Vote for or against pinnacle TA
12-22-2012, 09:32 AM
#1
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: CRJ
Posts: 64
Vote for or against pinnacle TA
Here we go, have fun with this.....Delta will sell eventually if the TA passes......TA passes furloughs will be minimal and furlough rights will be better than on the street....all on the list will be able, if all meet deltas requirements, to interview....TA fails close doors to pinnacle.
Ok so what to do....take a chance and stay or burn it down....an opinion is keep a job and furlough rights which keeps you in the loop and monies if you decide to laterally move, come back and upgrade. Burn it down to prove a point...........
Ok airline pilots show all your true colors......whin,whin,whin
Ok so what to do....take a chance and stay or burn it down....an opinion is keep a job and furlough rights which keeps you in the loop and monies if you decide to laterally move, come back and upgrade. Burn it down to prove a point...........
Ok airline pilots show all your true colors......whin,whin,whin
12-22-2012, 10:14 AM
#3
Saab Saab Phooey!
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Set Hundo
Posts: 479
I am sick of people assuming a "no" vote is a vote to "burn it down", and only chosen "out of spite". Sometimes things are just unacceptable, and despite the consequences, can not be acquiesced to by choice.
Look at Hostess. Everyone knew their management was corrupt and incompetent, everyone knew it would close if the bakers wouldn't acquiesce to a sub-acceptable contract, and they wouldn't, and Hostess closed.
Look at the locked-out Crystal Sugar workers in Minnesota. They have been out of work for over a year, with replacement workers keeping the plant going. They have gone back to vote on the same unacceptable (by their majority vote) contract four times (FOUR TIMES!), and every single time they have voted to not accept the offer made, at the expense of their jobs.
Look at the locked-out twin cities musicians. They have a great contract. They will still make what most folks would call "good money" if they take their managements' offers. But they wont take those offers because they, by their judgement, do not consider the offers acceptable. They are now not being paid anything by their employers.
Look at AMFA at NWA. Voted themselves right out of work. Why? Because the offer was simply not acceptable. (I think some might have ended up going back to work under considerably worse conditions)
I am voting "no" on this TA. I am not doing so out of spite. I am not doing it to hurt or harm or benefit or protect anyone. I do not wish to "burn down" my company, at which I have many friends, and high respect for many of my coworkers, including and beyond pilots and flight attendants. I enjoy my job. I respect the managers with whom I interact.
I am voting "no" because the deal is unacceptable and does not earn my vote. I am voting "no" because it is my right and duty to vote how I see fit based upon my consideration of the deal on the table. I know many of the ALPA guys involved, and respect the work they did to get the best deal they could. I'm still going to vote "no" - not to spite Pinnacle, ALPA, or Delta. I'm going to vote "no" because I can't vote "yes".
I will continue to respect my coworkers, regardless of how they vote, or the reasons, assumed or stated, that they give for their vote.
Regardless of the outcome of the vote, I will continue to work at my job at the highest standard I am able to give on any given day. I will continue to be safe, professional, and respectful of our passengers and my fellow workers. I will work until I can find a better job, or my job no longer exists. If I vote "no" and the TA passes, I will take my bridge payout same as anyone else, because it would be my right to do so. If the TA does not pass, I will lose my job.
There are perfectly good reasons to vote "no", just as there are perfectly good reasons to vote "yes". All pilots in good standing have the right to vote however they should chose to.
I will vote "no" because I can't vote "yes" to what's being offered.
Look at Hostess. Everyone knew their management was corrupt and incompetent, everyone knew it would close if the bakers wouldn't acquiesce to a sub-acceptable contract, and they wouldn't, and Hostess closed.
Look at the locked-out Crystal Sugar workers in Minnesota. They have been out of work for over a year, with replacement workers keeping the plant going. They have gone back to vote on the same unacceptable (by their majority vote) contract four times (FOUR TIMES!), and every single time they have voted to not accept the offer made, at the expense of their jobs.
Look at the locked-out twin cities musicians. They have a great contract. They will still make what most folks would call "good money" if they take their managements' offers. But they wont take those offers because they, by their judgement, do not consider the offers acceptable. They are now not being paid anything by their employers.
Look at AMFA at NWA. Voted themselves right out of work. Why? Because the offer was simply not acceptable. (I think some might have ended up going back to work under considerably worse conditions)
I am voting "no" on this TA. I am not doing so out of spite. I am not doing it to hurt or harm or benefit or protect anyone. I do not wish to "burn down" my company, at which I have many friends, and high respect for many of my coworkers, including and beyond pilots and flight attendants. I enjoy my job. I respect the managers with whom I interact.
I am voting "no" because the deal is unacceptable and does not earn my vote. I am voting "no" because it is my right and duty to vote how I see fit based upon my consideration of the deal on the table. I know many of the ALPA guys involved, and respect the work they did to get the best deal they could. I'm still going to vote "no" - not to spite Pinnacle, ALPA, or Delta. I'm going to vote "no" because I can't vote "yes".
I will continue to respect my coworkers, regardless of how they vote, or the reasons, assumed or stated, that they give for their vote.
Regardless of the outcome of the vote, I will continue to work at my job at the highest standard I am able to give on any given day. I will continue to be safe, professional, and respectful of our passengers and my fellow workers. I will work until I can find a better job, or my job no longer exists. If I vote "no" and the TA passes, I will take my bridge payout same as anyone else, because it would be my right to do so. If the TA does not pass, I will lose my job.
There are perfectly good reasons to vote "no", just as there are perfectly good reasons to vote "yes". All pilots in good standing have the right to vote however they should chose to.
I will vote "no" because I can't vote "yes" to what's being offered.
12-22-2012, 10:39 AM
#4
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Doing what you do, for less.
Posts: 1,792
I am sick of people assuming a "no" vote is a vote to "burn it down", and only chosen "out of spite". Sometimes things are just unacceptable, and despite the consequences, can not be acquiesced to by choice.
Look at Hostess. Everyone knew their management was corrupt and incompetent, everyone knew it would close if the bakers wouldn't acquiesce to a sub-acceptable contract, and they wouldn't, and Hostess closed.
Look at the locked-out Crystal Sugar workers in Minnesota. They have been out of work for over a year, with replacement workers keeping the plant going. They have gone back to vote on the same unacceptable (by their majority vote) contract four times (FOUR TIMES!), and every single time they have voted to not accept the offer made, at the expense of their jobs.
Look at the locked-out twin cities musicians. They have a great contract. They will still make what most folks would call "good money" if they take their managements' offers. But they wont take those offers because they, by their judgement, do not consider the offers acceptable. They are now not being paid anything by their employers.
Look at AMFA at NWA. Voted themselves right out of work. Why? Because the offer was simply not acceptable. (I think some might have ended up going back to work under considerably worse conditions)
I am voting "no" on this TA. I am not doing so out of spite. I am not doing it to hurt or harm or benefit or protect anyone. I do not wish to "burn down" my company, at which I have many friends, and high respect for many of my coworkers, including and beyond pilots and flight attendants. I enjoy my job. I respect the managers with whom I interact.
I am voting "no" because the deal is unacceptable and does not earn my vote. I am voting "no" because it is my right and duty to vote how I see fit based upon my consideration of the deal on the table. I know many of the ALPA guys involved, and respect the work they did to get the best deal they could. I'm still going to vote "no" - not to spite Pinnacle, ALPA, or Delta. I'm going to vote "no" because I can't vote "yes".
I will continue to respect my coworkers, regardless of how they vote, or the reasons, assumed or stated, that they give for their vote.
Regardless of the outcome of the vote, I will continue to work at my job at the highest standard I am able to give on any given day. I will continue to be safe, professional, and respectful of our passengers and my fellow workers. I will work until I can find a better job, or my job no longer exists. If I vote "no" and the TA passes, I will take my bridge payout same as anyone else, because it would be my right to do so. If the TA does not pass, I will lose my job.
There are perfectly good reasons to vote "no", just as there are perfectly good reasons to vote "yes". All pilots in good standing have the right to vote however they should chose to.
I will vote "no" because I can't vote "yes" to what's being offered.
Look at Hostess. Everyone knew their management was corrupt and incompetent, everyone knew it would close if the bakers wouldn't acquiesce to a sub-acceptable contract, and they wouldn't, and Hostess closed.
Look at the locked-out Crystal Sugar workers in Minnesota. They have been out of work for over a year, with replacement workers keeping the plant going. They have gone back to vote on the same unacceptable (by their majority vote) contract four times (FOUR TIMES!), and every single time they have voted to not accept the offer made, at the expense of their jobs.
Look at the locked-out twin cities musicians. They have a great contract. They will still make what most folks would call "good money" if they take their managements' offers. But they wont take those offers because they, by their judgement, do not consider the offers acceptable. They are now not being paid anything by their employers.
Look at AMFA at NWA. Voted themselves right out of work. Why? Because the offer was simply not acceptable. (I think some might have ended up going back to work under considerably worse conditions)
I am voting "no" on this TA. I am not doing so out of spite. I am not doing it to hurt or harm or benefit or protect anyone. I do not wish to "burn down" my company, at which I have many friends, and high respect for many of my coworkers, including and beyond pilots and flight attendants. I enjoy my job. I respect the managers with whom I interact.
I am voting "no" because the deal is unacceptable and does not earn my vote. I am voting "no" because it is my right and duty to vote how I see fit based upon my consideration of the deal on the table. I know many of the ALPA guys involved, and respect the work they did to get the best deal they could. I'm still going to vote "no" - not to spite Pinnacle, ALPA, or Delta. I'm going to vote "no" because I can't vote "yes".
I will continue to respect my coworkers, regardless of how they vote, or the reasons, assumed or stated, that they give for their vote.
Regardless of the outcome of the vote, I will continue to work at my job at the highest standard I am able to give on any given day. I will continue to be safe, professional, and respectful of our passengers and my fellow workers. I will work until I can find a better job, or my job no longer exists. If I vote "no" and the TA passes, I will take my bridge payout same as anyone else, because it would be my right to do so. If the TA does not pass, I will lose my job.
There are perfectly good reasons to vote "no", just as there are perfectly good reasons to vote "yes". All pilots in good standing have the right to vote however they should chose to.
I will vote "no" because I can't vote "yes" to what's being offered.
12-22-2012, 10:42 AM
#5
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: CRJ 900
Posts: 131
It doesn't matter how unacceptable it is, it's going to pass pretty easily. There are 5 other carriers ready to take this same deal or a worse one for the flying. The argument that its going to be a race to the bottom is moot point. Delta and all other mainline ALPA pilots don't care what happens to regional pilots so don't look to them to stand up for anyone at the regional level. They are starting to see some of the flying they lost for the last 10 years finally come back to the mainline; you will find no tears shed from these groups. Delta has decided what number they are willing to pay for regional feed; you either meet it or get shut down. They will start a whole other regional if they have to but they are going to get what they want. Those who are going to the street are going to grab their $6,000, 3 months pay, travel bennies, and healthcare before they leave. Senior people are going to see a pay cut but the alternative leaves them with no place to go where they can make the same kind of money at that age. Those in the middle will go to Delta via the preferential hiring agreement, or another Major. In the mean time they keep their job, money coming in the bank and most importantly current. The alternative is a 100% pay cut, to the street on unemployment competing against every other pilot trying to get on somewhere else. Its not right but business is business, and Delta has all the negotiating leverage.
12-22-2012, 10:50 AM
#7
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: CRJ
Posts: 64
I am sick of people assuming a "no" vote is a vote to "burn it down", and only chosen "out of spite". Sometimes things are just unacceptable, and despite the consequences, can not be acquiesced to by choice.
Look at Hostess. Everyone knew their management was corrupt and incompetent, everyone knew it would close if the bakers wouldn't acquiesce to a sub-acceptable contract, and they wouldn't, and Hostess closed.
Look at the locked-out Crystal Sugar workers in Minnesota. They have been out of work for over a year, with replacement workers keeping the plant going. They have gone back to vote on the same unacceptable (by their majority vote) contract four times (FOUR TIMES!), and every single time they have voted to not accept the offer made, at the expense of their jobs.
Look at the locked-out twin cities musicians. They have a great contract. They will still make what most folks would call "good money" if they take their managements' offers. But they wont take those offers because they, by their judgement, do not consider the offers acceptable. They are now not being paid anything by their employers.
Look at AMFA at NWA. Voted themselves right out of work. Why? Because the offer was simply not acceptable. (I think some might have ended up going back to work under considerably worse conditions)
I am voting "no" on this TA. I am not doing so out of spite. I am not doing it to hurt or harm or benefit or protect anyone. I do not wish to "burn down" my company, at which I have many friends, and high respect for many of my coworkers, including and beyond pilots and flight attendants. I enjoy my job. I respect the managers with whom I interact.
I am voting "no" because the deal is unacceptable and does not earn my vote. I am voting "no" because it is my right and duty to vote how I see fit based upon my consideration of the deal on the table. I know many of the ALPA guys involved, and respect the work they did to get the best deal they could. I'm still going to vote "no" - not to spite Pinnacle, ALPA, or Delta. I'm going to vote "no" because I can't vote "yes".
I will continue to respect my coworkers, regardless of how they vote, or the reasons, assumed or stated, that they give for their vote.
Regardless of the outcome of the vote, I will continue to work at my job at the highest standard I am able to give on any given day. I will continue to be safe, professional, and respectful of our passengers and my fellow workers. I will work until I can find a better job, or my job no longer exists. If I vote "no" and the TA passes, I will take my bridge payout same as anyone else, because it would be my right to do so. If the TA does not pass, I will lose my job.
There are perfectly good reasons to vote "no", just as there are perfectly good reasons to vote "yes". All pilots in good standing have the right to vote however they should chose to.
I will vote "no" because I can't vote "yes" to what's being offered.
Look at Hostess. Everyone knew their management was corrupt and incompetent, everyone knew it would close if the bakers wouldn't acquiesce to a sub-acceptable contract, and they wouldn't, and Hostess closed.
Look at the locked-out Crystal Sugar workers in Minnesota. They have been out of work for over a year, with replacement workers keeping the plant going. They have gone back to vote on the same unacceptable (by their majority vote) contract four times (FOUR TIMES!), and every single time they have voted to not accept the offer made, at the expense of their jobs.
Look at the locked-out twin cities musicians. They have a great contract. They will still make what most folks would call "good money" if they take their managements' offers. But they wont take those offers because they, by their judgement, do not consider the offers acceptable. They are now not being paid anything by their employers.
Look at AMFA at NWA. Voted themselves right out of work. Why? Because the offer was simply not acceptable. (I think some might have ended up going back to work under considerably worse conditions)
I am voting "no" on this TA. I am not doing so out of spite. I am not doing it to hurt or harm or benefit or protect anyone. I do not wish to "burn down" my company, at which I have many friends, and high respect for many of my coworkers, including and beyond pilots and flight attendants. I enjoy my job. I respect the managers with whom I interact.
I am voting "no" because the deal is unacceptable and does not earn my vote. I am voting "no" because it is my right and duty to vote how I see fit based upon my consideration of the deal on the table. I know many of the ALPA guys involved, and respect the work they did to get the best deal they could. I'm still going to vote "no" - not to spite Pinnacle, ALPA, or Delta. I'm going to vote "no" because I can't vote "yes".
I will continue to respect my coworkers, regardless of how they vote, or the reasons, assumed or stated, that they give for their vote.
Regardless of the outcome of the vote, I will continue to work at my job at the highest standard I am able to give on any given day. I will continue to be safe, professional, and respectful of our passengers and my fellow workers. I will work until I can find a better job, or my job no longer exists. If I vote "no" and the TA passes, I will take my bridge payout same as anyone else, because it would be my right to do so. If the TA does not pass, I will lose my job.
There are perfectly good reasons to vote "no", just as there are perfectly good reasons to vote "yes". All pilots in good standing have the right to vote however they should chose to.
I will vote "no" because I can't vote "yes" to what's being offered.
you guys are awesome!
12-22-2012, 10:53 AM
#8
I'm a man of my word.
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: Devil's Advocate
Posts: 2,883
He was quartered on the port side.
12-22-2012, 12:32 PM
#9
Saab Saab Phooey!
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: Set Hundo
Posts: 479
lolwut: well played sir.
Helperto EL: You assumed, in your opining post. At least that's how I read it. For that matter, I assumed I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to give an honest opinion on the validity of voting "no". Oops, my bad.
Merry Christmas!
Helperto EL: You assumed, in your opining post. At least that's how I read it. For that matter, I assumed I wouldn't be wasting my time trying to give an honest opinion on the validity of voting "no". Oops, my bad.
Merry Christmas!
Last edited by LoudFastRules; 12-22-2012 at 12:48 PM.
12-22-2012, 03:47 PM
#10
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Position: CRJ
Posts: 64
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Past V1
Regional
61
01-22-2009 07:17 AM
