Lobaeux

I understand what he's saying, no reason to attack him. The U.S. airlines are in a fight, not with each other, but for continued profits and prosperity. I disagree with the "poor service" comment, and we cannot simply flood the market with seats, but I understand what he is getting at.

But, I also disagree with the article in relation to Spirit, which is simply one of shareholder/analyst interest, yet is really only applicable to the Legacy airlines + SWA. Shareholder interest and continued increase in stock value for $SAVE is based on growth, which is really counter to the capacity discipline expected of the legacies. Capacity discipline would bring the market cap and share price down for Spirit, slow the growth of the threatening ULCC model, which I'm sure the legacies + SWA would love to see, in addition to increasing their own profits.

We do need to raise the standard of all airlines, especially the ALPA ones. I think we can do that with this contract.

As far as PBS goes, I've never worked with PBS, but from what I understand, it really is a no-go item here. I know line bidding and I want to keep line bidding, as well as the minimum four days off.

390SetBlue

Ummm.... I've had a conflict every month I've wanted one since the current contract has been in force, usually 10-11 a year. You can keep your PBS. I'll keep my line bidding and conflicts. Thanks.

Android

Anyone going to the MEC meeting?

Who's going to be elected new MEC. Chairman?

Android

You better get ahold of the NC guys, when they were in the crewroom last year they specifically said that we would have to give to get. Just sayin......

Hugedouche

interesting, that's not the tune they are playing now.

Android

Newsflash MEC email says that we're going to use "focused negotiations".

What does this mean? I'll tell you, it means that we're going to give up our opportunity to get gains in all of the sections. Why would we do this?

Dont we all agree that this is our chance to get great language in all sections? If so, why conceed our advantage? Un-F-ing believable!

Turbinebound

Did you read the email? They told you why they are taking this approach, and honestly it seems to make sense. I understand that we are in a good position, but so is the company, there is no impetus on their end to sign something. As the email pointed out, every day after the amendable date that we don't have a contract is money taken from our pocket.... that's money the company keeps. So why do we need to drag this out for 7 years over every intricate detail when we have a pretty good base to start from, unless we want to be then next Republic airways.

Furthermore, we all have to vote on this at the end of the day, so if is a giant dog turd, well then guess what? We all get a say...

fly20201

I agree with the focused approach, so long as it sufficiently addresses pay, premium pay, retirement, LTD and scope. I don't want to waste any time while only getting industry lagging wages. In my opinion, other issues can wait.

todhog2

See ya at the contract signing in 2019.

Plane Ramrod

Not really, 70% don't care and will vote for a pay cut if the MEC puts their stamp on it.