![]() |
|
Public Service Announcement - One month Left
Guys don't forget to make your DC plan rollover selections - due by June 13th. And be sure to leave some time to have the form notarized as required for many of us.
Scoop |
Originally Posted by Check Essential
(Post 1642271)
A Power Point will surely intimidate management. They'll fix this contract violation immediately.
I'll bet Donatelli will write another Chairman's Letter too. A strongly worded Chairman's Letter. Well, maybe not the Chairman's Letter. Let's not overreact and do something radical. Maybe Dickson will issue a memo changing that part of our contract and the problem will be fixed. George, ACL65 and I accurately predicted the failure of compliance with the Trans Atlantic Joint Venture more than three years ago. Our concern was met with assurances and the fact that inclusion of Alitalia increased our share. D-ALPA is correct ... we increased bargaining leverage with the JV revision. My failure has been to equate scope with "flying" when we have no practical resource to compel the Company to perform an iota of flying it does not want to perform. Perhaps we could take them to Court and force them to stop flying we don't permit, but, where is the money in compliance? The Company knows this and breaks our agreement knowing the answer is going to be trading employment for some other equity, usually cash. Finding a legal answer, which meets with political support, is really a tough nut to crack. For starters, we could and should start harassing the appropriate managers in crew room briefs about their noncompliance. After all, we do comply with our end of the agreement. We have ever reason to expect their compliance. If we were unified, we would not have this problem to this degree. We facilitate outsourcing for money, so a breach is a money issue.
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 1642241)
I hate to be a "Debbie Downer" about this but I forsee this all being rolled into contract negotiations which begin right about March 30, 2015 or within a few days of it...
Denny I would like it rolled into a global production balance in such a way that we capture "and beyond" flying in that metric. I will be disappointed if we convert wide body Captain jobs to cash. |
Originally Posted by Timbo
(Post 1642215)
So who exactly decides what is "Realistic"? Richard? Or Dalpa? Or the NMB? But apparently it's completely realistic for the company to offer less than 8433 (because you know that wasn't their opener. Or was it? :cool:) |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1642289)
Of course this trend has been clearly existent for nearly two decades. Management ordered 500+ RJ's before Contract 2000 was ratified. Then as scope was breached, concessions arrived as on schedule just as any hollywood movie protagonist arrives in the last 10 minutes to save the day.
George, ACL65 and I accurately predicted the failure of compliance with the Trans Atlantic Joint Venture more than three years ago. Our concern was met with assurances and the fact that inclusion of Alitalia increased our share. D-ALPA is correct ... we increased bargaining leverage with the JV revision. My failure has been to equate scope with "flying" when we have no practical resource to compel the Company to perform an iota of flying it does not want to perform. Perhaps we could take them to Court and force them to stop flying we don't permit, but, where is the money in compliance? The Company knows this and breaks our agreement knowing the answer is going to be trading employment for some other equity, usually cash. Finding a legal answer, which meets with political support, is really a tough nut to crack. If we were unified, we would not have this problem to this degree. We facilitate outsourcing for money, so a breach is a money issue.Yep. Two weeks later. I would like it rolled into a global production balance in such a way that we capture "and beyond" flying in that metric. I will be disappointed if we convert wide body Captain jobs to cash. Not only have these pilots been harmed for years, the violation shows no sign of ending. Ken Watts is an expert on this issue and can help if asked. Northwestern is TIC. From Chicago where all the people know American and United. They confused us with the railroad. |
Backdoor A lines are out for Jun. Most of them anyways.
|
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1642295)
At Northwestern we had similar contract violations. We rebid the air line on paper as if the flying existed. Then we paid the harmed pilots who should have upgraded.
Not only have these pilots been harmed for years, the violation shows no sign of ending. Ken Watts is an expert on this issue and can help if asked. Northwestern is TIC. From Chicago where all the people know American and United. They confused us with the railroad. |
Originally Posted by sinca3
(Post 1642251)
Not sure why you are inferring that we or atleast I am discussing fixing a company problem. All I did was state what was told to me. If thy have a problem they can fix it, if they need or want our help they can ask for it and at the same time throw us a bone to get us motivated to help.
|
Originally Posted by gzsg
(Post 1642295)
At Northwestern we had similar contract violations. We rebid the air line on paper as if the flying existed. Then we paid the harmed pilots who should have upgraded.
Not only have these pilots been harmed for years, the violation shows no sign of ending. Ken Watts is an expert on this issue and can help if asked. Northwestern is TIC. From Chicago where all the people know American and United. They confused us with the railroad. It's also a University in Evanston. I liked that you used it. It's like 'American West' or Delta Airlines. They did say that a lot in Chicago...:D I like to use the Bostonian "Delter" when referring to my employer. |
Originally Posted by Denny Crane
(Post 1642241)
I hate to be a "Debbie Downer" about this but I forsee this all being rolled into contract negotiations which begin right about March 30, 2015 or within a few days of it...
Denny |
Originally Posted by Bucking Bar
(Post 1642289)
Of course this trend has been clearly existent for nearly two decades. Management ordered 500+ RJ's before Contract 2000 was ratified. Then as scope was breached concessions arrived as on schedule just as any hollywood movie protagonist arrives in the last 10 minutes to save the day.
George, ACL65 and I accurately predicted the failure of compliance with the Trans Atlantic Joint Venture more than three years ago. Our concern was met with assurances and the fact that inclusion of Alitalia increased our share. D-ALPA is correct ... we increased bargaining leverage with the JV revision. My failure has been to equate scope with "flying" when we have no practical resource to compel the Company to perform an iota of flying it does not want to perform. Perhaps we could take them to Court and force them to stop flying we don't permit, but, where is the money in compliance? The Company knows this and breaks our agreement knowing the answer is going to be trading employment for some other equity, usually cash. Finding a legal answer, which meets with political support, is really a tough nut to crack. For starters, we could and should start harassing the appropriate managers in crew room briefs about their noncompliance. After all, we do comply with our end of the agreement. We have ever reason to expect their compliance. If we were unified, we would not have this problem to this degree. We facilitate outsourcing for money, so a breach is a money issue.Yep. Two weeks later. I would like it rolled into a global production balance in such a way that we capture "and beyond" flying in that metric. I will be disappointed if we convert wide body Captain jobs to cash. |
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:33 PM. |
|
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands