Originally Posted by lake alice

There aren't too many airlines who have the market cap to buy JetBlue but almost all will have equal or better pay and better benefits and retirement.

That being said it would be nice if bluejet could fix those issues.

On yeah, I highly doubt an obscure message board would be the first quotable source for an airline merger.

Originally Posted by OleDawg

Here is the deal. JetBlue has an offer on the table for a merger or acquisition. The board has given our ELT a chance to get the stock price up, or the merger or acquisition will take place. I do not know the time frame, nor do I know whom the partner will be. I will not / can not disclose the source, so please do not ask. I also do not know if this will benefit those of us currently on property; that depends on the other company and what is negotiated by our management and/or our committee.

Originally Posted by squaretail

Well, market cap doesn't have too much to do with it other than pigeonholing... but, there is one that has the money, has proven their will to settle a vendetta, and is looking... remember Song Sung Blue?

Originally Posted by Cruise

Too bad the ALPA vote didn't make it last time. Once (IF) the merger goes down, you now get to rely upon your management to negotiate YOUR seniority list for you (the figurative you, that is). That's a very dicey proposition, IMO.

No way would I want some management team negotiating MY seniority away....

Best of luck if that happens, 'cause you'll need it!

Originally Posted by Clear Right

One could argue that JetBlue pilots are in a better position without ALPA. First of all the RLA and McCaskill-Bond apply to B6 pilots, this has been confirmed by individually contracted labor attorneys. Next, there is protection language in the PEA that prevents JetBlue from engaging in any corporate transaction without first agreeing to a level of protection for pilots. Now, some will argue that these protections may not be worth the paper they are written on. However, independent council has confirmed that the language is stronger than most CBAs with regard to pilot protections. Again, lawyer interpretation, and some would argue that this may not the case.

To each his own on who you trust. In my humble opinion, one could argue, that the AirTran pilots would have been better off with similar language. In other words, the SWA/AirTran corporate transaction could not have happened without SWA agreeing to Section 3 and Section 15 of McCaskill-Bond i.e. Arbitration from the get go, again my opinion, not verified by legal council.

Unfortunately for AirTran, McCaskill Bond says union merger language takes precedence. i.e. ALPA merger policy required them to vote, rather than go directly to arbitration. Even the Delta pilots on this forum argue they would have done better in arbitration, and clearly SWA/SWAPA went to all costs (threats) to prevent them from going to arbitration, because they knew the outcome would have most likely favored the AirTran pilots.

And, yes...the question remains, who will represent the B6 pilots through the arbitration process, employee committees or the company? With what amount of money and do you trust the committee or company to represent the pilots...all valid questions.

Caveat all with just one pilots opinion. This could all be speculation and be wrong, but isn't that the case for most of this forum.

Originally Posted by Clear Right

One could argue that JetBlue pilots are in a better position without ALPA. First of all the RLA and McCaskill-Bond apply to B6 pilots, this has been confirmed by individually contracted labor attorneys. Next, there is protection language in the PEA that prevents JetBlue from engaging in any corporate transaction without first agreeing to a level of protection for pilots. Now, some will argue that these protections may not be worth the paper they are written on. However, independent council has confirmed that the language is stronger than most CBAs with regard to pilot protections. Again, lawyer interpretation, and some would argue that this may not the case.

To each his own on who you trust. In my humble opinion, one could argue, that the AirTran pilots would have been better off with similar language. In other words, the SWA/AirTran corporate transaction could not have happened without SWA agreeing to Section 3 and Section 15 of McCaskill-Bond i.e. Arbitration from the get go, again my opinion, not verified by legal council.

Unfortunately for AirTran, McCaskill Bond says union merger language takes precedence. i.e. ALPA merger policy required them to vote, rather than go directly to arbitration. Even the Delta pilots on this forum argue they would have done better in arbitration, and clearly SWA/SWAPA went to all costs (threats) to prevent them from going to arbitration, because they knew the outcome would have most likely favored the AirTran pilots.

And, yes...the question remains, who will represent the B6 pilots through the arbitration process, employee committees or the company? With what amount of money and do you trust the committee or company to represent the pilots...all valid questions.

Caveat all with just one pilots opinion. This could all be speculation and be wrong, but isn't that the case for most of this forum.

Originally Posted by OleDawg

Here is the deal. JetBlue has an offer on the table for a merger or acquisition. The board has given our ELT a chance to get the stock price up, or the merger or acquisition will take place. I do not know the time frame, nor do I know whom the partner will be. I will not / can not disclose the source, so please do not ask. I also do not know if this will benefit those of us currently on property; that depends on the other company and what is negotiated by our management and/or our committee.