gutshotdraw
ZERT Wilson CQB User
- Joined
- May 6, 2005
- Posts
- 3,226
Starman,
I never said the single carrier issue was dead. In fact, it is one of the hot buttons in negotiations and I'm sure will be a primary topic when talks resume today. I am only pointing out that the more likely avenue to merger, should it happen at all, will be contractual changes and not legal action. My guess is, the negotiating committee will ultimately sacrifice single carrier in exchange for the right pay hike. Whether you and the rest of the membership choose to approve that trade-off in a new TA is an open question.
Meanwhile, I would like you to address the seniority blending issue. Rationally, please. As I wrote before, the main argument for single carrier is that NJA, NJI, EJM, and NJE all work for the Same Company. Doesn't that mean merger based on date-of-hire since all those crews supposedly were hired by the Same Company?
I never said the single carrier issue was dead. In fact, it is one of the hot buttons in negotiations and I'm sure will be a primary topic when talks resume today. I am only pointing out that the more likely avenue to merger, should it happen at all, will be contractual changes and not legal action. My guess is, the negotiating committee will ultimately sacrifice single carrier in exchange for the right pay hike. Whether you and the rest of the membership choose to approve that trade-off in a new TA is an open question.
Meanwhile, I would like you to address the seniority blending issue. Rationally, please. As I wrote before, the main argument for single carrier is that NJA, NJI, EJM, and NJE all work for the Same Company. Doesn't that mean merger based on date-of-hire since all those crews supposedly were hired by the Same Company?
Last edited: