Yes transplants because he's not a new hire he's not working for new hire pay, he's working for new hire pay plus abx pay which means he's making more money than other true new hires in the same position. Maybe we should call them new hire +. And please don't talk to me about hatred after all the capital bashing that goes on here.

All I started out saying is the 72s aren't going away and why they aren't going away. From there it progresses to capital bashing and I have no credibility. Capital pilots are replacing ATI pilots. Nobody is gonna mix fleets for a while their are so many hoops to jump through.

And your the first person that says where's the love and brotherhood as soon as I give it back to you and the new hires +.

I don't want to see anyone furloughed, for what it's worth when the merger happens we have nooooo reserves so by contract we will have to either park the 72s and use current staff or actually hire to meet ATI contract staff requirements. Regardless, no matter what happens to the 72 , it has no bearing on the furloughs happening on the 76 side of the house.

But try to tell new hires + this. Remember I have no credibility.

Absolutely none.

As a person who actually receives at paycheck from ATI under this program. I can factually tell you and show you my pay stub. It is new-hire pay from day one. ATI, the company I work for, pays me only for the number of years that I have worked for ATI....no more...no less.

If I get money from FDX, AAL, or ABX (or wherever I worked before coming to here), from a provision that my brethren and I negotiated while I was there....what business is that of yours....or anyone else's? Now I'm guessing you want to know what my wife earns and from whom as well.

As for the rest....Oddly, the management team does lean somewhat towards CCI pilots regarding furlough and recall. Reducing current/qualified 767 pilots and recalling B727 pilots, only to retrain them to 75/76, is expensive and only has short term financial gains. These decisions are from a group that within short periods of time, keep 2 separate facilities (MCO/LIT) then move them all to ILN. Every email or statement is changed within a week reflecting a different position, resulting in a airline that moves a lot in a stationary position, but never gaining any forward momentum or result.

Finally, ATI has no 'contact staffing requirements' as you put it. I recognize that you are new to the JCBA as there is nothing familiar to you in the document. The CCI contract did not bring anything to the table in merging (that is a hint for those of you in the cheap seats...).

So new hire + let me understand this. As you see it, we have recalled all our people and trained in the 75, not because we added an aircraft but because we are going to displace 76 drivers even though it will be more than a year before any of the crews can cross the fence ?

Let me also understand their is no staffing requirement outline in the ATI contract which we will all be working under soon ?

Let me also understand that we recalled people straight into the 75 ?

I believe that you should re-read the provisions in LOA #2 of the JCBA again.

There is no fence in the JCBA that prevents a 767-qualfied pre-merge CCI pilot from bidding and flying 767 flying. The fence only prevents 757-qualified pre-merge ATI pilots from bidding CVG 757 flying before the pre-merge CCI 757 pilots have been dual-qualified. For ever CCI crew that is cross-trained, one CVG 757 line opens up to bid by dual-qualified ATI pilots.

What might come out of the ISL arbitration is anybody's guess.

If there is, I haven't seen it. What provision are you talking about? Perhaps I just don't recognize it as a staffing requirement.

I was under the understanding their is a 30 percent reserve crews requirement the contract calls for. Maybe the 30 percent number isn't a contractual requirement, maybe it's a number that is being planned for because the contract requires more staff (increased time off, training done on days on). Either way the company is planning a 30 percent increase in staff when the contract goes into effect. That means if the 72 goes away we have enough staff on property to staff the 75, if the 72 doesn't go away, we are going to have to increase staff to meet contractual needs.

The fence I'm talking about is the fence that's going to go up, not because of JCBA but because people need to be trained. I'm taking a guess at a year before people are trained before people can start bidding other equipment, maybe longer maybe less, but their will be a period of time before everyone can start bidding outside their own equipment.

My point is we added an airplane, we had to recall for that aircraft. The New hire + people think its a move against them, I still haven't figured logic. We add an airplane but we don't staff it ?

blogwth said..."It would seem that ATSG management and a substantial part of the ATI ALPA decision makers may have a shared interest in seeing that the furloughed ABX/ATI remain in the furlough pool".....

Yea think!

blogwth also said...."This has been a very secretive process and there is a definite opportunity for a conflict of interest, not to mention a motive"

Not as secretive as you might think.....

It was obvious from the start that ATSG management would take advantage of this merge to eliminate costs by manipulating the process so that they could end up with more Capital and less ATI crews at the end. If you're on the wrong end of that plan, it seems evil. If you are an ATSG manager, you see it as just a business decision because you don't consider the crew members involved as humans anyway. In fact, some ATSG managers will probably get a nice pat on the head from the CEO for having executed such a clever plan. If you are a beneficiary and intelligent, you will probably lay low or even feign concern for those who are going to get effed over in the process. If you are a beneficiary and not intelligent...

What I find to be the most disturbing is the level of coordination between management and the union in this effort. Obviously, management wanted to wait until the very last day possible to execute this last part of the plan, the furlough of the additional ATI guys. Most of us who are not in the know on this assumed the ISL would be presented by the arbitrator on Nov. 15th. I think most people didn't know about the delay until it was announced on the 15th. Obviously, the managers knew about the delay or they would have announced the additional furloughs on Nov. 1st so they would satisfy the 14 day requirement. As far as I know, the arbitrator announced that the ISL release date was being extended to something like the “first week in December.” The official furlough notice date is today, November 20th. 14 days from today is December 3rd. I assume the furloughs will go into effect 12:01 am December 4th, which is a Tuesday. Management had to have known that the ISL release date was going to be extended.

Another thing that bothers me is the flimsy excuse for the furlough and the fact that the ATI MEC doesn't even seem to be challenging it. In fact, the MEC seems to be trying to support it. What is “complications with the DHL contract in BAH?” They didn't even bother to say that there is any expectation of a reduction in the amount of work expected. In fact, I would be willing to wager there won't be a reduction.

Jus curious, how many crews are their compared to planes on contract ?