ptarmigan

Operating the 777 under the new rules comes to mind.

Labor peace comes to mind.

The FDA is not that much of a motivator. They CAN operate it sans an agreement, the cost differential is not that large. ALPA has costed it out, I am sure. The NG might even know those numbers.

I would say this. If I was very sure the economy would keep moving upward right now, I might think that the idea of waiting had some merit. Are you that sure? Here is the scenario that we might be looking at. Company is hiring right now because if the economy does continues to grow they will be very short soon. However, if it hiccups a year from now, we will be even MORE overmanned than the last time. Here comes 4a2b again.

So, the answer really depends on how sure you are about the economic growth. If it is growing, then we are almost for sure looking at a 2nd term for Obama and a good position to negotiate after the NPRM is all settled out (which will take a couple of years based on what everyone seems to think). The argument that we should vote "no" has some merit, although the cost of doing so might be higher than many here think.

If it has a chance of not growing, we risk going back into 4a2b with no protections. We also risk being in negotiations with a new president AND a bad economy, and no raises or fixes to the current CBA at all.

Personally, I am not so confident that the economy is a sure thing. Also, I am not so sure that I would be voting for Obama on a 2nd term either way, but a "no vote" would mean it would be foolish not to vote for him.

HumptyDumpty

Not to go off topic, but why in the heck would you have voted for him in the first place? LOL

FDXLAG

Cause the MEC told him he could change his vote.

FDX1

Hey FJ,

Couldn't agree more with your thoughts on 4A2B and the fact that we lost the arbitration and we will never see 1 red cent from any TA that gives "retro 4a2b" lost compensation.

I'm was also in the no camp initially, and after watching the road show have more reasons to vote YES! At first I was strongly in the NO faction from an emotional viewpoint of the way 4a2b was handled by the Company. That wasn't the fault of our Union and we at least challenged them in 3 aspects with arbitration on the facts. The problem was with the spineless arbitrator that wouldn't come off the fence.

That being said I can support a yes vote because it is simply better than spinning our wheels for the next 12 months with NOTHING to show for it. I don't buy the giving away our leverage idea for 1 second. People that believe this have some idea that this "leverage" is worth a golden egg from the Company. Bottom line is the Company will save $X.00 for the FDA as compared to SIBA and when we attempt to get more than that it will be "no thanks we will stick with the current language and make it work". So our pilots that are there now get left with no improvement and we are left wondering where all our "leverage" went?

The language in the TA allowing ALPA to pull the plug after 1 year is a tremendous benefit and tool we should use to ensure the Company continues in earnest with our NC on the critical work rules and pay and benefits sections. By then we should understand how the NPRM will affect us and the Company. Everyone seems to think the NPRM changes are only an issue for the Company. I would suggest that for commuters there are also some major issues that may not be in our favor and require some re-evalution of equipment bids.

Lastly, I believe our NC is honest in his evaluation of the current negotiation process and feels this is the best way for our pilots to reap "some benefit" NOW, while we continue to negotiate the more significant sections after the external NPRM issue is resolved.

Just as a side note, the 2 dissenters are previous DW era guys and not very friendly, politically speaking, with the current Leadership. All the yes votes were the APC friendly, new era "outspoken critics" for change folks. Interesting!

magic rat

Watch the 66 min video.

Unless I'm mistaken, JG states that WE suggested the TA, not the company. He also explains that the TA idea didn't sit well with them at first, but they thought they'd rubber stamp it and send it to us to see what we, the pilot group, thought of it.

And as far as our contract, in agreeing to the TA, we are signing off on the sections that the TA address, NOT the WHOLE NEW CBA, there is much negotiating left to do, very much (according to JG)...we are far from over and he points that fact out in the 66 min video.

Also, DLax, not that I think it matters or that it would ever come down to it, the current administration favors unions, a republican front office is anit-union....that's what they meant by not wanting to wait until next election.

ptarmigan

I didn't actually. I realize that the way I worded that could be read that way, though.

Precontact

This is interesting to watch from the sidelines..we're up next!

Busboy

So, the company won't negotiate anything scheduling related until the new rules are published. Okay...Well, the new "Flight and Duty Time Rules" from the FAA, must be published by Aug. 01, 2011.

That will only be 4 months from the time we finish debating and voting on this TA. 4 months!!! Are you telling me that there are not 4 months worth of other items that can not be negotiated, while we wait?

Of course, these new rules will not be implemented on Aug 01. But, our NC and management will both know, at that time, what they are. At that point, they can negotiate the final scheduling sections of the CBA.

We're talking 4 months!! What's the company's rush? I believe it's foolish and naive to think that the FDA-LOA is not important to their plan. And, that it doesn't offer any leverage.

JG may have "suggested" the TA. But, that was in response to the Company wanting the new FDA-LOA put out to us, with nothing else attached.

FDXLAG

Actually I think what was stated was we suggested a TA because the company wanted an FDA LOA and the union didnt think a stand alone FDA LOA had a snow balls chance in Delhi of passing. And the company agreed not because we have leverage but because they are kind and good hearted.

Speaking of Delhi I heard we will soon start a India to Indianapolis route under the current work rules. I think any ULR workrule leverage you guys may think we have is a figment of your imagination. ULR will equal whatever the feds come up with and the company knows it.

FDX1

4 months is not a problem, but I believe the NC and MEC see the remaining issues on our contract will likely take significant time to hammer out. So why not take some areas of significant improvement now such as FDA, FOQA, and ASAP? In addition to a pay raise NOW that will at least cover the time frame remaining for the outstanding sections to be negotiated.