New Alaska Negotiations Thread

[AKMD80GUY]

The farthest it can go back is to a May 07 DOS. The Kasher reaming was a two year deal from May 05.

You're absolutly right. I just have May 05 stuck on the brain.

 

[Fubijaakr]

If used properly, VSA can be one of our strongest negotiating tools. As I recall, the Delta pilots AS A GROUP refused all "overtime" flying and Delta gave them a contract pretty quickly.

I agree 100%. No one should be flying VSA past a contract amendable date OR while there are pilots on furlough.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Sorry, Crunk, but tossing out a bunch of numbers like you know what you're talking about without expanding on them is pretty useless.

I'm not an expert at the contract. And I'm learning one that is relatively new to me.

For example, 25.E.5 does not exist.

Yeah, you're right. Sorry I missed that. I meant 24.E.5. This deals with the bidding process, of course. In a few days, we will have pilots in ANC that were displaced from SEA. The 18 or so guys that thankfully weren't furloughed are staying put, wherever they are. The positions are not being awarded in order of seniority.

23.A.1:

1. Reduce Bid Blocks: In the event the Company furloughs pilots,
the Company and the MEC shall meet and establish a program for reducing the number of hours in the bid blocks to prevent the furlough.

I don't know what bid package you're looking at, but the line values in SEA have dropped to 75-77 hours. Plus the part time line program was agreed to and implemented. That pretty much satisfies 23.A.1.​

The last few months, the lines in ANC have been closer to 79 hours. For March, ANC is 78.51, LAX is 78.34, SEA is at 77.64. I was under the impression that the company never met with the union before furloughing the first group.

23.A.3:

Details of: When a furlough is scheduled the Company shall post a notice at all pilot bases advising of the effective date of the furlough, anticipated length of the furlough, and the number of pilots to be furloughed. As soon as possible after the posting of the notice, the Company shall notify each of the affected pilots, by certified mail, return receipt requested, at his home address, of the actual date of his furlough.

For the first group of furloughs, Pilot Bid 2009-02 would seem to cover all the bases required by Sec. 23.A.3.

I'm pretty sure there is a greivance on the length of the furlough not being posted. Some of the furloughees are finding prospective employers won't give you a shot if you can't tell them how long you'll be there.

So, what's the big deal?

I thought you were getting displaced? I'd think you'd be a bit upset if someone junior to you was holding your spot.

Good luck to you, whichever base you end up in.

 

[Fubijaakr]

I'm not an expert at the contract. And I'm learning one that is relatively new to me.

Of course you're not. None of us are.

I'm pretty sure there is a greivance on the length of the furlough not being posted. Some of the furloughees are finding prospective employers won't give you a shot if you can't tell them how long you'll be there.

But it is posted. Indefinite. Its on bid 2009-2.

Here's my suggestion. You really should pick up the phone and call the Contract Compliance guys. They can and will explain all this stuff to you. Then you can get some facts and not have to rely on anonymous webboards and "opinions" of people who have an axe to grind.

Give them a call. You'd be surprised how many guys formulate and postulate "opinions" and how few calls the guys with the answers in the office get.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Give them a call. You'd be surprised how many guys formulate and postulate "opinions" and how few calls the guys with the answers in the office get.

Yep, I hear you. I have spoken with a few union people and what it seems to me is there are bigger fish to fry right now.

Hopefully those fish with be tasty.

 

[AZFr8tPilot]

Using "Indefinite" as a length of estimated furlough is not an acceptable option in my opinion. For those of us on the street, it makes it difficult to plan when the time length is that indeterminate. I own and run a side business in the medical field (now my primary business). Trying to write business contracts that I know I can follow through on (without using a 30 day out clause) is challenging without having more information. "Indefinite" won't work in the contracts that I am involved with and is less than professional.

 

[Old School 737]

Pilot to pilot guy in crew room said he heard that the last thing to finish up in contract talks is the retirement section. Take it for what its worth. I hope he is right.

 

[turbodriver]

I wonder....

Can furloughees vote on a TA???

 

[becket]

Using "Indefinite" as a length of estimated furlough is not an acceptable option in my opinion. For those of us on the street, it makes it difficult to plan when the time length is that indeterminate. I own and run a side business in the medical field (now my primary business). Trying to write business contracts that I know I can follow through on (without using a 30 day out clause) is challenging without having more information. "Indefinite" won't work in the contracts that I am involved with and is less than professional.

what if Alaska was the secondary income and you concentrated on the med thing from here on out? That way, you'll have some control. You'll NEVER change the airline...use them for all you can. That's how they roll...

 

[Going2Baja]

I wonder....

Can furloughees vote on a TA???

My understanding is No. You are no longer an employee, but a person with recall rights to your previous position. Don't worry - I have your back and won't yes on anything without all the t's crossed and the i's dotted!

Baja.

 

[Ih8AFYesmen]

Pilot to pilot guy in crew room said he heard that the last thing to finish up in contract talks is the retirement section. Take it for what its worth. I hope he is right.

Hence, the "cautiously optimistic" statement, I suppose. Let's hope the retirement package doesn't consist of Plans A thru Z. I'm all for keeping the A-plan.
I hope this P-to-P guy is right.

 

[Chief Pilot]

Baja is correct...furloughees cannot vote for the TA.

All I have to say is that this better be an impressive contract with retro pay or my vote will be no. I have no intention of rewarding this management for the dirty tricks and stall tactics they have used throughout this negotiation process.

A precedent should not be set that allows management folks to drag their feet at the negotiating table and be rewarded by forcing us to continue working under an unfavorable contract. They need a monetary penalty, because that's the only thing they seem to respond to. No retro=NO vote for me.

 

[Going2Baja]

No Retro = No Vote

No Large Raise = No vote

No Reserve Language = No Vote

No Improved Reserve = No Vote

Baja.

 

[Fubijaakr]

Might as well vote NO now, Baja.

Must be nice to be able to formulate an opinion without reading the proposal.

 

[Going2Baja]

Might as well vote NO now, Baja.

Must be nice to be able to formulate an opinion without reading the proposal.

Hopefully you have your limitations as well. And I didn't realize we had a proposal as of yet.

Baja.

 

[igneousy2]

The Furlough grievance is being fast-tracked and is slated for arbitration (AGAIN!) this summer. The company has sand-bagged on this at least twice that I know of now.

23.A.1 requires the company to meet with the MEC "and establish a program for reducing the number of hours in the bid blocks to prevent the furlough."

It is our position (ours=all of us collectively through our union) that the company has not complied with this section of the contract.

This has NOTHING to do with any of the reduceded time programs that have been implemented.

There seems to be some confusion so I'll try my best to explain what a "program for reducing the number of hours in the bid blocks" should have looked like.

I'm WAG'ing the numbers but pre-furlough 1500 pilots averaging say 80 hours=120,000 total pilot hours.

Company comes to union and says we need to cut out 10% of the flying hours and come down to 108,000 hours. (again this is what should have happened...this did not actually happen)

You can do it two ways, you can cut down on pilots so you have 1,350 pilots flying 80 hours=108,000...which is essentially what the company did (that's where the origianl 150-200 furloughed number came from that gs was tossing around last fall...actual reduction is to 1,374).

The other way to do it is to take the 108,000 hours and divide it by 1500 and build the lines to that amount so you get...72 hours. In other words if the company builds all lines to an average of 72 hours then there would have been ZERO furloughs...which is what our contract requires them to do...hence the grievance.

Ironically, in my opinion, had they just reduceded the lines to 72 they would have covered the same amount of flying FOR LESS MONEY because they would have cut the hours of everyone including guys at the MAX of the payscale. Instead they keep the top guys/gals pay the same but cut the bottom lowest paid guys down to zero.

Again...the early outs, reduce bid blocks, or reduce reserve programs do NOT relieve them of their obligations under 23.A.1.

Fly Safe,

 

[turbodriver]

I saw the union blurb on this and I'm very interested in how this plays out. The CBA says that programs have to be implemented to PREVENT (not reduce or mitigate) furloughs.

I'd gladly fly a 72 hour line instead of applying for unemployment today.... I'm sure with our united pilot group of VSA'ers and open time fanatics this would have been accomplished with no problem. And I'm sure that the senior guys in the union would gladly fly reduced 72 hour lines just to keep us junior peons on property...

(dripping with sarcasm....)

 

[Fubijaakr]

Hopefully you have your limitations as well. And I didn't realize we had a proposal as of yet.

Baja.

I think you should just keep an open mind instead of saying "If it doesn't meet this criteria I'm voting NO!".

For example, you might want to do a little research and find out how many airlines have gotten retro pay. Not signing bonuses, but actual retro pay in the last ten years.

You go "autoNO" over one issue and you may reject gains in other areas of the contract.

When there IS a proposal, read it with an open mind. And just remember there are 1875 pilots on furlough at AA alone.

 

[Chief Pilot]

Fubi,

I don't think anyone, including Baja, has said that they won't read the contract in it's entirety. There are certain criteria however that should be met and people should not be spring loaded to vote YES if we actually see a TA. For us to make concessions in any part of a TA just to make some gains in another part after the raping that happened nearly 4 years ago is ludacris.

As far as retro pay is concerned and who received it in the last 10 years, you only have to look at what administration we were under at the time. Nobody had a prayer, and actually our compensation packages across the industry took a far greater hit than it had in the previous 20 years. I hate to sound cliche', but it really is time to "take it back." Hey, call it retro or call it a signing bonus, but it better be on par with what our retro would have been.

Yes I do know the difference between retro and a straight signing bonus, and I imagine management is much less willing to offer retro even if the numbers match. That's an entirely different argument.

I have no intention of signing off on a TA that is concessionary in any way regardless of how many pilots are furloughed at American Airlines. I care about the pilots furloughed at Alaska Airlines. The argument about furloughees at other airlines makes me suspect that you would be willing to vote yes to just about anything regardless of it's worth. I'm looking out for our distant future...you seem to be looking out for your immediate future. With 17k hours, are you nearing 60?

 

[av8instyle]

I have no intention of signing off on a TA that is concessionary in any way regardless of how many pilots are furloughed at American Airlines. I care about the pilots furloughed at Alaska Airlines. The argument about furloughees at other airlines makes me suspect that you would be willing to vote yes to just about anything regardless of it's worth. I'm looking out for our distant future...you seem to be looking out for your immediate future. With 17k hours, are you nearing 60?

xactly. We're not AA. We made $. After 4yrs of this crap, lack of retro is a no for me.