Here is my point of this thread, “Our desire to seek formal recognition underscores our need to have a relationship based not only on the benevolence of a leadership team that could transition at any time, but on a relationship where there exists a means to resolve our private discourses under the support of legal process.”
They talk the talk, let's see if the walk the walk. Then maybe, I'll see if they really "Get It".
Sorry, but I can't come anywhere near understanding your case here. I don't consider knowingly violating the contract just a "disagreement".
I guess we disagree on semantics then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
It's all relative. But when dealing with airline management, you can hope for the best but you better plan for the worst. Although I admire your optimism, I think you are underestimating what can happen. Maybe you've been through it before, but I'm guessing not.
I don't think I'm underestimating what can happen. What can happen is that XJT ceases to exist. What I'm trying to say is that despite what can happen, it doesn't mean that they are walking all over the pilots right now. Like I said earlier, I can't speak to what may or may not happen in the future or how management would act in that future. I haven't been through what you have in this industry and that may be the reason we seem to be talking past each other. I may be overly optimistic because I've seen that even with the "disagreements" they have been willing to either settling them or working within the system professionally and without dragging feet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
I didn't say the MEC was ignoring anything, the company was. As far as the last two grievances go, lets hope the affected guys get resolution soon. As far as the no CCS goes, what can we expect from that? Seriously, what is the company going to do when they lose that one? If there is some kind of payback, are many of the furloughed pilots going to be entitled to that?
You know as well as I know that the company has a very bad problem in their communications department. They seem to think that since they talk to the MEC or their committees that that suffices. Many problems arise from the company not communicating such as misconceptions, rumors, and just low morale. As for greivances, I suspect they will settle it rather than lose it in arbitration. Almost anything can be used to make the pilots whole. And it doesn't have to be monitary either. It can be contract improvements just as LOA 7 was, for example.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
I don't think there's really anything you can tell me that any other rep I've already talked to can.
Well, would you rather someone tell you what you want to hear or what the truth is? Again, you can PM me and I'll give you my phone number if you want to discuss it further. Take care.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Noseeums
There's nothing to "get" here. Either you work for a labor-cooperative employer or you do not.
Yes, exactly. You don't necesarily have to have a hostile relationship just because there is a union on property. How does the saying go? A company gets a union it deserves, or something to that effect. JetBlue pilots seem to have a good relationship with their management and only want "a means to resolve our private discourses under the support of legal process."
Quote:
Originally Posted by johnso29
They talk the talk, let's see if the walk the walk. Then maybe, I'll see if they really "Get It".
Its really up to JetBlue management whether they want to have a professional relationship with their pilots or not. If not, I'm sure they will hunker down and do what is necessary to try to represent their pilots as best as they can.
I may be overly optimistic because I've seen that even with the "disagreements" they have been willing to either settling them or working within the system professionally and without dragging feet.
I remember the blastmail about the charter vacation issue. It stated SPECIFICALLY that the company has ZERO desire to abide by the contract. Has there been a change in this issue? I didn't get a balstmail stating such.
I wouldn't call that "settling", or "working within the system".
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevets
You know as well as I know that the company has a very bad problem in their communications department. They seem to think that since they talk to the MEC or their committees that that suffices. Many problems arise from the company not communicating such as misconceptions, rumors, and just low morale. As for greivances, I suspect they will settle it rather than lose it in arbitration. Almost anything can be used to make the pilots whole. And it doesn't have to be monitary either. It can be contract improvements just as LOA 7 was, for example.
So AGAIN, what will come from the no CCS issue to "make the pilots whole"? What will the guys get from this month's ILIW fiasco? A buddy of mine a 40 your line lost a TON because of that whole deal. If it's not monitary, are they going to go back and let me retroactively electronically advertise a trip or trip segment from a year ago from a base that doesn't even exist anymore? Let me pick an some advertisement I could ever see because the company violated the CBA for OVER a year? Seriously, what can they do?
If the company was seriously interested in "making it right", LOA 9 wouldn't have been a one way street. Again, seriously, do you see the company giving us ANYTHING in contract improvements NOW?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nevets
Well, would you rather someone tell you what you want to hear or what the truth is? Again, you can PM me and I'll give you my phone number if you want to discuss it further. Take care
Like I said, I don't think you're gonna tell me anything I haven't heard from anybody else. But from reading some of your input on this, we have yet to see if the company is going to start abiding by the contract, or keep violating it. I think thats the truth here. Like I said, I admire your optimism, but it's just a little hard for me to believe the company is going to do the right thing.
I remember the blastmail about the charter vacation issue. It stated SPECIFICALLY that the company has ZERO desire to abide by the contract. Has there been a change in this issue? I didn't get a balstmail stating such.
I wouldn't call that "settling", or "working within the system".
Yeah, its like the MCD issue. The company has no intent on complying with it. Sometimes they do that because THEY feel that there is no other way of doing it knowing full well there will be a grievance and deal with it there. A lot of times its a cop out and sometimes its a business decision because of practicality. I don't believe that any of these instances are because they are purposely trying to step all over the pilots or for any other malicicious intent such as trying to lower morale like many other managements do so often. In the end, sometimes unfortunately for us, their decision to not comply with a certain part of the contract and dealing with it through the grievance process instead is working within the system.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
So AGAIN, what will come from the no CCS issue to "make the pilots whole"? What will the guys get from this month's ILIW fiasco? A buddy of mine a 40 your line lost a TON because of that whole deal. If it's not monitary, are they going to go back and let me retroactively electronically advertise a trip or trip segment from a year ago from a base that doesn't even exist anymore? Let me pick an some advertisement I could ever see because the company violated the CBA for OVER a year? Seriously, what can they do?
If the company was seriously interested in "making it right", LOA 9 wouldn't have been a one way street. Again, seriously, do you see the company giving us ANYTHING in contract improvements NOW?
Like I said, it can be anything. It doesn't necesarily have to be monetary or have to be able to undo whats been done. It just needs to make the pilots whole. The MEC decides what constitutes what making the pilots whole means. And yes, there are many no-cost contract improvements that can be made now
Quote:
Originally Posted by dojetdriver
Like I said, I don't think you're gonna tell me anything I haven't heard from anybody else. But from reading some of your input on this, we have yet to see if the company is going to start abiding by the contract, or keep violating it. I think thats the truth here. Like I said, I admire your optimism, but it's just a little hard for me to believe the company is going to do the right thing.
The truth is that the company will violate the contract from time to time. Sometimes its because certain people don't understand the contract and sometimes because management has made a calculated business decision. I think in the end, the company wants to do the right thing and that usually plays a role in settling some of the greivances.
I don't think I'm underestimating what can happen. What can happen is that XJT ceases to exist. What I'm trying to say is that despite what can happen, it doesn't mean that they are walking all over the pilots right now. Like I said earlier, I can't speak to what may or may not happen in the future or how management would act in that future. I haven't been through what you have in this industry and that may be the reason we seem to be talking past each other. I may be overly optimistic because I've seen that even with the "disagreements" they have been willing to either settling them or working within the system professionally and without dragging feet.
You know as well as I know that the company has a very bad problem in their communications department. They seem to think that since they talk to the MEC or their committees that that suffices. Many problems arise from the company not communicating such as misconceptions, rumors, and just low morale. As for greivances, I suspect they will settle it rather than lose it in arbitration. Almost anything can be used to make the pilots whole. And it doesn't have to be monitary either. It can be contract improvements just as LOA 7 was, for example.
Well, would you rather someone tell you what you want to hear or what the truth is? Again, you can PM me and I'll give you my phone number if you want to discuss it further. Take care.
Yes, exactly. You don't necesarily have to have a hostile relationship just because there is a union on property. How does the saying go? A company gets a union it deserves, or something to that effect. JetBlue pilots seem to have a good relationship with their management and only want "a means to resolve our private discourses under the support of legal process."
Its really up to JetBlue management whether they want to have a professional relationship with their pilots or not. If not, I'm sure they will hunker down and do what is necessary to try to represent their pilots as best as they can.
Like I said, they talk the talk. When they walk the walk we'll see if they REALLY get it. They can talk all they want. But ACTIONS show that they get it.
Like I said, they talk the talk. When they walk the walk we'll see if they REALLY get it. They can talk all they want. But ACTIONS show that they get it.
Fair enough. I understand that actions speak louder than words. This is all assuming that they are successful in organizing. But what makes you think it would be different from what they say? And why do you feel that way?
Fair enough. I understand that actions speak louder than words. This is all assuming that they are successful in organizing. But what makes you think it would be different from what they say? And why do you feel that way?
Look, I'm all for them being successful in organizing. I'm even WANT them to be successful in their negotiations. I hope they bring the payrates up dramatically, and improve the workrules. I'm not against them(even though it may seem that way from my previous posts).
I just don't see how their vision is any different then ALPA/Teamsters. I know that things have gone down the crapper at XJET. I'm an XJET Alum, and I still have friends there that I talk to on a regular basis. I know that the ALPA boys didn't do a great job. One of my friends was angry that EWR reps were doing the roadshow in IAH, and thought it was a waste of money to have them all there. I agree with him.
The point to my posts, I don't think JBPA is just going to walk in and be immediately successful at getting all they want. I think there is a lot of union busting going on, and I don't think JB management wants a pilot's union. I'm glad they have a good vision, but lets see how hard of ball they can play. Like I said earlier, I hope they're very successful.
Look, I'm all for them being successful in organizing. I'm even WANT them to be successful in their negotiations. I hope they bring the payrates up dramatically, and improve the workrules. I'm not against them(even though it may seem that way from my previous posts).
I just don't see how their vision is any different then ALPA/Teamsters. I know that things have gone down the crapper at XJET. I'm an XJET Alum, and I still have friends there that I talk to on a regular basis. I know that the ALPA boys didn't do a great job. One of my friends was angry that EWR reps were doing the roadshow in IAH, and thought it was a waste of money to have them all there. I agree with him.
The point to my posts, I don't think JBPA is just going to walk in and be immediately successful at getting all they want. I think there is a lot of union busting going on, and I don't think JB management wants a pilot's union. I'm glad they have a good vision, but lets see how hard of ball they can play. Like I said earlier, I hope they're very successful.
Their vision is the same as ALPA/Teamsters or any other union. That is to increase pay, benefits, and QOL. Also, I think that the XJT have done an exceptional job in the last 9 months! I may sound biased but there is a lot of information that the MEC is not able to divulge because of confidentiality agreements. Could they have saved a bit of money on the roadshows? Yeah, they could have only had the respective reps at each base. But I don't think having the MEC as whole at all roadshows was a bad thing considering the magnitude of the vote and the signal that shows to the rank and file. The MEC felt it was important that the rank and file vote in favor of the TA and I have no problems with them showing that by presenting that view as a whole in person. I actually would respect that more if I was a NO voter.
I don't know what you mean by JBPA being immediately successful but for me if they are able to organize they have been immediately successful. But just by going by what they said, "a relationship where there exists a means to resolve our private discourses under the support of legal process," it sounds like they just want to be able to use the RLA to resolve their disputes. And if they are successful in organizing themselves, they will have been successful in bringing in the rules of the RLA.
It sounds like they just want a professional relationship with their management. But if what you say is true about their management, and they end up playing hard ball with the pilots, then I wouldn't expect anything less than them playing hard ball back. That is why I mentioned the old saying, 'management get the unions they deserve.'
They've made their intentions clear in why they want to unionize. I don't see why people cant give them the benefit of the doubt in doing what is good for JB pilots especially considering their is no history to think otherwise.
Similar Threads
Linear Mode
