LEC rep who voted for MEMRAT might vote NO
06-24-2015, 06:53 PM
#22
Moderator
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: DAL 330
Posts: 7,010
You don't suppose it's because it's two separate kinds of votes, do you?
Like the vote on whether to send to MEMRAT or not is a decision on whether HIS PILOTS would want to decide for themselves on this TA, and maybe his personal vote is a vote on what's right for him and his family?
Personally, I don't know how you can be anything but on the fence on this contract right now. The company is always targeting 51%. If this was an easy yes, it wouldn't be on the table.
Like the vote on whether to send to MEMRAT or not is a decision on whether HIS PILOTS would want to decide for themselves on this TA, and maybe his personal vote is a vote on what's right for him and his family?
Personally, I don't know how you can be anything but on the fence on this contract right now. The company is always targeting 51%. If this was an easy yes, it wouldn't be on the table.
Not really I have voted both No and Yes in the past. I voted yes on C2012 and this is by far the easiest NO vote I have cast. Not even close.
Scoop
06-24-2015, 06:58 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
I too was on the fence .
It was not an easy vote and I read everything including the TA to attempt to parse out everything I could. In the end it's clear that the net gain is very little compared to the concessions. As we make $6 billion and increasing.
Sick leave left us with less protections, LCA OE drops will affect virtually all copilots, and we'll all have to work more.
I voted no for the first time ever and it was hard to do.
It was not an easy vote and I read everything including the TA to attempt to parse out everything I could. In the end it's clear that the net gain is very little compared to the concessions. As we make $6 billion and increasing.
Sick leave left us with less protections, LCA OE drops will affect virtually all copilots, and we'll all have to work more.
I voted no for the first time ever and it was hard to do.
06-24-2015, 07:07 PM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 5,113
I thought the whole point behind having the MEC vote was because they are in a much better position to judge the overall value of a TA because they have access to information the line pilot does NOT. According to many, the MEC vote was not an endorsement of the TA but rather "should we send it out for memrat?" IMO that is a clear abdication of responsibility when they are in the best position to judge whether this deal is up to par. The fact that they DID NOT make this judgment speaks volumes in my book.
Just went to a LEC meeting and the idea that the company is looking for a 50%+1 vote was somewhat debunked. To long of an explanation but if you want one, PM me and I will try to recall what was said.
Denny
Just went to a LEC meeting and the idea that the company is looking for a 50%+1 vote was somewhat debunked. To long of an explanation but if you want one, PM me and I will try to recall what was said.
Denny
I hope we can put up as much info as possible, but let's face it: the day belongs to slogans. You can be the judge as to which slogans are most aggressively presented here.
I sort of disagree on abdicating responsibility. If the TA was negotiated in a vacuum, yes. Since there were (I believe) nine meetings to give directions, and the NC was sent back (I'm told) three times to confirm no more funds, and no re-arranging of deck chairs, I think this was all there was to be had. Under that scenario, it would be criminal not to let the pilots determine for themselves whether this was a bluff, and whether it's worth the price of calling it.
That being said, PM coming.
06-24-2015, 07:28 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
This makes me sad. I would be the first to crack the whip on a POS (pilot or not) and DN is a good man. Our conversations from days before the TA to his endorsement leave me perplexed. Not sure *** happened in those final moments, just wish I couldve stared MD in the eyes when I grinned a no.
06-24-2015, 07:30 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2014
Posts: 367
You don't suppose it's because it's two separate kinds of votes, do you?
Like the vote on whether to send to MEMRAT or not is a decision on whether HIS PILOTS would want to decide for themselves on this TA, and maybe his personal vote is a vote on what's right for him and his family?
Personally, I don't know how you can be anything but on the fence on this contract right now. The company is always targeting 51%. If this was an easy yes, it wouldn't be on the table.
Like the vote on whether to send to MEMRAT or not is a decision on whether HIS PILOTS would want to decide for themselves on this TA, and maybe his personal vote is a vote on what's right for him and his family?
Personally, I don't know how you can be anything but on the fence on this contract right now. The company is always targeting 51%. If this was an easy yes, it wouldn't be on the table.
06-24-2015, 07:32 PM
#27
Back on TDY
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Position: 747-400 Captain
Posts: 12,487
I'm not hunting for yes votes. I understand. 23.G.5 is an issue I'm still quantifying. Right now I can account for up to about 2.76% of the trips going away for the most junior lineholder. Word is that UAL can only get about 35-40% of the stated benefit, because of various factors, so it could be closer to the 1-1.5% mark for the junior lineholder, less for the more senior. Still a philosophical problem in a category with a lot of training, and not at all in categories with no LCA's.
Carl
06-24-2015, 07:35 PM
#28
La Familia Delta
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: B-717 FO / C-17 AC
Posts: 2,467
What happened to DN is classic politics. Someone who steps up hoping to change things for the better, but in the process, the system changed him. Its easy for us to sit there and criticize but going through it and emerging with your integrity intact is a daunting task. If you want to see character, take a look at the 8 men who voted no. Heros of our industry.
06-24-2015, 07:38 PM
#29
The Brown Dot +1
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Position: 777B
Posts: 7,775
What happened to DN is classic politics. Someone who steps up hoping to change things for the better, but in the process, the system changed him. Its easy for us to sit there and criticize but going through it and emerging with your integrity intact is a daunting task. If you want to see character, take a look at the 8 men who voted no. Heros of our industry.
06-24-2015, 07:41 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: Kickin’ Back
Posts: 6,971
Hi Denny,
I hope we can put up as much info as possible, but let's face it: the day belongs to slogans. You can be the judge as to which slogans are most aggressively presented here.
I sort of disagree on abdicating responsibility. If the TA was negotiated in a vacuum, yes. Since there were (I believe) nine meetings to give directions, and the NC was sent back (I'm told) three times to confirm no more funds, and no re-arranging of deck chairs, I think this was all there was to be had. Under that scenario, it would be criminal not to let the pilots determine for themselves whether this was a bluff, and whether it's worth the price of calling it.
That being said, PM coming.
I hope we can put up as much info as possible, but let's face it: the day belongs to slogans. You can be the judge as to which slogans are most aggressively presented here.
I sort of disagree on abdicating responsibility. If the TA was negotiated in a vacuum, yes. Since there were (I believe) nine meetings to give directions, and the NC was sent back (I'm told) three times to confirm no more funds, and no re-arranging of deck chairs, I think this was all there was to be had. Under that scenario, it would be criminal not to let the pilots determine for themselves whether this was a bluff, and whether it's worth the price of calling it.
That being said, PM coming.
Right back at ya.
Denny
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
