Profit Sharing Violation
06-21-2013 | 06:05 PM
#31
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Likes: 0
The company wanted to give profit sharing to all employees to save face and avoid embarrassing negative press. Company check airmen were telling our management that the airline would experience massive cancellations on feb 14, because CAL pilots would be sick en mass on profit sharing day if they were not included. It was just a decision to include ALL employee groups and not shaft the CAL pilot group from money that they earned, like ALL other United employees. Just a business decision on their part, no vast conspiracy. Would you as a CAL pilot have shown up to work when all other employees were handed profit sharing??? I wouldn't. They knew that, settled a grievance and moved on. You should move on too ......
06-21-2013 | 06:12 PM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 1,415
Likes: 0
From: B-777 left
agree special tracking
06-21-2013 | 06:35 PM
#33
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
There are a lot of pilots who agree with you. And that was precisely the point. It should have played out as you describe. It may have greatly accelerated the JCBA process. Profit sharing broke the fever, so to speak, for LCAL pilots and then they claimed an agreement months before it was done. Got them through the summer. And here we are still languishing through another summer under C'02 pending implementation of "joint CMS" and "Joint Implemenation Team."
06-21-2013 | 07:13 PM
#34
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Likes: 0
There are a lot of pilots who agree with you. And that was precisely the point. It should have played out as you describe. It may have greatly accelerated the JCBA process. Profit sharing broke the fever, so to speak, for LCAL pilots and then they claimed an agreement months before it was done. Got them through the summer. And here we are still languishing through another summer under C'02 pending implementation of "joint CMS" and "Joint Implemenation Team."
06-21-2013 | 07:47 PM
#35
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
No job action, but a loss of enthusiasm for sure. And it wouldn't be to recoup what we didn't negotiate, it would be to say negotiate in good faith. I'd rather have more $ per month than $3000 once.
Last edited by APC225; 06-21-2013 at 08:03 PM.
06-22-2013 | 01:15 AM
#37
Thread Starter
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Likes: 0
Not a job action you say? Best of luck explaining a "loss of enthusiasm" to a federal judge.
06-22-2013 | 05:00 AM
#38
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 3,866
Likes: 0
You agreed with his tenet of not showing up for work when other employees received profit sharing. I showed up for work after I was told that my salary would not be raised to a commensurate level with my cal counterparts. That was after one of your own said he would delay the jcba indefinitely unless he got what he wanted. Good faith? Like I said, we have sunk into a morass.
Not a job action you say? Best of luck explaining a "loss of enthusiasm" to a federal judge.
Not a job action you say? Best of luck explaining a "loss of enthusiasm" to a federal judge.
06-22-2013 | 06:18 AM
#39
Line Holder
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 1,091
Likes: 1
It's a valid point. My point is that the company's perception was that LCAL pilots not having profit sharing could be problematic (whether it would have been or not) and this provided a rare point of leverage in the process. This leverage was mishandled in my opinion. I would have rather had the better pay and rules last summer.
06-22-2013 | 06:44 AM
#40
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 5,738
Likes: 5
From: Sleeping in the black swan’s nest.
You must not have got the memo? CAL saved us, so they can do anything they want and it's all good as long as it benifits the L-CAL group and not the L-UAL group.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
