LOA 20-04 MEC approves counter
#542
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2016
Posts: 6,831
As an outsider in... You sound as if your willing to vote anything in quick just to save some short term jobs. And this is how the industry starts a downward spiral again. Your dues you paid for a couple years isn’t a drop in the bucket FYI. MANY HAVE PAID DUES MUCH LONGER DONT WANT LONG TERM CONCESSIONS TO TEMPORARILY SAVE A FEW. Being junior has cons and you should never begrudge someone who isn’t willing to take it in the shorts.
#544
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 5,038
Another grace period. Furloughs delayed until Nov 27th. Last day according to company that can be extended to without issuing another warning notice. Still no TA that any of us have seen. 30 day voting period according to policy manual. Something's going to have to give. Timelines don't match.
#545
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2016
Posts: 2,558
Furloughs were delayed until Nov. 28th. According to management that is the latest allowed without reissuing WARN Act notifications that would further the delay another 90 days.
#546
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 866
[MOD EDIT]You sound as if your willing to vote anything in quick just to save some short term jobs. And this is how the industry starts a downward spiral again. Your dues you paid for a couple years isn’t a drop in the bucket FYI. MANY HAVE PAID DUES MUCH LONGER DONT WANT LONG TERM CONCESSIONS TO TEMPORARILY SAVE A FEW. Being junior has cons and you should never begrudge someone who isn’t willing to take it in the shorts.
#547
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jul 2020
Posts: 49
MJP et al —
Make no mistake. This LOA requires those senior to the bottom 1941 to make a choice:
Give up 36 hours of pay per year at their current rate in order to “save” you and everyone else in the 1941
Or
Protect the contract for the long term after this mess is complete.
That is as simple as it gets. Everyone obviously must make their own choice, but it comes down to are you willing to give away 36 hours pay to protect a potential furloughee.
The attempts to “shame” the people outside of the 1941 to vote the way you want are childish and most likely counterproductive.
Make no mistake. This LOA requires those senior to the bottom 1941 to make a choice:
Give up 36 hours of pay per year at their current rate in order to “save” you and everyone else in the 1941
Or
Protect the contract for the long term after this mess is complete.
That is as simple as it gets. Everyone obviously must make their own choice, but it comes down to are you willing to give away 36 hours pay to protect a potential furloughee.
The attempts to “shame” the people outside of the 1941 to vote the way you want are childish and most likely counterproductive.
#548
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 5,012
That does sound simple. Do you mind telling me how many hours I'll credit this year as a percentage of my average last year?
#549
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2015
Position: UNA
Posts: 4,681
MJP et al —
Make no mistake. This LOA requires those senior to the bottom 1941 to make a choice:
Give up 36 hours of pay per year at their current rate in order to “save” you and everyone else in the 1941
Or
Protect the contract for the long term after this mess is complete.
That is as simple as it gets. Everyone obviously must make their own choice, but it comes down to are you willing to give away 36 hours pay to protect a potential furloughee.
The attempts to “shame” the people outside of the 1941 to vote the way you want are childish and most likely counterproductive.
Make no mistake. This LOA requires those senior to the bottom 1941 to make a choice:
Give up 36 hours of pay per year at their current rate in order to “save” you and everyone else in the 1941
Or
Protect the contract for the long term after this mess is complete.
That is as simple as it gets. Everyone obviously must make their own choice, but it comes down to are you willing to give away 36 hours pay to protect a potential furloughee.
The attempts to “shame” the people outside of the 1941 to vote the way you want are childish and most likely counterproductive.
- PS commuting for everyone for a year
-lower TLV long term so we cannot run so lean in the summer ( more CA positions, more WB positions)
-lowering the GS trigger by 5 hours
- establishing a MBCBP
everything but PS commuting is a permanent change
these are not insignificant gains and should be factored into the decision. I appreciate every pilot getting to voice their opinion, but there are PLENTY of people outside the 1713 who will benefit should this pass.
When you say “protect the contract” I think this does just that, and actually improves the contract vs status quo
#550
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2018
Posts: 1,838
just throwing this out there, the benefits reach beyond the 1941 (1713 to be exact)
- PS commuting for everyone for a year
-lower TLV long term so we cannot run so lean in the summer ( more CA positions, more WB positions)
-lowering the GS trigger by 5 hours
- establishing a MBCBP
these are not insignificant gains and should be factored into the decision. I appreciate every pilot getting to voice their opinion, but there are PLENTY of people outside the 1713 who will benefit should this pass.
When you say “protect the contract” I think this does just that, and actually improves the contract vs status quo
- PS commuting for everyone for a year
-lower TLV long term so we cannot run so lean in the summer ( more CA positions, more WB positions)
-lowering the GS trigger by 5 hours
- establishing a MBCBP
these are not insignificant gains and should be factored into the decision. I appreciate every pilot getting to voice their opinion, but there are PLENTY of people outside the 1713 who will benefit should this pass.
When you say “protect the contract” I think this does just that, and actually improves the contract vs status quo
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post