lake alice

If I'm an eternal pessimist then you are eternally ignorant. Read the above post on how the tiers are decided. Then get involved and learn how the support is provided. Tier A doesn't get a different lawyer than Tier B because of any other particular formula other than availability and expertise on a particular topic.

You get what you negotiate and ALPA is there to provide you resources and expertise. Alaska and Hawaiin have contracts so far superior to ours that we are an embarrassment to them.

Keep this in mind as well. We are in a CBA world so how are we going to force a CBA carrier to negotiate an SLI with our PEA's. It can't go to arbitration because our PEA stipulates AAA and theirs NMB. We have neither money nor experience and as the legal firms contracted by the PVC to review our PEA's stated our integration will be based primarily on our trust and support from management.

Given that there are currently 3-4 different PEA's floating around how is that going to play out?

Let me give you a hint. We are going to have to fight this individually or in different groups. We're going to have to pool our monies together and agree on a lawyer to represent us. There have been formal offers in the past to purchase JetBlue and it will happen again. After 3A the stock could potentially drop over 20%. What do you think would happen then?

Is this worst case scenario? I don't know but given this management and the industry as a whole it's certainly plausible. Based on my seniority I'm betting I'll get stapled but still have a job. I don't want to see a single junior guy on the street.

eaglefly

If it's ALPA you're considering as a bargaining rep, my advice is to wait until AFTER the TWA legal situations financial ramifications are known. Otherwise, your initial payments to them might be a doozy. ALPA may very well have to declare BK and since they'd be doubtful to find insurance, members dues might be steep and a insurance seeding investment via assessment would also seem to be a likelihood.

Doesn't look like AA is in any position to fund a merge while inside BK (unless it's done by another like U/Parker), but Delta might, so that would be your short-term concern.

gloopy

On a technicality, DL is a short term concern. But over all much, much less likely than AA. SWA is also a short to medium term concern, and over all much more likely than DL. Could be good news for JB shareholders as a financial tug of war could drive up the price a couple extra bucks per share, which is a massive percentage, even if it leads to a 2 or 3 way fragmentation, all of which are below the fragmentation thresholds for a "merger".

You make an interesting point about an ALPA BK though. To the general public, and even to airline workers for some reason, BK means total distruction and the entity in question just vaporizing. But we see very clearly that's not even remotely close to being true. While it may or may not cause ALPA to declare BK, the TWA pilots simply ain't getting their reparations windfall fantasy much more than a few cents on the dollar, if that, regardless what happens to ALPA, which would still be around and might just be able to shed some fat in the process.

Clear Right

Thank You EagleFly, that is a refreshing perspective from you. Just wish our ALPA organizers would understand that a JBPA 2 drive would get more of the fence sitter vote. There are many here that just will not vote for ALPA.

Contrary to Lake's opinion and many others, it has nothing to do with being at a former Regional Air Carrier. For many, it has to do with Legacy CBA tactics and bargaining techniques. There are a lot of folks believe it or not who actually want to work for both the best interests of the pilot group and the best interests of the company. Labor often becomes our own worst enemy in this industry. You see legacy CBA ideas, result in a Labor vs Management mentality...nothing against Lake because I respect his passion and I am sympathetic to his personal LTD experience, but you can see the us vs them rhetoric in his posts. This is what many of us believe has been historically proven to fail in this industry, because management has the BK trump card.

You see history has shown, as soon as you handcuff management enough through legacy CBA pattern bargaining, to the point where they can not be competitive or execute a corporate vision or strategy, then they will revert to Bankrupcy or a Merger / Acquisition. Many of us want a moderate collective bargaining agent, that balances the needs of the pilots with the needs of the company and we just do not feel that ALPA or the local ALPA MEC reps will be capable of a SWAPA like CBA model. It is actually possible to negotiate with a common goal to protect both the pilot group and the best interests of the company, but it takes a major shift in the collective bargaining mindset that many just don't think the hard-liner ALPA organizers and future MECs are capable of. Again, this is just my opinion.

Climbto450

Wow, that's the first non pessimistic, articulate post I have seen you make. Keep writing like that and you may be able to make a point. Good post!

whiskey72

I spoke with the Group B or 2 group's EVP yesterday. Your ranking is decided on either monetarily OR pilot group size. In order to qualify for Group A or 1, you must generate 10Mil in dues OR have at least 4000 pilots. However, we are and would be perfectly fine in B. In fact, we would be bringing approx. 2500 votes to the table which would pretty much seal up the largest votes of the group, which in turn would most likely give us an EVP position on the Executive Council. That's a strong position to have.

Now as far as being the red headed step child...total Bull$hit. When I was with whiskey, we had a measly 600 pilots. We almost struck, in fact we were parked and all pilots in a hotel. In the final hour, we walked with an industry leading contract, and that was compared to majors. We had rigs like no other, vacations that topped none. Majors were saying to us on the jumpseat, "how in the hell did you do that????" How? ALPA. We had access to every same lawyer, strike fund and benefit that ANYONE in group A had. There was nothing, NOTHING spared to us because we were a regional. I'm sorry that a lot of you feel that you were shortchanged by ALPA, but don't for one second think it was ALPA that was the major fault, take a closer look at your LOCALLY elected councils and your own companies. ALPA provides resources, it's up to your local councils HOW your resources are used.

Bluedriver

Good post.

One of the problems here at JB is that many pilots here WANT to work for less. You can tell them till your blue (no pun intended) in the face that we have worse retirement, bonus, healthcare and benefits. The fact is, they are OK and even satisfied with that, because they believe that pilot compensation is the determining factor in the survival of an airline. Management has won the rhetoric game on many people here.

Read clear rights post again. He wants to work for less, and he is far from alone. His arguments are dribble, but he is clear that he doesn't want pay, retirement and benefits that other companies have, because he thinks those pilots brought down companies (not the other hundred factors that ACTUALLY brought them the final results).

He somehow thinks that ALPA national dictates the priorities, and then insinuates that elected reps for ALPA would somehow have different mindsets than elected reps for JBPA. They would likely be the same people....

Then he says the MEC would not have the a "SWAPA like CBA" mentality... You know, the highest paid narrow-body pilots....

Illogical non-sense... You just really can't fix stupid.

Herkulesdrvr

I guarantee you these blue juicers would be singing a different tune if they turned on the television and saw that jb was being acquired by a major airline. I'm pretty sure "direct relationship" would take on a whole new meaning if American or USAir rolled in.

Clear Right

While I understand your point I don't quite agree with you. If you believe the language in Section 15 is worth the paper it is written on, then one could argue that we are better off in a T/E. Take the AirTran/SWA scenario. I don't want to get into the specifics of Section 15 on this public forum, but if you believe Section 15 we would have been much better off than AirTran.

The problem with Section 15, is it takes a certain amount of trust in our management team. Many pilots find it very difficult to trust management. You also need to have some knowledge of MaCaskill-Bond. Again the nay-Sayers will argue that there are many ways to get around the legislation. But again one could also argue that JetBlue would have gone to arbitration if they were involved in the same scenario as SWA/AirTran. Again, rather not get into the details on this public forum.

Essentially it will come down to a personal comfort level when balancing risk and trust associated with management and your future if a T/E were to take place. But for every argument against section 15, most folks can come up with an equal argument in its favor. The best thing to do is educate yourself on both sides of the argument and make an informed decision.

Fins Up

Is it really a good idea to trust that management, whether present or future, will be looking out for the best interest of the pilot group while trying to work out their own deal? After all Mc-B says that management can represent the pilot group if they want to.

Also, imagine APA versus JB pilots with individual PEAs. I have no doubt that we would get ripped to shreds. Our $2mil fund that supposedly exists somewhere for the purpose of T/E representation would, after individual pilots who wish to go their own way and take their share of the fund out, not get us very far.

As the DC law firm(s?) told our PVC, we live in a CBA world. Like it or not we need to jump on the CBA boat or drown like rats (hypothetical T/E withstanding).