RedWhiteAndBlue

“Screwed’s” last comment shows that there is indeed more reason to be concerned that “Atlas” is pulling the strings so to speak. In fact it shows there is actually a term for it!

The fact that no one nominated an Omni person has NOTHING to do with whether or not the above strings are in fact being pulled.

I don’t expect to vote on the existing document. I do expect the union to get with the company to talk about it. I don’t think the union should continually add things to the table. And finally I do think the company should be willing to be flexible in language adjustment. And they verbalize that they are.

Which once again points to “Atlas” not being willing to consider things that they think will hinder their own contractual train wreck. I couldn’t care less about the Atlas problem. I care about Omni.

aviatorhi

1000% agreed.

boschpilot

With all due respect, I do not know who you are and I could care less where your money goes. I will say this again, we were not afforded an opportunity to vote or elect a new representative. This was confirmed by someone who ranks higher than both of us in the union.

Dutch80

1- The company has a proposal on the table. Call it bullet points, french fries, or anything else one would like, we can all
agree that we are all familiar with the general terms. Pay rates, Business Travel, 401k Contributions, etc.
Admittedly none of that exists in an official format, or at least that we have seen.
But.....

2- A meeting between the EXCO and Omni can resolve this issue. A document can be redacted, containing the necessary
language and other such formalities, and be offered to the pilots for consideration. All it takes is the desire to do so by the
afore mentioned parties.


3- If such a document, meeting all legal hurdles and contractual language is deemed acceptable by the majority of the pilots then
It effectively becomes the new CBA. If, in the other hand, the majority of pilots consider the proposal deficient in one or more
areas, it gets rejected and sends the company a clear message that is time to come to the negotiations with a new set of ideas.

So, is there anything wrong with my reasoning? I think is practical and accomplishes the goal either way.

I find any refusal to allow the pilots this opportunity , offensive and condescending. It implies that we are not intelligent enough , educated enough or otherwise capable of making our own decisions. It really is that simple.

Either that, or as many suspect, there are ulterior motives at play and either the company, the union, or both have their own interests at heart and fear the pilot group may, overwhelmingly, reach a conclusion not in line with their wishes.

On a side note, pilots I have spoken with in the course of this month, would prefer to have their opinions heard, one way or the other, by a margin of 10 to 1. Not a “scientific poll” but something to think about.

be76flyer

Yes and No

Putting something out for a vote can work for or against the union and pilots. If they put something out for a vote and it gets voted down by a 80%-90% them the union is handed a ton of leverage and sends a very clear message to the company that they are out of touch, the flip side is if it is voted down 48% to 52%. A vote like that would cut the union off at the knees, and let the company know how close they are to getting 50% +1, remember they view any vote over 50% +1 as a sign that they offered to much. The company is pushing for a vote to see how much more they have to offer or if they have offered to much already.

RedWhiteAndBlue

The company sent the union a contractual document. Information has circulated about its contents. Line pilots like me are generally aware of its contents. If correct it represents significant gains and far exceeds even reasonable expectations. The company wants to meet to adjust language to meet the union’s concerns. Does anyone really think this is unreasonable????

If one listens carefully to the last union teleconference the general tone was “its not industry standard therefore we will not allow you to see it much less vote on it”. That is my paraphrase but I believe its accurate. You then need to ask yourself who decides what industry standard is and how and why and if it should apply.

“Atlas” attends our negotiating sessions. “Atlas” gets the final nod on whether to send anything to Omni pilots. “Atlas” said ok to the 18 day company proposal conditioned upon opening negotiations again in 18 months (ridiculous and designed to get a “no response”). That “no “ response was then characterized by the union to us as “the company walked away from the table” which in my opinion is just plain dishonesty. Atlas(non-italicized) is in a contractual train wreck right now.

“Atlas” most likely believes an Omni contract that doesn’t meet THEIR requirements for THEIR own contractual negoatiating trainwreck will mean less gain for THEM. Remember “Screwed’s” own admission of this in an earlier post?

Is “Atlas” deciding on what Omni industry standard is?

Local 747 is no longer in existance. Its now Local 1224.

Do the math. A reasonable head sees the concern.

RyeMex

No. The Local of which you are a part is deciding what industry standard is, since you couldn't be bothered to participate in your union enough to run your own Exco.

RedWhiteAndBlue

Who is president of local 1224?

Does this individual attend negotiations?

RedWhiteAndBlue

Thank you RyeMex for agreeing that what I think is happening IN FACT IS.

Hetman

"...What's in a name? that which we call a rose
By any other word would smell as sweet..."