Originally Posted by
Hetman
I saw where you were flinging poo at the Frontier guys over on that other thread (one of the hundreds) and holding up the Omni TA as an example. I came close to PM'ing you not to be so quick about it but decided to let that play out on its own. I don't know if your apparent indignation at the 2-1 defeat of this TA is related to that.
In any case, it does not appear you have looked in depth at this TA or made the comparison with the current "at will" work rules as have the pilots who would have actually had to work under it for five years minimum.
Hetman, the last thing I am is management as asserted by others here. I do admit to having some pretty good contacts in the business on both sides of the fence, even though I freely admit to being 110% trade unionist.
I am also a realist who has dealt with the NMB several times in the past and have a good handle on their mindset. And I have a pretty darn good Rolodex. The current conditions remain in force as long as the company wants them to, the NMB and the subsection you reference have no relevance. If you do not have a contract, there is no status quo provision to apply. You might want to research the Williams case that went to the Supreme Court where the court ruled that a union group that does not yet have a contract is not entitled to the status quo provision.
Now, that doesn't mean the union won't fight any changes. It's just that there is no legal framework to stand on.
In regards to FAPA; personally I have a problem with any group that goes out and tries to back door a deal to cut someone elses throat or career as they did with their SLI proposal, and then stand there and wrap themselves in the flag while trashing the pilots of the airline that bought them. They conveniently forget that F9 was in the can through no fault of the RAH pilots. If they had the money then THEY should have bought the airline. But they didn't, BB bought it and he's no saint. So they (no all, but many) have taken to trashing the pilots and the IBT to cover up the shortcomings of their own leadership's actions. Actions that were designed to carve out a special deal and instead set a new, lower bar for management to point at and tell everyone else and point to that as the "new industry standard."
Personally, I want nothing but the best for the Omni pilots. They have endured more than enough. I also understand the difference and indeed the distance between realistic and unrealistic first contract expectations. The important thing is to get what you can and get the legal protections that cover your back while you work to improve on the contract during it's term and work on global issues to tee up for the second contract, that include closing the loopholes of the first one.
It's difficult to look at "mature" contracts that others have and make more with. You have to remember that those contracts have gone through decades of negotiations, in some cases back to the 1940's and 50's to get where they are today. Does that mean Omni should wait that long? Of course not. It also means that if you are moving forward, then move. Every step forward now and during the life of the contract, regardless of how small, builds on the ability for even greater gains in the next one.
That's what got missed. And with management having the upper hand until an agreement is reached, that's not a good thing.