I wonder how many Pilot-CkAirmen took time to ask the tough question....."Where's our JCBA"?!?!

UNITED DAILY 10-21-2011

Jeff and Pete McDonald talk with pilots at Flight Standards meetings

Jeff and EVP and Chief Operations Officer Pete McDonald spent more than an hour with about 200 check airmen and instructors in Chicago this week as part of an annual series of Flight Ops Standards training meetings. We are holding four of these meetings — to include all five fleets — from September through November.

Jeff and Pete have attended two of these meetings so far. They provided company updates and addressed issues that are on pilots’ minds, including ongoing labor negotiations, plans for new aircraft and how we are competing against other airlines.

“This meeting helped our check airmen and instructors understand the goals of the new airline,” said Flight Standards Managing Director Dave Lynn. “Jeff and Pete gave the pilots a clear understanding of where we are and where we need to go and listened and responded to their issues.”

In all, more than 550 pilots participated in the first three meetings. Another 180 check airmen and instructors will attend the final meeting in Chicago the second week of November. The annual Standards meetings are FAA-required and provide recurrent training for all Flight Ops Instructor/Evaluators at the new United Airlines. The series also features presentations on our progress toward a single operating certificate (SOC), new technology (iPads), and new requirements for our check airmen post-SOC.

 

Kool Aid chugging contest? Completing the "we no longer have a safety culture" CBT?

I can imagine what these new requirements might be....

 

I wonder how soon we would settle the JCBA if all SC and Instructors simply returned to the line. Refusal to do line checks and training is perfectly acceptable if safety is being compromised. MY2C's

 

The problem is that if SC and Instructors returned to the line, that would be a change of the status quo and a judge would likely rule that it was a violation of the RLA. I'm no lawyer but I would seek solid legal advice before taking that course of action.

 

When I was a new hire we got the visit from Larry Kehlner. I'll never forget the pathetic site of 3 different Flight Ops managers (including Dave Lynn) throwing elbows at each other while scurrying to pour Larry a cup of coffee. As our new Assistant Chief FO's demonstrate, Fred only promotes based on merit!

 

I say bring on the fines and burn it down. A huge fine for ALPA national that would bankrupt ALPA would be the best thing that could happen for the United pilots. The sooner ALPA is gone the better. Besides, ALPA is a Scab Union, they let all those Continental Scabs back into its union. What kind of a union readmits Scabs back into the fold?

Craig

 

Not to drift that far away Craig, but I cannot agree with you more!! What is/was the penalty for being a scab? Better seniority, pay and schedule? At Cal, its a shoe in for lca or sim instructor. Go ahead and crosss, F-over your co workers, and by the way, welcome back to ALPA..you did send in your dues check right?

 

Andy,

Unless something changed, those positions are voluntary. With no coordinated effort by the union (that would be a change in status quo) if individuals in those 2 groups elected to withdraw their services, a judge could do nothing.

Frats,
Lee

 

Lee, just remember, IF is a big a$$ word in this sentence..like IF the sun does not rise tomorrow.......

 

Lee, after reading the entire ruling with respect to Delta's pilots working overtime - the appeal, not the original verdict - I believe that the current legal system will consider mass voluntary resignations to be a coordinated job action in violation of the RLA.
Over the last 15 years, the chips have become heavily stacked against labor unions that fall under the RLA. We are now threading a very small needle on the actions that we can take.

With that in mind, unions need to reconsider how contracts are constructed. Management can go in slowdown mode, dragging out negotiations for years. Rather than attempt to get retro pay, I think all new union contracts should have automatic payraises built into them at the amenable date. For instance, an automatic pay raise of CPI-W plus 3% annually until a new contract is signed. This would eliminate the need for retro pay. Also, it's crucial that the figure be tied to a CPI metric rather than putting a finite number such as 4% annual pay raises. We have no idea if we'll be in a low or high inflationary environment when the amenable date occurs.
Just imagine putting in a clause where we get a 4% pay raise annually at the amenable date but the inflation rate is running at 8%+ when we reach the amenable date. Management would have even greater incentive to drag out contract negotiations.