Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Union Talk
Local357 EXCO response to the RPC(FAPA!!) >

Local357 EXCO response to the RPC(FAPA!!)

Notices
Union Talk For macro-level discussion: legislation, national unions, organizing pilot groups, etc.For airline-specific discussion, use relevant forum above.

Local357 EXCO response to the RPC(FAPA!!)

Old 06-07-2011, 12:29 PM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Mulva's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: A-320 Asst. Pilot
Posts: 423
Default

Originally Posted by Killer51883 View Post
... All the while the leadership was getting paid any where from $20,000 to $35,000 from the pilots on top of their pay from the airline. They are truely no different than Gene Sowell.
I realize that amount of money may seem like a lot to a Republic pilot. Here at Frontier we call that a stipend.
And worth every freaking penny! You couldn't pay me enough to do the work these excellent people do on our behalf. They work tirelessly in their efforts with a huge negative impact to their spare time and families. I'm more than happy to provide them this incentive.
Mulva is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 01:19 PM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Mulva's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: A-320 Asst. Pilot
Posts: 423
Default

It has become painfully clear FAPA will do and say anything to stay in power.........With no bylaws or anything in place to legally bind the rpc (fapa) to do as they currently say they will, how can they be trusted? If fapa is willing to drop all litigation with rpc, then its for a reason. At this point, nothing fapa says in regards to integration can be believed.
On the contrary, it is unbelievably painfully clear that many on this board have made ZERO effort to even understand any of this. For starters, the RPC is a viable option conceived by FAPA and a handful of it's members. RPC is unequivocally NOT FAPA with a new name. RPC IS a joint "council" made up of 3 reps each from RAH and F9, most likely 3 IBT and3 FAPA. Ultimately that decision will be up to each and every one of us. Here at F9, we are quite happy with our current representation so will most certainly send 3 current FAPA reps to populate our seats on the RPC. In can't speak for "native" RAH guys but assume they would send 3 current 357 reps as well. Doesn't matter to me though. You can Micky Mouse, Daffy Duck and Bugs Bunny if you want. But it would be nice if the 6, in aggregate, have the smarts and skillsets to provide a unified leadership and guidance for our (initially) separate bargaining agents (IBT357 and FAPA) as efforts are made to work with each other rather than fight. You guys just don't seem to get (or want to get) this message. Yes, we want FAPA involved in the RPC in the same way IBT357 would be. I can just about guarantee you the Frontier pilot group will vote unanimously for RPC. It will not be any louder or clearer what we think the best and healthiest option is. Ultimately, this is your decision. You are all in the drivers seat here. The big question is, after studying the RPC option, is RPC a structure that could work for us all while also starting the process of healing, rather than continuing the divisiveness. Most of us think it is a decent compromise where no body loses, we can all win.

As for the litigation, I could pretty much assume FAPA had close to 100% support from their membership on the NMB and SLI challenges. And I'll be the first to agree that these actions would rub me the wrong way if I were in your shoes, but I'm not. If we can find a way (RPC?) to work together then I am in total support of stopping these counterproductive actions and focusing on out future together. However, if forced into unwanted representation by IBT, I (and I imagine most F9 pilots) will fully support any reasonable and legal effort to further delay this entire process. Right or wrong, I just can't feel comfortable with IBT representation as may well soon be dictated to us and see it in our best interest to force the issue with our $2.2M checkbook. None of this is meant as a threat, just a realistic take on what the future looks like depending on the choices you all make in the next few weeks.

In golfing terms, we're asking you to consider "laying up" and taking the safest shot. That way you might win the tournament. Or you could just wind up with your driver and cross your fingers you don't get buried in a trap or in the pond. Again, you guys get to choose, but PLEASE don't assume an IBT victory in this election will mark the beginning of a long period of peace and prosperity.

It highly doubt it will!

Last edited by Mulva; 06-07-2011 at 01:40 PM.
Mulva is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 01:23 PM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 879
Default

Originally Posted by Mulva View Post
I'm more than happy to provide them this incentive.
$5 per month per pilot to pay the $38,000. It'd be a bargain at $20 per month.

Originally Posted by sticky View Post
This is getting worse by the day. It used to be entertainingly silly...but now actually quite scary.
If you can't attack the message, uh....say something meaningless?
FAULTPUSH is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 01:35 PM
  #14  
Line Holder
 
FlyGirl007's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 42
Default

Originally Posted by Mulva View Post
On the contrary, it is unbelievably painfully clear that many on this board have made ZERO effort to even understand any of this. For starters, the RPC is a viable option conceived by FAPA and a handful of it's members. RPC is unequivocally NOT FAPA with a new name. RPC IS a joint "council" made up of 3 reps each from RAH and F9, most likely 3 IBT and3 FAPA. Ultimately that decision will be up to each and every one of us. Here at F9, we are quite happy with our current representation so will most certainly send 3 current FAPA reps to populate our seats on the RPC. In can't speak for "native" RAH guys but assume they would send 3 current 357 reps as well. Doesn't matter to me though. You can Micky Mouse, Daffy Duck and Bugs Bunny if you want. But it would be nice if the 6, in aggregate, have the smarts and skillsets to provide a unified leadership and guidance for our (initially) separate bargaining agents (IBT357 and FAPA) as efforts are made to work with each other rather than fight. You guys just don't seem to get (or want to get) this message. Yes, we want FAPA involved in the RPC in the same way IBT357 would be. I can just about guarantee you the Frontier pilot group will vote unanimously for RPC. It will not be any louder or clearer what we think the best and healthiest option is. Ultimately, this is your decision. You are all in the drivers seat here. The big question is, after studying the RPC option, is RPC a structure that could work for us all while also starting the process of healing, rather than continuing the divisiveness. Most of us think it is a decent compromise where no body loses, we can all win.

As for the litigation, I could pretty much assume FAPA had close to 100% support from their membership on the NMB and SLI challenges. And I'll be the first to agree that these actions would rub me the wrong way if I were in your shoes, but I'm not. If we can find a way (RPC?) to work together then I am in total support of stopping these counterproductive actions and focusing on out future together. However, if forced into unwanted representation by IBT, I (and I imagine most F9 pilots) will fully support any reasonable and legal effort to further delay this entire process. Right or wrong, we see it in our best I interest to do so with our $2.2M checkbook. None of this is meant as a threat, just a realistic take on what the future looks like depending on the choices you all make in the next few weeks.

In golfing terms, we're asking you to consider "laying up" and taking the safest shot. That way you might win the tournament. Or you could just wind up with your driver and cross your fingers you don't get buried in a trap or in the pond. Again, you guys get to choose, but PLEASE don't assume an IBT victory in this election will mark the beginning of a long period of peace and prosperity.

It won't!
Forget the "golfing terms." This is nothing more than elementary playground antics (bullying). Allow me to translate this thinly veiled threat: FAPA - "We play OUR way, or we take our ball and go home."
FlyGirl007 is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 01:41 PM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Mulva's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: A-320 Asst. Pilot
Posts: 423
Default

Originally Posted by FAULTPUSH View Post
$5 per month per pilot to pay the $38,000. It'd be a bargain at $20 per month.
Without a doubt, a bargain for the efforts we get.
Mulva is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 01:43 PM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Mulva's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2011
Position: A-320 Asst. Pilot
Posts: 423
Default

Originally Posted by FlyGirl007 View Post
Forget the "golfing terms." This is nothing more than elementary playground antics (bullying). Allow me to translate this thinly veiled threat: FAPA - "We play OUR way, or we take our ball and go home."
Then I guess you ought to just let er rip, huh? Go for the 350 yard bomb. It's a lower percentage shot, but maybe worth the risk.. Your choice Fantasy Flier!

Mulva is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 02:47 PM
  #17  
Che Guevara
 
ToiletDuck's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Default

Originally Posted by FAULTPUSH View Post
I don't see how that's worse than IBT producing an RAH pilot who stated (under oath), that his career expectation at RAH was to fly a 747 one day.
Maybe I'm missing something but what's wrong with someone saying they plan on moving up to bigger equipment in the future? And how does that statement have anything to do with what Dan wrote above?
ToiletDuck is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 02:53 PM
  #18  
Che Guevara
 
ToiletDuck's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Default

Originally Posted by FAULTPUSH View Post
1. I have NEVER heard a complaint here about LOA 39. I'm not even sure what it is
How would you know if you had when you don't even know what it is? I'd advise reading it.

2. You're lying about the LOA getting thrown out if the price of gas changes. If I'm wrong on this, please prove it.
Once again you should probably read it. The LOA wouldn't get "thrown out" but rather enacted.


Paragraph 6. "Force Majeure" (renumberd to l.E.7.) items shall be modified as follows:
c. Reduction in flight operations because of (1) a decrease in available
fuel supply or other critical materials due to either governmental
action or commercial suppliers being unable to provide sufficient
fuel or other critical materials for the Company's operations or (2)
adverse economic, market or business conditions that directly
materially impact/he Company 's level of operations;
d. An increase in the price of jet fuel that has a material adverse
impact on thefinancial condition of the Company;
f. A U.S. Government declared national emergency affecting the
Company's operations. a war on U.S. soil, an act of terrorism or
invasion by the U.S. into a foreign country which has a material
adverse impact on the financial condition of the Company;
j. A health crisis or pandemic «e. SARs, Swine Flu) that has a
material adverse impact on the financial condition of the
Company.
k. A Chapter 11bankruptcy filing by the Company or RAH.


Vote IBT.

Last edited by ToiletDuck; 06-07-2011 at 03:18 PM.
ToiletDuck is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 03:09 PM
  #19  
Che Guevara
 
ToiletDuck's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,363
Default

Originally Posted by Mulva View Post
As for the litigation, I could pretty much assume FAPA had close to 100% support from their membership on the NMB and SLI challenges. And I'll be the first to agree that these actions would rub me the wrong way if I were in your shoes, but I'm not. If we can find a way (RPC?) to work together then I am in total support of stopping these counterproductive actions and focusing on out future together. However, if forced into unwanted representation by IBT, I (and I imagine most F9 pilots) will fully support any reasonable and legal effort to further delay this entire process. Right or wrong, I just can't feel comfortable with IBT representation as may well soon be dictated to us and see it in our best interest to force the issue with our $2.2M checkbook. None of this is meant as a threat, just a realistic take on what the future looks like depending on the choices you all make in the next few weeks.
You're saying it's your way or the highway. Doesn't sound like much of an option. If you're only looking out for yourself here why expect anything different of others? I'm not seeing your willingness to cooperate when you say to either vote RPC or you hope to be USAPA. When you start showing your true character like this I can't imagine anyone wanting your RPC.
ToiletDuck is offline  
Old 06-07-2011, 03:46 PM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 879
Default

Originally Posted by ToiletDuck View Post
You're saying it's your way or the highway..
We're saying it's your way for you, and our way for us, with coordination between the two for a common goal. You're saying it's IBT. Period. Not even the highway option.

Originally Posted by ToiletDuck View Post
d. An increase in the price of jet fuel that has a material adverse
impact on thefinancial condition of the Company..
D'oh! You weren't lying. My sincere apologies. We'd better hope that BB doesn't see that clause, or he'll toss the LOA. I'd say the conditions have been met. I wonder why he's even bothering with the collaborative bargaining thing.

Last edited by FAULTPUSH; 06-07-2011 at 04:04 PM.
FAULTPUSH is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
shane123
Regional
29
04-01-2008 07:17 PM
HerkyBird
Cargo
17
11-04-2007 03:08 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread