Opening The Contracts

[PITbull]

No, they won't. Snapbacks perpetuate the problems of union contracts, namely that they inevitably lag the business conditions.

Well then mweiss, what the hey, why have any contracts? Right?

And while we are at it no raises ever, ever for unionized workers, cause what the hell, it will just increase cost for the company and less bonuses and perks for the senior execs.

Yea, those damn pesky union workers wanting an increase in their career.... :angry:

 

[mweiss]

Jim,

You mean to tell me that Parity+1 was designed to bring your costs down? Wow. Truly amazing.

PITbull,

I don't think you understand where I'm coming from. I think that in many respects the contracts hurt the union employees. After all, as I'm sure you've noted in the past, when business is good, the company's attitude is "a contract is a contract," so you have to wait until the contract is up before renegotiating for better wages. But when business is bad, the company comes after you for concessions, contract be damned.

How is that good for union employees?

 

[BoeingBoy]

mweiss,

Yes, the parity contract was designed to bring costs down - and for pilots it probably would have if it hadn't been for the big raise at UAL, followed by DAL. I know that we pilots certainly saw it as a concession at the time it was agreed to, and since Wolfe wanted it, I assume he did too.

And to clarify one point, it wasn't parity +1 but rather parity + 1%. In someone's example earlier, the pay would be $11.62, not $12.50 (1% more than $11.50).

Jim

 

[mweiss]

Yeah, I know it's 1%. It's just that I'm too lazy to type that extra two-key character, OK? I admit it.

 

[PITbull]

Jim,

You mean to tell me that Parity+1 was designed to bring your costs down? Wow. Truly amazing.

PITbull,

I don't think you understand where I'm coming from. I think that in many respects the contracts hurt the union employees. After all, as I'm sure you've noted in the past, when business is good, the company's attitude is "a contract is a contract," so you have to wait until the contract is up before renegotiating for better wages. But when business is bad, the company comes after you for concessions, contract be damned.

How is that good for union employees?

For clarity sake...unions are contracted employees.

We can negotiate short duration contracts or long.

(PITbull's definition)...Unions statement of purpose: To form a group of organized employees who are legally and collectively recognized to have a voice in the work place to create and maintain jobs, protect employment through due process of grievance, to collectively bargain for livable wages, benefits and work rules, and have a voice to ensure a a better, safer environment.

So, contracted employees must have contracts.

Whether you are union or not, when times are tuff, every employee gives. That is
the "nature of the beast".

 

[mweiss]

Of course you can negotiate the length of the contract, but you end up inevitably having to balance opposing forces vis a vis contract term length. Too short, and you're negotiating the next one before the ink is dry on the current one. Too long, and you're unable to be appropriately flexible to changing market conditions.

 

[olivia]

Good posts here.....I have a thought to add....If and when the contracts
are reopened, I would recommend to the CWA to negotiate a contract for
two years at most. Being locked down for six years was way too long with
the current contract. If by some miracle the company did regain some profits at least we could get some benefits back if not some minor pay increase.

Also, morale is poor among the employees for many reasons. I think Dave
is partly responsible by fighting all the employee groups publicly in the press
in regards to our pay. You cannot disrepect and denigrate your employees
to the public and then turn around and ask them for more.