Possible SWA T.A. pay numbers... Embrace the suck.

[PCL_128]

Go back to dispatching those RJs, General.

 

[WalterSobchak]

Go back to dispatching those RJs, General.

Let's be clear: even "our kind" would never claim that moron. He's all yours.

 

[Lear70]

Again, being able to stand up and ask a question or make a statement is not what Lear was talking about. He wants a full presentation of both pros and cons. They ain't gonna do that. I'd put money on it.

No, they're not.

They're pushing back pretty hard on the idea, actually, even a couple reps/execs who SAID they don't like the deal but still voted yes "so the pilot group could see it". They clearly do NOT want dissenting opinions with presentation and hard data points at the road shows.

The plan is to have the Rebuttal out by the end of the week so pilots will have it to peruse for about a week before the first road show. At least they'll be able to ask the right questions.

The issue is, will they insist on getting answers THAT ARE BACKED BY THE LANGUAGE...? We'll see.

 

[Lear70]

A shame that I resigned. This show could be entertaining.

I agree, BTW. I'm usually not a scope hawk, but it appears that the concessions in your TA would allow at least a couple years of stagnation as the company builds near international feed with code share partners. Bad juju. Unlike RJ feed, that's flying that the airline is likely to do itself if you don't give them the concessions. That is a direct giveaway of jobs.

A couple?

I think you're being generous.

And yes, it is.

 

[Lear70]

You better believe I will be asking each and every rep present at any road show I attend what their recommendation is for the membership vote. These folks have had extensive briefings and I want to know where they stand on the issue. They owe me an honest and forthright answer. Each and every board member needs to be on record as to their personal recommendation. Me personally I needed to read no further than section 1 give aways to know I was firm and unchangeable no. But, I need to know what reps share my sentiments and those that don't so I know who to vote for or against in being my elected representative going forward.

Good plan.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

I think - respectfully - that you're inserting foul play where there is none. They freely admit that they didn't like the deal but that the moderator wouldn't support them in any further negotiations. If the 23 member board voted the AIP down then the company spins it as an activist board out of touch with the pilots. If 8000 pilots vote it down, it's a mandate.

My reps say they'll be at the road show sharing their opinions. This is emotional enough. I look forward to reading what you write, but let's not assume the worst in the people who are volunteering to do the work of the Union. They have skin in the game too.

 

[PCL_128]

Having spent far more time than I'd like dealing with the NMB, I find it almost completely unbelievable that they're losing patience already. I'm sure the mediator may be saying such things to help speed along the process, but unless the execs have been called to K Street to be yelled at a few times, you're nowhere close to the Board's limit. I think what you've got are some negotiators and execs who just don't have the experience dealing with the Board to know how to work the process.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

Could be. Do you know anything about the NMB budget being spent for the year already? Supposedly was no $$ left in the budget for any further mediated sessions in 2015.

 

[PCL_128]

Could be. Do you know anything about the NMB budget being spent for the year already? Supposedly was no $$ left in the budget for any further mediated sessions in 2015.

That is possible. Their budget has been tight for years. They've been cutting at least as far back as 2009 or so. But nothing prevents the parties from meeting with each other without the mediator, of course.

Just as likely, however, is that the mediator is just putting pressure on them. They'll tell you just about anything to get you moving. That's their job.

 

[FurloughedAgain]

Well, either way I think it speaks much louder to have the majority of 8000 pilots vote no than 23 guys who the company already believes are out of touch.

 

[PCL_128]

That's great logic, if it actually happens. Unfortunately, it rarely does. Instead, you usually get something like 60/40 against, and then the company takes a wag at how much more cash they need to throw on the table to get the other 10% +1 vote. That's why BODs/MECs are supposed to be the check valve.

 

[Lear70]

I think - respectfully - that you're inserting foul play where there is none. They freely admit that they didn't like the deal but that the moderator wouldn't support them in any further negotiations. If the 23 member board voted the AIP down then the company spins it as an activist board out of touch with the pilots. If 8000 pilots vote it down, it's a mandate.

My reps say they'll be at the road show sharing their opinions. This is emotional enough. I look forward to reading what you write, but let's not assume the worst in the people who are volunteering to do the work of the Union. They have skin in the game too.

I'm not inserting foul play where there is none. Did you read Jon Weak's blast email to the LAS pilots today? He clearly laid out what I just said here... Many BoD members thought they were going to have an opportunity to send it with a NO recommendation, then the vote never happened.

Weaks was the one who presented the resolution, by the way.

The rest I agree with you. 8,000 pilots voting NO would be a great mandate. Hell, 85% of them would be awesome, but with the NC in heavy "spin" mode, highly moderating the T.A. sections of the Q&A area, deleting replies, deleting threads, leaving just the NC's response then locking a thread,,,

There's a big sales job being pitched here, and I'm concerned that the agenda of those in control of the T.A. section of the website is not going to allow dissenting viewpoints to be even heard by the majority.

It's going to be up to the Reps who are against it and the pilots sharing this info with other pilots who aren't as engaged or we're hosed.

 

[Lear70]

Having spent far more time than I'd like dealing with the NMB, I find it almost completely unbelievable that they're losing patience already. I'm sure the mediator may be saying such things to help speed along the process, but unless the execs have been called to K Street to be yelled at a few times, you're nowhere close to the Board's limit. I think what you've got are some negotiators and execs who just don't have the experience dealing with the Board to know how to work the process.

That would be about right.

Straight from the horse's mouth, the rumor that the mediator was frustrated with us isn't true. She wasn't, she just said "You have converged on a point in RRC and it's largely industry leading, I'm not going to push the company for more, you're going to have to figure out what you want to do from here."

I'm not going to comment on the questionable "industry leading" on the Scope changes, I don't have Delta's or American's Scope sections to compare to see what the limits are on their touching international same-station code share.

 

[General Lee]

Go back to dispatching those RJs, General.

Ahahahahaha! You did say the DL TA would pass. You are a complete idiot. And go vacuum over by Moak's desk, you missed a spot.....



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[Nindiri]

I was a pretty solid NO vote when I first looked over the TA, but after reading a conversation about the retro/bonus/whatever, I'm reconsidering. Not that this TA is getting any better, but if the next TA is going to take away my bonus because I happen to be FAT, then I'm probably going to vote yes to lock it in now.