Originally Posted by samc

For your first point, that the commercial agreement says nothing about representation, thats not true. Paragraph E of the agreement states: "FAPAInvest or its designee(s), successor(s) or assigns have the sole authority to represent the interest of the Participating Pilots in any matter related to this Agreement.".

Originally Posted by samc

With respect to your new BOD the agreement states that "FAPAInvest or another entity formed for the benefit of the Participating Pilots in connection with the Equity Participation will be allowed to designate a representative (with voting authority) on the Board of Directors of the Company" .

Originally Posted by samc

. While a good idea, this usurps representation by IBT or any union without approval of FAPAInvest or the pilots who are now represented by IBT. So your deal, carried over the threshold of the election, delineates power to FAPAInvest to bargain and negotiate for things pertaining to the LOA. That power should have gone to whoever won the election. .

Originally Posted by samc

As far as influence, you'll find I never said anything about it, but it could be argued that LOA 67 influenced FAPA pilots to vote for RPC as RPC claimed they would enforce LOA 67 if I remember correctly.

Originally Posted by FAULTPUSH

I meant representation in the sense that it's been exclusively used in this thread - as labor representation, not business representation.



Employees in labor groups have had seats on the board before. Once again, it's a business thing, not labor.



Contracts are contracts. The election happened after the LOA. FAPA had no obligation to author its LOA's with a mind to who might be representing the pilots down the road. You might as well claim that our scope was invalid because it "carried over the threshold of the election" into a conflict, or that the bidding language was faulted because it didn't take into account that there might be an IMSL down the road.





I hadn't read that, but IBT is under the same obligation to enforce the LOA, which they are failing to do. Our vote for RPC was because we wanted fair representation and protection, which IBT reps had openly said they would not do. The only reason IBT is fighting it (against the will of those that they are obligated to represent) is because they don't want to lose the dues and jobs. It's all about money, which is why IBT isn't pushing to have an election on the flight attendants - they are afraid they might lose that one.


So back to my question, which remains unanswered:

Who was influencing who to vote for who?

As far as I can tell, it's only illegal if the company was attempting to influence an employee group to vote for a particular reprentative, or lack of representation. That was not the case.

Originally Posted by F9 Driver

Maybe you missed the part where ALL of the F9 pilots voted for RPC and were still forced into the IBT. When you are the minority you are forced to bend to the will of the majority. Call it what you want, but if you're wondering why Frontier pilots aren't going to play nice, this is why.

Since having the IBT foisted upon us we have had NO attempt by the IBT leadership to welcome us or address our concerns. Exactly the opposite actually.

This is a zero sum game, or worse, so your gain is necessarily our loss - and vice versa (11/08/11 may be interesting). You should expect us to resist. The IBT walked up and hit us in the nose and is surprised that we are fighting back.

Originally Posted by zoooropa

Interesting take on the outcome. Your analysis of potter's blunders is relatively accurate.

Eischen has definitely made his decision, and if it helps you sleep at night you can say that the RAH pilots didn't "steal" F9 pilot seniority. But, the RAH pilots like to pick and choose the pieces of history that suit their needs.

1. They claim they had nothing to do with the acquisition of Midwest (that acquisition ended badly for all involved and offered no potential benefit for the RAH pilots, other than the opportunity to fly E190 aircraft that they never had the chance to fly prior to the acquisition of Midwest or Frontier).

2. They claim they personnally saved the Frontier pilots from liquidation, and now we owe them our souls. The Frontier acquisition ended with the potential of higher earnings and better quality of life for the RAH pilots, so rather than take the same position they took with the midwest acquisition, they were no longer innocent bystanders, they SAVED US. Now they want a reward for their heroic actions.

You can't have it both ways and be honest with yourselves. Either you had nothing to do with both acquisition or you have everything to do with both acquisitions. So which is it?

Don't talk to me about "inherent risk". How many FFD aircraft did RAH have in 2008? 220+

How many do they have today? 170

How many 190's did RAH have in 2008? 0

How many do they have today? 20?

No one has benefited more from this disaster than the RAH pilots. Keep telling yourself that you didn't steal anything. Are these the same IBT pilots that didn't want to include the Midwest pilots in the single carrier system? Why would they choose to leave a group of pilots out in the cold, perhaps because they were a very senior group of pilots and it would be very convienient if Midwest was not included in the Single Transportation System? Does that sound like the behavior of a group of pilots that was not intent on stealing something from another group? Don't take my word for it read the IBT filing:

"This letter constitutes the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Airline

Division’s (IBT) response to the carriers’ submission of October 26, 2010. The information contained in those responses—together with the evidence submitted here by the IBT—demonstrates that Chautauqua Airlines, Shuttle America,Republic Airlines, Frontier Airlines, and Lynx Aviation, the operating subsidiaries owned and controlled by Republic Airways Holdings, comprise a single transportation system for purposes of representation for the craft or class of Pilot. As explained below, however, Midwest Airlines is not a part of this single transportation system as it is no longer a carrier. Accordingly, the Board should issue a determination that the operating affiliates of RAH constitute a “single carrier” for the representation of Pilots and that single carrier does not include Midwest Airlines."

So, in your world, the RAH pilots have done nothing to effect the outcome of events and they are merely innocent bystanders. How fortunate, I get warm and fuzzy just thinking about their windfall.

In the Frontier pilot's world the RAH pilots, along with the IBT, have done everything imaginable to take everything they possibly can take from the Midwest and Frontier pilots.

Spare me your shangri-la happy version of events.

Originally Posted by sizzlechest

Except for the grievances they are handling for you... yep, they sure aren't lifting a finger for you....

Originally Posted by Airdale

I thought this thread was about the strike vote?

Originally Posted by TrojanCMH

87% have voted and still a good chunk of guys having trouble getting the log in information.

Originally Posted by F9 Driver

“Once the Frontier process is complete, the team will begin a similar process with all our key stakeholders to lower our costs on the ERJ fleet with the goal of improving our economics so that we can fly these products for many years to come,” he adds. Republic subsidiary Chautauqua Airlines operates 50 of the Embraer ERJ-145s."