Spirit Strike VOTE

[:-)]

Time to Stand Up to this POS management. I am voting yes, not just for my personal gains but to raise the bar in this industry. It is not worth working for a company that has no respect for its employees or its passengers. Lets get what we are worth and turn this company around.

What do you really want to do?

- stand up to the POS managers?
- raise the bar?
- get what you are worth?
- turn the company around?

You gots to prioritize. Me, I don't care about standing up to managers. I don't care about raising the bar and I don't care about turning the company around.

I only want to remain employed. Not one pilot at Spirit whose off of probation makes less than $40 grand a year. If you can make better elsewhere, don't le the door hit you on the ar$e on your way out. Do you like Alaska's money, go to work for Alaska.

 

[:-)]

How is that relevant for this vote? That is not even intelligent.

It be more intelligent than striking a weak company (run a union buster) in the worst economy since the great depression.

 

[kwick]

AA got a good contract because they had pilots with balls who would strike if they had to.

Why don't you quit and go to American?

 

[huncowboy]

It be more intelligent than striking a weak company (run a union buster) in the worst economy since the great depression.

Except that we have no idea how weak or strong NK is doing. Planes are still filled while fuel is down. The capacity cut (of 20%) must have resulted in additional savings. Most companies are reporting 10-15% decrease in traffic. We should have a +5% balance due to our 20% capacity cut. And that is assuming NK has experienced the same drop the legacy carries have experienced. Fuel cost speaks for itself. All that should have resulted in significant cost savings that should eventually lead to growth unless there is further drop in traffic. It is also a fact that they were looking for airplanes. Allegiant, while a different animal, posted record operating margins. Airtran has said it was expecting profits for this year. But that is just guessing. We will see the real numbers coming from the industry I believe this week. Only then can you say how bad the sector has been doing in Q1 and make some speculation about NK. Until then we simply do not know.

But this is not why your post was unintelligent. Your comment was unintelligent not because it is debatable whether we should strike now or later, but because the strike is already on its way and it is going to pass. What is debatable is whether it will be a strong or a weak vote and it makes a huge difference and that in fact has nothing to do with how many pilots (including myself) are on the street at this moment. Of course you could argue that the vote will indeed not pass and this is why you are voting against it. In that case I'd understand your position. Is that what you are arguing? I don't think so.

3 outcomes of this vote:

1. high pass (85-100% votes yes)
2. low pass (51-84% votes yes)
3. fail (0-50% votes yes)

Effect on pilots:

1. Good (It will yield a good position for the MEC to negotiate a good TA fairly soon because they can argue that their pilots are ready for a change and want significant improvements. They can present their “high YES” vote to support their position.)

2. Bad (It will put the union into a low leverage position and the argument is in favor of management because they will argue that a fairly weak TA is enough to pass because most pilot are even happy with the current CBA. This will result in a TA that has very little improvement.)

3. Debatable (Subjective because you would argue this is good especially so if you are against current MEC. I would argue it is bad because I am afraid of the effect on morale, unity, and the time it will take to get another CBA will undoubtedly be extended. I am also not interested in a better or different MEC because I doubt that will make a major difference and I have no emotional ties to the old or the current MEC.)

So what is the likelihood of each scenario to happen? We have no scientific polls to go by but my gut feeling is that it will definitely pass. However I am starting to be afraid of a low pass. Unless you are certain of a NO outcome it makes no sense to vote NO. And that is regardless of the state of the economy, now that the vote is on it’s way. A NO vote by a small margin (+15%) of pilots is the absolutely the worst outcome we could have. I think this is beyond argument. This is the scenario exactly where the company wants us to be. They will be able to play the "bad economy card" + "low strike support" combined and force the MEC into a substandard TA.

A failed strike vote would result in status quo. Would status quo be better for the company? No it would not be because they know the “bad economy” card can only be played for so long. In addition it is in their interest to go into a growth phase with a CBA especially if they do want to go public within the next couple of years. So if you vote NO, knowing the vote will probably pass, you are playing into the hands of the company. Vote NO only if you are certain the vote will fail.

I too have said the strike was not timed properly. Unfortunately that is now behind us and unchangeable so don't bring the weak economy argument to the table since it has no relevance anymore.

 

[Mike man]

I'd like know what we are striking for...

Better pay? What are the sample rates?
401(k) match? What percent?
Better work rules? What are they?

Why burn it down if we don't know what we are lighting the match for?

 

[vandypilot]

I'd like know what we are striking for...

Better pay? What are the sample rates?
401(k) match? What percent?
Better work rules? What are they?

Why burn it down if we don't know what we are lighting the match for?

yeah post what the negotiating committee is aiming for so the company can read this board and know what our lowest offer is. real smart.

lets show this company that we are willing to strike. the state of the economy does not matter to the outcome of a contract. look at delta and united. they got an awsome contract during the peak of the economy and gave it all way after 911 during bankruptcy. they gave away good work rules for higher pay. only after bankruptcy to be left with crappy pay and crappy work rules. we gave away pay and work rules back in 2003. now its time to get them back. VOTE YES. we could wait 2 years for the economy to turn around and still be in the same spot as delta and united did.

 

[Gearthrower]

A little clarification is need here as to what the strike vote's is. They usually occur way before any potential strike. A strike vote is an ALPA bylaw requirement not an RLA requirement and does not signify or require any immediate action. One example, is ASA, they took a strike vote 2 1/2 years before they settled their contract just recently. This is a readiness vote not an immediate action vote or a vote that requires the MEC to ask for a release. Put simply, this vote is a way for your Negotiating Committee to tell the company they are ready.

If the mediator feels in his or her opinion that negotiations have stalled and need to move to the next step, the negotiator recommends and determines to a large degree if a release happens. If the mediator offers a Proffer of Arbitration to both parties this signifies the beginning of a potential cooling off period. Usually or always both parties decline the proffer and then he recommends a release to the NMB board. The board then brings the parties together seperatly to inquire as to their demands and then the debate whether a release would assist negotiations. The three member board then votes whether to release the two parties into Super Mediation. Once release into super mediation the 30 day cooling off period begins. At the end of the 30 days they asses whether both parties want to continue to negotiate if so no strike, if they do not then they release both to self help.

At best this takes months!

 

[ThreeGreens]

A little clarification is need here as to what the strike vote's is. They usually occur way before any potential strike. A strike vote is an ALPA bylaw requirement not an RLA requirement and does not signify or require any immediate action. One example, is ASA, they took a strike vote 2 1/2 years before they settled their contract just recently. This is a readiness vote not an immediate action vote or a vote that requires the MEC to ask for a release. Put simply, this vote is a way for your Negotiating Committee to tell the company they are ready.

If the mediator feels in his or her opinion that negotiations have stalled and need to move to the next step, the negotiator recommends and determines to a large degree if a release happens. If the mediator offers a Proffer of Arbitration to both parties this signifies the beginning of a potential cooling off period. Usually or always both parties decline the proffer and then he recommends a release to the NMB board. The board then brings the parties together seperatly to inquire as to their demands and then the debate whether a release would assist negotiations. The three member board then votes whether to release the two parties into Super Mediation. Once release into super mediation the 30 day cooling off period begins. At the end of the 30 days they asses whether both parties want to continue to negotiate if so no strike, if they do not then they release both to self help.

At best this takes months!

I wish more people would read your post and understand this.

 

[njcapt]

I'm 100% behind the Spirit folks, but you need to drive the expectations of a strike vote up somewhat. If the vote doesn't come back above 90% in favor you can kiss any additional negotiating leverage with the company goodbye. They know you'll lose about 20% of the yes voters when the rubber hits the road (so to speak) and will propagandize the crap out of the pilot group in an effort to divide the weak supporters into crossing.

If you get in the mid 90's you can drive it right up their a$$es. I participated in a 98% vote at ALG in the early 90's and we got a great contract, then was on the Negotiating Committee at ATA when the best we could do was a 86% vote and the company made us their b!tch. Yeah there were other factors in play, but the low strike vote killed any leverage we had.

 

[Mike man]

A little clarification is need here as to what the strike vote's is. They usually occur way before any potential strike. A strike vote is an ALPA bylaw requirement not an RLA requirement and does not signify or require any immediate action. One example, is ASA, they took a strike vote 2 1/2 years before they settled their contract just recently. This is a readiness vote not an immediate action vote or a vote that requires the MEC to ask for a release. Put simply, this vote is a way for your Negotiating Committee to tell the company they are ready.

If the mediator feels in his or her opinion that negotiations have stalled and need to move to the next step, the negotiator recommends and determines to a large degree if a release happens. If the mediator offers a Proffer of Arbitration to both parties this signifies the beginning of a potential cooling off period. Usually or always both parties decline the proffer and then he recommends a release to the NMB board. The board then brings the parties together seperatly to inquire as to their demands and then the debate whether a release would assist negotiations. The three member board then votes whether to release the two parties into Super Mediation. Once release into super mediation the 30 day cooling off period begins. At the end of the 30 days they asses whether both parties want to continue to negotiate if so no strike, if they do not then they release both to self help.

At best this takes months!

SPA ALPA needs to do a much better job of getting this word out