ASpilot2be
Qbicle seat warmer
I don't think he is unhappy there. With retirement in sight, I wouldn't leave there. His QOL seems pretty good.
Next Up in the RLA Conga Line
- Thread starter Flyinthrew
- Start date
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
I was hoping there would be improvements, since we’re hemorrhaging people like crazy, but it is what it is. No other job would fly me to and from work, from wherever we happen to be camped out. I’m a lifer here, for 9 years, 7 months, and 25 more days, not that I’m counting. That’ll be retirement at 60.
Skåning
Well-Known Member
What about holding a strike vote? NMB?
thepotato232
Well-Known Member
There'll be nothing of that sort anytime in the near future. We're basically smack in the middle of a MEC-negotiated and pilot group-approved CBA that becomes amendable in 2025.
The quick and dirty of the situation is that, after months of foot-dragging and nasty glares from the head office since the 2016 CBA had become amendable, the company suddenly shoved a "last chance, take it or leave it, screw you, but you'd better pass it right away" proposal at the MEC in early 2021. The TA contained virtually no QOL-improving contractual language, 2.5% yearly raises through the end of 2024, and a retirement change from a 5% match to a 7% DC.
For reasons that still baffle me to this day, the MEC responded to this TA with a HARD sell in favor. Being a TA-skeptic, I rolled my eyes at multiple emails, had to ask MEC members to respect sterile cockpit in flight, and was the subject (among others, not by name) of a video, put out with ALPA trimmings on an ALPA budget, in which the then-head of the MEC accused prospective "no" voters of bad faith and "common-core math." Just to make it even spicier, the company began use of a new scheduling software for all line construction during this period. There was no language whatsoever in the TA governing the use of this software. MEC members expressed no interest in returning to the bargaining table in response to the company's unilateral alteration of the status quo under which the TA had been negotiated.
The TA passed by a >3% margin shortly afterward. The reason for management's extreme urgency for passing the contract became crystal clear about a week later, when it became public knowledge that all federal COVID airline support funding was contingent on there being no reduction in workforce. This information obviously would have changed the tone of our contract negotiations, had it not come days after the pilot group's unconditional surrender of all bargaining leverage. All talk from the MEC since the contract's passing of "mid-contract talks" and platitudes such as "just because we passed the contract doesnt mean we're done negotiating" have been met with open derision from management. Our DO has explained in multiple all-pilot calls, as one would to a child, that the contract we voted in is a legally binding document and will be followed.
Perhaps I'm a cynic, but I believe that any pilot who didn't understand that would be the case as soon as the TA was released two years ago is either profoundly ignorant about the nature of collective bargaining, or just sees themselves as more management than labor. The email to which Stone Cold is referring is simply the MEC abandoning the face-saving measures it's been attempting ever since the vote, and embracing the fact that the only leverage we have is attrition.
The quick and dirty of the situation is that, after months of foot-dragging and nasty glares from the head office since the 2016 CBA had become amendable, the company suddenly shoved a "last chance, take it or leave it, screw you, but you'd better pass it right away" proposal at the MEC in early 2021. The TA contained virtually no QOL-improving contractual language, 2.5% yearly raises through the end of 2024, and a retirement change from a 5% match to a 7% DC.
For reasons that still baffle me to this day, the MEC responded to this TA with a HARD sell in favor. Being a TA-skeptic, I rolled my eyes at multiple emails, had to ask MEC members to respect sterile cockpit in flight, and was the subject (among others, not by name) of a video, put out with ALPA trimmings on an ALPA budget, in which the then-head of the MEC accused prospective "no" voters of bad faith and "common-core math." Just to make it even spicier, the company began use of a new scheduling software for all line construction during this period. There was no language whatsoever in the TA governing the use of this software. MEC members expressed no interest in returning to the bargaining table in response to the company's unilateral alteration of the status quo under which the TA had been negotiated.
The TA passed by a >3% margin shortly afterward. The reason for management's extreme urgency for passing the contract became crystal clear about a week later, when it became public knowledge that all federal COVID airline support funding was contingent on there being no reduction in workforce. This information obviously would have changed the tone of our contract negotiations, had it not come days after the pilot group's unconditional surrender of all bargaining leverage. All talk from the MEC since the contract's passing of "mid-contract talks" and platitudes such as "just because we passed the contract doesnt mean we're done negotiating" have been met with open derision from management. Our DO has explained in multiple all-pilot calls, as one would to a child, that the contract we voted in is a legally binding document and will be followed.
Perhaps I'm a cynic, but I believe that any pilot who didn't understand that would be the case as soon as the TA was released two years ago is either profoundly ignorant about the nature of collective bargaining, or just sees themselves as more management than labor. The email to which Stone Cold is referring is simply the MEC abandoning the face-saving measures it's been attempting ever since the vote, and embracing the fact that the only leverage we have is attrition.
Last edited:
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
Yeah, that’s not close to being possible. We signed a crappy contract. Our management and union put out a survey and asked what could keep people here. So there was hope that something might open up early negotiations, as management had expressed interest in helping to stop people leaving.
The union just confirmed that they see nothing changing in the future, hence my first comment.
This pretty much sums it up. I’ve only met 1 person who admits to voting for the contract. Amazing how that happens. Like I said, it is what it is.
alaskadrifter
Landing gear operator
How bad is the attrition?
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
We have a pilot group that hovers around 750-770. I think they said we had a “gain of +4 pilots last year” after losing over 200. Our current seniority list shows 770 on the list, with 63 in the IOE pipeline between the two planes, and that doesn’t include people in initial right now. So, at least 80 that aren’t qualified are on the seniority list of 770, right now.
thepotato232
Well-Known Member
For perspective, that net growth of four pilots is with a training department operating at or near full capacity year-round and a fleet that had shrunk by one aircraft type and about 10 airframes. The additional staffing required for the new 777s on the docket this year (provided the company does indeed intend to staff them) will be an interesting challenge for the instructors. Anecdotally, most of the ones I know are firmly in the "crack a beer and watch it burn" camp.
Another pertinent statistic is that of the 770 pilots currently on the seniority list, just under 60% have a hire date making them eligible to vote on the 2021 CBA - suggesting fewer than 30% of the pilots on property right now voted in the affirmative for a contract that has us well below Atlas and roughly on par with National in the current ACMI market. Morale and attrition are about what you would expect under these circumstances, trending appropriately.
Another pertinent statistic is that of the 770 pilots currently on the seniority list, just under 60% have a hire date making them eligible to vote on the 2021 CBA - suggesting fewer than 30% of the pilots on property right now voted in the affirmative for a contract that has us well below Atlas and roughly on par with National in the current ACMI market. Morale and attrition are about what you would expect under these circumstances, trending appropriately.
I was hoping there would be improvements, since we’re hemorrhaging people like crazy, but it is what it is. No other job would fly me to and from work, from wherever we happen to be camped out. I’m a lifer here, for 9 years, 7 months, and 25 more days, not that I’m counting. That’ll be retirement at 60.
Isn't it funny how just yesterday we were looking at all the stuff we were trying to do in aviation, and now the OG's are on the downstroke of the career? When did we get old?!
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
Maybe we’ll finally park 745, and the dumpster fire plane. Lol
Stone Cold
Well-Known Member
I’m not old. You’re old.Isn't it funny how just yesterday we were looking at all the stuff we were trying to do in aviation, and now the OG's are on the downstroke of the career? When did we get old?!
I’m not old. You’re old.
I DO spend an inordinate amount of time talking about my health and eat a mealsworth of supplements!
alaskadrifter
Landing gear operator
Oh yah, I can totally see why management thinks there’s no problem. I’m sure that won’t cause problems later on down the road.
Richman
JC’s Resident Curmudgeon
Best part of the supplements is after a couple of days, you pee about 90-95% of them out.
Yup! I remember taking a mid sim period pee at Airbus yesterday thinking "Welp, there goes the vitamin b-12… Hints of saffron hue..."
Is that the color of excellence?
tcco94
Future GTA VI Pilot
Do I want real “retro” and more back pay so company doesn’t do this again? Sure. Do I want my fleet pay banded to other widebodies (at least 763)? Yeah. Do I want 18DC on DOS? Yeah.
Is it enough to vote no for considering the other massive gains I’ve been wanting and risk losing just for a bit extra on a retro payment and maybe one year earlier of a DC payment? No.
The length of getting the next deal could make it a wash anyways then just lose QOL items that I wanted more than a specific $ sign. Just my 2c.
I also wish global scope had some sort of way to gain back lost flying from a decade ago that’s already been lost forever. But that’s a pipe dream. Not sure what voting no on this global scope is going to do. It’s a good deal I just wish we signed it in 2010, not 2023.
Is it enough to vote no for considering the other massive gains I’ve been wanting and risk losing just for a bit extra on a retro payment and maybe one year earlier of a DC payment? No.
The length of getting the next deal could make it a wash anyways then just lose QOL items that I wanted more than a specific $ sign. Just my 2c.
I also wish global scope had some sort of way to gain back lost flying from a decade ago that’s already been lost forever. But that’s a pipe dream. Not sure what voting no on this global scope is going to do. It’s a good deal I just wish we signed it in 2010, not 2023.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Dear Delta, please pass your new contract and have pay rates effective before Sept 1.
Dear United, please pass your TA2 and have pay rates effective before Sept 1.
Dear American and Southwest, please get and pass TAs and with payrates effective before Sept 1.
Thank you!
-PANDA
Dear United, please pass your TA2 and have pay rates effective before Sept 1.
Dear American and Southwest, please get and pass TAs and with payrates effective before Sept 1.
Thank you!
-PANDA
