txbusdriver

FIRST of all, 3A is NOT a lawsuit. It's simply JetBlue pilots using the dispute resolution process the company has set up. Bluedriver, I suggest you seek the facts of the case and not get wrapped up in emotion. JetBlue has $1.6 billion in the bank and even if the pilots in the 3A DISPUTE got everything they asked it would amount to a small dent in the bottom line. The case is going to arbitration and most likely will result in a judgement resulting in a payout amounting to pennies on the dollar.

What you and others unfamiliar with case need to be aware of is the behavior of JetBlue during the process. They have stonwalled, delayed, and LIED repeatedly. This is the same company that 1193 of our pilots think will be there for them in our time of need. It's really been an eye opener on how the real JetBlue operates and only confirmed suspicions. No emotions, just facts.

GuppyPuppy

Yeah. The company is the one who put 3A in my PEA. Not me, and not 969 of my fellow pilots.

If 3A destroys the company, then it is the fault of those who originally put 3A in your PEA.

What if the company promised you and all pilots a new Ferrari FXX on your 10 year anniversary. Then your 10 year anniversary came and the company said, "Sorry...if we give you a Ferrari, we'll have to give all the pilots a Ferrari. We can't afford that!" Would you be just a little ticked off?

Nobody held a gun to the head of the person who wrote the contract. However, when I was hired we either had to sign that contract or not work at JB.

Do I think that I should be paid $165/hr as a E190 captain? Debatable. However, I'm not the person who wrote or even negotiated that contract. This is all on management's shoulders.

I could see the company now sponsoring an in-house union in exchange for reducing the 3A payout (or even eliminating it). If they really think they'll lose the arbitration, watch for it.

GP

Bluedriver

I believe they have 1.2ish billion, not 1.6. But, the reality is that for MOST, this was about personal gain (money).

I would probably be hostile as well if I tried to give pilots a raise, and then was served with a massive grievance because some people thought they could force an outsized raise for themselves. You and I both know the company was trying to correct an imbalance in pay, and bring E90 pilots to parity. And they got a finger in the eye for it.

So they either had the option to do wrong by all E90 pilots, or have a giant grievance filed by some trying to force outsized and unearned raises for themselves.

You can pretend it was about principle, but it was about money. Money you did not earn. And by filing the grievance, you are basically saying that the E90 pilots should have stayed at regional wages.... Since there was no way to correct the imbalance and bring the E90 pilots to reasonable parity with the wording in the PEA.

This was about personal financial gain using a technicality, no matter what the eventual consequences.

GuppyPuppy

I think you are mistaken about what triggered the 3A dispute.

Section 3A refers to newly-hired pilots, not E190 pilots as a whole. In 2007 when the new-hire pay went from $37/hr to $47/hr (I think) that was to bring all first-year, or newly-hired pilots parity because they really didn't have a choice of aircraft any longer and it was getting difficult to get people into class back then. Remember, United, Delta and Southwest were hiring back then.

The company could have just lowered the pay of the first-year A320 pilots and 3A wouldn't have been triggered. Or, they could have just left it alone. By no means does 3A have anything to do with keeping the E190 pilots at "regional wages". The two are not related at all. The company offered big raises to the E190 pilots, especially in 2009. This did not effect 3A because they kept new-hire pay the same. They company could have raised the rates for year 2 and beyond to anything they wanted to for both fleets and it would not have triggered 3A.

Want to call it a technicality? Go right ahead. But, the company is responsible for what is in the PEA, not me. And the company is responsible for those reprehensible E190 rates when the plane was introduced. Do you remember that in 2005, a second year captain was making $72/hr? That was far less than many CRJ pilots and Horizon Q400 pilots were making at the time. Some CRJ-700 pilots were making $120/hr back then! Again, the company's fault, not the pilots fault.

Quite frankly, I am sick and tired of going above and beyond in my work life at JB (which I still do to this day) and not reaping the rewards that we were told to expect (such as SWA pay/benefits -2%). They could have put that in writing, but they didn't. Section 3A is right there in black and white for all to see. It is clear and concise and is 100% the responsibility of the company.

Quite frankly, the company would have been much better off financially had they just endorsed JBPA back in '08.

GP

txbusdriver

I could care less about the money and expect NOTHING. I don't wish to supress anyone's wages and for you to say so is dead wrong. It's about holding JetBlue accountable....period. So far the company has LIED repeatedly. They have lied to judges, arbitrators,attorneys, and to the pilot group. Instead of attacking your fellow pilots on a message board you should be studying carefully how the company has behaved throughtout this process.

Heard in the last 10 years.....

-JetBlue will pay WN wages -1%
-Peer set average including major carriers, now that is becoming too expensive so the peer set will change. Listen to the last Maruster call.
-Defined FSM process outlined only to have the rules changes in the end
-Pilots negotiate their contracts on an individual basis
-Retirement work around and still no fix

....and the list goes on......

lake alice

Anyone who thinks 3A will destroy the company is an absolute friggin' moron.

The ironic part of 3A is the leaders of the BoB's are headliners on 3A. The very a-holes who worked tirelessly to ruin our careers with these 5 documents choose to sign up for 3A.

lake alice

You are hired, direct entry, to the CP office or senior leadership position. Your choice. Just get back to us in a timely manner.

This sort of blind faith, lemming-esque, if you will, is to be immediately rewarded.

Moose

Nah. Just an example of somebody who glugs the BlueJuice and "has his."
Probably will fly to 65 too.

Bluebusdriver, as you well know there will always be competing interests between pilots and management. They are not our friends and they are not our enemies. It's business. They play their games, we play ours. If you think Barger and the BoD are your buddies, ask yourself why JetBlue is a member of the Airline Industrial Relations Conference. Ask why they retain Ford & Harrison. Why a PEA? Ask why it would be in their best interests to "pretend" to be your friend.

You are a cost that needs to be managed. Nothing more when considering the bottom line. If they can convince you to do more for less they win with the BoD, shareholders, Wall Street and their bonuses. It's business. Whatever it takes.

whatifguy

Not free healthcare, but how about better than what a brand new ramper who was working at McDonald's last week? Again, our pay rates aren't bad, but that's because we have basically no retirement to speak of. The "guaranteed" 5% can't be both profit-sharing and retirement, it's either one or the other. The Dave would like it if you would believe that it covers both....now, you're not falling for that, are you?

benzoate

Copied from one of the guys who was involved with the 5 document debacle.
THIS IS JETBLUE REALITY. Please take the time to read and research this yourselves. While I know this to be true I implore anyone questioning these issues to contact as many people as they can.

The PEA is a binding contract. We all can certainly agree upon that.

The reason our individual PEA is worthless in a M and A is UNLESS the successor agrees to the terms with Jetblue the enforcement of said PEA is an individual dispute using the dispute resolution process within the PEA or DRM. Unless the merger of airlines triggers a Single Transporation System finding by the NMB then APA, USA, SWA and all other pilot groups with RLA Contracts can simply ignore our PEA. What that means is simple - without a NMB finding of STS then we have no power to integrate our seniority within the other pilot groups CBA seniority list. All we have is a dispute with Jetblue and no mechanism to force a STS or merger of operations. Put another way AAA is not the NMB and has no power under the RLA to render another pilots groups CBA unenforeable. Without that trigger the other pilot group has not legal obligation to INTEGRATE US - NONE.

We are in the Contract Law World and our peers are in the RLA/NMB/CBA Universe and the American Arbitration Association has not been granted the the power by Congress to rule that another pilot group CBA is unenforceable. Congress granted that power to the NMB though the RLA.

Section 15A and C (Expansion Transaction) is worthless not because it is in a PEA or CBA but because of the words, the language, the lack of protection.

If you would like I can arrange a conference call with the attorneys the PVC interviewed and you can ask your questions, bounce your ideas off of them. If you have already made up your mind because you have already spoken to an attorney then I would like to speak to them too and so would the CTC and PVC.

Maybe the PVC and CTC missed something and the more views on target the better.

So far besides Kevin Fitzpatrick and Jetblue internal counsel every other attorney, included those who are not union attorneys but instead are New York Contract Law attorneys and Labor Law Attorneys concluded the same thing - every single one.

Look forward to a PM of a good day and time for you or for your referral to your legal source.