anything they publish on an aviation related issue because they've demonstrated to you that they're not a reliable source.

I'm as pro union and pro CBA as anyone here, but if you don't have the intellectual honestly to stick to the cold, hard facts you're a detriment to the drive. Made up facts and statitistics only fire up people who are already anxious to vote yes- those people aren't going to win the campaign- changing a no voters mind will do that, and they're turned off by the chicken little routine.

 

[linepilot]

But what happened to my health plan and why am I paying industry leading premiums AND industry leading co-insurance AND industry leading deductibles for a plan that fights me for every single penny?

We have the WORST health plan in the industry.

Paste it on every thread.

This place has ZERO values and a made up culture.

It's all contrived.

 

[Dizel8]

MH,

Whereas you certainly have a point, part of the problem is with the history over the last 12 years AND the lack of a defined process. Now, I thought the peer review was a pretty straight forward piece of business, but it certainly didn't feel that way.

Now we can parse words and statements, but the email in question did leave me with a bit of concern and coupled with again, the lack of a defined path.

It will be interesting to see what the future brings.

 

[milehigh6080]

MH,

Whereas you certainly have a point, part of the problem is with the history over the last 12 years AND the lack of a defined process. Now, I thought the peer review was a pretty straight forward piece of business, but it certainly didn't feel that way.

Now we can parse words and statements, but the email in question did leave me with a bit of concern and coupled with again, the lack of a defined path.

It will be interesting to see what the future brings.

The last 12 years are solid, factual, documented reasons why we should all be chomping at the bit to vote yes for a union and to negotiate a CBA. Let's stick with those facts. Someone who knows the whole story should put together a timeline just like what FedEx has for their history of labor relations. I think that would at least swing a few of the no voters over the right side.

 

[Beechnut]

Ready, Fire, Aim. My apologies!

 

[Fins Up]

That's not what the email said, and where are you getting the 125% from? The email is clear that we are getting the 2.21% this year and that they want to revisit it and potential adjust the peer set and premium trigger next year.

The email said the company is looking at re-defining our peer set. Some of our "peers", one specifically mentioned in the email, have a premium pay of 125%. That is where that comes from.

When you don't have the confidence in your argument's effectiveness to stand on its own with factual, real points and attempt to augment those points with made up facts and speculation, it has the opposite effect that you're looking for- it makes your audience assume that all your facts are skewed based on the ones that obviously are.

It is a fact, as stated in the email, that the company is trying to determine the value of paying us premium pay. Why do you think that is? Are they going to determine that our premium pay is too low? I don't think so.

I'm as pro union and pro CBA as anyone here, but if you don't have the intellectual honestly to stick to the cold, hard facts you're a detriment to the drive. Made up facts and statitistics only fire up people who are already anxious to vote yes- those people aren't going to win the campaign- changing a no voters mind will do that, and they're turned off by the chicken little routine.

I made up no facts. The pay rate increase is set. Hurray for us. What is not set is what will happen with our peer set/industry-standard picture. Also, up for the chopping is our premium pay. It already got reduced once, remember?

I'm glad to hear you're pro-cba. I'm not one of those zealots who beat people over head and tell them how stupid they are if they are not a 'yes' vote (at least I don't think I am). But I have been at this company long enough to see the good and the bad of what leadership is going to offer.

It's just business right? It was just business to:
Do away with stock options for new-hires
Reduce or do away with (I don't remember anymore) the CSPP discount
Raise the premium trigger from 70 to 78, etc.