Neither is alpa.

 

It's from the CEO's playbook. Happening right now at PSA.
We vote in a contract (Not the TA), that had great critical pay, flexible schedules and the famous SAP.
Well the company manipulates the reserve grid so no day becomes critical, SAP is slower than the line up at the DMV. And thus we have little flexibility with our schedules.
Management cannot and will not follow a contract. They will do whatever they can to use the slow arbitration process to save millions. So go ahead and vote on the contract. Just know that it won't make a difference either way. Management is going to do what they are gonna do.

 

I have been reading all of the posts. Mostly people commenting based upon the little bits and pieces of information about the offer that have been doled out. Lots of speculation and incremental analysis.

Then, intermixed among the amateur analysis, are professionally written posts which seem to be designed to slowly move the audience into believing that the offer is really a hidden gem and that the better informed are the ones who are seeing the value. I don't see anything in their posts that really point to any good reasons to support the offer, they just point to this crumb and that crumb and then conclude that they expect the thing will pass once everyone sees the value and that they will probably vote yes. Lawyers thinking that they are lowering themselves down to the level of a pilot so as to out smart them with their words. Reminds me of when a politician goes out to the country to be filmed as an ordinary guy doing ordinary things and suddenly develops a country/southern accent, "Ya'll gonna come out and watch me shoot some varmints!"

Am I being paranoid or do others see the same thing?

 

So per IBT, anytime management "says" this is their LBFO it is required to go to a vote?
so they never need to negotiate. Make a LBFO, watch the results and sweeten it just enough to pass.

 

First the EBoard must decide if it truly is an LBFO.

If yes, then sent out for a member vote.

If voted down, then the union and company are released to immediate self help, ie the union could withhold services (aka strike).

This though, isn't permitted by a union controlled by the RLA.

Hence the problem and why a pilot union shouldn't be represented by the IBT.

 

Ok, so your Eboard gets to decide. That's better.... Not good, just better than the alternative.

Having read it; it's a great improvement in some areas and some significant givebacks in others.

My real concern would be giving the work rules concessions; RAH then going through Bankruptcy anyway and taking the money pay back too.

I think many of the analysts are saying a BK restructuring is inevitable; right?

 

I no longer have a dog in the BB vs. RAH pilot group.

However I worked for that SOB for long enough to know how he operates. Anything that him and his team of lawyers wrote will have so many exploitable areas that the pilot group will effectively be working without any language.

DO NOT TRUST BEDFORD. As bad as the teamsters are, their lawyers and the EBoard need to look at every word.

If I was still there the email containing the LBFO would have been deleted without even reading it. The NC knows what I want and BB doesn't want to give me what I want, thats why negotiations continue.

 

Who should represent the regional guys then?

 

So, to clarify, the Republic guys are not bound by the Railway Act, because their union is not an "airline" union? Or, the republic guys are subject to the Railway Act, by virtue of being airline employees? Alternately, neither is important, their union by-laws mandate a vote?

 

I usually only posted in the USAir/AWA/AA thread and recently decided to stop posting, but I liked your post and wanted to reply.

Good on you, you are using critical thinking skills. Answer to the question is absolutely yes. Think a bit. The company rolls out what they call their LBFO. Why? Then they roll it out in Washington DC, not company headquarters. Why? Completely bypass the NC and union. Why? Post show up saying VERY GENTLY it is better than what we have and it will pass. Why?

Remember, these are the same people who have been stringing you along for 7 or 8 years while making a fortune (completely planned and carried out strategy, its not just an accident). They want this badly. They are paying a lot of money for this counsel and advice. Everything they are doing is a legal strategy. The pilot group can re take the momentum ONLY if they remain unified. If not the company will steamroll you. I have looked at the language. There are plenty of landmines throughout that product. I know because I spent a career writing landmines into contracts. Refuse to bite. I do not understand why the Teamsters have not countered. What they should be doing it refusing to address the "LBFO" and attack the leadership to the Board of Directors, IN Washington DC. Let them know this fight will continue as long as the current leadership remains. If BB does not control the majority stock, the board could send him to the showers. If the company cannot attract new hires, they are going to lose a ton of money. That is something they will try to avoid, even if the cost is firing BB. This offer is of course better than what you have. But the million dollar question is " Is this better than what we could have?". Cave and you will eat crap for years (those landmines). Refuse to follow and make/FORCE the company play nice. Still won't matter if the company files Chapter 11. But perhaps if the BODs listens, they will fire BB and replace him with another Herb K.