Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   Republic guys... (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/53471-republic-guys.html)

ToiletDuck 09-19-2010 05:54 PM


Originally Posted by Trogdor (Post 872913)
This from a guy who is stealing jobs from the Midwest pilots. You're a real class act.

Sorry but people are only making sure their contract is followed to the letter. Just because you say it doesn't make it so.

HawkerJet 09-19-2010 08:29 PM


Originally Posted by sizzlechest (Post 872866)
Lynx pilots are not on the RAH SL yet. They cannot fly the Q if it is on the YX certificate. They should then refuse to fly the Q that they are not qualified to do. There are no provisions to have 2 separate pilot groups under in airline certificate. For Lynx to fly that is divisive and illegal and wrong.

The Q's are on the Lynx certificate, we are the only ones flying them and we are qualified. What you've said show's no knowledge about what has happened to the Midwest pilots. Easy to fix, eliminate one group, no more conflict. Since you have no dog in this fight by your own admission, disappear.


Originally Posted by ToiletDuck (Post 873034)
I've read with my own eyes a .pdf copy of the unions official response to the company wanting to do this. Perhaps you should do some digging yourself.

TD is it possible for the IBT to say one thing and do another?

I for one would like to know what the IBT's response really was.

Oskeewowow 09-19-2010 09:16 PM


Originally Posted by HawkerJet (Post 873083)

TD is it possible for the IBT to say one thing and do another?

I for one would like to know what the IBT's response really was.

Possible sure, but a signed & dated letter to the company saying "no we disagree with you and you are violating our CBA"???

Listen, I'm no fan of the IBT in general but I at least believe the new leadership that they're fighting this. The new EXCO has shown good communication & a no bullspit attitude.

Killer51883 09-20-2010 05:22 AM

from what is on our union board it sounds like the company mentioned something about bringing Q's onto the RW certificate but didnt explain what all was going to be involved. The Union said we would be interesting in discussing the situation, and the company apparently took that as do what ever you want. the Union has since sent a letter saying that they did not approve what is going on and that the company is once again violating several sections of our contract.

HawkerJet 09-20-2010 07:20 AM


Originally Posted by Killer51883 (Post 873137)
from what is on our union board it sounds like the company mentioned something about bringing Q's onto the RW certificate but didnt explain what all was going to be involved. The Union said we would be interesting in discussing the situation, and the company apparently took that as do what ever you want. the Union has since sent a letter saying that they did not approve what is going on and that the company is once again violating several sections of our contract.

That sounds realistic to me at least. The source was official on my end, no reason to doubt the validity of the claim. The timeline the company wants this all to happen is rapid to say the least. I'm also interested in how the FAA is going about the process.

sizzlechest 09-20-2010 10:44 AM


Originally Posted by HawkerJet (Post 873083)
The Q's are on the Lynx certificate, we are the only ones flying them and we are qualified. What you've said show's no knowledge about what has happened to the Midwest pilots. Easy to fix, eliminate one group, no more conflict. Since you have no dog in this fight by your own admission, disappear.



TD is it possible for the IBT to say one thing and do another?

I for one would like to know what the IBT's response really was.


you are qualified...? What is your RAH SL #? I wasn't aware the arbitrator had decided.... cuz he hasn't. You are not qualified to fly the Q at YX.... is it really that hard to understand? As far as Midwest, none of those planes were xfered over to any RAH carrier. They were returned. The Midwest thing does not apply here. I can comment on all I like... that's what's fun about BBSs! :D

SUX4U 09-20-2010 11:02 AM


Originally Posted by sizzlechest (Post 873310)
you are qualified...? What is your RAH SL #? I wasn't aware the arbitrator had decided.... cuz he hasn't. You are not qualified to fly the Q at YX.... is it really that hard to understand? As far as Midwest, none of those planes were xfered over to any RAH carrier. They were returned. The Midwest thing does not apply here. I can comment on all I like... that's what's fun about BBSs! :D

You say you are not a RAH guy, but damn... for an outsider you sure seem to have alot of knowledge and passion of the inner workings regarding the scenarios being played out...

Yabadaba 09-20-2010 11:21 AM

Yup... my guess is if he isn't with RAH he is with Chautauqua, or Shuttle America. LOL.

sizzlechest 09-20-2010 02:11 PM

I have several old college friends there who I stay in good touch with. Almost everybody in the industry is watching this thing closely.

ToiletDuck 09-20-2010 08:46 PM


Originally Posted by HawkerJet (Post 873083)
TD is it possible for the IBT to say one thing and do another?

I for one would like to know what the IBT's response really was.

What's so difficult here? The letter from the union to the company, as well as the letter from the company to the union are posted for us to see. You can't make moves like this based on verbal consent. Nothing was ever signed. They weren't for and never have been.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:45 AM.


Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands