The Negatives of the new Netjets proposal

[doylehargraves]

Ok NJA folks, we keep hearing from our CP at Flexjet that we only talk about the good things from this new proposal and that its not fair to only talk about the good things. For our benefit, what are the bad things in this new deal so we may discuss?

 

[Mooneymite]

Danger, danger!

I am fairly new at NetJets...less than 2 years, so most of the big stuff seems to be aimed at bringing me up to the so-called "pre-rats". If this passes, I'll get to give up my 9.5 hour drive to/from work. I get a nice raise. I get a choice of three different schedules. I get to use a sick day for an off-day without having to tell a lie. All good.

What are the negatives?

There are two biggies as far as I'm concerned:

A 39 month seat-lock is onerous. For a first officer looking for his first captain up-grade, being seat-locked for more than 3 years on a non-apu aircraft during a time of rapid movement is a tough pill to swallow.

A contract that can possibly last until 2016 is outright dangerous should we have a period of hyper-inflation. Some of you might be old enough to remember how far wages fell behind during Jimmy Carter's presidency. I will never forget the economic hardship this economy impossed on every wage earner.

Danger, danger!

Exercise extreme caution.

I am really on the horns of a dilema. I really want to stop commuting and really would love the raise, but I have to ask myself if this interim agreement is a short cut to job/wage stagnation.

 

[mauipilot]

That 39 month seat lock still doesnt apply to a captain upgrade. Even if you bid in to the falcon as an fo which incurs another 39 month seat lock after you complete your inital seatlock you can still upgrade to captain and your seat lock just rolls over.

 

[x402]

The IBB TA has a few elements that 'some' dislike but I believe it will pass >65%.
Some instructors 'may' get assigned to lines or schedules they don't want.

18 day schedule will be just that 18 days.

The length bothers some, but if the option years are picked up it will mean NJI/NJA has been resolved.

Some 14+ year pilots feel their pay will have been capped.

Some think we should wait until this contract is amendable 2 years and have at it then.

These are internal issues and I can't see that your CP would be able to interpret them as bad things. They are things that some here disagree with but not bad.
All in all great raise and QOL for new guys, ok raise for everyone else, oh and another signing bonus.

Time will tell how the vote goes.

 

[DO-82 driver]

This is not really the appropriate venue to discuss this topic.

Many of the negatives are only perceived until they are properly explained and understood. I had several negatives until I picked up a phone and called an MEC member and things were explained to my satisfaction.

Are there some negatives....sure. Let's talk about them on the secure Union board. That's where the decisions to vote "YES" or "NO" will be made.

The rest of the world will have to wait until Nov 20th

 

[On Your Six]

Contract for the next 8 years?????

I don't work at NJA, but I have a few friends who do. Basically it is a short-term vs. long-term tradeoff. For anyone who was hired post-ratification of the last TA, this will enable them to boost their salaries and choose from 100 total domiciles - that would be a significant QOL win for the pilots. Plus, interest in NJA would jump because pilots from every other facet of aviation would be interested in the choice of domiciles and high pay (including some major airlines). It would be very positive for some pilots in the short term.

On the other hand, my friends are very concerned about the implications of a contract that could last until 2016 - that is a loooooooooong time. Many things could happen during that time.

So, it's a short-term vs. a long-term type of question. Do you take the short term benefit of the initial higher wage and great domicile choices? Or do you think about the long-term considerations in which you could be screwing yourself for a very long time depending on what happens in the industry. What about inflationary concerns? What about structural changes in the industry? Why can't NJA provide the domiciles in a home-basing format like the formerly did for NJA and currently do for NJI? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. NJA management is waving this initial salary/domicile carrot in front of all of the junior people to entice them and to distract them from the long-term picture that would surely benefit them (not having to negotiate for a long, long time).

Personally, there is no way I would agree to any contract that long. Never - that is way too long (and it includes a negotiating period at the end). Netjets management knows that it needs pilots NOW for growth and the current domicile system is ridiculous (and NJA management knows that - it is basically a bargaining chip that they are waving around). If NJA management is serious about attracting and RETAINING the best pilots it will have to change the domicile policy because pilots are actively avoiding Netjets because of the restrictions. Plus, NJI (the related Gulfstream operation that is not unionized) already operates on a home-basing setup - so, we know it can be done if NJA management wants to make the change. Home basing can be done - and that's the way NJA used to do it.

So, if you think about this as a long-term career issue, I would vote NO if I were in your position and I would wait for NJA management to make the INEVITABLE domicile and salary changes (or I would have the union reps negotiate it). If they don't, I believe attrition rates will increase as the majors continue to hire more and the so-called "best pilots" avoid the joint going forward. This is a long-term vs. short-term bet. It is very easy to focus on the short-term benefits and forget about the long-term implications - and NJA management wants you to focus on the S-T picture.

That's my $0.02.

 

[MILPILOT]

May 22, 2013 would be the new end date with an option to extend to May 21, 2016. This IBB extends the 2005 CBA 2 years and 6 months.

 

[Mooneymite]

That 39 month seat lock still doesnt apply to a captain upgrade. Even if you bid in to the falcon as an fo which incurs another 39 month seat lock after you complete your inital seatlock you can still upgrade to captain and your seat lock just rolls over.

The 39 month seat lock does apply.

You are not prevented from up-grading from FO to your first captain seat. However, you do incur a seat lock in that first captain seat.

If you are an FO with 10 months left on your FO seat lock, you may immediately up-grade to captain, but you have a seat lock in whatever airplane you up-grade to. If it is an airplane with "low desireability", you are stuck there until your seat-lock is up.

 

[Mooneymite]

This is not really the appropriate venue to discuss this topic.

Huh?

The question was "what are the bad things in this new deal..."

Seems like a reasonable question to me. Anyone interested in applying to NetJets needs to know what's cooking in NetJets land.

 

[cush]

I don't work at NJA, but I have a few friends who do. Basically it is a short-term vs. long-term tradeoff. For anyone who was hired post-ratification of the last TA, this will enable them to boost their salaries and choose from 100 total domiciles - that would be a significant QOL win for the pilots. Plus, interest in NJA would jump because pilots from every other facet of aviation would be interested in the choice of domiciles and high pay (including some major airlines). It would be very positive for some pilots in the short term.

On the other hand, my friends are very concerned about the implications of a contract that could last until 2016 - that is a loooooooooong time. Many things could happen during that time.

So, it's a short-term vs. a long-term type of question. Do you take the short term benefit of the initial higher wage and great domicile choices? Or do you think about the long-term considerations in which you could be screwing yourself for a very long time depending on what happens in the industry. What about inflationary concerns? What about structural changes in the industry? Why can't NJA provide the domiciles in a home-basing format like the formerly did for NJA and currently do for NJI? There are a lot of questions that need to be answered. NJA management is waving this initial salary/domicile carrot in front of all of the junior people to entice them and to distract them from the long-term picture that would surely benefit them (not having to negotiate for a long, long time).

Personally, there is no way I would agree to any contract that long. Never - that is way too long (and it includes a negotiating period at the end). Netjets management knows that it needs pilots NOW for growth and the current domicile system is ridiculous (and NJA management knows that - it is basically a bargaining chip that they are waving around). If NJA management is serious about attracting and RETAINING the best pilots it will have to change the domicile policy because pilots are actively avoiding Netjets because of the restrictions. Plus, NJI (the related Gulfstream operation that is not unionized) already operates on a home-basing setup - so, we know it can be done if NJA management wants to make the change. Home basing can be done - and that's the way NJA used to do it.

So, if you think about this as a long-term career issue, I would vote NO if I were in your position and I would wait for NJA management to make the INEVITABLE domicile and salary changes (or I would have the union reps negotiate it). If they don't, I believe attrition rates will increase as the majors continue to hire more and the so-called "best pilots" avoid the joint going forward. This is a long-term vs. short-term bet. It is very easy to focus on the short-term benefits and forget about the long-term implications - and NJA management wants you to focus on the S-T picture.

That's my $0.02.

Very well stated. This contract will dictate half of the rest of mine and manys career at Netjets. Not to mention i'm a year 12 guy on (was) the verge of a class 4 bid....the rug has been pulled away...AGAIN!

 

[Dr Pepper]

Mooney,
Upgrades for new hires will likely happen after there seat lock has expired. The beauty of seat locks, or the pain if you will, is that it causes one to make choices. Stay in the a/c they are currently in and incur no new seat lock until upgrade. Or move to an aircraft greater than 40K GTOW, and then they must decide to upgrade "on-time" with the roll-over lock or stay in the seat until the lock expires. How much do you value your $ or your APU/TCAS? I will concede that I am in a "good" aircraft (everything is relative) and won't go non-APU for 7 or so years in a row.

On-Your-Six,
One of the big debates is the time value of money and how clear is your crystal ball. The voters must decided if they truely can recoop the loses over a career by voting no (if this is their driving issue). Also, one must decide if they think we will get a deal as good, better or worse in 2010-2012 (however long it takes to amend the 05 CBA). It has been made clear that there is no chance for IBB2 if this fails - no time.

Doyle,
Other concerns are:
- the 100 bases are still arbitrary.
-Falcon guys will not make what they could have previously.
- No annual adjustment to the base salaries
- PTO is complex and useless (for its intended purpose) to the junior pilot (seat/fleet).
- The 15 day flex schedule - you have 0 control. It can be junior assigned.
- PBS has 24 months to be implemented. Why does it need to take that long when the programming is already in existance?
- There are some changes to the HBA system that have weaker language than the '05 doc.
- Retiree health care is changed. Some see this as a minus, others as a necessity.
- Use of the company credit card.

This is a negotiation though. Some of these negatives are only negatives for a select group. To each his/her own. Vote accordingly.

 

[old*art]

Anybody pre 98 should have very few complaints. If you want the money you can make yr 12 $155,000 to $166,000 yr 14 regardless of aircraft, signing bonus of +/- $21,000 yr 12, 4% per year longevity bonus after 15 yrs, cola after 2013 if contract is extended, family medical fully funded - at least $10,000 -, unless you are a complete pig and cannot survive on company crew meals, $240 a tour tax free, 50% match 401k = $7500 a year with terrific investment options, 4 weeks vacation at yr 12, treat you great if you have a family emergency .. get out of the way and let someone have the job who will appreciate it !
Tell me who else will pay you like this for the work you do !!

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

Another consideration looking long term:

If this TA passes, I would assume that NetJets would get a lot of new guys applying with good credentials.

If this TA is shot down, then NetJets will get less pilots applying and less qualified pilots applying. This situation will get worse as the pilot shortage gets worse, month after month, into the foreseeable future. (Boeing predicts that worldwide, 17,000 new airline pilots are needed per year for the next 20 years.).

If the number of new hires isn't enough to staff the expanded fleet, the company will make less money, thus they will have less to pay the current pilots in future contracts.

If the quality of new hires isn't as good, then the owners may perceive that NetJets is worth less money, thus leading them to switch fracs or not sign up with NetJets in the first place.

The situation, like everything on Earth, is very complicated.

If you are a NetJets pilot, I hope the vote goes your way.

cliff
ABQ

 

[johnsonrod]

Vote it DOWN! Don't accept the management carrot...

I love the idea of working at Netjets. Great airplanes, unlimited route variety, very good money relative to all regionals and even some national airlines. However, I do get concerned when I think of the long-term nature of this proposed contract. A deal that could potentially last through 2016 is too long - I agree with On Your Six.

I also agree that the domicile offer is just one big carrot being dangled in front of the junior pilots who had been stiffed by the restrictive 5 domicile policy. Netjets could easily institute 20, 50 or 100 domiciles if they wanted to, but instead they use it as a bargaining chip. Both Citationshares and Avantair offer 20-40 domiciles each.

Given the choice, I would probably vote it DOWN as well. Netjets will have to make changes if they expect to hire the quality of pilots they promise their owners. Better pay and domicile selection will be required to do that. I just don't think you should give up your flexibility in the short term with a super-long term contract. That sounds foolish and short-sighted to me.

 

[gutshotdraw]

After having re-read the TA a few times now to make sure I wasn't missing something: Don't base your vote on the length of contract. In my assessment, the Company will not meet all the terms required to automatically extend the contract 2 1/2 years. Beyond that, decide for yourself and your situation which is better and vote accordingly.

 

[marqmarq]

I don't get it

Our contract will be extended to 2013. We get a big bump now. FOs get taken care of. Junior captains do well, senior captains, maybe not so much. If we wait we HOPE that we can get something better in 2010. No guarantees here except what we agree to now. IF the company meets several benchmarks, including the incorporation of NJI, then the contract goes to 2016. And what happens then? Well, captains will see a $10k+ raise each year between 2013 and 2016! More importantly, if we wait, who is going to negociate for us? It'll be the same folks who gave us the 2005 CBA and the IBB. The same ones who recommend the IBB. Those screaming and yelling the loudest about the imperfections are incapable of leading the pilot group (have they run for office??) and/or they cannot or will not make the sacrifices of the current leadership.

Questions and dialogue are wonderful and necessary. Close review by the pilot group has pointed out some errors and given the leadership a chance to clarify new and confusing language.

While change is scary, the fear will recede, and eventually we'll all start bit*hing about the contract because that is what pilots do. Otherwise, he IBB is a good deal for the pilot group.

 

[RNObased]

Ok NJA folks, we keep hearing from our CP at Flexjet that we only talk about the good things from this new proposal and that its not fair to only talk about the good things. For our benefit, what are the bad things in this new deal so we may discuss?

Sounds like your CP is on a fishing mission.

There is some stuff that I think is bad, but that is from the inside of NJA looking at it. Most of the bad stuff is internal changes. If you are on the outside looking in, you would be hard pressed to find a lot of bad.

Example; I know guys over at Flex used to work 6 on 4 off, using 28 days as a month. (Personally that is a BS tatic for getting more work out of you, but I won't go there right now) So say you did this on the 18 days schedule at NJA, if it gets voted in. My base salary would be around 135,000 and that is on a real month, not a fake 28 day one, is your salary going to be anywhere close to that???

 

[doylehargraves]

RNO, good point. Something "bad" to you guys might not necessarily appear bad to us. It's all relative I suppose. Bottom line here is they should give us a raise based on the last 2 great years we've had. I wonder what would happen if you guys vote "no" and then we get a raise that surpasses NJ?? Might create some tension over there.

 

[imacdog]

I love the idea of working at Netjets. Great airplanes, unlimited route variety, very good money relative to all regionals and even some national airlines. However, I do get concerned when I think of the long-term nature of this proposed contract. A deal that could potentially last through 2016 is too long - I agree with On Your Six.

I also agree that the domicile offer is just one big carrot being dangled in front of the junior pilots who had been stiffed by the restrictive 5 domicile policy. Netjets could easily institute 20, 50 or 100 domiciles if they wanted to, but instead they use it as a bargaining chip. Both Citationshares and Avantair offer 20-40 domiciles each.

Given the choice, I would probably vote it DOWN as well. Netjets will have to make changes if they expect to hire the quality of pilots they promise their owners. Better pay and domicile selection will be required to do that. I just don't think you should give up your flexibility in the short term with a super-long term contract. That sounds foolish and short-sighted to me.

Do you even work for NJA? Have you read the entire TA?

 

[netjetwife]

More importantly, if we wait, who is going to negociate for us? It'll be the same folks who gave us the 2005 CBA and the IBB. The same ones who recommend the IBB. Those screaming and yelling the loudest about the imperfections are incapable of leading the pilot group (have they run for office??) and/or they cannot or will not make the sacrifices of the current leadership.

Mx2, The last part of your statement is more realistic than the beginning. I think it's a mistake to assume that the current negotiators of the IBB proposal would make the same effort all over again IF the pilot group gives their work a vote of no confidence. The natural reaction would be to suggest those dissatisfied should take their place; as in "Be my guest" and other less polite expressions. Even if the present team was willing, human nature says the company would not be. (Insert the angry, crude phrase you use in that situation). IBB was written in a spirit of cooperation and ushers in a new era of mutual respect. The company is meeting the pilots half way. If that effort is rejected it could set 1108 back to the days of the contract battle, and the current leadership has made it clear they want to keep moving forward. Positive reinforcement (voting yes) may very well lead to another round of talks a few years down the road. [personal observation and deductive reasoning only]

The downside of the IBB proposal, then, is the test that is forced on the new relationship that both sides have invested heavily in with time and effort. Those who say it's not just about the money and the bases are right. Far more is at stake and the potential pay off is huge. IBB represents a whole new way of doing business for the NJ pilots and management. The proposal is a sign post to a brighter, more secure future.

 

[RNObased]

RNO, good point. Something "bad" to you guys might not necessarily appear bad to us. It's all relative I suppose. Bottom line here is they should give us a raise based on the last 2 great years we've had. I wonder what would happen if you guys vote "no" and then we get a raise that surpasses NJ?? Might create some tension over there.

Doyle,
Yeah, if it went down there would be issues, you are correct in that regard. However I think it is passing, with a yes vote of somewhere around 80%. (This number has been going up, as more and more hardcores post they are voting yes). The fact is this is a decent deal, notice I didn't say exellent, and helps the pilot group in the long term. (Yes, I know there are flaws so don't jump all over me about that last statement, I have read the IBB twice already)

As for you guys, I agree you need a raise, will they give it to you out of the kindness of there hearts??? Time will tell. As for it being more then ours??? Don't know about that.

Have you ever considered the theory that RTS put out these pay scales to put pressure on the mangement of the other fractionals???

 

[On Your Six]

Doyle,
Yeah, if it went down there would be issues, you are correct in that regard. However I think it is passing, with a yes vote of somewhere around 80%. (This number has been going up, as more and more hardcores post they are voting yes). The fact is this is a decent deal, notice I didn't say exellent, and helps the pilot group in the long term. (Yes, I know there are flaws so don't jump all over me about that last statement, I have read the IBB twice already)

As for you guys, I agree you need a raise, will they give it to you out of the kindness of there hearts??? Time will tell. As for it being more then ours??? Don't know about that.

Have you ever considered the theory that RTS put out these pay scales to put pressure on the mangement of the other fractionals???[/quote]

Maybe RTS did it to poach the pilots Citationshares claims it has who are the "best pilots in the industry." I've seen CS's corporate video and that's what it claims. Clearly those pilots need to move to Netjets.

 

[pilotyip]

Would this not be an equipment lock.

That 39 month seat lock still doesnt apply to a captain upgrade. Even if you bid in to the falcon as an fo which incurs another 39 month seat lock after you complete your inital seatlock you can still upgrade to captain and your seat lock just rolls over.

this not be an equipment lock or combination thereof?

 

[av8tor4239]

At ASA our contract was signed in 1998, it became amendable in 2002 and we just got a ta last week in 2007.. THAT IS 9 YEARS OPERATING ON A PRE 9/11 CONTRACT. And out QOL is still in the TOP 3 of all regionals..

5 years of negotiations.. almost 300 mediated sessions.

This is a great opportunity for NetJet pilots and to vote this down would be INSANE..

MAKE SURE YOU READ THE LANGUAGE AND WHAT THE COMPANY HAS TO DO TO MAKE IT EXTEND UNTIL 2016. DO NOT BASE YOU VOTE ON WHAT YOU READ ON FLIGHTINFO.COM

 

[Guitar Guy]

this not be an equipment lock or combination thereof?

Upon hiring, a new-hire would get a 39-month "Initial Equipment Lock in his aircraft type and duty position", which starts the first day he reports for any company-required training. This initial lock will not prevent said crewmember from upgrading to his first captain position, regardless of aircraft type. If that upgrade is in a different type, there is a new 39-month equipment lock. If the first upgrade is in type, only the remaining portion of the original 39-month equipment lock still applies.

If a new-hire, after his initial 39-month lock, switches to a new fleet still as an SIC, a new 39-month lock is incurred. However, unlike our current CBA, that person could take the first available in upgrade in a different fleet without restriction from the new seat lock. In that instance, the balance of the second lock would be added to the new lock incurred when taking the upgrade. For instance, say someone is hired into the 400XP and after 39 months, bids to the G200. Then, 14 months after getting the G200, that person bids and is awarded an upgrade in the Encore. That person would have the portion of the G200 lock (25 months) added to the new Encore lock, for a total lock in the Encore of 64 months (39+25 months). (And yes, in this example, the person would find himself in the E-boat for over 5 years.)

At least that's how I understand it to work from reading Section 15.4.

Disclaimer: don't read anything into upgrade projections based on my example. Your mileage may vary...

 

[CA1900]

this not be an equipment lock or combination thereof?

Not in the new TA. If it passes, the "subsequent equipment lock" for FOs -- i.e., bidding another airplane before upgrade -- will not delay your first upgrade, unlike the current contract.

If an FO bids a different airplane as an FO, and is later awarded an upgrade during his equipment lock, he can still upgrade into it. The remainder of his FO equipment lock will be added to the 39-month lock on his new airplane. (If he upgrades into the same type he's already flying, no new locks are added; it's only if his switches airplanes again.)

 

[rettofly]

Maybe RTS did it to poach the pilots Citationshares claims it has who are the "best pilots in the industry." I've seen CS's corporate video and that's what it claims. Clearly those pilots need to move to Netjets.

I thought Flex has the "best pilots in the industry". No, wait.. it's Avantair! No, it's NJA. Wrong! Flops has the best pilots. Wrong again. Brand (insert a name) has the best pilots. Just ask the Marketing weasels at ((insert a name). They'll tell you.

Who needs all the hype about who has the best pilots? In my seven years and three different employers in the Frax, I only see a whole bunch of folks who have achieved a remarkable safety and customer satisfaction record.

Compensation and QOL varies between companies, but the pilot groups are all "the best".

Bottom line: The hype about who has the best pilots is just hype.

 

[On Your Six]

Upon hiring, a new-hire would get a 39-month "Initial Equipment Lock in his aircraft type and duty position", which starts the first day he reports for any company-required training. This initial lock will not prevent said crewmember from upgrading to his first captain position, regardless of aircraft type. If that upgrade is in a different type, there is a new 39-month equipment lock. If the first upgrade is in type, only the remaining portion of the original 39-month equipment lock still applies.

If a new-hire, after his initial 39-month lock, switches to a new fleet still as an SIC, a new 39-month lock is incurred. However, unlike our current CBA, that person could take the first available in upgrade in a different fleet without restriction from the new seat lock. In that instance, the balance of the second lock would be added to the new lock incurred when taking the upgrade. For instance, say someone is hired into the 400XP and after 39 months, bids to the G200. Then, 14 months after getting the G200, that person bids and is awarded an upgrade in the Encore. That person would have the portion of the G200 lock (25 months) added to the new Encore lock, for a total lock in the Encore of 64 months (39+25 months). (And yes, in this example, the person would find himself in the E-boat for over 5 years.)

At least that's how I understand it to work from reading Section 15.4.

Disclaimer: don't read anything into upgrade projections based on my example. Your mileage may vary...

5 years on the Encore with no APU!!!!!! That's reason enough to vote this thing down...

 

[NJA bound]

If you dont want the no APU A/C than dont bid upgrade in it. That was easy.

 

[imacdog]

It's only five years if you want it to be. Otherwise, wait for the lock on your current seat to be up, and whatever plane you upgrade into will incur the standard 39-month lock. It's all about choice.