Originally Posted by YAKflyer
(Post 191081)
The issue is not getting a guilty person something they don't deserve, the issue is making sure the individual gets a defense and is not falsely terminated.
Delta had 10 flight attendants and one pilot fired for failing drug tests (all out of the same base) a few years ago. It was a huge fight and Delta did not want to give loyal good employees the benefit of the doubt that all of the sudden these folks all had the same problem. It took an extensive investigation that was very expensive, but in the end it was proven that the lab was bad. How would you like to work someplace that used a bad lab (unknowingly in Delta's case) and fired you for a false positive? Your record permanently blemished so you can never replace what was lost. If these folks were SKW employees it would have never been fixed. |
Originally Posted by YAKflyer
(Post 191081)
The issue is not getting a guilty person something they don't deserve, the issue is making sure the individual gets a defense and is not falsely terminated.
Delta had 10 flight attendants and one pilot fired for failing drug tests (all out of the same base) a few years ago. It was a huge fight and Delta did not want to give loyal good employees the benefit of the doubt that all of the sudden these folks all had the same problem. It took an extensive investigation that was very expensive, but in the end it was proven that the lab was bad. How would you like to work someplace that used a bad lab (unknowingly in Delta's case) and fired you for a false positive? Your record permanently blemished so you can never replace what was lost. If these folks were SKW employees it would have never been fixed. |
Originally Posted by Go Ugly Early
(Post 191710)
Did the pilot get his job back? Did the F/A's get their jobs back? And Delta's F/A's are still not union. What does that tell you?
I doubt that any of the individuals could have afforded the legal bill that would have been generated in a legal challenge and no lawyer was going to take a contingency case fighting a case where it is someone's word against lab results. After ALPA disclosed the facts some of the individuals went on to file wrongful termination suits to try to get more than just their jobs and back wages back. The point is all of them would have lost if ALPA was not there to take on their case. What does that tell you? |
Originally Posted by YAKflyer
(Post 192797)
The Delta MEC took on the cause of the F/A's (out of moral out rage) along with the pilot and all were offered their jobs back. The reason the F/A's got their jobs back was because even though they were not members of, and ALPA had no responsibility to represent them, ALPA allowed them to ride the coat tails of the pilot. If ALPA had not pursued this case the F/A's would have never gotten their jobs back and would have been branded with the stigma of failing a drug test along with the resulting employment exclusions for the rest of their lives.
I doubt that any of the individuals could have afforded the legal bill that would have been generated in a legal challenge and no lawyer was going to take a contingency case fighting a case where it is someone's word against lab results. After ALPA disclosed the facts some of the individuals went on to file wrongful termination suits to try to get more than just their jobs and back wages back. The point is all of them would have lost if ALPA was not there to take on their case. What does that tell you? Great post Yak, I don't think that a lot of people realize the average attorney want 1,000 dollars just to talk to you. Then you get billed for everything from Xerox to his parking. In this case you would have the added bill of the investigative team who research the lab. An airline (any airline) has attorney on retainer if not in house counsel. There is no way you could afford to fight a major company. For those of you who don't want an ALPA attorney, put one on retainer now, because if you don't have one and find yourself needing one, you're toast. Stick |
Originally Posted by YAKflyer
(Post 192797)
The Delta MEC took on the cause of the F/A's (out of moral out rage) along with the pilot and all were offered their jobs back. The reason the F/A's got their jobs back was because even though they were not members of, and ALPA had no responsibility to represent them, ALPA allowed them to ride the coat tails of the pilot. If ALPA had not pursued this case the F/A's would have never gotten their jobs back and would have been branded with the stigma of failing a drug test along with the resulting employment exclusions for the rest of their lives.
I doubt that any of the individuals could have afforded the legal bill that would have been generated in a legal challenge and no lawyer was going to take a contingency case fighting a case where it is someone's word against lab results. After ALPA disclosed the facts some of the individuals went on to file wrongful termination suits to try to get more than just their jobs and back wages back. The point is all of them would have lost if ALPA was not there to take on their case. What does that tell you? |
I'm still not entirely convinced that ALPA was the only resolution to this problem.
But be that as it may, ALPA sounds like a really expensive insurance policy for issues that probably won't even affect most people. |
Originally Posted by SharkAir
(Post 193284)
I'm still not entirely convinced that ALPA was the only resolution to this problem.
But be that as it may, ALPA sounds like a really expensive insurance policy for issues that probably won't even affect most people. Aeromedical alone is worth the dues. |
Originally Posted by SharkAir
(Post 193284)
I'm still not entirely convinced that ALPA was the only resolution to this problem.
But be that as it may, ALPA sounds like a really expensive insurance policy for issues that probably won't even affect most people. |
Originally Posted by Sanchez
(Post 193407)
If that's too expensive for you, then for your sake I hope you never bend metal.
|
Originally Posted by SharkAir
(Post 193284)
ALPA sounds like a really expensive insurance policy for issues that probably won't even affect most people.
All insurance is really expensive if you don't use it, but priceless if you do. |
What's in it for me?
"..issues that probably won't even affect most people" will certainly affect some people, and they are your brother and sister pilots. We should support medical insurance for pilots' families, even if we have no intention of getting married. We should support furloughed pilots even if we are too senior to ever be furloughed ourselves. A moral principle of unionism, too often forgotten, is that we help each other where we can, without calculating the payback.
|
Originally Posted by tomgoodman
(Post 193578)
We should support furloughed pilots even if we are too senior to ever be furloughed ourselves. A moral principle of unionism, too often forgotten, is that we help each other where we can, without calculating the payback.
Not surprising why (Pilot concessions to help out the company only to get screwed later) . . . sort of makes one NOT want to help. However, what you and I are referring to has to do more with an "Individual's" choice vs. a Group choice. |
Well Im going to be in LGA later this month supporting the Colgan pilots with other ALPA pilots, anybody esle wanna come and show their support?
|
All times are GMT -8. The time now is 04:54 AM. |
User Alert System provided by
Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) -
vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands