Airline Pilot Central Forums
Page 3 of 3
1
2
3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   Holding ASA and XJT MEC's accountable (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/73925-holding-asa-xjt-mecs-accountable.html)

todd1200 03-27-2013 01:03 PM
Term limits, required line currency, and greater transparency (pay, expenditures) would be nice. I'd like to see some of PA's (ATL captain rep) ideas implemented, but I have no idea what the process is like.

Captain Tony 03-29-2013 05:23 AM
Originally Posted by NoHandHold (Post 1380686)
I agree whole heartedly...I seek to end divisive rhetoric....Captain Tony needs to pipe down.
Oh yeah... I'm the problem here... scapegoat much? :rolleyes:

Captain Tony 03-29-2013 05:27 AM
Originally Posted by Good Rate (Post 1380690)
Tony...That's not a real solution. There are great benefits of a successful merger for both pilot groups and the company as well. It would be silly for us to not work toward one pilot group.

One problem is that the MECs become detached from the pilot groups. The negotiations quickly turn to ****ing match with the only interest is winning the battle and the desires of the pilot group falls by the wayside.

Maybe another option could be to increase the number of members of negotiating group. Why do we have a such a small group representing such a large number of pilots. More members could equal a more fair representation of the pilot group. Then a 2/3 majority wins the issue and we move on

Just trying to think of solutions....
Really? What possible solution exists now that we would have no choice but to take concessions in order to obtain a JCBA? The XJT MEC took all of those non pay issues to the arbitrator just to undermine our negotiating position. You are right in that they just want to "win". Both MECs are no different than the idiots in Congress. But now that the company is holding an award for a CRJ-900 rate $2-$10 less, dual qual, and non seat based pay, do you think they're going to turn around and say "just kidding!"? We either accept that deal, or the company keeps us separate and slowly shuts down the ASA side. I prefer the latter.

Captain Tony 03-29-2013 05:30 AM
Originally Posted by JoeyMeatballs (Post 1380713)
In all fairness, mgmt also said Flightline as it stands currently is never going to be in a JCBA.
Give it a rest Joe. You're like the college freshman who still attends the high school prom just because he can't let go.

And what you said isn't even really true. Management had previously said they hated vacation low, but other than that, didn't care what PBS system we used as long as it fit the cost parameters. Then McK showed Courtney H how much money SmartPref could save her by constraining the line values, and the company was sold. Another hand grenade he lobbed into these "negotiations".

McNugent 03-29-2013 08:45 AM
Originally Posted by todd1200 (Post 1380746)
Term limits, required line currency, and greater transparency (pay, expenditures) would be nice. I'd like to see some of PA's (ATL captain rep) ideas implemented, but I have no idea what the process is like.
I like this. Required line currency would maybe keep the office guys a little more grounded, and in touch with what we deal with on a daily basis.

Greater transparency on expenditures would also be nice. It would really be interesting to see where some of our 2% goes. I know we have a right to see for ourselves where this money is going. There is actually a group of Amereican Eagle pilots auditing their own union reps, and finding some interesting things. I think this needs to be done here also. It's our money, we have every right to see how it's being spent.

All in all this stuff takes time and know how. Like you I have no idea what the process is like, which is part of the problem.

Nevets 03-29-2013 09:28 AM
Originally Posted by Good Rate (Post 1380690)
Tony...That's not a real solution. There are great benefits of a successful merger for both pilot groups and the company as well. It would be silly for us to not work toward one pilot group.

One problem is that the MECs become detached from the pilot groups. The negotiations quickly turn to ****ing match with the only interest is winning the battle and the desires of the pilot group falls by the wayside.

Maybe another option could be to increase the number of members of negotiating group. Why do we have a such a small group representing such a large number of pilots. More members could equal a more fair representation of the pilot group. Then a 2/3 majority wins the issue and we move on

Just trying to think of solutions....
Really? What possible solution exists now that we would have no choice but to take concessions in order to obtain a JCBA? The XJT MEC took all of those non pay issues to the arbitrator just to undermine our negotiating position. You are right in that they just want to "win". Both MECs are no different than the idiots in Congress. But now that the company is holding an award for a CRJ-900 rate $2-$10 less, dual qual, and non seat based pay, do you think they're going to turn around and say "just kidding!"? We either accept that deal, or the company keeps us separate and slowly shuts down the ASA side. I prefer the latter.
It's not $2-10 less. Yes, the rate may be but total compensation is not.

ross9238 03-29-2013 11:32 AM
Originally Posted by Nevets (Post 1381659)
Yes, the rate may be but total compensation is not.
This would be fine IF we would be able to keep the compensation that XJT group has right now. Now I don't claim to know even 1% of what you or Tony know but we all know that management will drive to lower the compensation that XJT has in their contract for our new one. So ultimately, this is all moot till we know the final language in our JCBA.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 02:34 PM.
Page 3 of 3
1
2
3
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


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