Search

Notices

Place Your Bets!

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 12-18-2022, 08:12 AM
  #141  
Perennial Reserve
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 12,203
Default

Originally Posted by flyingmonkeys
Sadly I believe this will now pass. It will be by a slim margin. Lots of turtling going on amongst the pilots in various group chats I’m a part of. Voting yes out of fear. We have such a weak pilot group. Battered pilot syndrome is a thing. I hope I’m wrong.

There are like at least a dozen reasons to turn this turd down but all yes voters can hang their hat on is ‘management might not come back to the table’. That’s some straight limp D energy.
I disagree. And to set the record straight, I reversed my feelings on this after the B6 TA got negotiated with a catch-up provision. I think that there is more that can be squeezed out this time even with a potential JCBA looming and now will be a ‘no’ vote because the JCBA can’t be depended upon before it actually passes DOJ muster. Now having said that, my no vote without a catch-up provision really is more about hedging the bet against DOJ disapproval than about believing this is a ‘turd’ because I think the NC actually did a pretty good job with the marching orders they were given, it’s just that the successes scored by B6 and DA have sort of changed the strategic outlook. I think we now have the ability to insist on a catch-up provision so we won’t be eternally trapped in lag by one contract cycle if the merger/acquisition falls through. It’ll also make us less attractive to Franke if that happens.

But other people are going to make other rational choices, some because they actually don’t plan on sticking around long enough to benefit. One can hardly expect someone who already has a legacy CJO and anticipates a class date 3 months out to vote to reenter negotiations rather than take a 1 Jan raise. Other people will make rational decisions to vote yes for other reasons. I’m now hoping the “No” voters prevail, but certainly don’t believe those who vote yes are weak or fearful or even uninformed. Some are just more comfortable with the proverbial “bird in hand…”. That’s not bad, just a different value judgment than mine.

It takes all kinds to make a world.
Excargodog is offline  
Old 12-18-2022, 08:47 AM
  #142  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2015
Posts: 394
Default

Originally Posted by Excargodog

Other people will make rational decisions to vote yes for other reasons. I’m now hoping the “No” voters prevail, but certainly don’t believe those who vote yes are weak or fearful or even uninformed. Some are just more comfortable with the proverbial “bird in hand…”. That’s not bad, just a different value judgment than mine.

It takes all kinds to make a world.
I feel the same way. Hoping for a “no”, but can’t fault those that vote yes. Not everyone has the same level of risk tolerance. To each their own.
Lakeaffect is online now  
Old 12-18-2022, 04:55 PM
  #143  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SoFloFlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,356
Default

Originally Posted by FahQ2
You have no idea what you’re talking about.

First year pay and the subsequent attrition is not my problem. The union roadshow quantified just what this first year pay raise cost us in negotiating capital, and that cost is over 90 million dollars. That’s 90 million that is not going towards getting our pay to market rate. It is the largest cost component of this TA.

I. WILL. NOT. FINANCE. ATTRITION.
This logic doesn’t add up. Keeping first year pay lower to bring everyone else up still isn’t industry standard. Attrition will also continue to be bad until newer peeps are offered a reason to stay. Being paid better than current contract rates.

I know you disagree, but I’ve never seen a more emotional group of people than the “no” voters in this forum
SoFloFlyer is offline  
Old 12-18-2022, 06:39 PM
  #144  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2018
Posts: 417
Default

Originally Posted by SoFloFlyer
This logic doesn’t add up. Keeping first year pay lower to bring everyone else up still isn’t industry standard. Attrition will also continue to be bad until newer peeps are offered a reason to stay. Being paid better than current contract rates.

I know you disagree, but I’ve never seen a more emotional group of people than the “no” voters in this forum
Compared to what exactly?
onedolla is offline  
Old 12-18-2022, 06:53 PM
  #145  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2019
Position: baller, shot caller
Posts: 1,025
Default

Originally Posted by onedolla
Compared to what exactly?
His very recent CFI job
SSlow is online now  
Old 12-18-2022, 07:29 PM
  #146  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 511
Default

Originally Posted by sioux8ships
Unfortunately, I feel you’re correct. This will be voted in out of fear.
Glad im not the only one. First time in a decade that I felt like I was back at the regionals. Between weak pilots and draconian management , B6 can't come fast enough.
8JRMfortheyear is offline  
Old 12-18-2022, 08:02 PM
  #147  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SoFloFlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,356
Default

Originally Posted by onedolla;[url=tel:3555037
3555037[/url]]Compared to what exactly?
Regular APC users lol
SoFloFlyer is offline  
Old 12-18-2022, 08:02 PM
  #148  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Nov 2019
Posts: 76
Default

Originally Posted by FahQ2
So you stand on the shoulders of other men who fought for contracts and call yourself tall.

Had you entered this industry twenty years ago, you would be a regional jet lifer with the attitude you have. I am very happy you got in during this hiring climate.

Please, say more.
He obviously hasn't seen his company's financials.
Avro85 is offline  
Old 12-18-2022, 08:03 PM
  #149  
Gets Weekends Off
 
SoFloFlyer's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 2,356
Default

Originally Posted by SSlow;[url=tel:3555046
3555046]His very recent CFI job
Lol yeah, no
SoFloFlyer is offline  
Old 12-18-2022, 08:35 PM
  #150  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Irishblackbird's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2014
Posts: 447
Default

Originally Posted by Avro85
He obviously hasn't seen his company's financials.
I'm curious, have you? My understanding is the people who have are under a nondisclosure.

This deal represents $463 million, if we are in such financial dire straits this deal would not have even come to light. The difference to bring us to parity with JB will not make a difference in the company's financial standing. This deal, in it's current form will do nothing to curb our attrition and entice prospective pilots to come here. I'm certain our attrition will greatly accelerate, and any prospective pilot looking to come here would be better served to join JB for both better SLI and higher pay right off the bat. The only pilots that will join are those that are unemployable elsewhere or those looking for the type to move on to a legacy. If this passes, we will continue to be a sinking ship, and if it doesn't, and management chooses not to engage we again continue to loose pilots and attract new one's which will add to our inefficiency and utilization of the current fleet.
Irishblackbird is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
CASApilot
Delta
18
12-07-2022 07:10 PM
atr42flyer
Major
2
06-06-2011 04:16 PM
MARX
Compass Airlines
13
04-20-2011 05:53 PM
FuelJetA
Part 135
11
03-12-2006 03:29 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices