Originally Posted by b707guy (Post 2848773)

That's funny, because here's what you said in post 126 of the "Life From a Relatively New Hire at ATI" thread: "The pilots were able to stop all items in violation of the contract which caused the strike and in the end were paid hugh settlements. Which was the sole purpose of the strike....that and to show JH we would not stand by while he tried to move aircraft on ABX certificate to ATI ( which he wanted) without repercussions."

So, which is it?

BTW, what's a "hugh" settlement. Hugh Laurie? Hugh Hefner? Were they involved in the payout? ;) They do have a lot of money!

As for your iron-clad scope, maybe you need to take a deeper look at what that's really doing to your Company at this point.

You were told you "...cannot "continue to" strike with respect to the three minor disputes..." and went back to work when ordered to do so. Kind of flies in the face of "They can and we did...". Sounds more like "We thought we could and got called on it".

You question my reasons for commenting on issues of which "I have no idea"? That's really funny! Pot, meet kettle! :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by woog315 (Post 2848746)

I am seriously hesitant to bog down in this discussion, but this line of thinking really can't just be left hanging out there to enter all the impressionable minds of pilots (i kid, i kid). A status quo strike, absent a major contractual dispute, is illegal under the RLA. The court looked at our situation, said there was no major dispute, and told us to get back to work. The strike was enjoined, it really can't be more clear. The union did not follow the procedures, which are undoubtedly stacked in the company's favor but that doesn't really matter because the law is the law. This is the clearest explanation I have found that doesn't require you to be a lawyer - https://www.goodwinlaw.com/-/media/f..._line_rule.pdf

Why didn't the company come after us? Well that's real simple, actually. They are trying to secure as much business as they can, and a company that is dragging its labor through the courts does not look like a stable business. So when they sit down and negotiate with Amazon or DHL, and they ask "so hows labor relations?' its pretty hard to say "good!" when you are dragging your pilot group through court. What would taking us to court accomplish?

They are *trying* to make ATSG succeed, and they are succeeding without the help of ABX currently. ABX currently negotiates using a "We win it all, or no one wins anything" mentality, which is the equivalent of a Darwin award for organized labor (a choice quote around here is 'burn it all down!'. Yes, maybe light my house on fire too, that'll show em). We're like the knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail who, after having all his limbs chopped off, keeps hurling insults and making threats. We're basically just being laughed at by now. They'll keep using us to plug holes in their schedules and giving all the real growth to the guys interested in playing ball. Good for those guys.

Originally Posted by nitefr8dog (Post 2848828)

Fixed it for ya. How about.... did....and would again if the contract is violated while in sec 6 (move aircraft) better? And you still do not have a clue. As far a scope, that is the point you really don't understand. Hete says take a low ball contract or we take your aircraft....we strike over contract violations and to keep the aircraft and they downsize the airline. The outcome is the same. We would be right where we are now either way. Really nothing to lose. Is the whole whipsaw idea that hard to understand? It's not that "huge".

Originally Posted by nitefr8dog (Post 2848828)

Fixed it for ya. How about.... did....and would again if the contract is violated while in sec 6 (move aircraft) better? And you still do not have a clue. As far a scope, that is the point you really don't understand. Hete says take a low ball contract or we take your aircraft....we strike over contract violations and to keep the aircraft and they downsize the airline. The outcome is the same. We would be right where we are now either way. Really nothing to lose. Is the whole whipsaw idea that hard to understand? It's not that "huge".

Originally Posted by NeverHome (Post 2848995)

If the outcome was the same, why hurl crap at at ATI? By your own words this was gonna happen anyway. That has nothing to do with ATI pilot group. In fact the whole strike and fallout has nothing to do with ATIs pilot group. I believe that certainly ABX group was and is getting screwed. But not by ATI.

Originally Posted by b707guy (Post 2848979)

Editing a direct quote to support your agenda doesn't "fix" it for anyone but you.

As for "...or we take your aircraft...", maybe when, despite your overly-filled bag of clues, you realize that none of us can call any of this "ours", you'll figure out how this all really works. In the meantime, enjoy your status quo.

Originally Posted by nitefr8dog (Post 2849048)

Going to happen anyway after ATI accepted a contract that only gave pay raises. Less matching funds, lower disability pay, no reassignment/change of designation pay etc. The pay raise looked good and they bought it because they were willing to work for Walmart cart boy pay for years...something ABX crews would not do 20 yrs ago or now. Yet now that is the bar that is put before us. Does anyone understand whipsawing? ATSG now owns 3 airlines. We do not yet have a new contract...to get aircraft from the other carriers we would have to agree to a matching or less contract like ATI did...to get promised aircraft at the cost of the other carriers...like ATI did..
understand? It's not rocket science.

Originally Posted by NeverHome (Post 2849072)

Yes I do understand whipsaw. At the same time it’s almost comical that you seem to think the ABX savior or stumbling block is ATI. If the ATI pilot group rejected the contract, did you really expect your management to come to your group on their knees? Or is it more reasonable that the BS would have continued in another direction. One way or another ABX pilot group was/ is gonna get screwed correct?

ATIs group took the contract they felt best for their situation. So far that decision seems to be working towards their benefit. Did you really expect ATI to vote on their contract with ABX in the center of their thoughts?

Originally Posted by nitefr8dog (Post 2849098)

Wow...working together to raise the bar would have been way more beneficial for ATI and ABX. Unbelievable. I will make more and have more days at home working under a concessionary contract....you could gotten a lot more. Good luck on improvements going forward. You do not know Joe. This is like talking to kindergartners.

Originally Posted by woog315 (Post 2849185)

ATI could (and should) have done better, but a guy with the same longevity at ATI is now making significantly more than you... sorry to break it to you. Yes, that includes retirement (not interested in squabbling over DC vs match... who cares). And for newer hires, its not even close- ATI wins. All they got was the offer ATSG gave to our union and our union wouldn't even show us. ATI was given a chance to significantly improve their pay and conditions and they took it, I believe that is how it is supposed to work in America. Just because we were too greedy to see the writing on the wall and work out a deal doesn't mean ATI is a bunch of losers.

As to more days at home- maybe you live in CVG and good for you if you do, but there is not really a significant difference in days worked between the 2 companies. ATI undoubtedly works less if you commute at ABX. I'm not even going to get into hotels/crashpads and lack of per diem in CVG, as that puts ABX even further behind. You're grasping at straws trying to justify the utter failure of ABX. Sorry it hasn't worked out for us, but your attitude is a huge part of the problem.