Originally Posted by fadec

​​​​​​You order a pepperoni pizza. You wait 2 hours. You receive a day-old half-eaten slice of cheese pizza full of hair and lint. You have a leftover hamburger in the fridge.

Replicant detected...

Originally Posted by Lewbronski

This statement is further evidence that most pilots don’t understand how negotiations in the airline industry work. Maybe what pilot unions really need is a basic voter competency test in order to be able to cast a vote. We’d all probably have better contracts.

United pilots don’t need to worry about arbitration. The only way, under the RLA, for pilots to end up with an arbitration decision imposed on them is for a pilot group to agree to arbitration. They can agree to arbitration by:

1. Ratifying a contract that contains a mandatory arbitration clause, or
2. Agreeing to enter arbitration following a NMB mediator’s proffer of arbitration

In no case under the RLA is arbitration ever mandatory. Unless United’s current contract already has a mandatory arbitration clause, the only way you guys could end up in with an arbitrator’s award imposed on you is if:

1. You file for mediation
2. And then spend enough time in mediation for the NMB mediator to determine that an impasse exists. This period of time would be a minimum of 2.5 to 3 years.
3. And then the mediator proffers arbitration
4. And then the United pilot group IS STUPID ENOUGH to accept arbitration. If your pilot group is dumb enough to accept arbitration, esp when you leverage would be near a peak at that point, then you deserve whatever arbitration award is imposed on you.

The RLA NEVER forces arbitration on a union.

Originally Posted by mustang304

I can't vote for or against, so it is kind of a moot point for me- I'm along for the ride while full wingers vote. To be clear I'm not saying this one is great, nor am I saying we should accept it- regardless of value.

There seems to be a lot of desire to replace the MEC and NC, some folks seem to believe replacing them is the answer, rather then sending them back to the table. NC training is a several months to a year minimum, and "hiring a professional negotiator to negotiate for us" is really not viable, as a professional negotiator will not fully understand the ins and outs of our operation and work experiences. Going to arbitration can be a bad idea as well -ask the Atlas folks how that worked out.

I do appreciate we have 14K pilots to draw from, so we might be able to rebuild a NC and MEC quickly. It takes time to build a rapport with the company team. There is a cost associated with this (inflation, lost wages and benefits, etc). Not taking a new contract means that the current contract stays in place. No improvements happen while a new contract is being formulated- only the ones agreed to in previous contracts.

I'm just wondering how long it took Delta ALPA to rebuild its MEC and NCs, and how long they took to build a new TA. Any idea? One year? 6 Months? 3 Years? Anyone from DL want to chime in?

Originally Posted by mustang304

Thanks for that clarification-- New to UA ALPA. In two teamsters airlines I worked at, we never made gains, and you saw the stuff that happened at Atlas.

Originally Posted by mustang304

I can't vote for or against, so it is kind of a moot point for me- I'm along for the ride while full wingers vote. To be clear I'm not saying this one is great, nor am I saying we should accept it- regardless of value.

There seems to be a lot of desire to replace the MEC and NC, some folks seem to believe replacing them is the answer, rather then sending them back to the table. NC training is a several months to a year minimum, and "hiring a professional negotiator to negotiate for us" is really not viable, as a professional negotiator will not fully understand the ins and outs of our operation and work experiences. Going to arbitration can be a bad idea as well -ask the Atlas folks how that worked out.

I do appreciate we have 14K pilots to draw from, so we might be able to rebuild a NC and MEC quickly. It takes time to build a rapport with the company team. There is a cost associated with this (inflation, lost wages and benefits, etc). Not taking a new contract means that the current contract stays in place. No improvements happen while a new contract is being formulated- only the ones agreed to in previous contracts.

I'm just wondering how long it took Delta ALPA to rebuild its MEC and NCs, and how long they took to build a new TA. Any idea? One year? 6 Months? 3 Years? Anyone from DL want to chime in?

Originally Posted by Beewatcher2

We don't want our NC or MEC to build rapport with the company team...we want the company team to fear our pilot group. We want Kirby and Wall Street to wonder what our next move will be. We need to get mad. What built our current contract was pitchforks and strife... beat the drums! All the new hires think this is such a great altruistic company with ponies and rainbows for all but in the end even Swayne will be *%?*& off. An angry, militant pilot group is how you get the contract you deserve. We don't give an inch back on our contract...EVER!

Originally Posted by WHACKMASTER

You sir need to be the UAL MEC chairman because you “get it”.

Originally Posted by Beewatcher2

We don't want our NC or MEC to build rapport with the company team...we want the company team to fear our pilot group. We want Kirby and Wall Street to wonder what our next move will be. We need to get mad. What built our current contract was pitchforks and strife... beat the drums! All the new hires think this is such a great altruistic company with ponies and rainbows for all but in the end even Swayne will be *%?*& off. An angry, militant pilot group is how you get the contract you deserve. We don't give an inch back on our contract...EVER!

Originally Posted by Lewbronski

I'm with you in spirit especially the part about not wanting the NC or MEC to build rapport with the company team. And I agree that, for a union to be successful against the corporatocracy, they almost need to get mad.

I might be splitting hairs, but I think the best way to express a union's anger is not with Amber Heard-style fits of rage - screaming, name-calling, slapping, throwing, pooping, torches, or pitchforks. Sh** like that just enrages the other side and hardens their position. I personally think the better way is that of a very businesslike, almost sociopathic approach. Consequences occur like clockwork and are delivered without emotion. That's scary. Maybe a good embodiment of this approach is Javier Bardem's character, Anton Chigurh, in No Country for Old Men.

Originally Posted by CALPilotToo

My skin would crawl when you’d hear of Todd Insler bragging about the relationship he has with our CEO and how they are able to sit down at dinner and truly discuss the issues at hand. Yea, just feeling each other out. One seeing what he can get the other to sign off on for 13000 of us and the other trying to figure out what’s in it for him once he’s done representing the 13000 of us. Hamilton seems to be falling right in line.