What now for Skywest
11-04-2010 | 05:00 AM
#51
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
You're taking a risk as it is by staying at the regional level regardless of your seniority. If you think you're safe where you're at, I suggest you take a page from history. There's absolutely nothing that says that Skywest won't retire existing frames at the new improved ASA post CPA, and give the growth to non-union cheaper Skywest labor. While that scenario might be years away baring the current protections that the XJT MEC is negotiating for the joint company, it's still a very vivid option.
Reality check here: You (like many of us) work for a contractor, and you're at just as much risk sitting here at the top of the B scale, as you are at the bottom of the A scale.
The word is risk, if you believe you're impervious, then I suggest you try a different line of work as you will probably hurt yourself. Someone with the degree of experience you claim to have would know better.
Reality check here: You (like many of us) work for a contractor, and you're at just as much risk sitting here at the top of the B scale, as you are at the bottom of the A scale.
The word is risk, if you believe you're impervious, then I suggest you try a different line of work as you will probably hurt yourself. Someone with the degree of experience you claim to have would know better.
11-04-2010 | 05:01 AM
#52
Line Holder
Joined: Mar 2010
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
Ford v. ALPA and Cooksey v. ALPA were both settled Oct. 23, 2007, no? The settlement included adding new language to ALPA policy, including:
ALPA would have to violate their own rules for this line of reasoning to have merit. ASA ALPA has been, and continues, to review its scope goals between themselves and mainline groups. UAL and CAL ALPA have been, and continue to, review their scope goals with regional groups. Currently, ALPA's Collective Bargaining Committee and ALPA's Fee For Departure Committee preform some of this work. I know you know this, just reviewing it for everyone on the forum who isn't familiar.
I suspected the "I'm a Supreme Court Justice" line, or "I'm the Solicitor General" (Funny, I even put it in my response, at first, to beat you to it, but didn't think you'd take it that far - should have known, huh?). Alas, even armchair attorneys such as myself know that no sitting justice is an active pilot for ASA (one of many other claims you've made).
So, first it was 'status quo wins in court'. Then it was 'everyone is an armchair lawyer'. Now it's 'repeat the RJDC strategy'.
Good luck with your litigation.
- scope review between mainline and regional negotiating committees
- required discussion of goals by both mainline and regional prior to bargaining
- review by the national committee of scope goals
ALPA would have to violate their own rules for this line of reasoning to have merit. ASA ALPA has been, and continues, to review its scope goals between themselves and mainline groups. UAL and CAL ALPA have been, and continue to, review their scope goals with regional groups. Currently, ALPA's Collective Bargaining Committee and ALPA's Fee For Departure Committee preform some of this work. I know you know this, just reviewing it for everyone on the forum who isn't familiar.
I suspected the "I'm a Supreme Court Justice" line, or "I'm the Solicitor General" (Funny, I even put it in my response, at first, to beat you to it, but didn't think you'd take it that far - should have known, huh?). Alas, even armchair attorneys such as myself know that no sitting justice is an active pilot for ASA (one of many other claims you've made).
So, first it was 'status quo wins in court'. Then it was 'everyone is an armchair lawyer'. Now it's 'repeat the RJDC strategy'.
Good luck with your litigation.
