Thanks for the input if you are a MEC member trying to get info out, under the table. But really. TRUST? You guys lost that with the over 60 screw the fellows vote. That being said, we are for the most part pretty smart, so if you would like to explain in DETAIL why the MEC acted the way it did on some of the LOA issues fire away. Most of us will listen. You might be able to change some minds, but be carefull what you wish for! You might change them in a way you don't want.

 

i was hired in 96 and am right at 50% on the master seniority list. but it is a different union, no doubt.

 

First the FCIF and now this threatening post from a management type is further evidence that they're scared, very scared.

Face it Rowdy1, tell your boss that you all had better start working on a better LOA or CDG and HKG will not open this year, and Fred will be very upset with you Flight Management types if you don't make this happen.

Now get back to work and give us a LOA that is fair and equitable with Cathy Pacific so we can move forward.

SG

 

Not asking you to debate.

Not personally attacking.


But how do you figure 500 pilots overmanned?

And how do you figure an end to SIBA? If not, then there will be a lot of Double DH's for the MD11 to cover the flying.

 

Rowdy Rowdy rowdy,

As HazCan so appropriatly puts it:

"Break was over 15 minutes ago B@#&H"....get back to your cubicle...

 

Rowdy,

If you are so in the know and connected, why don't you have someone who is a regular poster on this site with some credibility confirm your importance without revealing your identity. Even the most on abstract and out of touch nutjob who works for Fedex has someone out there who is willing to say that they are "OK." If you can't do that then you are not "in the know" with anyone that matters to me. If you are management, then your apparent arrogance in launching such self-serving first thread speaks volumes to the many problems that ails this company.

By the way, your no more SIBA and too many pilots arguments only make if we were to bend over for this deal and allow ourselves to get raped via STV.

Feel free to hire new hires to fill these FDA's at the current rate if you can.

 

Wow, that may have been the best 'drive-by' post I have ever seen on this board. 4 pages so far and we all know that he will not answer at all except to say something along the lines of 'I know the truth and you will see if you vote this down.' The post itself doesn't make me mad and really could have been made by simply picking and pulling from the various posts we all have made about this deal that have included discussions on potential negatives if this doesn't go through.

How big would these bases be to start out to 'mostly' soak up 500 pilots? 335 pilots would be 67% of that surplus, 375 would be 75%. Seems pretty big for a new domicile(s) especially when one doesn't even have operational aircraft on property yet. How exactly are they getting those 4.5 year and under previously trained 757 guys to just volunteer to go over to Paris with or without an LOA? If they hire into both seats after the bid, those pilots would be on our list and it's still FDX flying so what exactly is the problem? As far as foreign pilots go, let's be honest it would never get to that point over this particular deal. The MEC would file a grievance and a temporary injunction at which point in time and likely negotiate a settlement-although I grant you it would likely be one that we wouldn't like. In addition, our good Uncle Prater wouldn't let it get that far as it would affect his interests and wallet.

Seems to me that if all of this was as imminent of a threat as you imply, that the MEC would be squawking a lot more about this and campaigning hard ahead of July 23rd instead of limping along to the finish line like they have thus far. Since you didn't use the word 'furlough', I would say that you'd have to be mgt. or some sort of lower level ALPA committee member on an 'approved' leak. A line puke would have just said 'hundreds of people on the street, big excesses, downgrades and stagnation,' as there is little to lose if somewhere is clever enough to track down their identity. My gut says management since you elected to use the word 'legal' ahead of contractual and your constant use of pilot buzzwords like career expectations and how a continued hiring process would affect our positions. P.S. the upside of hiring all of those experienced pilots the last few years is strong candidates for potential quick upgrades anywhere, the downside is that they are less moved by scare tactics-'there is nothing that you can do to me, that Castro hasn't already done'.

 

As much as we would all like for Rowdy to defend and substantiate his remarks, I think we need to realize that this was a "drive-by" comment thrown out to test/stir the waters. As previously stated...nobody has even attempted to confirm his credibility....nor the validity of his post.

500 excess pilots??? That's extremely poor planning for a company that has always exercised extreme prudence in their pilot hiring practices. Wow!! Should we expect furloughs soon??

 

Beat me to it Mr. Larusso.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y4eOOlSxr_c