"The Pinnacle pilots want your flying"
#11
Why dont you guys just give up your paychecks already? You're selling yourself out to that fat Chuck as it is. Get it over with and work for free already, it would be more dignified.
Your problems will not go away by taking pay cuts. I am amazed that nearly 20 years of degradation in our quality of work, pay, and life hasn't thought most pilots that lesson yet. It will NEVER stop until we, PILOTS, put a stop to it.
Your problems will not go away by taking pay cuts. I am amazed that nearly 20 years of degradation in our quality of work, pay, and life hasn't thought most pilots that lesson yet. It will NEVER stop until we, PILOTS, put a stop to it.
#12
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2008
Posts: 29
I hate to tell you but the only guys that will do any better with a union are the union leadership guys. The rest of you guys will get screwed the same with or without the union. Except now you'll get charged 2% every month from the union for the privilege.
Last edited by urahosr; 11-20-2008 at 04:25 PM.
#13
How long have you been in this business? How long have you worked under the PNCL corp/inc umbrella? Obviously not long if at all.... The 9E pilots are not out to get the 9L folks OR their flying! Look up Buddy Casey and tell me about his past business partners... The apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
#14
Banned
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: A-320
Posts: 6,929
Chuck that you?
On a serious note, The Colgan Pilots deserve better then what they have, a Union is a start.
Good luck fellas.
2 more posts until I reach 4,000 how sad haha
#16
It has been brought to our attention as well that during a meeting Buddy personally announced that we ARE exercising the options for 15 more Q400s with the first delivery June of 2010. It was not options it is confirmed orders with positive deliveries.
but....there has been no mention in the news at all or more importantly from pinnacle inc. They have in fact stated more recently that they will NOT exercise those options until they have codeshares that sign the dotted line that they want them.
It is interesting and certainly has the makings of a dangling carrot.
but....there has been no mention in the news at all or more importantly from pinnacle inc. They have in fact stated more recently that they will NOT exercise those options until they have codeshares that sign the dotted line that they want them.
It is interesting and certainly has the makings of a dangling carrot.
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2006
Position: Student Pilot
Posts: 849
That is the sad thing and I think they know it. The majority of us who know that their propaganda is not worth the paper it is printed on is not the problem. I project that this letter and the upcoming tactics will cause at least 20-50 minimum no votes. Even more reason we need overwhelming support on the yes side.
there are just some pilots that already have their minds made up, and there is no fact you can push in their face that will make them think twice. you can inform them over and over that we're not going to get stapled, and they wont believe you. i think we just need to concentrate on the ones that are still on the fence, or are having second thoughts due to buddy's lies.
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2006
Posts: 787
The funny thing is they don't even mention the other side of the street, which is that, down the road (fences would be in place for 2-3 years prob), 9L guys could bid on 9E flying and vice-versa...they make it sound like we would just suck up all your flying and put you on the curb, which is ludicrous and completely impossible under ALPA bylaws...speaking of ALPA bylaws, they also insinuate that we would try to staple you, which is also impossible under ALPA bylaws (and the new McCaskill legislation, if we were in diff. unions).
My money is on ALPA passing, the company wouldn't be merging our corporate HQ if they were going to keep pretending we're "different" companies.
Bottom line on 9E and 9L stuff is this--we have had similar-ish hiring reqs and upgrade times for the last year or two to my knowledge...so at least for people hired in the last year or two, why the heck would we have come to 9E if we wanted 9L bases, equipment, or routes??? I came to 9E for the base, if I wanted Houston or Newark, yeah, I woulda gone after Colgan or XJet, etc...nope, I want 9E bases...
My money is on ALPA passing, the company wouldn't be merging our corporate HQ if they were going to keep pretending we're "different" companies.
Bottom line on 9E and 9L stuff is this--we have had similar-ish hiring reqs and upgrade times for the last year or two to my knowledge...so at least for people hired in the last year or two, why the heck would we have come to 9E if we wanted 9L bases, equipment, or routes??? I came to 9E for the base, if I wanted Houston or Newark, yeah, I woulda gone after Colgan or XJet, etc...nope, I want 9E bases...
#20
The funny thing is they don't even mention the other side of the street, which is that, down the road (fences would be in place for 2-3 years prob), 9L guys could bid on 9E flying and vice-versa...they make it sound like we would just suck up all your flying and put you on the curb, which is ludicrous and completely impossible under ALPA bylaws...speaking of ALPA bylaws, they also insinuate that we would try to staple you, which is also impossible under ALPA bylaws (and the new McCaskill legislation, if we were in diff. unions).
My money is on ALPA passing, the company wouldn't be merging our corporate HQ if they were going to keep pretending we're "different" companies.
Bottom line on 9E and 9L stuff is this--we have had similar-ish hiring reqs and upgrade times for the last year or two to my knowledge...so at least for people hired in the last year or two, why the heck would we have come to 9E if we wanted 9L bases, equipment, or routes??? I came to 9E for the base, if I wanted Houston or Newark, yeah, I woulda gone after Colgan or XJet, etc...nope, I want 9E bases...
My money is on ALPA passing, the company wouldn't be merging our corporate HQ if they were going to keep pretending we're "different" companies.
Bottom line on 9E and 9L stuff is this--we have had similar-ish hiring reqs and upgrade times for the last year or two to my knowledge...so at least for people hired in the last year or two, why the heck would we have come to 9E if we wanted 9L bases, equipment, or routes??? I came to 9E for the base, if I wanted Houston or Newark, yeah, I woulda gone after Colgan or XJet, etc...nope, I want 9E bases...
Not sure who your source is but we are not trying to open up doors to the "other world"... Just protect from a whipsaw between us and enhance work rules, QOL, and security on BOTH sides. Colgan cannot get "stapled" regardless of any vote, only helped by being a fellow ALPA carrier. There would eventually be the possibility of one list but the fences are looked at as being permanent fences- you are either flying for 9E or 9L, not jumping around between the two. This is a fact that many are not quite understanding. There would NOT be 9E folks bidding the Q, nor would there be 9L folks bidding -900CA BUT there would be the opportunity to hold security in the event of furloughs or movement if one of the carriers becomes stagnant while the other explodes with growth (hypothetical). This notion that we are trying to take Colgan flying is ridiculous but buddy and the gang want nothing more than to keep a union off property because it removes some of MGMT's leverage. The Colgan folks have nothing to lose by going ALPA and the 9E folks get an enhanced "pillow factor" knowing we have an ally towards MGMT. The ballots go out on the 24th for these folks and they get to make the decision. ALPA has been working FOR PILOTS for over 75 years and 2% is a super cheap insurance plan. Heck, just in work rules I am sure they will be getting a raise so the 2% is a non-factor.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
B727DRVR
Cargo
14
08-22-2008 02:23 PM