IA1125

IBT 357 has had representatives at disciplinary hearings, but I haven't heard of any of their representatives changing the course of a hearing.

357 has done a good job in effectively pursuing grievances. I honestly don't know if that is due to the work of Marc or others at 357 or if the grievances were pretty cut and dried.

I don't doubt you, but I don't know of any arbitration that has occurred since RAH and F9 "became one."

Are you referring to "native" RAH issues that were arbitrated or have there been any arbitration on the F9 side?

Have the "arbitration awards" been in favor of 357 or F9 or have we lost all or some of them?

To the best of my knowledge, there hasn't even been a System Board of Adjustment hearing since IBT took over. That's not to say that 357 hasn't pursued issues that should have gone to SBA, it's just that there have been no issues requiring a SBA.

It is my understanding that 357 can't legally staff a System Board of Adjustment with F9 pilots, as required under the Frontier/FAPA CBA, because there aren't enough F9 pilots that are members of 357. If I'm wrong, please feel free to correct me.

And, of course, the LOA 67 litigation being pursued by the IBT is to the determent of the F9 pilots. We view the lawsuit as a purposeful, malicious threat to the career and future of every F9 pilot.

That is the primary reason 99% of F9 pilots are not members of 357. F9 pilots feel that 357 is using the money generated by our dues to harm F9 pilots, why pay any more than what is absolutely required (Financial Core Fee Objector) if the money is being used against us?

Just a perspective...

Still searching for those "certain words in a certain specific order that can explain all of this."

mikehoncho

Reading these posts from the RAHbros, it almost seems as if you like RAH?? But, we can see the truth. It's almost as absurd as your posts. RAH is a crappy regional like just about all of them are, maybe worse. If you are buying to the BS that CM and the IBT is selling you about making it a career airline, then maybe you deserve each other.

Ask yourself the question of why did you go to RAH? If your answer is anything but "to get as much jet PIC as possible and get the hell out" then you are a liar or an idiot. Don't act like you came there to stay. No one stays unless, they can't leave. Granted things are slow at the moment, but I'm sure none of you came RAH and thought your career was complete.

You say that you don't want the F9 job? Ok, I get it. F9, unlike RAH, is made up of pilots that want to be there. It may not be the most, in your words, "coveted" jobs in aviation. But what you fail to see is almost all of the pilots choose to go to F9, not because there was no other place to go. Before RAH ruined it, local DEN people did find it as a coveted position. A small local company is what some wanted.

Take some advice, quit acting like you actually give a crap about RAH, F9, or for sure the IBT. Do what a lot of F9 pilots have already done at the regionals, upgrade as soon as possible and get out. NOT ONE F9 pilot wants to take that from you. NO ONE at F9 wants to take your upgrade at RAH.

Or...you can hitch your cart to CM and see what that gets you.

3662forlife

So everybody wants to give me a hard time about spelling and grammer? If this is the best we can get from our union, I dont see how you guys can critasize.

Try and keep track of how many times you have to read each sentance or paragraph before it makes sense.


June 1, 2012

Brothers and Sisters:

A whole lot has happened since the last PDU, and yet there's not a lot of concrete information for us to pass on to you in this PDU. Typically, we refrain from sending out blast emails to our pilot group that contain more questions than answers, but we try to give what explanation we can during scheduled PDUs.

●Q400 introduction

That said, we'll jump right into the issue that has netted us the most phone calls over the past few weeks: the Q400s. As we discussed in the mid-May PDU, the previous ExCo attempted to get the company to negotiate Q400 pay rates when the aircraft were moved to the Republic Certificate late last fall—but the company stalled because they were “going away.” This Executive Board in January again requested (in both word and writing) during the January Ops Meeting to negotiate Q400 pay rates. The company again insisted that the equipment was leaving the fleet and thus wasn't a pressing issue. In February we inquired again as to the status of that process and were met with yet another stall tactic by the company. In March, the company detailed their plans to remove it from service and displace the pilots on it to other equipment—and again suggested that the Union drop the issue.

Of course, we all now know that roughly 7 weeks later the company announced plans to operate a total of 32 Q400 for United. After the announcement was made of the new service and the company's intent to provide United with a “seamless transition” to Republic for the Q400s the Union sent a letter to the company with two main points: 1) Don't even think about street captains, and 2) the pay should be no less than for the turbojets in a comparable seat band within our current CBA until a negotiated pay rate could be agreed upon. Why is the pay rate a big deal? Because the pay rate will drive the question of who will be allowed to bid on the new equipment.

So: who can bid on the Q400 Captain vacancies? Under our current CBA, and the way it has worked since 2003 has been that if you bid for, and are awarded a vacancy that you must take the position. There is no process for the Union or for a pilot to back out of a bid award. That said the company can (and has in the past) cancel all or part of a vacancy bid, but the choice to do so remains firmly in the hands of the company. In this case, however, the company has shown some willingness to be flexible and allow some first officers who had already been awarded captain positions on other equipment (mostly EMB-145), with the caveat that the Union has to allow it. Nobody has yet given up their 145 Captain vacancy, but some have been allowed to delay their 145 upgrade classes in order to possibly bid for the Q400, if that option becomes open to them.

Last week, the company met with the Union to begin discussing the myriad of issues that the expansion of Q400 flying brings to the surface. Let's be clear: had the company agreed to the Union's proposal for a new contract, these questions would be moot. The rules would be known for everyone involved, and the process would be significantly more orderly—and the transition of the airplanes to Republic significantly more seamless. As we are all painfully aware however, that is not the case. The company asked the union for some sort of agreement to address these issues immediately (as opposed to signing a new contract which we believe will fix the problems for good). Wayne Heller offered (among other dates) June 1st to discuss Q400 pay and other issues. Our Negotiating Committee accepted that date, and never received a response from Mr. Heller confirming the date. That said we heard from other members of management that Mr. Heller had indicated that they were meeting on June 1st, so we assumed that the meeting would indeed take place. In the interim, however, the Union was basically asked to make an agreement of some sort. The question to which the Union needed to answer was not entirely clear. Whether it was to agree on who could bid for the Q400, what the pay rates would be, or something else entirely—but the company did want an answer quickly.

Of course, the Union asked for some information to allow us to make an informed decision (and allow our pilots to make informed decisions themselves). Where will the airplanes be based? What sort of trips will the pilots expect there? How many pilots will end up in each base? What is happening to the current Q400 pilots who had been displaced in April? How does the company expect to train the volume of pilots required to provide the seamless transition promised to United? To make a long story short: there were no clear answers to those questions.

This is a common practice of Republic. Bryan Bedford ran off and made an agreement with United, made promises to United, and then returned to the office expecting everyone else to comply with the deal he unrealistically made. If the company was really concerned with a seamless transition, they would have discussed this with the Union the moment they suspected this expansion would become a reality. However, there can still be a seamless transition, but it requires the help of the Union and the pilot group to make Bedford's dream a reality. Of course, a collaborative relationship has been entirely elusive for the Union to have with Republic management—indeed Bedford has laughed with his FAPA cronies about the whole idea of cooperative labor relations. But we remain hopeful that perhaps THIS will be the event that convinces Republic management to deal with us as professionals who are the biggest asset the company could ever hope for.

That brings us to the few facts that we know: Article 21 of our CBA governs rates of pay for new aircraft. The company is allowed to enter a new type into service without first having a negotiated pay rate (even though the Q400 isn't entirely a new type, but is being treated as such), but shall pay no less than the rate for an aircraft with comparable power plant (turbojet OR turboprop) than the seat bands already found in our CBA. The Q400 configured with 74 seats would thus fall into the 60 to 78-seat category. It is the Union's contention that, unless a negotiated pay rate is in place, paying less than the 60 to 78 seat turbojet rate would violate the contract. So if the Company believes a pay rate below the 60 to 78-seat rate is appropriate, it needs to reach agreement with the Union on that issue.

So, what happens during the meeting on June 1 (today)? Just about anything is on the table. The Union isn't opposed to working on an agreement that addresses the company's issues, as long as it also respects a pilot’s seniority. There is no such thing as a “cost neutral” way to address everyone's concerns, but we believe an agreement can be reached that reasonable addresses the needs of the pilot group and the Company.

The NC will put out an update regarding the June 1 meeting as quickly as possible. We delayed this update until the PDU simply because there's not any concrete answer to the questions pilots have been asking us. But this update should at least explain where we are in that process.

●Moving on to the next topic: the LOA 67 lawsuit depositions have begun. We can't say much about them at this point, other than the fact that they began, and there are more depositions scheduled. Those deposed this week are Bryan Bedford and Ron Henson. The attorneys are pleased with the results. As we have in the past, updates shall be sent out as soon as we are able to update the pilot group with information about this lawsuit.

●Contract Negotiations have appeared to be stagnant.

The mediators simply didn't have time to meet during the month of May. That does not mean that nothing has happened on the negotiations front. After the Unity Conference, the full weight and resources of IBT are being turned towards dealing with the problems at Republic. It's no magic button, and it takes time for us to see results, but those wheels are indeed turning. Among other things Airline Division Director David Bourne met with the NMB to discuss our case and impress upon them the tenuous labor situation that exists at Republic. The company has attempted, and resorted to self-help, and solely by the restraint of the Union has there been no damaging response. We believe that we are moving to a position where the NMB must release us to self-help unless there is a dramatic change in the Company’s position. RAH have had our proposals in hand for over a year. They have heard the explanations of why they can afford to agree to them and why the pilot group cannot continue under our current CBA. We voluntarily agreed to leave all but four sections as they are. We have come to an agreement on Article 1 Scope. We have said nearly everything that can be said about the others. Our pilots aren't going to suddenly decide that it's OK with them to keep the current reserve and scheduling rules, nor will you find our group deciding that topping the pay scale for first officers at roughly $32,000 a year is suddenly acceptable.

●Displacements and moving expenses.

Another topic that bears repeating is displacements: some of our pilots in the MKE A319 base are about to be displaced out of the base. Prior to the representation election, FAPA and the company agreed to use the “CHQ-IBT agreement” Article 5 rules regarding displacement expenses, including any improvements that might be made to the CHQ-IBT agreement. Because many of the pilots in the MKE A319 base are unlikely to be familiar with the expenses they are entitled to during a displacement, here's the basics:

• The company will pay up to $7,000 for you to move from your old domicile to your new domicile.

• Included in that $7000 is a professional mover to move up to 10,000 lbs. of household goods, mileage for the pilot to drive 2 vehicles to the new domicile, food and lodging incurred while moving to the new domicile, $200 for utility termination fees, 2 months rent if you have to break a lease, and the pay protection from any trips you are required to be removed from in order to move.

• 4 consecutive days off for a move up to 700 miles, and an additional day for each 350 miles above that. Moving days shall not be during the weeks of Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Years. Moving days shall be coordinated with the Chief Pilot.

• If you elect not to move, you are entitled to $250 for not causing the company to incur the moving expenses set out above.

• You have 1 year to decide if you are moving or not, and submit the expenses to the company.

Whether you work under the Frontier CBA or the Republic (CHQ-IBT) CBA, it's not a bad thing to be more familiar with the rules surrounding displacements. The fact is most of us have been displaced by RAH at some time, and it is a virtual certainty that more of us will in the future as business evolves.

●Republic DO attacks SPC member.

On an unpleasant note, a number of our pilots have had the displeasure of a visit from Republic DO Jeff Davis to recent training classes. Rather than limiting his statements to matters appropriate to a re-current training class, Davis has engaged in laughable lying concerning SPC member and Republic FO Erick Miles. You will recall that Davis, no doubt acting as a stooge for senior management, called Miles in for a disciplinary hearing back in March in retaliation for Erick's involvement in the Local's launch of the RAHContractNow.org website. Davis' action was blatantly illegal. The Local called the Company on it and management ran like a scalded cat away from Davis' illegal act. Instead, the Company filed its frivolous lawsuit against the Local--which we expect to be dismissed by the fed-eral court in Indianapolis soon.

Now Davis is lying to recurrent classes by accusing Miles of fabricating that he was called in for disci-pline. It's hard to decide which is more pathetic--Davis' lying or that he thinks pilots would believe a liar. The facts are that Davis did retaliate against Miles and when Local attorney Marc Anderson called the Company's outside attorney at Ford & Harrison to challenge the illegal action, the Company quickly backed down.

Apart from Davis' lying, his conduct violates Company policy by publicly discussing disciplinary mat-ters. It's another example of a lack of professionalism. And it's yet another example of why pilots at Republic have no confidence in Davis.

We hardly need to tell you not to believe the ridiculous lies spouted by some in management. But this Local will vigorously defend all of our volunteers and representatives. We showed that in March when we forced the Company to back down from its retaliation against Miles; we are doing it now in again responding to management attacks; and we will continue to defend all our pilots in the future.

●The final topic we wanted to address is the other forms of leverage being exerted on RAH to drive them to treating their workers fairly, honestly, and equitably. On June 8, there will be hand billing and informational picketing activities at multiple airports across the country. (IAD, CMH, PIT, IND, ORD, EWR, SFO, LAX, DEN, IAH) This is bigger than the pilots, bigger than the Local, and bigger than the IBT. We are FAR from alone in our problems with RAH management, and this is an opportunity to get that word out. RAH is perilously close to hurting large numbers of the travelling public due to their intransigence dealing with the pilots, mechanics, flight attendants, customer service representatives, dispatchers, etc. In short: labor. If you provide the actual work that makes the company prosper, the company has little respect for your contribution and that lack of respect is affecting their operation. We simply want to use this opportunity to tell our real customers (the passengers) about these problems. We ask that you coordinate with the Local Executive Board to participate in these important actions to inform the public of the Company’s failure to fairly and properly treat its employees. You will receive further information from our SPC committee shortly.

In Unity,

Executive Board – Local 357

slumav505

Can you please go back under the rock from which you came? You complain a out sentence structure? Are you one of the 20 guys who took the bait and are now FAPA lanyard wearing fools?

WeaselBoy

Sigh... Here we go again...

Although, there are quite a few punctuation errors and a strong tendency use run on sentences, it is pretty coherent.

But, maybe the big words threw you off?

intransigent: characterized by refusal to compromise or to abandon an extreme position or attitude

Also, when you criticize someone, make sure you at least spell that word right. Doing that will make your grammar argument a little stronger.

WeaselBoy

Since someone else started a parable on another thread, I'll try my hand it.

Several years ago while in college I got a crappy apartment to stay in. Single bedroom, stained carpets, refrigerator that Jeffery Dahmer may have used for storage,ect.

I spent about two years there while finishing up my degree. Slowly, over time, I got the landlord to replace the carpets. Later, I spent two days in old clothes tearing apart and cleaning the refrigerator to the point that cadaver dogs stopped being able to use it for training. One weekend the girlfriend and I painted all the rooms.

By the time I graduated it was a pretty decent place. Nice enough that my brother wanted to rent it the next semester.

There are quite a few Midwest guys, including CM, that this will be their last airline. There are people that will be here after I upgrade and leave. I don't think making this a better place for my fellow pilots is too unreasonable of a goal.

mikehoncho

Weasel...after reading a number of your posts I thought you had it figured it. I guess I'm wrong. You'll see someday. You say that the IBt is the lessor of two evils yet you are totally behind the cause. I respect the point that you want to make things better for those who follow in your path. I wanted the same for those who followed me at my other airlines. It's a great goal. But it's the same bs everywhere....you are at a regional. I was at a regional. They could give a rat's a-hole about you and at the end of the day you will feel the same. They use you and you use them for a lot of flight time and exit asap. Look around at other regionals. Tell me how many are "great" places to be? I went to AWAC when it was the place to be. Call some of those guys and talk to them about how much they love it now. It's a step. Reading the letters from CM, it's amazing how you would think he's fighting a noble cause for those who follow behind you. IBT cares about one thing....THE IBT.

Why don't you look at your leader's background before you jump off the cliff following him.

Question Weasel...in your nice little apartment story....did your neighbor fix up his apartment? Maybe he was a few years ahead of your work and his was nicer than yours. Did you take it over and claim credit for the hard work he did? Sound familiar?

WeaselBoy

Thanks!

Ohhhh... Nevermind...
Stop toying with my emotions!

Trust me, I am highly critical of the IBT. But, I voice criticisms within my organization, with my actual name attached to it, to the people who can address it. Stuff may not get sorted out the way I think it should have, but I have always gotten an answer from them.

Not really understanding your logic here.

You say that regionals are all soul-crushing pits of dispair where the companies do not care for their workers. And, I agree. And that is why I have no qualms trying my best to improve it. After all, I've got nothing else to do while I'm here.

Right now the Teamsters at the national level have a vested interest in our contract because they are trying to poach some of ALPA's the airlines that are disfranchised them. They have dumped quite a bit of money into us with the STS, IMSL, and contract negotiations then we would have been able to afford on our own, even with the much maligned assessment.

I'm familiar with the criticisms the Midwest guys have with CM. I've flown with more than one MW guy that has their own opinion of him.

Let me just say, "My Negotiation Committee Speaks For Me, For Now"

With all the rocks you guys are throwing at the 357, no one has stepped to do anything. You are too busy gambling that staying seperate will give you a clean break later on.

Nope. My neighbors where mostly younger than me and busy partying their way through their parent co signed student loans. Didn't stop me from drinking a few beers on the back porches with them, though.

Bolo

Weasal Boy, You must have graduated from Purdue? Fast track program? Do you wear your hat to and your chest held up high walking down the concourse?

Do you really think any F9 pilot would have been voted in to ANY of your E-board positions?

3662, I have some FAPA lanyards in my V-file waiting for you! Good informative stuff you bring to the forum. Keep it up!

"Of course, a collaborative relationship has been entirely elusive for the Union to have with Republic management—indeed Bedford has laughed with his FAPA cronies about the whole idea of cooperative labor relations."
Your union President(CM) really does have F9 pilots interests at heart as well. Makes feel like joining as a full member. NOT!
Cooperative labor relations worked for us in roughly a years time. How many years in counting has it worked for you?

mikehoncho

They have dumped quite a bit of money into us with the STS, IMSL, and contract negotiations then we would have been able to afford on our own, even with the much maligned assessment.


Again you want to say what the IBT has done. Look what they have done to F9 and half of your pilot group with the STS and IMSL. But we all should just give in and know they want the best for everyone??? You believe that? F9 pilots should help fund this?

Right now the Teamsters at the national level have a vested interest in our contract because they are trying to poach some of ALPA's the airlines that are disfranchised them.

Weasel....this sentence...I want to thank you for the best laugh I have had in weeks. IBT is going to poach some ALPA carriers?? Maybe invade, rape and pilage..but poach?? Hahahahaha.

Also...you said those like CM are probably at their final airline (for him I would say that's the truth) and they are looking to change RAH. Wouldn't you agree that someone like him would like the best paying position at that last airline he will work at? So the Airbus, you say no one there covets, is another bs post you made, right? I'm sure he covets the pay instead of his $36/hr.