The end game...
11-13-2023, 08:55 AM
#82
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2015
Posts: 643
That stood out to me as well. It adds to my belief that they are about to go on a sell job with garbage rates.
11-13-2023, 09:09 AM
#83
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2015
Posts: 1,174
I was curious and did some comparison calculations on a common trip I do at a AA in the 737.
DFW-SNA Turn
- 6:28 pay guarantee at AA = $1099.01 for the trip (yr 2 GRP 2 FO)
- 7.4 TFP at SWA
- Pay parity on that trip would require $148.51/TFP
Edited for accuracy, my original TFP calculation was wrong.
DFW-SNA Turn
- 6:28 pay guarantee at AA = $1099.01 for the trip (yr 2 GRP 2 FO)
- 7.4 TFP at SWA
- Pay parity on that trip would require $148.51/TFP
Edited for accuracy, my original TFP calculation was wrong.
.
11-13-2023, 09:31 AM
#84
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2017
Posts: 224
Of course our trips are built differently, so this comparison is probably more academic than reality.
11-13-2023, 09:33 AM
#85
gets time off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,234
Oh yeah, absolutely, I understand. I was just curious what the actual TFP/Hour conversion was for a specific example. But in this case it’s 1.144, so reasonably close to the SWA claim if 1.15.
Of course our trips are built differently, so this comparison is probably more academic than reality.
Of course our trips are built differently, so this comparison is probably more academic than reality.
11-13-2023, 09:33 AM
#86
Gets Weekend Reserve
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 3,776
SWAPA has years and years of polling data. They know what's important to the vast majority of the pilots. They also refreshed it in the recent poll as well. They also stated they're not interested in a 51% solution either. They've also acknowledged the mistakes made in 2016 especially with implementation and agreeing without codifying and completing the language.
And let's be honest here... if we went by the forums temperature, do you honestly think any of the legacy contracts would have passed by the margins they did? Do you think Alaska's turd would have passed by the margin it did? Or Delta's? They settled for far less than they should have, and every other major airline CEO except our halfwit, rushed to "l0cK iN dA gAiNz" because the pilot contracts were on sale at bargain rates. Yet, despite the forum temperatures, they passed, convincingly so.
The problem with people opposed to this are people who use one-liners, disparaging comments without so much as offering any other substance, rationale or reasoning, or something that would appeal to people to vote against what they perceive to be a turd. Yes, it's a sales job whichever way you slice it - you want people to vote yes, you gotta sell it. Same with no votes, gotta sell voting no, and what may seem obvious to you may not be so obvious to others. As Zap said earlier, disparaging a type A personality usually tends to push them the other way. However, a polite conversation does wonders. That's why I was a huge fan of JL the last go because he wasn't disparaging to those who disagreed with him with the exception of TD who actually deserved everything coming to him and then some. Pull down some data, engage in conversation and sell me your no (or your yes) vote. An analytical approach is far more convincing than cutesy name calling, disparaging and perjorative remarks with zero substance, mindless chest thumping, "do your own research" referrals, and one liners. That's at least part of the reason why crappy TA's pass - people are too lazy to counter with a sales job of their own.
With respect to our rates, at the very minimum, they need to be on par with A321XLR/A321neo/B757/B767-300. At least they do for me to even continue reading any agreement before voting no. I will be paying a very close attention to retro calculations as well.
We shall see what the next 3 weeks bring.
11-13-2023, 10:17 AM
#87
At your mom's house
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: cpt 737
Posts: 2,798
Not sure if this qualifies as sprinkles... maybe Pollyanna 😜, but I didn't take the podcast as the sell job coming and here's why.
SWAPA has years and years of polling data. They know what's important to the vast majority of the pilots. They also refreshed it in the recent poll as well. They also stated they're not interested in a 51% solution either. They've also acknowledged the mistakes made in 2016 especially with implementation and agreeing without codifying and completing the language.
And let's be honest here... if we went by the forums temperature, do you honestly think any of the legacy contracts would have passed by the margins they did? Do you think Alaska's turd would have passed by the margin it did? Or Delta's? They settled for far less than they should have, and every other major airline CEO except our halfwit, rushed to "l0cK iN dA gAiNz" because the pilot contracts were on sale at bargain rates. Yet, despite the forum temperatures, they passed, convincingly so.
The problem with people opposed to this are people who use one-liners, disparaging comments without so much as offering any other substance, rationale or reasoning, or something that would appeal to people to vote against what they perceive to be a turd. Yes, it's a sales job whichever way you slice it - you want people to vote yes, you gotta sell it. Same with no votes, gotta sell voting no, and what may seem obvious to you may not be so obvious to others. As Zap said earlier, disparaging a type A personality usually tends to push them the other way. However, a polite conversation does wonders. That's why I was a huge fan of JL the last go because he wasn't disparaging to those who disagreed with him with the exception of TD who actually deserved everything coming to him and then some. Pull down some data, engage in conversation and sell me your no (or your yes) vote. An analytical approach is far more convincing than cutesy name calling, disparaging and perjorative remarks with zero substance, mindless chest thumping, "do your own research" referrals, and one liners. That's at least part of the reason why crappy TA's pass - people are too lazy to counter with a sales job of their own.
With respect to our rates, at the very minimum, they need to be on par with A321XLR/A321neo/B757/B767-300. At least they do for me to even continue reading any agreement before voting no. I will be paying a very close attention to retro calculations as well.
We shall see what the next 3 weeks bring.
SWAPA has years and years of polling data. They know what's important to the vast majority of the pilots. They also refreshed it in the recent poll as well. They also stated they're not interested in a 51% solution either. They've also acknowledged the mistakes made in 2016 especially with implementation and agreeing without codifying and completing the language.
And let's be honest here... if we went by the forums temperature, do you honestly think any of the legacy contracts would have passed by the margins they did? Do you think Alaska's turd would have passed by the margin it did? Or Delta's? They settled for far less than they should have, and every other major airline CEO except our halfwit, rushed to "l0cK iN dA gAiNz" because the pilot contracts were on sale at bargain rates. Yet, despite the forum temperatures, they passed, convincingly so.
The problem with people opposed to this are people who use one-liners, disparaging comments without so much as offering any other substance, rationale or reasoning, or something that would appeal to people to vote against what they perceive to be a turd. Yes, it's a sales job whichever way you slice it - you want people to vote yes, you gotta sell it. Same with no votes, gotta sell voting no, and what may seem obvious to you may not be so obvious to others. As Zap said earlier, disparaging a type A personality usually tends to push them the other way. However, a polite conversation does wonders. That's why I was a huge fan of JL the last go because he wasn't disparaging to those who disagreed with him with the exception of TD who actually deserved everything coming to him and then some. Pull down some data, engage in conversation and sell me your no (or your yes) vote. An analytical approach is far more convincing than cutesy name calling, disparaging and perjorative remarks with zero substance, mindless chest thumping, "do your own research" referrals, and one liners. That's at least part of the reason why crappy TA's pass - people are too lazy to counter with a sales job of their own.
With respect to our rates, at the very minimum, they need to be on par with A321XLR/A321neo/B757/B767-300. At least they do for me to even continue reading any agreement before voting no. I will be paying a very close attention to retro calculations as well.
We shall see what the next 3 weeks bring.
JS on UA the other day and they asked how it was going over here. We spoke about retro and the CPT said in their 1st TA his ratification bonus, his words, he would have gotten 15k for retro and he was happy with that because in his 38yrs of flying he never got any retro and anything from the company was a bonus to him.
luckily for him they held out and his TA2 bonus was over 50k. He was very excited about that.
The FO said anyone who thinks they should get full retro was fooling themselves and shouldn't bother and we would be stupid to delay to try and get it.
I think the OAL have a way different idea of their worth and that's why all three voted in less than they deserved.
I dont see that here.
Also it's not my job to convince you to vote yes or no. It's your job.
I'll look at it both ways and try to find why I should vote yes and why I should vote no.
I'm already leaning heavily one way so itll take some convincing from me.
11-13-2023, 11:51 AM
#89
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2011
Posts: 1,029
My experience lately has been that, while the forum crowd is THE most hardlined, it's not by much. 2 years ago I was greatly concerned with the awareness of the CA's I was flying with. Today, not so much (save one). I've had CA's tell me how much more hardlined the FO's they fly with are. That leaves me hopeful for a thoroughly picked through TA given the extremely cynical attitude towards management.
11-13-2023, 02:50 PM
#90
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2013
Posts: 3,672
My experience lately has been that, while the forum crowd is THE most hardlined, it's not by much. 2 years ago I was greatly concerned with the awareness of the CA's I was flying with. Today, not so much (save one). I've had CA's tell me how much more hardlined the FO's they fly with are. That leaves me hopeful for a thoroughly picked through TA given the extremely cynical attitude towards management.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
