Originally Posted by
KnockKnock
Nope, I stand firmly by my argument that it’s total hypocrisy. You knew before you interviewed that VX did not have scope, yet, you still went. You did not know when or how long VX would be a non union shop without a contract and therefore you had no idea when, if ever, you’d get the chance to vote in scope. Yet, you still went. You can’t use time as your crutch. As it stands, you went to an airline with no scope and had no idea if or when you’d get any. You guys claim to be vets of the industry knowing how important scope is to an airline and yet you still went to one without any. If scope was on the back burner for you then, why do you now have the gumption to chastise AS pilots who have no scope. To this I say, neither of our groups can hold the moral high ground on this issue and therefore the hypocritical argument should be dead in the water. Let’s move on to things that are actually important like....getting scope
You're "Wrong n Strong".
I understand your reflexive need to be defensive but that's OK.. We can agree to disagree...
From the start, apart from the payrate, VX offered pretty decent Scheduling and QOL provisions. Issues popped up pretty quickly however and that's why within a year of operations, I remember the discussions and eventual efforts to get a Union on property so that we could move towards getting an industry standard compensation and benefits package.
May I also remind you of the fact that no Start-up has ever started out the gate with industry standard provisions, scope included. Not FedEx, not SW, not JB, not Spirit; I could go on and on..
So it was not an anomaly nor is it a "head scratcher" that guys made the decision to go to VX without some of those provisions in place at the outset..
It is an anomaly though and certainly a "head scratcher" that after over 80 years and having a Union on property, Scope did not make its way into AS's contract.