Originally Posted by ImSoSuss

Was that your point, or did you answer his question about night override with something that is not night override to hide the fact that AA does not have that?

The OP's question, does AA have night override? I want a yes or no answer from you.

Originally Posted by Fly76

we do, just ours is 2 hours theirs is 4 hours.

Originally Posted by ImSoSuss

What if you are West Coast based and you have a front end red-eye? How about a mid-sequence overnight where you get in at 12:50 am? How much night override do you get?

Originally Posted by Flyinggrill

Agreed, this is a huge concession. No thanks.

Originally Posted by AB321Driver

Agreed. Company is bluffing just like 2020 Covid!
No way they will furlough. LMAO

Originally Posted by Easyflier301

Richest and most profitable legacy, by far, and STILL was in mediation for well over a year, and then reportedly only got their deal finalized following their CEO going on a national news network and ****ing off the mediator by saying the pilots couldn’t legally strike.

To expect that we could follow that same path by filing for immediate federal mediation and quickly win a few work rules, RIGS, and a pilot guaranteed trading system without losing any of the gains we currently stand to gain is just not realistic. Look at when SWAPAs and FDX ALPAs next scheduled meeting with their mediators are.

Originally Posted by FangsF15

FWIW, you are putting entirely too much impact on the DL CEO's comments. The contract was literally 98+% complete when that happened, with only 4 open items in the entire contract remaining: Pay rates, Vacation value, "Retro" pay, and (I don't recall anymore).

Did it have an impact? To an extent, of course it did. But acting like the DL CEO's comments on CNBC were responsible for DL's stellar contract (from which UALPA and APA copy/pasted literally dozens of major items) is dangerously ignorant and a huge disservice to DALPA's outstanding Negotiating Committee.

OBTW, due to Covid, DL was actually in active mediation for about 10 months. Given that it was almost a total rewrite, that's pretty good. At this point, most of the heavy lifting has been done - APA doesn't have anywhere near the amount of ground to cover that DALPA did. Mediation length would be determined by the intransigence of AA Management, nothing else. On that point, only you all can offer an opinion.

Originally Posted by Easyflier301

Too many assume DAL/UAL/AAL are essentially the same company and are playing with the same deck of cards. They’re not.

Originally Posted by StoneQOLdCrazy

this is a poor analogy.
Dal ual and aal pilots are doing the same job. Exactly the same. Why should one group sell itself short, make poor excuses for its bargaining agent, or otherwise shirk its duties to pattern bargain up?

Mgmt and the shareholders need to foot the bill. One mgmt group might have the ready cash. Another might need to mortgage the farm, but that’s the price of poker at this table.

APA’s unwillingness to raise the bar in this environment will go down as an historic failure.

again. we have the exact same jobs.

Originally Posted by Easyflier301

I wouldn’t call it a cop out as much as a reality check. If it’s something the company wants eventually and it’s in the current contract and unimplemented, then it is leverage for them. Let’s take the reserve system and buckets, for example. They can tell us to take the current offer in the new TA (which we had a say in) or leave it, but one way or another it’s coming because if we turn down the TA, they will implement current book to drive efficiency gains anyway. Wouldn’t that be how you would negotiate for something you wanted if you had that leverage?

So assuming we argued and pushed hard for better but that is their position, our only options in the negotiation are to “call their bluff” and walk away on that portion (as suss puts it) but then if they call OUR bluff and press ahead, we are in a weaker position moving forward spending capital while trying to negotiate backwards, and meanwhile we will have a system we all hate and had no say in…

Will also add, at least for the reserve provisions, APA seemed willing to sacrifice more “leveling” on the reserve side resulting in productivity gains with the goal is creating more lineholders.

in our pilot group we have a number of folks complaining about the new reserve system (because they like reserve and have carved out a niche), but we also have tons of people on these pages complaining about the amount of reserves AA keeps (due to lack of productivity of current practices). If the amount of flying is static, which would we prefer? More lineholders creating more tradeability, or less efficient (and more) reserves? This is the problem the union faces.