IBT Scare Tactics at NAC
#41
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2017
Posts: 45
The fact is that when NAS decided to merge the airlines, the status of the AAC guys’ claim to that flying definitely wasn’t set in stone, which is why you all were losing your minds when the news broke.
..... But you guys are definitely overstating how ironclad your rights to that flying are. They aren’t. That’s why you were all going nuts when the merger was announced.
..... But you guys are definitely overstating how ironclad your rights to that flying are. They aren’t. That’s why you were all going nuts when the merger was announced.
"Don’t really see how AAC guys are somehow connected to flying that was done by another airline, with different pilots"
So you obviously you feel that the Aloha pilots should not have rights to bid the 767 before NAC pilots. in HNL. But you keep ignoring the facts.
When the 767 was brought on to the Aloha property, there was no talk or rumor of any merger. So why wouldn't the Aloha pilots not be "connected" to the 767 flying out of HNL? And yes, they didn't fly it when it started, because that was allowed by the contract. Check your TA, I'll bet there is section that allows a wet lease.
If the decision to merge didn't happen, the Aloha pilots would have been flying the 767 last Fall. That is how close they were to an agreement with Aloha management on pay rates and they were ready to go to the FAA to start proving runs.
Like you said, what happened , happened, but if you go forward telling people that Aloha pilots don't have a right to have a fence on the HNL 767 pilots, then you will never have the unity that you claim you want.
Fact is airline mergers are messy. Pilots get bumped out of bases they have lived in for years, they get bumped out of equipment, have 1000s of other pilots put senior to them, etc. All that sucks, but you have to acknowledge the facts. If your company never had a type of airline and never had any plans to get it. then you had no career expectation of flying it.
It is the same mentality that says, "all your pilots should be put at the bottom of the seniority list because you guys are being added to our certificate." Total BS, should be date of hire , period.
hopefully your merger goes smoothly, but looking at some of the mergers in the past 10 years, that is not always the case. There are still lawsuits pending over some of them.
#42
Line Holder
Thread Starter
Joined APC: May 2017
Posts: 39
I’m not so sure why you’re determined that everyone must hate each other. You say you don’t work here, so maybe go find another thread to troll.
#43
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 89
So it took me some time to figure out what you were referring to artic, but no akfr8r is not me. I’m out in the open about my concerns with the new contract, I was man enough to share my concerns in a very public email chain, I’m a big boy and don’t need to hide behind fake names or anonymous internet profiles. ted
#49
Line Holder
Joined APC: Sep 2014
Posts: 89
767 fo 1st yr $84 12 yr $182
737 ca 1st yr $133 12 yr $204
737 fo 1st yr $83
Guarantee is 65 hrs, witch historically has been hard to break.
Retirement, typical supplemental, you better have a plan of your own,
Nut shell the 767 guys got an increase, the 737 guy got the retention bonus rolled into the hourly.
Lots of promises as far as picking up pay, but that’s all due to the schedule, so only time will tell.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post