SWAPA TA2 heads to the membership for a vote.

[shootr]

Granfathering the lances was NOT all about the 200 or so lances. For me, doing away with them was just another way of taking current flying done by the FO's to the CA side. Junior FO's are getting good turns from the lances. The former lances would have kept this flying, thus keeping more open time available to the senior side of the CA list. Due to flexibility loss, I also think it would have had a negative impact on junior CA's. Who would take their F-S-Su 19.5 trip, allowing them to pick up something better? Keeping the lances for now is helpful to the bottom 2/3 of the entire seniority list.

 

[scoreboardII]

This will pass.

 

[shootr]

without a doubt

 

[ableone]

I was a no voter and may very well be a no voter, again. However, I am open to the idea that the QOL/scheduling fixes may have more value than the SLIGHT loss in pay from TA1 to TA2. Waiting for the final language...

Who do you work for, able? Just sayin'...

shootr

I am not talking about the pay rates. I agree that scheduling enhancements may be well worth a lower hourly, or in your case trip rate.

I am talking about the overall price of the package. It is my understanding that the TA2 package is worth millions less than the TA1 package. If this is true you would be well advised to vote no, regardless of how you voted in TA1.

If TA2 is worth less than TA1 and you approve it the company will know that in the future they can always win 50%+1 by threatening that should the membership vote no, the next package will be worth less.

You don't want them operating this way. You will be at a strategic disadvantage in every future negotiation.

 

[Daddy]

No, I read them. Sorry to bunch you in with the lances, it just seems that four out of five forum posters on both TA1 and now TA2 are lances complaining.

Sheared,
I feel the same way as shootr...you do not seem to be comprehending some of the concepts here and just defaulting to an answer that everyone must be a lance if they are posting here.

For all,
There is not much to discuss on this TA...it is going to pass by at least a 2 to 1 margin. We were not able to gain that much in pay because of the pay rates of other narrowbody pilots. We did make gains in other areas like scope and that will have to do for now. I think most in SWAPA will agree that we could have done better, but not with the current SWAPA leadership. We'll try again in a couple years with a new BoD and front office.

 

[gutshotdraw]

Outsider question: Where are all the foam-at-the-mouth senior folks who were screaming "we'll never do this well on a new TA. Gary is laughing at us" when TA 1 failed? Sounds to me like the TA 1 no voters got it right.

 

[shootr]

Most yes voters I have spoken to agree that the no vote was useful and helpful to our cause. Of course hindsight is 20/20. Easy to say we (the no voters) were right after seeing what happened.

 

[gutshotdraw]

When is the vote?

 

[shootr]

October 2 - November 1

 

[FR8dognit]

When is the vote?

Opens 2 OCT
Closes 1 NOV

prediction PASS 74%-26%

Me...voted no the first time around...will probably vote yes this time. This contract was not about pay rates for me. It was all about scope and codeshare. After looking at TA 1 some other things [open time, ELITT, ETC] came to light. They appearantly have fixed most of the things that caused me to vote no.

Just from talking to folks around campus, I suspect there are many people that voted no the first time around that feel the same way I do. It is time to put this one behind us.:smash: