IPA Flight Times Article
09-24-2007, 12:28 PM
#171
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Position: Leftof longitudinal
Posts: 1,899
Originally Posted by GEOFFREY
This straw poll makes the whole subject of seniority integration a dead issue.
Nice try. We are and never have been class and craft with the line pilots. We do much more than just fly airplanes. The only issue is class and craft. If the IPA cannot prove this in front of the NMB by a preponderance of the evidence, a million straw polls could be taken and it would not matter.
Katz may be a great attorney, but he will lose this one.
Nice try. We are and never have been class and craft with the line pilots. We do much more than just fly airplanes. The only issue is class and craft. If the IPA cannot prove this in front of the NMB by a preponderance of the evidence, a million straw polls could be taken and it would not matter.
Katz may be a great attorney, but he will lose this one.
Last edited by SaltyDog; 09-24-2007 at 12:41 PM.
09-24-2007, 01:55 PM
#172
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 337
The only portion of the poll that didn't meet the 80% threshold was giving the subordinate officials UPS date of hire. I voted no on that portion. I think their date of hire with respect to the IPA seniority list should be the date that they joined management. That would keep the guys that were originally IPA and then went into management from getting a windfall from coming back to the IPA with their original UPS date of hire. They made their choice to leave the IPA and should not be "rewarded" with their UPS date of hire.
09-24-2007, 03:20 PM
#173
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: -
Posts: 189
Originally Posted by FlyByCable
The only portion of the poll that didn't meet the 80% threshold was giving the subordinate officials UPS date of hire. I voted no on that portion. I think their date of hire with respect to the IPA seniority list should be the date that they joined management. That would keep the guys that were originally IPA and then went into management from getting a windfall from coming back to the IPA with their original UPS date of hire. They made their choice to leave the IPA and should not be "rewarded" with their UPS date of hire.
09-24-2007, 04:22 PM
#174
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,333
Originally Posted by FlyByCable
...They made their choice to leave the IPA and should not be "rewarded" with their UPS date of hire...
If that's the case - you're right - the relatively few (percentage wise) former IPA pilots who crossed over to the mgmt side will not be "rewarded with their UPS date of hire." Unfortunately, at the same time we shot ourselves in the foot by letting the status quo continue which in the long run hurts line pilots way more than it hurts the management pilots in the form of lost training and check airmen positions that could become available to line pilots.
That's just my take on it and I'm frequently wrong, in this case I actually do hope that I'm wrong.
09-24-2007, 04:36 PM
#175
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 337
Originally Posted by ⌐ AV8OR WANNABE
Very true. However, the way I read the initial letter from the IPA was that unless they got 80% YES votes to ALL 3 questions, they wouldn't be pursuing this subject at all (I hope I am wrong). So by voting NO to one question you were voting NO to all of them (at least the way I understood the letter).
If that's the case - you're right - the relatively few (percentage wise) former IPA pilots who crossed over to the mgmt side will not be "rewarded with their UPS date of hire." Unfortunately, at the same time we shot ourselves in the foot by letting the status quo continue which in the long run hurts line pilots way more than it hurts the management pilots in the form of lost training and check airmen positions that could become available to line pilots.
That's just my take on it and I'm frequently wrong, in this case I actually do hope that I'm wrong.
If that's the case - you're right - the relatively few (percentage wise) former IPA pilots who crossed over to the mgmt side will not be "rewarded with their UPS date of hire." Unfortunately, at the same time we shot ourselves in the foot by letting the status quo continue which in the long run hurts line pilots way more than it hurts the management pilots in the form of lost training and check airmen positions that could become available to line pilots.
That's just my take on it and I'm frequently wrong, in this case I actually do hope that I'm wrong.
Miller said that the IPA could proceed without getting 80% on any of the three areas. With the one sub 80% area being so close, I think the IPA will still proceed. It's clear that the majority of IPA crewmembers want the subordinate officials in the IPA, the question remaining is what kind of seniority integration do they get.
09-24-2007, 05:26 PM
#177
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 337
Originally Posted by ⌐ AV8OR WANNABE
Then why is there a talk of another poll in the future?
Just my guess, but maybe it's to poll the membership on how they would like the seniority issue handled since the UPS date of hire didn't get the 80%
09-24-2007, 05:33 PM
#178
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Posts: 3,333
Originally Posted by FlyByCable
Just my guess, but maybe it's to poll the membership on how they would like the seniority issue handled since the UPS date of hire didn't get the 80%
09-24-2007, 05:49 PM
#179
New ride...
Joined APC: Apr 2005
Posts: 534
Gentlemen,
I don't believe this to be a dead issue. This whole process was going to take a long time to play through. I still think that it will proceed. It's just going to take time.
While reading the B & G, I agree with the poster that the ball is in the court of the subordinate officials at this time. If this is what you want, you must do some work as well (i.e. signing union cards). The straw poll has shown them that the majority of the membership is willing to listen, and not just staple them to the bottom. It is a two-way street. We all have something to be gained in this scenario.
I don't believe this to be a dead issue. This whole process was going to take a long time to play through. I still think that it will proceed. It's just going to take time.
While reading the B & G, I agree with the poster that the ball is in the court of the subordinate officials at this time. If this is what you want, you must do some work as well (i.e. signing union cards). The straw poll has shown them that the majority of the membership is willing to listen, and not just staple them to the bottom. It is a two-way street. We all have something to be gained in this scenario.
09-24-2007, 05:55 PM
#180
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Position: Relaxing
Posts: 235
Cable & Boy
I think that we have some of the same opinions, but I'm not sure that we see eye to eye on which managers are rewarded. My gripe is the post '04 managers that were rewarded with a solid six figure salary and keeping that without ever serving a day of probation or the new-hire pay scale. Additionally, these poor guys will probably be fenced as CAs for a while. We'll have two guys hired within days of each other with a 100K pay gap. I say that these guys bought their way on the seniority list to the bottom. Yea, we all work for UPS, but I thought that this was an IPA list. Just an opinion. MBB
I think that we have some of the same opinions, but I'm not sure that we see eye to eye on which managers are rewarded. My gripe is the post '04 managers that were rewarded with a solid six figure salary and keeping that without ever serving a day of probation or the new-hire pay scale. Additionally, these poor guys will probably be fenced as CAs for a while. We'll have two guys hired within days of each other with a 100K pay gap. I say that these guys bought their way on the seniority list to the bottom. Yea, we all work for UPS, but I thought that this was an IPA list. Just an opinion. MBB
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
