ghilis101

No. This is a huge concession. And you got nothing in return for it. If you claim your pay raise is what you got in return for it, then what did you get in exchange for your PS reduction? That same pay raise right? What did you get in exchange for higher TLV? a nickel in perdiem. What did you get in exchange for harm to FO bidding? ummmm nothing. What did you get in exchange for the massive Scope concessions? An e190 B-Scale.

Evaluate the whole package. Youre getting played bigtime. I get that youre voting yes, but for many of us this more than just pay rates. Im putting that brain of mine to use to collectively weigh the pros and cons, and the TA comes out overwhelmingly con. And that's not emotion. That's business.

notEnuf

Thank you for being honest. Sick leave is a concession. Enough said. Why am I willing to agree to concessions?

BTW LTD is 25 cents on the dollar for sick time unused.

ERflyer

Part 3

A continuing analysis of the TA is multifaceted. I have learned much, been corrected, reanalyzed and weighted the TA in its entirety. Each of us looks at this TA in a slightly different light.

FO's focus on LCA LOE PBS drops which is 2% of rotations. As far as the argument made that these trip drops will affect all copilots getting inferior trips it is an incomplete point. LCP's seniority ranges from senior to junior, to holding great trips to holding terrible trips. Most copilots will not be affected but more than 2%. There will be a few FO's pushed onto reserve. How many FO's are able to skim the great deal of bidding with a LCA, dropping the trip, then green slipping? Many less than who might benefit directly from the pay increase and will still be able to green for "only" double pay.

In addition to some serious coin there are other modest positive changes that affect all of us such as:
- Vacation payoff after retirement
- A few DPMP enhancements
- No offset to disability benefits from new income after 36 months
- Maximum duration of LTD benefits for psychiatric conditions

Scope has pluses and minuses and for me it's a wash. If you're having a helmet fire over this - okay. I'm not. I do like 25 less RJ's and a new aircraft for us.

Part 4

To summarize the overall main controversial contract highlights:

1 - If you want a net 5.34% annual pay raise - vote Yes. If you're holding out for 6.34% - the odds are slim.

2 - If you're sick - Lo and behold, you still get paid for sick leave up to 270 hours. If you want to gain some sick leave enhancements that might help YOU who never massively abuses sick leave, might get surgery/break a bone/stay in a hospital, might be held back while awaiting FAA approval and wants to get paid for two months anyway in addition to sick leave, or might want 100% pay for a longer time if you go out on LTD - vote yes. 99% of us don't massively abuse sick leave and it's a non-issue for me after I have studied more details, reading, asking questions and misunderstanding at times, but ultimately figuring out it's not that bad. Do I like the current sick leave better? Yeah. But overall I see the new sick leave logically as not much of a change for me after sorting through more details.

3 - If you're a triple-dipping, LCA LOE bidding green slipping copilot in the bottom 75% of those who get LCA trips in PBS - voting no could make sense. If you're not - look at the TA in its entirety and especially the pay rate lock in.

Here's the elephant in the room - One must ask the question: Should I turn down $4,400 a month (or whatever your number is for your seat) with significant downside protection to protect some sick leave abuse and triple dipping pilots?

In short, the money is significant and most of the concessions will have minimal impact to the vast majority of the pilot group. 100% of the pay raises do affect us and they are significantly more important in the event of bad times. Unless of course in the continuing line of fantasies - downturns, black swans, terrorist attacks and unfair competition are things of the past.

Much has been made on both sides of the debate of what will happen if this TA is voted down. After all the speculation the only true answer is that no one knows. I do know what I get in the TA if it passes.

If this TA is voted down and there is no quick resolution and profits disappear - it will be interesting.

I do not see a quick resolution as I thought before and surprisingly (or maybe not due to certain agendas) many on here DO NOT want a quick resolution. Some want to clean house and/or want to vote in DPA as I forgo some serious coin - for a year. Maybe two. In part at least, much of the shrill hyperbole on here has convinced me that voting yes is a better choice. Good job.

Do I think we were still manipulated and played? Somewhat, but we did extract value. Do I wish sick leave had remain unchanged? Yes, but it's not really that much different. Did this TA fall short of my survey? Yes, however, the TA before us is what it is. It is real money and at this time will pay 20% more than our largest competitor. This TA still has significant net pay far above our peers. Reality is a *****. Pay was #1 on the survey. Here it is.

Each person should vote what is in their best interest for them and their family. As will I. If you're married to someone with significant income, a doctor perhaps, I can see why you're willing to vote no and roll the dice. If you're worried about sick leave, like I was, I get it. Drill into the details more. If you don't think this TA is enough money - get a clue. Everyone looks at this TA through their own lens of how it affects them personally. For me, this TA in spite of its drawbacks is still a significant plus.

sailingfun

Most of what you posted I agree with. There certainly is a group who would like to see this drag out as long as possible. There are a couple of points I disagree with.
Sick-The changes would have zero effect on me based on past history but I have no way to predict the future. Health changes and accidents happen. On principle I don't like getting a note from mom.
Pay-different categories pay differing amounts above AMR. In some cases a few pennies. Unless we are consistently hitting 9 billion a year in profits which is highly unlikely we will not be seeing 20% above AMR. In fact I suspect a big chunk of profit sharing is going away with or without this TA looking 3 years down the road.
In the end if you are voting strickly on the contract and don't have a outside agenda then it comes down to if you think RA will come back to the table with more money in the near term. There are lots of opinions on that!

Trip7

Excellent analysis ERflyer. Agree 100%.

Good points also Sailingfun.

ghilis101

All pay, no protection.

This is the same argument over and over. We get it. Vote yes for the money. Vote no for protections that you can never get back.

I recommend No. Happy voting.

sailingfun

I would read the TA again.

Flavio340

7ER you make some valid points, but are also missing some huge holes that need to be filled and can be filled with voting down this TA. I would most appreciate your opinion of the J/V & profit sharing reduction. This is how I look at it: Our J/V partners need Delta's help; the way the program works on flights that share a J/V code number Delta is responsible for up to 50% of the cost of that flight no matter what the paint says on the side of the plane. If that flight makes money then Delta get a cut if not we eat the loss. AF&KLM for political reason that do not need to be discussed are forced to fly airplanes that make it difficult to turn a profit. That forces them and Delta to ensure the profitability of those airplanes. How is that being accomplished? Through the change in our J/V section of the TA. I am OK with that, we do need them as much as they need us symbiotic relationship and all. However, we still need to make sure we get paid for helping out our partners. How can we get profits from a plane flow by a foreign county? Profit sharing!!!! This TA is both cutting off our hands and our feet. This WILL affect every pilot regardless of seat or seniority, you will not get $4,400 extra each month if you are displaced or flying shorter legs across the "pond," and you not see your sacrifice returned to you in the form of profit sharing. This will be a huge unintended consequence that will have most pilots saying "gee if I had known that I would have voted NO."

ghilis101

Im knee deep in it. 30 years left. Not selling out scope, sick, and important work rules for a quick pay raise. Thats like taking the condom off because it will feel better at the time, but then paying for it rather painfully the rest of your life. Im keeping the condom on

Hank Kingsley

Hypothetical question for ER, if you will. Had the company not "needed" profit sharing, what do you feel straight pay raises would be TA'd? I suspect we'd be getting 4, 1, 1, 1.