Can everybody play nice now? Try and be professional, and abide by the rules of posting here. There are plenty of other boards to exercise your right to insult, lob verbal grenades, etc.

Hugs and kisses always,

Tony

 

Ok, I'll bite...which strategic plan are you referring too. Does it involve fleet simplification (all-Boeing fleet) and having 2200 pilots on the property ?...with the use of large airplanes flying multiple, domestic runs every night and the consolidation of the ONT base into ANC next year ?

“To further support this momentum, we will continue to strengthen our network with larger planes, specifically the 747-400, and increase our air capacity .

Logistics week-July 2010

Just curious, as I color in my coloring book.

 

You forgot the increased utilization of FQS flying MEF year round. Along with the flood of contractors during peak. And some contractors through SCS for other times of excess demand.

All of which will be completely contractual ... and affect more than 300.

But those 2200 left will still be defering advisories and such scare tactics ...

Pass the coloring book my friend, I am sure yours is X-rated !

 

OK, I'll play nice. What difference would that make now? By that I mean what could we do now to reverse something that was agreed to over 20 years ago by a former administration? I understand your frustration over some EB's decision both past and present, that concern is shared by many union members at some time in their career. But heres the difference, that is our right, we are members of this union and you are not. You must understand that we get a little testy when an outsider attempts to influence the direction our elected leaders choose. [edit: delete potential flamebait]

 

Definitely not trying to kick a hornet's nest here, but some of the recent information being posted on this thread is worth paying attention to. I am an FQS, and was here from the beginning of the airline. Right or wrong, good or bad, it was the job I was offered - and is the job I accepted. It's been a good career, and I have no regrets. I am nearing the end of my career here, so the outcome of any integration plan will not affect me one way or another. Whether it ever happens or not is anyone's guess.

In the early days of the airline, Rob Dorsey and I spoke often about his ideas regarding many aspects of the airline (anyone who knows Rob knows that he wasn't shy about expressing his opinions). Rob felt strongly that there needed to be changes in the Flight Operations structure. He felt that the "Fleet Supervisors", as they were referred to at the time, should have representation. Rob climbed WAY out on a limb to try to make this happen. He knew that strength was in numbers, and he counted on the IPA to back him up when he decided to move forward with his plan. I still remember the day that the IPA dealt Rob the coup-de-Gras when they "officially" took the position that they had no desire to represent the UPS Mgmt Pilots. That was the beninning of the end for Rob, and the rest is history. Many "Fleet Supervisors" who supported the integration felt terribly betrayed, and couldn't understand this position.

Somebody mentioned in a past thread that if there was ever a "right time" for the integration, it was early in the history of the airline. They were exactly right. Now, the FQSs are deeply vested in their pension and retiree health care plans that would change drastically if any type of integration were to occur now. This is one reason (among others) why there doesn't appear to be much support in the form of "cards" being returned.

I'm sure there will be many angry responses to this post, which will have a different version of what happened back then - and that's OK. I'm not interested in debating this, and I'm not interested in discussing whether or not I even agreed with Rob. Again, I'm not trying to defend any position here - I just feel like this perspective is worth being voiced. I really believe the IPA missed a huge opportunity back then, and now it may be too late.

 

I hope those who think they know what they are talking about read and understand this, because it is the truth.

IPA members have nothing to blame but the backroom deals of the past for the present FQS situation.

 

My question as an IPA member albeit furloughed is how long will the IPA membership blindly follow BT and TK.

Can someone name anything good that has come from the current administration.

Before you jump on the Unity fund bandwagon I contend BT/TK have major ownership in the furlough MOU failing. Both gentlemen were against the MOU during the election campaign and were totally silent in the final weeks before the end of the sign up period. If the agreed upon amount had been reached it would have been much harder for UPS to have reneged on the MOU (my opinion).

I do agree with BT concerning the need to bring the FQS into the IPA but do not agree with the timing or the haphazard way it is being executed.

BT's off the cuff comments and statements have done much to damage his credibility with me,
1) furloughs wont happen.
2) IPA will file injunction to stop FQS MEF flying when first crewmember furloughed.
3) Furloughs will stop at 90
4) Furloughed crewmembers will be back by peak, (which year??)
5) Will have favorable POI's ruling on P3's by end of June

In the end I realize that UPS made the final decision to furlough me and the rest of the folks on the list but I believe things might have been different with someone else at the helm of the IPA.

 

Everyone loves to bash politicians and praise straight-talking, take it to the company style rhetoric. The truth is we need politicians in the IPA right now. Anyone can pound their chest and raise their middle finger to UPS mgt, but what does that get us? Self-respect? I'd rather everyone have a job. The backroom deals regarding FQS in the early 90s aside, BM seemed to be able to work with the company. BT and TK seem way over their head and are not doing anything constructive regarding protecting our jobs. MD-11s/747s flying 4 legs a night in the domestic system is going to take away a lot of jobs. What are we going to do about it, defer advisements and rent signs on Cessnas?

 

Don't kid yourself. As far as the company was concerned, the MOU was not going to prevent furloughs. The MOU was about footing the bill for 125 DC8 crew members who were sitting at home collecting full pay and benefits.

BM tried his usual "let's make a deal" and the company laughed all the way to the bank.

The furloughs were coming, the company just was slick enough to wring $100 million out of the pilots in spite of it.

 

Agreed on all that Lil J... Stick and move, stick and move....