Airline Pilot Central Forums - Hiring / training

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Frontier (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/frontier/)

- - Hiring / training (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/frontier/119576-hiring-training.html)

Anyone going to interview next March 30th?? Do you have any last minute advice before the D-DAy?
TIA

Quote:

Originally Posted by Popeye0537 (Post 3395989)

He's not lying.....
You're on probation and it's in the Unions interest to follow the CBA and not allow the company to have full autonomy on hotels and who gets them. If allowed it sets a future precedent in negotiations.

https://i.ibb.co/v3smD9b/AE17-A2-FC-...D2-AF656-C.jpg

Oh, he isn’t LYING, what he’s doing is making a statement against interest so that in a civil suit by new hires as a group their getting damages from the union is a slam-dunk.Same for complaining to the NLRB that your union has failed in its obligation to treat you fairly.

Quote:

THE DUTY OF FAIR REPRESENTATION
I. The Origin of the Duty of Fair Representation
A. Steele v. Louisville & Nashville R.R., 323 U.S. 192, 15 LRRM 708 (1944).
The Supreme Court, in a case involving the Railway Labor Act, held that the Act implicitly expresses the aim of Congress to impose on the exclusive representative the duty to exercise fairly the power conferred upon it on behalf of all those for whom it acts, without hostile discrimination against them. See also, Tunstall v. Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen, 323 U.S. 210, 15 LRRM 715 (1944).
B. Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman, 345 U.S. 330,31 LRRM 2548 (1952).
The Supreme Court applied the fair representation analysis developed initially under the RLA to a case arising under the National Labor Relations Act. This case, like the previous RLA cases, dealt with a Union’s power to negotiate a contract. See also, Syres v. Oil Workers Int’l Union, 350 U.S. 892, 37 LRRM 2068 (1955).
C. Conley v. Gibson, 355 U.S. 41, 41 LRRM 2089 (1957).
The Supreme Court, in a case involving a claim under the RLA against a Union for alleged racial discrimination in the application of a nondiscriminatory contract, held that the duty set out in Steele to represent all fairly did not come to an abrupt end with the making of the contract between the Union and the Employer. The Court held that the Union could no more unfairly discriminate in carrying out its grievance functions than it could in negotiating a contract. See also, Humphrey v. Moore, 375 U.S. 335, 55 LRRM 2031 (1964).
II. General Standards for Breach of the Duty of Fair Representation
A. Humphrey v. Moore, 375 U.S. 335, 55 LRRM 2031 (1964).
The exclusive agent’s statutory authority to represent all members of a designated unit includes a statutory obligation to serve the interests of all members without hostility or discrimination toward any, to exercise its discretion with complete good faith and honesty, and to avoid arbitrary conduct.
B. Vaca v. Sipes, 386 U.S. 171,190, 64 LRRM 2369, 2376 (1967).
“A breach of the statutory duty of fair representation occurs only when a Union’s conduct toward a member of the collective bargaining unit is arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.”
C. United Steelworkers of America v. Rawson, 495 U.S. 362,134 LRRM 2153 (1990)

How junior is PHL...what are the chances of getting it right out of training?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3396095)

You are APC's "Man of La Mancha".

Quote:

Originally Posted by BiffleBalls (Post 3396218)

You are APC's "Man of La Mancha".

Seriously, would you want to take this to a hearing AFTER the alleged public statement? It’s the epitome of unequal representation to benefit people who don’t personally suffer from it. It’s the kind of thing where you lose in the court of public opinion even if you sneak it by in a court of law on some technicality.

Enforcing the contract my @$$. Does anyone seriously believe if the company unilaterally declared 25% profit sharing the union would be fighting to ‘enforce the contract’ rather than taking the money and running? I say, take everything they give you AND everything you can negotiate, FOR EVERYBODY.

We are not responsible to GIVE ANYTHING….. if the company wants to house and pay newbies that’s on THEM

So if and when joint CBA negotiations happens, and the company even mentions credit for new hire pay or motels, they can POUND SAND!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Excargodog (Post 3396226)

The first line in the main body paragraph you attached states, Your union has the duty to represent all employees. Not much of a technicality, this is where the argument simply falls flat on its face. The company (at least as of a 2 weeks ago) has not been willing to meet with the union on this subject, thus the union has been unable to represent them. Just stating law vs public opinion...nothing unequal here when they aren't even contacted before the company implements changes to the CBA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by catrapilot (Post 3396086)

Anyone going to interview next March 30th?? Do you have any last minute advice before the D-DAy?
TIA

Everything you need to know is on Aviation Interviews.

Anyone have any idea how big the March class is?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Buspilot99 (Post 3396604)

Anyone have any idea how big the March class is?

officially starts tomorrow, so should know then....planned vs reality, will be curious to see if somebody in that class posts the number, I'm sure they will.