Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : Assessment


chickenorbeef
10-23-2018, 05:24 AM
I think the timeline for the potential assessment is too infinite. An assessment with shorter “bites”, ie. a one year time frame, with the opportunity to re-vote a continuation or expiration of it after that shorter time frame would have been more appropriate. An assessment till the next contract is signed? Take a good-hard-look at what is going on at Frontier. This assessment will drag on for 5-7+ years if its voted in. Teamsters need to be smarter with the money they get now, not keep asking for more. (Sounds like government). What they are making now should be supportive. If a CA averages $350/mo and FO $150/mo in dues, x450= $225,000/mo in dues. (And with the potential to add a bunch more pilots in the next couple of years will inflate this even more).
Timeline is too vague. Its a No.


labbats
10-23-2018, 05:59 AM
Anyone voting no doesn’t understand the resources necessary to offset the philosophy of a company like ours.

Most airlines average 20-30 grievances a month. We average 120-130. That is by design. If you vote no then you are succumbing to the plan to wear down the union.

The company and not the union is responsible for this assessment.

CAirBear
10-23-2018, 07:31 AM
Anyone voting no doesn’t understand the resources necessary to offset the philosophy of a company like ours.

Most airlines average 20-30 grievances a month. We average 120-130. That is by design. If you vote no then you are succumbing to the plan to wear down the union.

The company and not the union is responsible for this assessment.

This. All day long. This is extremely important. They have my full support.

The more we win (and continue to win) grievances/arbitration’s, eventually some of these morons (you can hope) in HQ will stop or slow down with this BS already.


FreshWater
10-23-2018, 09:33 AM
I think the timeline for the potential assessment is too infinite. An assessment with shorter “bites”, ie. a one year time frame, with the opportunity to re-vote a continuation or expiration of it after that shorter time frame would have been more appropriate. An assessment till the next contract is signed? Take a good-hard-look at what is going on at Frontier. This assessment will drag on for 5-7+ years if its voted in. Teamsters need to be smarter with the money they get now, not keep asking for more. (Sounds like government). What they are making now should be supportive. If a CA averages $350/mo and FO $150/mo in dues, x450= $225,000/mo in dues. (And with the potential to add a bunch more pilots in the next couple of years will inflate this even more).
Timeline is too vague. Its a No.

I like how you conflate the assessment with the Teamsters and Government. The assesement is controlled directly by and for the benefit of the Allegiant pilot group exclusively, not the teamsters general fund. The assessment is not infinite. It can be rolled back by our exco anytime our exco chooses to do so. The exco is appointed by the membership. The assessment ends when a new contract is signed. We weren’t supposed to get this contract before the end of the century.

An exact end date to the assessment is as dumb an idea as telling your enemy when we are going to pull our troops out. All management has to do is wait us out, which they would. IMO Captain Kinzer was wrongfully terminated over two years ago by an overzealous and out of control flight ops and strategically handled by g4’s legal to keep him on the streets penniless for the rest of his life, was aided by Teamster attorneys. Imagine if the lawyers who were representing Jason Kinzer told g4 management that they only had about a year until they would stop pursueing the case?

The pilot group thus far has reaped the benefits of defending itself with dues we pay now. Including the Kinzer settlement, which I would guess is not less than ten million dollars and the arbitration awards we have won thus far has paid the rest of the pilot group as well.

Pilot growth at this airline? Look around, no airplanes on order. But, I hear we’re getting some sweet go-carts. Given the fact that g4 is not interested in growing the airline, but instead is focused on turning us into ‘Travel company’ employees, not airline pilots. There will be no significant growth of the pilot group.

It’s a yes.

KC135
10-23-2018, 10:10 AM
I think the timeline for the potential assessment is too infinite. An assessment with shorter “bites”, ie. a one year time frame, with the opportunity to re-vote a continuation or expiration of it after that shorter time frame would have been more appropriate. An assessment till the next contract is signed? Take a good-hard-look at what is going on at Frontier. This assessment will drag on for 5-7+ years if its voted in. Teamsters need to be smarter with the money they get now, not keep asking for more. (Sounds like government). What they are making now should be supportive. If a CA averages $350/mo and FO $150/mo in dues, x450= $225,000/mo in dues. (And with the potential to add a bunch more pilots in the next couple of years will inflate this even more).
Timeline is too vague. Its a No.

We can get our union leadership to put out a vote to end the assessment at any time if we feel it is dragging on to long and/or becomes unnecessary.

9easy
10-23-2018, 10:12 AM
So if the negotiations do drag out 5-7 years, ala Frontier, doesn't it stand to reason that the union will need continued $$$$ to fund this fight? People who have a problem with this assessment are being extremely short sighted. Every dollar spent helping the EXCO fight for the next contract will reap multiples times the money in return.

SladeTin
10-23-2018, 04:18 PM
So if the negotiations do drag out 5-7 years, ala Frontier, doesn't it stand to reason that the union will need continued $$$$ to fund this fight? People who have a problem with this assessment are being extremely short sighted. Every dollar spent helping the EXCO fight for the next contract will reap multiples times the money in return.

Agree 100%. Our EXCO needs every dollar they can get their hands on to try and battle this management group that has decided to blatantly disregard pretty much our entire contract. It’s a solid YES vote for me.

tom11011
10-23-2018, 06:06 PM
How do we measure success and return on investment? How is it decided which bank account (Teamsters or Pilots) money will come out of for a grievance?

akulahunter
10-28-2018, 09:53 PM
I think the timeline for the potential assessment is too infinite. An assessment with shorter “bites”, ie. a one year time frame, with the opportunity to re-vote a continuation or expiration of it after that shorter time frame would have been more appropriate. An assessment till the next contract is signed? Take a good-hard-look at what is going on at Frontier. This assessment will drag on for 5-7+ years if its voted in. Teamsters need to be smarter with the money they get now, not keep asking for more. (Sounds like government). What they are making now should be supportive. If a CA averages $350/mo and FO $150/mo in dues, x450= $225,000/mo in dues. (And with the potential to add a bunch more pilots in the next couple of years will inflate this even more).
Timeline is too vague. Its a No.

First, this should be on the official FB page, not here...

Second, although I voted yes, the actual wording of what the assessment dues can be used for is extremely open-ended. I can see why some people have an issue.

Third, again I voted for it, but we will never, as a pilot group, be able to raise enough money to battle the company if they want to keep fighting this and up the ante. (G4 writes our checks and has MUCH bigger pockets...) This money is to help negotiate and help pay the lawyers that are fighting our grievances... (I'll leave my opinion on that out of this)

If you are against it, vote no. If you are for it, vote yes. If you want to have a constructive conversation, do it on the FB page not here...

tom11011
10-29-2018, 04:45 AM
First, this should be on the official FB page, not here...

Second, although I voted yes, the actual wording of what the assessment dues can be used for is extremely open-ended. I can see why some people have an issue.

Third, again I voted for it, but we will never, as a pilot group, be able to raise enough money to battle the company if they want to keep fighting this and up the ante. (G4 writes our checks and has MUCH bigger pockets...) This money is to help negotiate and help pay the lawyers that are fighting our grievances... (I'll leave my opinion on that out of this)

If you are against it, vote no. If you are for it, vote yes. If you want to have a constructive conversation, do it on the FB page not here...


Not everyone has a facebook account.

FreshWater
10-29-2018, 10:11 AM
First, this should be on the official FB page, not here...

Second, although I voted yes, the actual wording of what the assessment dues can be used for is extremely open-ended. I can see why some people have an issue.

Third, again I voted for it, but we will never, as a pilot group, be able to raise enough money to battle the company if they want to keep fighting this and up the ante. (G4 writes our checks and has MUCH bigger pockets...) This money is to help negotiate and help pay the lawyers that are fighting our grievances... (I'll leave my opinion on that out of this)

If you are against it, vote no. If you are for it, vote yes. If you want to have a constructive conversation, do it on the FB page not here...

G4 sure does have deep pockets, they just wrote a check to the Kinzer legal team (my guess) for over 10 million dollars. A midnight hour last minute out of court settlement, because G4 was going to lose big time and they knew it. G4 management is machine gunning contract violations faster than the pilot group can write them up. We ultimately win well over 50 percent of our disputes. All in an effort to frustrate and break/bankrupt the pilot union.

Are they winning?

Desert Sky
10-29-2018, 01:40 PM
Not everyone has a facebook account.
That's not a reason to post internal info on a public forum. People can always open a FB account and solely use it for internal union issues or email the exco asking for another forum option.

tom11011
10-29-2018, 02:14 PM
That's not a reason to post internal info on a public forum. People can always open a FB account and solely use it for internal union issues or email the exco asking for another forum option.


Obviously people don't agree with you :rolleyes:

dutch rudder
10-30-2018, 08:54 AM
I hear negative sentiments regarding the company’s treatment of the contract, especially here. I hear things like “company completely disregards the contract,” and “company constantly battles pilots, they hate us.”

I am going to propose something controversial. Put your pitchfork down and hear me out. Ok, here goes… what if we brought this on ourselves? What if it’s our fault there are so many grievances? Yes, even the PBS situation. After all, we voted yes on this contract. Should we be as angry knowing the decision came from us? There, I said it.

Perhaps the company is only doing what our contract allows them to do. Maybe they are just interpreting it differently because the contract allows interpretation… we all know this is true. What if nothing malicious is taking place and they’re simply doing what we voted to let them do? I know there are exceptions.

This should be our motivation going into the next round of negotiations. Let’s not forget.

FreshWater
10-30-2018, 10:56 AM
I hear negative sentiments regarding the company’s treatment of the contract, especially here. I hear things like “company completely disregards the contract,” and “company constantly battles pilots, they hate us.”

I am going to propose something controversial. Put your pitchfork down and hear me out. Ok, here goes… what if we brought this on ourselves? What if it’s our fault there are so many grievances? Yes, even the PBS situation. After all, we voted yes on this contract. Should we be as angry knowing the decision came from us? There, I said it.

Perhaps the company is only doing what our contract allows them to do. Maybe they are just interpreting it differently because the contract allows interpretation… we all know this is true. What if nothing malicious is taking place and they’re simply doing what we voted to let them do? I know there are exceptions.

This should be our motivation going into the next round of negotiations. Let’s not forget.

I do hope we can continue to discuss all these matters in a civil tone during our eventual status quo strike. Should be quite the show, all those pretty airbus’s parked for just a few days. This will be a fantastic opportunity for maintenance to get all caught up.

labbats
10-30-2018, 11:03 AM
Selection of a PBS vendor will be mutually agreed to by the parties. Such agreement will not be unreasonably withheld

I suggest you call your union rep and get the full story. You will be surprised at why we are where we are now. It is unreasonable and thus goes against our contract quoted above.

CAirBear
10-30-2018, 12:48 PM
I do hope we can continue to discuss all these matters in a civil tone during our eventual status quo strike. Should be quite the show, all those pretty airbus’s parked for just a few days. This will be a fantastic opportunity for maintenance to get all caught up.

I swear to god it better happen! ENOUGH is ENOUGH.

The notion we have put ourselves in this position is asinine. The PBS LOA was 95% agreed upon, by BOTH parties before the company walked away and said F you. Now they are trying to implement this without any LOA. What are you smoking?

dutch rudder
10-30-2018, 06:06 PM
I suggest you call your union rep and get the full story. You will be surprised at why we are where we are now. It is unreasonable and thus goes against our contract quoted above.

If the LOA contained only the sentence you posted, perhaps we would be better off. Why didn’t you post the paragraph directly above it? You know, the paragraph that states that the company and PBS committee will select a PBS vendor, “including the consideration of the current in-house solution.” No consideration should be given to the in-house solution, so why is that sentence even there?

dutch rudder
10-30-2018, 06:29 PM
I swear to god it better happen! ENOUGH is ENOUGH.

The notion we have put ourselves in this position is asinine. The PBS LOA was 95% agreed upon, by BOTH parties before the company walked away and said F you. Now they are trying to implement this without any LOA. What are you smoking?

I think you're taking my words further than I intended. Of course we aren’t responsible for the company reneging on the 95%. However, we did put ourselves in the situation of being 2 years in without any consequences for the company.

For example, what if our LOA contained a clause like “both parties shall mutually agree to a PBS vendor within one year. NO consideration will be given to in-house solution. After one year has elapsed without agreement, the PBS committee shall make the selection.” Hypothetical? Yes, but with language like that, you'd bet your ass we’d have new software.

CAirBear
10-31-2018, 10:15 AM
I think you're taking my words further than I intended. Of course we aren’t responsible for the company reneging on the 95%. However, we did put ourselves in the situation of being 2 years in without any consequences for the company.

For example, what if our LOA contained a clause like “both parties shall mutually agree to a PBS vendor within one year. NO consideration will be given to in-house solution. After one year has elapsed without agreement, the PBS committee shall make the selection.” Hypothetical? Yes, but with language like that, you'd bet your ass we’d have new software.

They have not once (management) ever talked about using CBI. Maybe in the very beginning, and I missed it, but they seem to want SmartPref and both the Union and Company agreed on it. Obviously they feel they are going to implement it without an LOA (Good luck this isn’t pre-CBA). I will ask you this, even if we had hard time lines in place why would you think they would still care or honor them?

I know everyone says it was unrealistic, but we did in fact have a deadline. This was supposed to be done Jan 1, 2016.

chickenorbeef
11-07-2018, 05:13 PM
Congratulations?



Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.1