80ktsClamp

I need to jump in before the unionoids dive in and say "but if you include all of the others, we are the 2nd(ish) best!!."

Forget that... the market in a very consistent manner profitably supports southwest's payrates in their 737s... which are configured for leisure/tourist stuff where the "margins are slim."

satchip

Nice retort there, 80. Factually based and targeted towards economic factors. I don't think, however, that is what he means. Our esteemed DC-9 captain's entire argument is an emotional one. He repeatedly states that our profession is not compensated at the level that he expected when he started, I'm assuming, approximately 20 years ago. Is anything as you expected it? That is an emotional argument.

APA made an emotional argument. They sat for 4+ years with absolutely no progress. Is that what you want for us? DAL, you decry that we are under a bankruptcy contract. Do you want to be under that contract for 4 or 5 more years? Because if you make irrelevant, emotional arguments to the NMB, that is what you will get.

Remember, the Buddha said, "a jug fills drop by drop".

BlaineFaban

Not for nothing, but this could just as easily be an excerpt from ALPAs playbook as well. For example, say that the president of ALPA decided to try and push for a change in the structure of the committees at the national level. Say, for example, that he wanted the 1st vice president to preside over the traditional roles of safety chairman, training chair, jumpseat chair, aeromedical chair, and security chairman. Say also that in the haste to try and shove this change through without any kind of input whatsoever, he received some push back from certain members crucial to the success of this endeavor due to the fact that their constituents found out about said plan and had some objections.
Rather than let the vote fail, he might just go ahead and cancel it to retrench, regroup, and re-attack.

Perhaps they are not so different after all.

DAL 88 Driver

B.S. 80 described my position perfectly.

satchip

Then state it. Base your arguments on facts and economics, not emotions and expectations. You've never stated that way before.

Carl Spackler

This is one of the reasons having a discussion with you is so difficult. You don't read. Not even really short sentences. DAL88 has done a very good job of posting his thoughts based on facts. And you tell him to state it after he tells you that Clamp described his position perfectly? Here is Clamp's post again just so you can see how he summarized with irrefutable facts. He even used short sentences:

Pay attention Satchip!

Carl

80ktsClamp

If you don't like what he's saying then at least respond to my logical argument instead of trying to tell me what he's saying... which is a wrong assumption on your part in the first place.

Elvis90

I would consider quotes by "Buddha" an emotional argument and not fact-based. Stick with the facts please...and by the way, the easiest way to influence ALPA and management, it seems, would be to just vote "No", as stated previously, if the negotiated contract fails to meet expectations, just as Hawaiian pilots did in the past. Perhaps that would manage ALPA's low expectations and force them higher, despite warnings of, "This is the best TA you'll get."

Columbia

Management certainly doesn't. Why should we?

Carl Spackler

Unfortunately, management doesn't have to negotiate their pay structures through the Railway Labor Act with the National Mediation Board playing the part of judge and final arbiter. We do.

This is every bit as important as scope, and both national union groups are not even mentioning the problem of NMB's abuse of power.

Carl