Rock

Man, I seriously wish that was a problem at this company. From what I can tell, people never retire. They just hit 64 and 11 months and stop the clock.

TonyC

Why do you think they're offering money to work through "1 more peak"?






.

Rock

To avoid a mass exodus if this TA passes. If it doesn't, they didn't spend a dime, and I'd be willing to bet the guys who could retire but don't have to will hang out for as long as they can to see what other good deal gets floated their way.

Raptor

If we have zero leverage, then why not stall forever. We can't strike, so keeping the CBA we have and just continuing the process should have been a win for the company. They finally came to an agreement as the company thought it was in their interest to do so. They presented the minimum they thought they could get away with. Why, if we have no leverage did this happen. We do have leverage and it was getting even better when we blinked.

I agree it will be harder to enjoy this level of leverage in the future. The company is also ensuring this TA enshrines rules to keep this from happening again when the next TA is presented in a decade and is even worse. They fix their Captain problem with the SLB, they can fix their F/O problem at any time by hiring, they can fix their seat manning problems cheaply with bump and flush with small slot denial payments, and they fix their instructor problem with reserve manning sims (however voluntary) as they will just offer 200% to do it and will find takers.

Note that in the MD-11 alone, in July, I heard the company relied on the instructors to fill 183 slots that were unassigned. Imagine how bad the 757/767 pipeline situation is too. Individual actions of instructors would shut down training pipelines and with this TA, that problem is solved.

The company is fox smart in many areas while oddly incompetent in others. This TA keeps us from having leverage in the future.

TonyC

The mass exodus for this TA would be slowed by the delayed payout of the "signing bonus." The "1 more peak" bonus will apply for every year henceforth. Unless we have a large percentage of pilots who celebrate birthdays in October, I think the accumulation of next year's full vacation bank has a big influence on when pilots retire. The point is, they don't all stick around until they're 65, so the unpredictability of their retirement date is indeed a problem for The Company.

And here it is, almost October again ...






.

Rock

The NMB wouldn't allow them to stall forever. All they could hope was that we'd pick up the slack and turn down the TA our MEC agreed to. I agree with you. We did blink. Or at least the union that represents us did. Pretty hard to take that back now. And I still haven't seen a plan that suggests how we do that. "We want more" isn't a strategy.

pipe

I happen to have the only house. You need a house just as much as I need to sell. Let's keep talking.

Or we can just keep the whole arrangement a rental. That isn't usually very good for the place.

Pipe

TonyC

The NMB sets the times and places for meetings, and would actually help them stall by delaying meetings. Seeing no progress in the mediated talks, they could simply set the next meeting for next February in Minot, North Dakota. They can't make us make a deal, and they can't make The Company make a deal.




But you did. My Post #48, not an original thought, as it's been suggested elsewhere in this forum as well. You responded and agreed in your Post #49.

Nothing apocalyptic, nothing complicated, nothing emotional -- just a refusal of their offer, and back to the business of negotiating with a mandate for more.






.

MaxKts

You are starting to sound like a management hack that wants us to play our hand face up!

Rock

I made an offer. You declined it. I lose nothing with the status quo. Convince me I do. Otherwise, nothing changes. Again, is that a win for you?