Why there will never be a T.A.

[B737 driver]

So you wanna bank on having overtime? No way, no how, Most all don't want to bank on overtime, most do not want to work overtime, screw overtime,. It's there if needed and nice to use that option but you should never base your income factoring in overtime, never. That just means you are living beyond your means and have to have overtime to get by. Not something I have ever banked on and never will.
No negative growth driver, watch the growth we do now and thru next year it will be positive growth rather we have a new contract or not.
I applaud my NC for doing their due diligence to ensure all the numbers and facts are correct. No rushing into something all the members would blame AMFA for if they were to overlook one iota of an item. My math is not flawed at all driver, it just doesn't add up to want you want. Make me whole or no contract, period...

Your math is flawed, AMFA is basically thinking you would make 3% a year. If you did extensions you could probably get that. Maybe this last six years will teach them a leason. If you vote the offer down. Then you have 0 raise. Inflation runs about 2.5 percent. So with no raises your earnings get less and less every year. Why you have been fighting over say 2 to 5% . If you get it say next year, you made $2000 more. But by not taking the deal in 2018. You lost $15,000 in a straight time raise. Not to mention delaying your back pay, and not mention the compounded 401k loss for the last six years. So what you think you are gaining , say if you got your extra $2000 , it would take you 8 years to gain the $15,000 ,you lost by saying no. YOU never base your life on overtime, but it is always there, it's your choice to work it or not. The best thing about arguing with you, is the American guys, get to see your true colors. They also get to see that their union is not as flawed as you claim. That you are not the labor expert that you claim that you are. Plus the fact that AMFA is not the great bringer of contracts, that they claim to be in their marketing to other airlines.

 

[767 mechanic]

You have no clue to how flawed our union is!!!!!!!!! You don't know how lucky you are to not have an industrial catch all union. Most people would think you would have learned your lesson with the reamsters. I believe you have been told that it takes two sides negotiate and swa was not going to negotiate in good faith for 5 years. So I believe your negotiating committee has done the right thing by not bringing back a concessionary agreement back several years ago.

 

[swamt]

Your math is flawed, AMFA is basically thinking you would make 3% a year. If you did extensions you could probably get that. Maybe this last six years will teach them a leason. If you vote the offer down. Then you have 0 raise. Inflation runs about 2.5 percent. So with no raises your earnings get less and less every year. Why you have been fighting over say 2 to 5% . If you get it say next year, you made $2000 more. But by not taking the deal in 2018. You lost $15,000 in a straight time raise. Not to mention delaying your back pay, and not mention the compounded 401k loss for the last six years. So what you think you are gaining , say if you got your extra $2000 , it would take you 8 years to gain the $15,000 ,you lost by saying no. YOU never base your life on overtime, but it is always there, it's your choice to work it or not. The best thing about arguing with you, is the American guys, get to see your true colors. They also get to see that their union is not as flawed as you claim. That you are not the labor expert that you claim that you are. Plus the fact that AMFA is not the great bringer of contracts, that they claim to be in their marketing to other airlines.

Company boy here!!!

 

[swamt]

You have no clue to how flawed our union is!!!!!!!!! You don't know how lucky you are to not have an industrial catch all union. Most people would think you would have learned your lesson with the reamsters. I believe you have been told that it takes two sides negotiate and swa was not going to negotiate in good faith for 5 years. So I believe your negotiating committee has done the right thing by not bringing back a concessionary agreement back several years ago.

This guy has no clue. he is just a company boy trying to spread co. propaganda and get yes votes. It's amazing how people always fold to the Southwest propaganda of how they need to keep the cost so low so they can charge cheap a$$ fares. And it's all BS-PERIOD!!!

 

[B737 driver]

You have no clue to how flawed our union is!!!!!!!!! You don't know how lucky you are to not have an industrial catch all union. Most people would think you would have learned your lesson with the reamsters. I believe you have been told that it takes two sides negotiate and swa was not going to negotiate in good faith for 5 years. So I believe your negotiating committee has done the right thing by not bringing back a concessionary agreement back several years ago.

All unions have their issues, the Unions that have been at SWA have had it easy , because of the company financial health. American had bankruptcy, Sept 11 th. So the TWU had to deal with the hand it has. I have never attacked your union, nor will I. If you guys want AMFA, go for it, it will not get you any better contract then your management team is willing to give. If you want more money, or better retirement, you will probably get it with AMFA, but Parker will make you lose language to do it. If you guys won't approve that, it will be a long drawn out process. All I know is we were told by AMFA this deal would take three years to do this process, because they didn't want to do an extension, and it has been double that. When you ask them what a no vote would do, for a deal now that is not that bad. They can't tell you anything. I personally do not feel like waiting 7 or 8 years for a contract, when working for a healthy company. When I have watched all the other groups move on, and enjoy their new benefits. Plus will soon be working on new contracts, and have already started.

 

[B737 driver]

This guy has no clue. he is just a company boy trying to spread co. propaganda and get yes votes. It's amazing how people always fold to the Southwest propaganda of how they need to keep the cost so low so they can charge cheap a$$ fares. And it's all BS-PERIOD!!!

Whatever dude the other employees are enjoying their rewards, why we chase a pipe dream. You must be on AMFA payroll, last time I looked, SWA pays our pay checks. Why don't you quit SWA , that treats you so bad. And go work for American and live under their contract, since SWA is so gready! Plus your response just shows how clueless you are how business works. You have to pay your employees enough to retain them. Last time I looked we have thousands of people trying to get hired by SWA. Whereas American probably has problems keeping employees, unless they are pilots, if the other Airlines pay more.

 

[twood]

Below is a link if anyone is interested in signing an on line petition for the Negotiating team to bring back a TA before the September Section 6 openers.


https://www.gopetition.com/petitions/maintenance-and-related-tentative-agreement.html

 

[Matt1200]

Below is a link if anyone is interested in signing an on line petition for the Negotiating team to bring back a TA before the September Section 6 openers.


https://www.gopetition.com/petitions/maintenance-and-related-tentative-agreement.html

Another ploy by the company to keep us divided.

 

[Jester]

Below is a link if anyone is interested in signing an on line petition for the Negotiating team to bring back a TA before the September Section 6 openers.


https://www.gopetition.com/petitions/maintenance-and-related-tentative-agreement.html

While I am against the company's publicly stated agreement on the grounds due to the elimination of LUS health insurance (especially without the trade-off of substantially better 401K matching) and scope issues related to shrinking workforce/lack of future station expansion, I favor a vote on the T.A. I believe it would demonstrate the Membership's due consideration of Management's proposals and a serve as resolution in favor (or opposition) to Section 6.

 

[WeAAsles]

While I am against the company's publicly stated agreement on the grounds due to the elimination of LUS health insurance (especially without the trade-off of substantially better 401K matching) and scope issues related to shrinking workforce/lack of future station expansion, I favor a vote on the T.A. I believe it would demonstrate the Membership's due consideration of Management's proposals and a serve as resolution in favor (or opposition) to Section 6.

There is no TA. A TA means “Tentative Agreement” The two sides have not reached that point yet and will still have some more further Negotiations before then first.

 

[Jester]

There is no TA. A TA means “Tentative Agreement” The two sides have not reached that point yet and will still have some more further Negotiations before then first.

I agree, and maybe I am being taken too literately. Separately from the Company's public proposals on wage, benefit and scope, I am making the assumption of other "important" issues (bulletin boards, uniforms, and maybe even shift trades etc.) to have been mutually agreed upon without any substantial changes from prior contractual language. If such to be the case, then an actual T.A. could be printed over a weekend.

As we know, the N.C. could accept a company T.A., recommend a "No" vote to its Membership, and submit it to a vote-- and I think that's what the aforementioned on-line petition would be asking.

 

[1AA]

While I am against the company's publicly stated agreement on the grounds due to the elimination of LUS health insurance (especially without the trade-off of substantially better 401K matching) and scope issues related to shrinking workforce/lack of future station expansion, I favor a vote on the T.A. I believe it would demonstrate the Membership's due consideration of Management's proposals and a serve as resolution in favor (or opposition) to Section 6.

So do I. First we need a complete T/A to vote on. Company emails with bullet points and highlights is not a T/A. This is not how the unions in this industry negotiate contracts for their members.
The petition is a ploy to further divide us with an agenda that does nothing productive for the membership.

 

[WeAAsles]

So do I. First we need a complete T/A to vote on. Company emails with bullet points and highlights is not a T/A. This is not how the unions in this industry negotiate contracts for their members.
The petition is a ploy to further divide us with an agenda that does nothing productive for the membership.

No way is that petition a ploy. The guy who wrote it even signed his name. A. Nonymous.

 

[WeAAsles]

I agree, and maybe I am being taken too literately. Separately from the Company's public proposals on wage, benefit and scope, I am making the assumption of other "important" issues (bulletin boards, uniforms, and maybe even shift trades etc.) to have been mutually agreed upon without any substantial changes from prior contractual language. If such to be the case, then an actual T.A. could be printed over a weekend.

As we know, the N.C. could accept a company T.A., recommend a "No" vote to its Membership, and submit it to a vote-- and I think that's what the aforementioned on-line petition would be asking.

Your parentheses list of important items are not that important. Until we know otherwise there are still issues regarding SCOPE (The fine print) that have not been publicly presented by the Company that should make any of us feel suspicious.

The fine print is the area that has caused many Represented groups in the Industry to have buyers remorse on the deals they ultimately accepted.

This “could” all be close to the finish line soon but I don’t expect my Negotiators to release anything to me until every possible trap door has been addressed and if any remain are fully prepared to be explained to us for our consideration.

Otherwise Section 6 gets a Thumbs Up from me.

 

[NYer]

Your parentheses list of important items are not that important. Until we know otherwise there are still issues regarding SCOPE (The fine print) that have not been publicly presented by the Company that should make any of us feel suspicious.

The fine print is the area that has caused many Represented groups in the Industry to have buyers remorse on the deals they ultimately accepted.

This “could” all be close to the finish line soon but I don’t expect my Negotiators to release anything to me until every possible trap door has been addressed and if any remain are fully prepared to be explained to us for our consideration.

Otherwise Section 6 gets a Thumbs Up from me.

Making a decision on what you're being told rather than what you've seen is the easiest way to obtain "buyers remorse."

In Section 6, you'd need to ensure you everyone's support, if you don't the return in that forum will be less than what you can get now.

Right now, there doesn't seem to be full support (speaking from Fleet perspective) and it's mostly because they haven't seen the details.

Guess how you can get more support? It isn't by asking for it