Speedy/Willie/GB.
The expectation among the No voters, I believe, was that a No vote would galvanise J* management into putting their 'real' final offer on the table despite them being repeatedly told that this was the real offer and that a No vote would result in nothing further happening before September at the earliest. No voters seemed to also believe that AIPA/AFAP was riding in like white nights to save them from a lackluster JPC/evil management.
Speedy seems to think it will still happen that way.
You're dreaming. With all the indications of slowing economy, threat of looming recession etc etc there is just NO WAY any responsible management would dare preempt things in such a way
when as it stands pilots are NOT leaving J* in significant numbers.
Joyce gave his word, (in front of many pilots) that all current J* pilots on AWAs would be offered EBA 4 if it was voted up and that no pilots would be offered AWAs/Individual contracts on better conditions in the future.
When asked if he would honor that promise in the case of a No vote he said he would, in those circumstances, do whatever he needed to do to ensure the success of J*.
This wasn't a threat he was simply answering a direct question with a direct answer.
Those pilots who voted No essentially voted
against group solidarity.
So who voted No?
Wouldn't have been too many captains...they stood to gain a great deal.
Wouldn't have been too many cruise FOs...they stood to gain, % wise, the most.
So we are left with FOs who 'only' stood to gain about 9% (6+3) 18
extra days off/annum, and a maximum of 3 reserve days/mth if rostered for < 75 hours...among a whole raft of other improvements in their T&Cs...as well as having their command prospects protected to the extent that that is possible in any airline. FOs who, without exception, have been in J* less than 18 months and who likely would all have been given an opportunity to successfully complete a command course in the next 2 years..and that time frame applying to the most junior/least experienced current FO. These very same people are demanding
VB equivalent T&Cs but when asked why they don't just go and apply to
VB say "Well I don't want to be away from home all the time".
The No voters are all about "Me, me, I want" and yet they come to this place and claim the Yes voters, those who voted
FOR solidarity, who voted
to protect the command prospects of (inexperienced) FOs, who voted
for Cruise FOs (SOs) to be paid the same as all FOs, are selfish wreckers
And if they had really done the numbers they would have found they were bloody close to
VB (better in places-2k for working a day off as an example) while still maintaining a better lifestyle.
They will, of course, come on here and claim the 55% for
new hire 1st year FOs was a disgrace.
VB do the same thing...and when you consider the average experience of new hire FOs it is probably not unreasonable given the extra training they would require to have any hope of being upgradeable within the very short time frames J*
WAS talking about.
Just how stupid are these people?