Arctichicken

1) Every reserve pilot has no choice but to call crew scheduling or check crew access at the end of the trip. Remind me again how this is better than ACARS telling a pilot to call crew scheduling at the end of every trip?
2) Still 12 days off on reserve and 13 days off three times a year. Improvement? Huh?
3) Vacation day at 3:45 is a joke. Even Kasher, 17 years ago, gave us 3:50. Of course, the company took us to arbitration arguing that it was a period and not a colon (3:50 vs 3.50). Management gets another Alaska discount!
4) Signing bonus/Retro pay or whatever they want to call it is a complete slap in the face. And no annual increases past 2024 gives the company a license to steal!
5) Pay rate is a joke. It doesn’t even cover inflation. The snap-up clause sounds like it only applies to TOS CA rate. Average of 5 carriers including B6 can be a doozy. B6 gets 1.x (?) after so many hours of credit. Has that been accounted for?
6) Great! We now get an extra hour of pay if we are 4 hours late getting home. It’s better than a kick the a$$ but hardly worth the pain.
7) 0.5 to 1% increase in 401K contribution will soon be below that of our counterparts. Even the 1% snap up is not up to par since the big boys will most likely get close to 19%.
These are my initial thoughts for now. If this was 2009 or 2013, I’d say we hit it out of the park. There has been no better time than now for pilot contract negotiations. The improvements that were achieved are fairly significant but sadly, we are now on par with everyone else. Yes, our current contract sucks that bad. It’s a good start but we will be left in the dust when the “five” come out with their TAs. How about we have a snap up clause to their work rules of their new TAs? SWA and DAL both came out ahead after voting theirs down the first time. The company can afford to do better. Just my 2 cents.

Avgeek7248

I don’t think this is going to help stop the attrition. I think a majority of the pilot group understands now is the time to demand what we deserve and ask for more. I don’t think we lose much by voting NO. A few months and an even clearer sign to the company were not F’n around and there will be no Alaska discount this time around. The only risk I see is the impending recession. I also think the company sees that as an opportunity and wanted to get something pushed out quick both to try and stop attrition and to pressure the group into something because we all know the recession is coming.

Arctichicken

I’m guessing you haven’t been around the Angle Lake block for long. Everyone will vote with their pockets. This TA will most likely pass since this pilot group has a history of being the “Chicken Little sheep”. After the dust settles, everyone will claim to have voted NO. On a selfish level, I can make this TA work with my seniority, just like OCDPigeon himself. As a whole, we would be leaving more than you will ever know on the table if this TA passes.

BasicB

Agreed. This is, at best a 2018 contract to bring us up to par with industry standard. That doesn't pass in a 2022-23 environment. With the regionals ,making even more than ever, these pay scales are not where they need to be. The bonus is not even close to what we should be getting for all our years of work and being under paid. The vacation still needs work, what happened to deadhead pay at 100%?, holiday pay should be for everyone regardless if they work or not (even non-union SkyWest has that) there's so much more.. this is our one chance to get an amazing contract. Everyone here has been working under an awful contract for so long that an "ok" contract looks like the end all. We all can do so much better!

TheMitigator

Im relatively new and have been waiting to see this TA to decide whether to leave or not. If it passes im gone. OTZ may be right about the vote but is absolutely wrong about attrition just like the 3 other mergers which didn’t happen so no surprise there.

1st year pay is a joke, snap up is useless, etc etc.

KnockKnock

So you're saying the company needs this signed in by Nov 1st in order to complete a larger deal? Shouldn't you be advocating that we vote NO, based on this, "fact", alone? They would have to really sweeten the pot to get that all important yes vote, to move forward on this, "conditional", (merger/acquisition)....but you seem ok with tossing your leverage in the trash.

OTZeagle1

Dude this is a 75-80% contract, it’s the industry, I guarantee if the market moves significantly higher we will absolutely keep step. If you are a midcon or Ecoast commuters, this job is never going to be great. If you are a west coast guy/gal, this is gonna be a great gig. People will come here, people will stay here, people will be very happy here. If you are part of the angry 30, you will never, ever be happy. This is done, this will pass, the MEC and NG worked there butt off and got us a great contract that will only move higher!

flyprdu

More predictions from our very own Carnac the Magnificent.

Pedantillious

I think folks should zoom out, take 72 hours to learn all of the nuanced details of how this deal actually works, and understand why there was unanimous consent by the MEC.

Will, Joe, Garin, Ronan, and the entirety of the elected representatives support this deal. Of the elected reps there were zero no votes. What’s more likely? Did they suddenly all turn into company kiss asses, or did they evaluate what they ended up with scrupulously, asses the real negotiations landscape, and decide this was a TA worthy of putting up for vote?

Furtrhermore, what do we think a no vote of 51-70% will yield us in negotiations. Do we get realeased from mediation because we think we deserved retro back to 4/1/20 when the revenue had fallen off a cliff for the entire industry? Do we think a mediation board releases us for that? Do we get released because we think we’re worth 330 right now when AA or likely ends up at 305(I’ll happily eat crow if AA ends up significantly higher.). Our MEC has been talking with other MECs to understand the pulse of their realities too. So has the company…

Every voter most certainly has the right to a no vote if that’s what they think the right thing to do is. I would only ask that you think seriously about what executable leverage you have about forcing something materially better and in what timeframe. If we shoot this down maybe the company coughs up more in retro and rates sooner rather than later, or maybe we go into protracted mediation… what will the mediator say about who has bargained in good faith… in my eyes the company just reset the clock if we choose that path. I don’t know if this is the absolute right way to evaluate this situation, but it’s my perspective.

Lenticularis

just browsing the sentiments spoken here. OTZ I gotta say I’m born raised in the PNW and I have never ever considered working at Alaska airline. I like Alaska and all you guys/gals are great but it doesn’t compare to the other opportunities that are available to people. I hope you guys vote it down. Don’t get quarterback faked!