While I agree with you 100% Sink, you have to remember that on the other side of every JV there is another pilot group who is thinking the same things we are thinking. If we want these JV's to work out long term, then the best option would be to take a snapshot of all flying being performed by both airlines at the time of the JV and agree that none of the existing flights will be shifted to other carriers. Then all future growth within the JV will be shared 50/50. I think getting that and a cut of the revenue benefit for us facilitating these deals could work out well for both sides of each JV we enter into.

Any one know how many, if any, more PIRP pilots there are that haven't retired yet? Thanks,

Denny

Got a guy on my street who manages a Wal-Mart who gives me the same crap. I asked him the other day if I could come in and get all my stuff for cost -10%. Of course he said no because then they would lose money. I then told him that's OK, they could cut his pay to make up for it and everyone would be happy. After I explained to him that it costs alot more than $99 to fly a person to Las Vegas and they have cut everyone's pay to make up for it, he sorta realized why sometimes airline employees really don't do more than required to kiss his butt when he flies.

An AirTran buddy of mine put this up on facebook, this is a comedian talking to Conan Obrien about life and flying on airliners, its funny and pro-airline:
YouTube - Everythings Amazing & Nobodys Happy

So we don't have a countdown to the hiring go/no go decision going yet? You guys disappoint me... :D

Heyas Denny,

There is more to it. You can't simply read the contract language and say that an issue is black and white. You need to look at what the notes that were taken during the negotiations as well as looking at "past practice".

Over on the north side, grievances were won and lost by what the negotiator's notes said and what past practice was, which, at times, was completely different than what was spelled out in the working agreement.

I've seen seemingly "no win" grievances pay up serious $$, while other "home run" grievances be decided completely in the company's favor.

That's why you take EVERYTHING to bat. You never know how it's going to go. AND that's why letting due process run it's course is so important.

This is really is a no-lose scenario, which is why the stonwalling makes everyone up north so suspicous. Take it to arbitration, you lose, and you can say the procedure was followed, and due process was given. You win, and some pilots get a nice bonus check.

But to actively stonewall the process and side with management against pilots that are constantly reminded that "we all one group now", to the point where a loyal contract admin, who would NEVER say anything about a sitting MEC chair, stands up and cries foul, makes a lot of people really, really wonder about what the heck is going on.

I'll say it again for emphasis: What is the harm in allowing this, and the few remaining northside grievances run their course?

Nu

That is unless your a North guy!;)

I would ask KW directly. He will answer your questions.
Schwanker

We're completely in agreement. I want JV protections, just like what you describe. I just don't want to get a sum of money in lieu of doing our portion of the flying.

As to the issue with nrt and nonrev treatment, wasn't something similiar happening two years ago or so in CDG but far more sinister in that AF nonrevs got on but DAL nonrevs were left behind?