No comment on ASA PBS LOA yet?

[blesko]

Even a company raped, grievance rife version of our contract is better than most out there. Now let's make it better.

The PBS LOA may do that. Or not.

But judge the PBS on it's own merits or troubles, not some piddly contract enhancements meant to bribe us.

The PBS LOA is about PBS, not fixing everything we don't like about our contract. Leave the fixing of our contract to the next contract and judge PBS on it's own.

Fine but I hope you wont be the first one b*itching at the loopholes that the company WILL find and use to screw us once PBS is put into place. All I'm asking for is for ALPA to uphold what we potentially will vote in, plain and simple. Managerial contractual negotations are only as good as how they are enforced. If the MEC and others stand up and not let the company get away with potential loopholes, we'll all be ok, if not, we're in the same boat we are now, everything that's wrong with the current contract. Except it will be how PBS ruined our lives.

 

[buscap]

Fine but I hope you wont be the first one b*itching at the loopholes that the company WILL find and use to screw us once PBS is put into place. All I'm asking for is for ALPA to uphold what we potentially will vote in, plain and simple. Managerial contractual negotations are only as good as how they are enforced. If the MEC and others stand up and not let the company get away with potential loopholes, we'll all be ok, if not, we're in the same boat we are now, everything that's wrong with the current contract. Except it will be how PBS ruined our lives.

You think ALPA "let's" the company get away with anything?
ALPA is you.
Your grievances.
Your resolve.
Your support.
Your vote.
Your sweat.
Your parking brake.
Your can.
You gets what you gives.

The company which the MEC fights is much deeper pocketed and business savy than a pilot populated MEC. Sure, we could hire more legal gunslingers, but do you have any idea how freakin expensive that is? We complain about covering MEC pay as is.

By the time an MEC has been around long enough to be really good at all this, they've made enough enemies and allies within management and the pilot group to have absolutely everyone hating their guts and suspect of their motivations.

It's politics!!!

And unions are just like government. You get the one you deserve.

Jesus H!!! Read a book.

 

[crj567]

Really? You WANT to be negotiating right now, when the industry is down? This is not the time to be negotiating.

O.K.-
So we just grin and bear that discomfort in our collective posterior? Some deals are so crappy, they need to be killed-no matter how bad the economy may be.

 

[blesko]

You think ALPA "let's" the company get away with anything?
ALPA is you.
Your grievances.
Your resolve.
Your support.
Your vote.
Your sweat.
Your parking brake.
Your can.
You gets what you gives.

The company which the MEC fights is much deeper pocketed and business savy than a pilot populated MEC. Sure, we could hire more legal gunslingers, but do you have any idea how freakin expensive that is? We complain about covering MEC pay as is.

By the time an MEC has been around long enough to be really good at all this, they've made enough enemies and allies within management and the pilot group to have absolutely everyone hating their guts and suspect of their motivations.

It's politics!!!

And unions are just like government. You get the one you deserve.

Jesus H!!! Read a book.

Its me and 1700 others, most of which dont give a damn, so now what? Its all about whats in it for them, not for the greater good and advancement of the company to make life better for the collective and the industry. I've read many books, doing an MBA thesis on these very things, where's you book chief?

 

[Poppa Hodax]

You think ALPA "let's" the company get away with anything?
ALPA is you.
Your grievances.
Your resolve.
Your support.
Your vote.
Your sweat.
Your parking brake.
Your can.
You gets what you gives.

So what are we paying dues for? If the onus is on the line pilots to do what the Union is supposed to be doing, I would rather keep my dues and fund my own trip to Vegas. Or any of the other seaside/located near a golf course destinations to "work".

 

[buscap]

I'm gonna back away from the keyboard on this tangent, and return to the main point about the union as it relates to the PBS LOA.

There is quite a bit of frustration with the perception that ALPA is unwilling or unable to enforce the existing contract, so why should we let the company have this PBS just to have them shoot it full of holes, while the MEC does nothing due to inability or ineffectual grievances.

We have won some grievances. We have lost some grievances. Some of the language turned out to be looser than we thought. Some of the language has proven presciently effective; furlough clause perhaps.

I just don't see that frustration as a justifiable reason to vote NO or YES. That frustration is the result of the adversarial relationship the MEC has with management. Both sides sign contracts and then proceed to work them to their respective advantage. It's not like some business contract in which adherence to the spirit of the contract is necessary, if one has any desire to secure a future contract with the same entity.

Further, the MEC's ability to enforce the contractual language is very much related to the pilot group's resolve during negotiations and later on during grievances. Dues just get us a seat at the table and at times our own dues don't cover the cost of that seat. It takes National's support when things drag out.

There are contractual improvements in the LOA outside the PBS area, but I believe they are irrelevant. We haven't seen the LOA yet, so we can't judge if the language is watertight or rife with "may", "as much as possible" or "shall attempt".

The 60% 4 day restriction sounds airtight, but that's all I know of, so far.

 

[Speedtape]

Weren't there supposed to be a mix of trips as per the contract? Weren't the trips supposed to be front-loaded as per the contract? If I'm correct, this certainly has not been enforced, so why do I have any faith that anything we do further will be enforced as well? I'm not voting yes, or voting no yet as I want to find out the exact language of the TA first, however, ALPA needs to be held accountable for enforcing what they negotioate. The conpany sure as hell won't do it.

What's ALPA saying we're doing this and dammit we're gonna uphold this? I haven't heard one d*mn thing about that yet. Stand behind it and I might be more likely to vote yes.

The last time I looked, there was a "mix" of trips. I saw cdo's, day lines, 2 days, 3 days, and 4 days. What is it you want?

 

[buscap]

The last time I looked, there was a "mix" of trips. I saw cdo's, day lines, 2 days, 3 days, and 4 days. What is it you want?

Dat funneee sheeet!!

 

[Speedtape]

Consider this as well:

Our current contract mentions a "mix of 2, 3, and 4 days, as well as naps and day lines."

-Has the company complied with this stipulation even once month since the contract was signed? I think not. What about "Red Arrow" days? What happened there?

-We are dealing with people who never try to comply with the language of the contract-and we have union people who (for some reason I cannot understand,) spend all their time and resources trying to explain away all the crappy things the company does and wants to do to us.

-PBS is a crappy deal-
-We cannot afford to give away what is left of our QOL for this crappy deal.

You have the mix. By the way, define "mix!"

 

[buscap]

You have the mix. By the way, define "mix!"

C'mon!! You made your point!!

He wants what we all want!! Enough of the particular kind of trip he desires for his seniority to hold!!

Yeah, that's not in the contract!!

He didn't take your bait, but I did, so poo poo to you!!

 

[Speedtape]

C'mon!! You made your point!!

He wants what we all want!! Enough of the particular kind of trip he desires for his seniority to hold!!

Yeah, that's not in the contract!!

He didn't take your bait, but I did, so poo poo to you!!

What's left to say? He wants something that his seniority want hold.

They build a mix of trips. The contract has not been violated.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

O.K.-
So we just grin and bear that discomfort in our collective posterior? Some deals are so crappy, they need to be killed-no matter how bad the economy may be.

Look. If we negotiate when the economy is down, we will take it in the posterior more, not less. Good luck!

 

[blesko]

C'mon!! You made your point!!

He wants what we all want!! Enough of the particular kind of trip he desires for his seniority to hold!!

Yeah, that's not in the contract!!

He didn't take your bait, but I did, so poo poo to you!!

I get what I want, what works for me, that's not an issue. 6 3-days is NOT a mix of trips.....

 

[Plainsman]

I wish the company would have made some of the red arrow days green, maybe even a candy cane here or there. It would be much more Holidayish like that. Bring on the nog. Can't move a single freakin trip! Remember how they will bash what ever we pass when pbs goes through. I am scared of a 3day followed by a two day. They will abuse the language somehow. Just ask the right questions and voice it to the ALPA guys.

 

[JoeMerchant]

The best way to improve you schedule if you are junior is to become senior...ALPA, nor the contract, can do what growth can...

The union can't make things perfect..They can't stop everything you don't like...They can't force the company to cater to your needs...Sorry if the truth hurts, but I think many have some unrealistic expectations of what a union can and cannot do....

 

[aircombat]

The best way to improve you schedule if you are junior is to become senior...ALPA, nor the contract, can do what growth can...

The union can't make things perfect..They can't stop everything you don't like...They can't force the company to cater to your needs...Sorry if the truth hurts, but I think many have some unrealistic expectations of what a union can and cannot do....

More with the growth. You are clearly blinded by catch phrases. It's starting to sound a lot like "Change". Misleading statement #12. “The company will not save a dime until we have growth”. I’m assuming people are saying that because the company says they will be overstaffed due to the no furlough clause, which is the only thing that has saved our buts so far. I have to ask you though why can’t the company just as easily and more likely wait until attrition takes effect and shrink to profitability?

 

[aircombat]

If we vote PBS in, the company pays for the first 18 months of contract negotiations. That way they have a financial obligation to get things moving.

Plus, what makes you think that we would get as good of a deal during Section 6? During this process, we only really discussed PBS. During Section 6, the whole contract is open. What are you willing to give up to have the same things we have now, just a year or two later?

I do not see how you guys think giving the company PBS now will give us leverage during contract talks. Is the company going to say, “the pilots were nice enough to give us PBS so we should give them everything they want and do it quickly”? I know you are afraid that it will go to arbitration but I can assure you that is not going to happen. It would take many years for that to happen and the company has demonstrated how much they want PBS now. Why would we get garbage if we vote it down. I’m not an expert in contract negotiations but in the past when voted down it’s the company that has to sweeten the deal not us. The last contract didn’t go to arbitration and we had no leverage. They want PBS quick and arbitration takes too long.

Our leverage is going to be the company paying for 18 months of negotiations? Classic smoke and mirrors. Folks I’m not asking a lot just think a little. Which is going to be cheaper. paying for 18 months of negotiations and stalling the contract talks for 5+ years or signing a contract fast with improved PBS system, pay raises, and bonuses for all the pilots. I hope you don’t think it’s the second.

I’m not a union hatter. I know that they have done some good things. The problem is this is a dog eat dog world and just like you they are looking out for number one. I’m sure the union leaders don’t mind a drawn out contract negotiation. They get paid more, free food all the time, baseball games, and other perx. I’m just saying don’t be surprised when they are sitting back eating their chimichangas saying “we are helpless because we are only as strong as the pilot group”.

 

[Speedtape]

I do not see how you guys think giving the company PBS now will give us leverage during contract talks. Is the company going to say, “the pilots were nice enough to give us PBS so we should give them everything they want and do it quickly”? I know you are afraid that it will go to arbitration but I can assure you that is not going to happen. It would take many years for that to happen and the company has demonstrated how much they want PBS now. Why would we get garbage if we vote it down. I’m not an expert in contract negotiations but in the past when voted down it’s the company that has to sweeten the deal not us. The last contract didn’t go to arbitration and we had no leverage. They want PBS quick and arbitration takes too long.

Our leverage is going to be the company paying for 18 months of negotiations? Classic smoke and mirrors. Folks I’m not asking a lot just think a little. Which is going to be cheaper. paying for 18 months of negotiations and stalling the contract talks for 5+ years or signing a contract fast with improved PBS system, pay raises, and bonuses for all the pilots. I hope you don’t think it’s the second.

I’m not a union hatter. I know that they have done some good things. The problem is this is a dog eat dog world and just like you they are looking out for number one. I’m sure the union leaders don’t mind a drawn out contract negotiation. They get paid more, free food all the time, baseball games, and other perx. I’m just saying don’t be surprised when they are sitting back eating their chimichangas saying “we are helpless because we are only as strong as the pilot group”.

Are you one of those who likes to argue with yourself? Our contract is one of the best, if not the best in the regional industry--and better than a major or two! This would include pay and work rules--even reserve rules.

Who are we going to use as a model for negotiations to leap-frog? Would we negotiate to price ourselves completely out of jobs? Maybe, this is your first rodeo. Our contract is very rich and puts us at a competitive disadvantage now--should we just push forward to the point that our company becomes no longer economically viable? As the cliche goes, watch what you ask for, you may just get it!

 

[Jack-O-Lantern]

Are you one of those who likes to argue with yourself? Our contract is one of the best, if not the best in the regional industry--and better than a major or two! This would include pay and work rules--even reserve rules.

Who are we going to use as a model for negotiations to leap-frog? Would we negotiate to price ourselves completely out of jobs? Maybe, this is your first rodeo. Our contract is very rich and puts us at a competitive disadvantage now--should we just push forward to the point that our company becomes no longer economically viable? As the cliche goes, watch what you ask for, you may just get it!

So true Speedtape. As I said before, it gets so tiresome to hear these few whiners we have that just can't seem to grasp reality here. Some come around eventually as their experience in this industry grows, and some, will just never get it.

 

[PCL_128]

Some of you guys just don't understand how collective bargaining works. Thinking that you'll have more leverage if you turn down PBS now is fantasy. In reality, you'll be shooting yourselves in the foot.

The company will come to the mediator and talk about how every other regional carrier you compete with has PBS, but those mean ASA pilots just refuse to give it to them, hurting their competitive advantage. The mediator will look at the rest of the industry and see that, yes indeed, almost every other regional has PBS already. For the rest of bargaining, the mediator will see things through the prism that the pilot group refused to provide an industry-leading PBS to the company. You look unreasonable. The company looks incredibly reasonable to an outside observer such as the mediator, because they'll show him how they paid for a year of flight pay loss for your PWG, plus agreed to the best PBS LOA in the business, which you turned down. So, the company has curried favor with the guy that writes his reports to the NMB every time you meet to negotiate. Who do you think will be favored in those reports? How much leverage do you really think you'll have when the mediator is telling the NMB that you're unreasonable?

Remember, the only leverage you really have in the end is the threat of a strike. Thinking you have some huge advantage at the table because you've turned down PBS is fantasy, because the mediator and the NMB look at accepted industry standards to determine whether a party is being reasonable or not. Unreasonable parties don't get released, and therefore have zero leverage. The company can continue to stonewall for all eternity, because they know you aren't getting released.

So, how do you really get leverage in bargaining? Accept this industry-leading PBS LOA now, and see what bugs turn up in the system prior to the start of Section 6 bargaining. You can then go into negotiations with a list of errors that you can correct, and you look like the reasonable party that just wants to fix a few loopholes. Half of the battle in negotiations is just getting the number of open items down to as few as possible, because that's when the NMB will release you (your real leverage). When you have 200 open items still on the table, you aren't getting released whether there's an impasse or not.