Pep Rallies and mob mentality
 

Given the current climate for getting a contract in place, will take a lot more than hosting pep rallies and other such bs to effect any kind of change ......... I am not surprised that folks around here are keeping their collective heads in the sand and believing that the current course will hopefully yield some kind of result. Lanyards, pep rallies, dont do this and dont do that ........... Folks you are kidding yourselves and it will take a lot more to get anyones attention and effect a change here.
The chocks are in, the plane is not moving ............. what say you ?

Thank you Captain Obvious. What do you propose?

Said in my best Billy Crystal Miracle Max voice,

"Have fun with that illegal job action!"

Cue Carol Kane,
"Do you think it'll werk?"

"It'd take a mir...Wait! Nope"

Fly the contract. Taxi at a brisk walk, (5mph). Don't leave early. Don't take direct routings, Don't help out, Don't accept Drafts, Don't fix "problems",etc. etc.

These are NOT illegal job actions. And if you think they are, you are misinformed.

I know the flyboy didn't specify FedEx, but we know it is. Unless FedEx squirreled away a few old Tiger 747s I don't know about, you don't work here.

The actions (or lack of action) you mention are a perfectly acceptable INDIVIDUAL choice. What has already been decided via several court decisions to be illegal is public communication (like online forums) by union members encouraging people to act as a group and make those same choices. It can then be interpreted as a violation of "status quo" during section 6 negotiations and is most, most definitely illegal.

Therefore, sir, it is you who are misinformed.

[QUOTE=tennesseeflyboy;1843790]Given the current climate for getting a contract in place, will take a lot more than hosting pep rallies and other such bs to effect any kind of change ......... I am not surprised that folks around here are keeping their collective heads in the sand and believing that the current course will hopefully yield some kind of result. Lanyards, pep rallies, dont do this and dont do that ........... Folks you are kidding yourselves and it will take a lot more to get anyones attention and effect a change here.
The chocks are in, the plane is not moving ............. what say you ?[/QUOTE]

:rolleyes:

Then carry on then. And get the lame COLA contract in 2 years. And what I said was correct. If individuals decide to work by the letter, it will go a long way. Not suggesting the Union put this out there. It's a individuals choice.

+1 Exactly!

Seeing as he's not a Fedex pilot, I'd say he's well within his rights, legally and professionally, to say that if Fedex pilots did not fly draft, take shortcuts, etc etc we just might have a contract sooner than later. I would never say that, of course, but Commando can.

You might ask the AA MEC who got fined $40+M after they grabbed their hard drives. Hope they don't grab yours.

That was a "bought" Judge based in Texas. Imagine that. And the APA really didn't promote the situation but got screwed in the end. They did pay half or a little less in the end. But it was caused by the MIA Domicile Pilots calling out Sick, since they were more than upset over the RENO Air merger. The APA really can't force someone not to call in Sick, but the Judge from Dallas disagreed. A buddy of Crandell's by the way. You have hundreds of Judge's out there, and can probably get a hundred different decisions.

Aww. How pweicious! Commando thinks that there are un-bought judges still! :rolleyes:

Comprehension problem? That is not at all what he said! :eek:

I'm not attempting to imply I have any sort of education in the law (other than watching Law and Order when I hit the hotel at 0700). What's up with that anyway - it's got to be on 4 or 5 channels at times. I digress –

After the APA case, there was a more recent case (around 2008) against UAL ALPA and some of their individual pilots. The airline won, ALPA appealed and lost again.

I think we are now dealing with issues of precedence regarding previous rulings on this. We may be able to get a hundred different decisions from other judges, but the one that matters is the one from the judge who ruled in the APA and/or UAL cases. Once there is a ruling, it's not like we get a clean slate and just have to find a judge who thinks differently. Whatever judge we might get would be bound by previous rulings in most situations.
In the UAL ALPA case, the use of online communication was a huge factor. I don't remember what sort of penalty was imposed. It may have just been an injunction but either way, they lost.

In addition to UAL ALPA, some of the defendants in the case were individual pilots using electronic bulletin boards and other forms of communication. This fact is huge. Individual pilots were defendants in the lawsuit. Much of their communications were not using an official ALPA bulletin board or emailing in an official ALPA capacity. They were not even working for ALPA in any official capacity and some were already furloughed. My point though, is their online communications were used against them to prove allegations of an illegal job action. Here are a couple of relevant excerpts from the appeal ruling upholding the original decision: (bold additions from me)

Phrases such as “work safe,” “work by the book,” “adhere to strict contractual requirements,” “not to neglect even the most minor write ups,” “check every item on the checklists,” were all recognized as coded signals to engage in a slow-down.  In ALPA, we suggested that statistical evidence(of actions taken by pilots) plus a notice posted on a union's bulletin board could suffice as clear proof.

Second, and more importantly, the court also relied on the many messages that the defendants(specific pilots) conveyed to the pilots during the relevant time frame. Among those messages were repeated directives to “fly the contract,” to not waive any part of the contract, to decline junior/senior manning assignments, to “fix it now,” and to “work-to-rule.”   Some of these directives appeared on websites and in mass e-mails, the twenty-first-century equivalents of a bulletin board.