Republic's FO Pay Increase
03-08-2012, 08:01 PM
#11
Line Holder
Joined APC: Oct 2006
Position: Displaced
Posts: 74
Originally Posted by 9easy
Most the the union are lifer captains anyways who don't give a crap about FO's.
03-09-2012, 12:41 AM
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Posts: 919
This wont be a good thing in the end. The company is not just going to give away money, its not their style. This would be far from the first time they made an offer promising it would have no influence on negotiations only to bring it to the table the very next meeting. If this isnt a ploy, then bedford secured new flying that hes been hinting at for months and this is the only way to attract new FOs. Hiring has been abysmal so far this year. The one thing this without question means: the company has no plans to negotiate in good faith on a new contract. Absolutely no reason to offer this while we are so deep in negotiations.
03-09-2012, 01:39 AM
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Posts: 1,075
Originally Posted by 9easy
This happened at Pinnacle, except the union rejected it, and it created an enormous amount of bad feelings towards the union.
If the company wants to pay anyone more than they are entitled to, let them. It's not going to have any influence on contract negotiations. Most the the union are lifer captains anyways who don't give a crap about FO's.
If the company wants to pay anyone more than they are entitled to, let them. It's not going to have any influence on contract negotiations. Most the the union are lifer captains anyways who don't give a crap about FO's.
It is you, specifically, at whom this transparent (Ron H) maneuver is aimed and it appears to be a bulls eye. You are BB's tool.
tool/to͞ol/ Noun: A device or implement used to carry out a particular function.
03-09-2012, 03:12 AM
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Position: Driving a Bus for Recreational Pleasure.
Posts: 544
*Here's the proposed pay scale from the company. Starting with first year. 30, 34, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42. Seems like their trying to sway some votes. This is coming from the IBT.
Last edited by MusicPilot; 03-09-2012 at 03:23 AM.
03-09-2012, 04:04 AM
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Posts: 687
Originally Posted by MusicPilot
*Here's the proposed pay scale from the company. Starting with first year. 30, 34, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42. Seems like their trying to sway some votes. This is coming from the IBT.
03-09-2012, 04:17 AM
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 790
Originally Posted by MusicPilot
*Here's the proposed pay scale from the company. Starting with first year. 30, 34, 37, 39, 40, 41, 42. Seems like their trying to sway some votes. This is coming from the IBT.
03-09-2012, 04:17 AM
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Aug 2011
Position: Driving a Bus for Recreational Pleasure.
Posts: 544
Originally Posted by MunkyButtr
Those rates are for the 170/190??? Thats down right pathetic. Thats hardly average for recently negotiated 50 seaters. Chuckle and send it back.
03-09-2012, 04:19 AM
#19
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Posts: 790
Originally Posted by 9easy
This happened at Pinnacle, except the union rejected it, and it created an enormous amount of bad feelings towards the union.
If the company wants to pay anyone more than they are entitled to, let them. It's not going to have any influence on contract negotiations. Most the the union are lifer captains anyways who don't give a crap about FO's.
If the company wants to pay anyone more than they are entitled to, let them. It's not going to have any influence on contract negotiations. Most the the union are lifer captains anyways who don't give a crap about FO's.
This new proposal could be presented to the vote as an LOA and can be made effective certain date. As long as LOA language is right, I'd vote YES to it..
03-09-2012, 04:29 AM
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: blueJet
Posts: 4,514
Originally Posted by MusicPilot
Apparently they're going to implement it without negotiation. The union is aware of it and most likely going to allow it. That still leaves room in negotiations to increase it and get retro-pay.
What happens when negotiations break down into "if you want those guys to keep their raise, what are you going to give up for it?" and suddenly it's the union's fault they're getting a pay cut?
The company can't just decide to pay some contract employees more. That's why they have a contract. Collective bargaining kinda implies that they can't give to some without giving to the whole collective. If the union isn't challenging this, they are obsolete.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
