New ABX Contract

[ABXbooger]

I have been hearing talk that the contract is nearing completion, but I have also heard that there are a lot of "concession" type things being offered up (R1 changes, etc.) Anybody hear anything they want to share/and/or comments?

 

[hvydriver]

I have been hearing talk that the contract is nearing completion, but I have also heard that there are a lot of "concession" type things being offered up (R1 changes, etc.) Anybody hear anything they want to share/and/or comments?

Well, after all the speeches about "no concessions" from the ABX side, I hope that's not so. Here we are taking a strike vote trying to hold the bar. Pitiful, if true.

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

It has been strongly rumored that the previous misguided union leadership ( the one with alleged pants' trouble ) has perhaps signed off on some less than desirable terms which will, under the guise of negotiating in good faith, by default become part of any TA offered for ratification.

Voting 'No' to any TA with concessions and starting again with a clean slate unhindered by prior agreements is the only way forward. There is no hurry to get this sorted out as the status quo, for several reasons, hurts Joe much more than it hurts us.

 

[GoABX]

Apparently, the company wanted to changed a previously TA'd article. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Why bother wasting time spliting hairs over COLA plus 1% versus plus .5% . . .they are both $hit. So if the company doesn't get moving in earnest in the next week, we should take all of their last offers . . .and put it to a vote. There are plenty of other turds in the TA's sections that are worthy of a NO vote...the pay makes it a no brainer. I don't expect UPS or FDX money, but a 30% discount to it isn't going to fly either.

 

[hvydriver]

Apparently, the company wanted to changed a previously TA'd article. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Why bother wasting time spliting hairs over COLA plus 1% versus plus .5% . . .they are both $hit. So if the company doesn't get moving in earnest in the next week, we should take all of their last offers . . .and put it to a vote. There are plenty of other turds in the TA's sections that are worthy of a NO vote...the pay makes it a no brainer. I don't expect UPS or FDX money, but a 30% discount to it isn't going to fly either.

That's our view too, GoABX. It's time to call their bluff on both sides of the field.

 

[GoABX]

HvyDriver,

If you guys REALLY want our support, your MEC needs to get on the phone to our Eboard and apologize for that Bull$hit hotline message of last week (if you don't think we were pissed; listen to our hotline this week) and step 2 the lawsuit needs to dropped ASAP. The lawsuit is a non-starter anyway so you guys aren't giving anything up (it all started a land grab by ALPA DC, your MEC was sold a bill of goods from the git-go).

But even those of you that are passionate about the merit of the suit can surely see the irony of asking those whom you are suing for support?

(Please don't insult my intelligence by spewing the same crap your Chairman did about forcing a merger. I look at the language of the suit, which says that the ABX flying is ours, it doesn't say anything about a merger. Plus, how exactly does a merger directly benefit the Astar pilots? It doesn't.)

The Astar pilots can still get our support but you guys have a Fukking weird way of asking for it.

 

[erichartmann]

HvyDriver,

If you guys REALLY want our support, your MEC needs to get on the phone to our Eboard and apologize for that Bull$hit hotline message of last week (if you don't think we were pissed; listen to our hotline this week) and step 2 the lawsuit needs to dropped ASAP. The lawsuit is a non-starter anyway so you guys aren't giving anything up (it all started a land grab by ALPA DC, your MEC was sold a bill of goods from the git-go).

But even those of you that are passionate about the merit of the suit can surely see the irony of asking those whom you are suing for support?

(Please don't insult my intelligence by spewing the same crap your Chairman did about forcing a merger. I look at the language of the suit, which says that the ABX flying is ours, it doesn't say anything about a merger. Plus, how exactly does a merger directly benefit the Astar pilots? It doesn't.)

The Astar pilots can still get our support but you guys have a Fukking weird way of asking for it.

Amen, in spades. Otherwise, they can go take a long walk on a short pier!!!

 

[hvydriver]

Amen, in spades. Otherwise, they can go take a long walk on a short pier!!!

Whatever. ALPA National won't let go of that suit, because if they let it stand, then it will defeat scope language in any and all ALPA agreements. You can thank Joe's attorneys for that. To beat a dead horse, check the dates. It was filed prior to DHL's purchase of ABE. Remember though, no concessionary contracts!

 

[hvydriver]

HvyDriver,

If you guys REALLY want our support, your MEC needs to get on the phone to our Eboard and apologize for that Bull$hit hotline message of last week (if you don't think we were pissed; listen to our hotline this week)

That was a standard "going to war" hotline that is generated whenever an ALPA carrier is getting ready to go on strike. Your local was never mentioned directly. Remember that there are several carriers out there besides ABX and Astar that could be used to patch together a small recovery of the network. I listened to Ross' hotline. Sounded like it hit close to home to me. As to the rest, I responded to that on eric's post.

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

Whatever. ALPA National won't let go of that suit, because if they let it stand, then it will defeat scope language in any and all ALPA agreements.

Whatever. I'm not inclined to become a sacrificial lamb for the late great ALPOs posturing. The strategy of pissing off the one carrier best able to further your cause has to be of dubious merit and I think that perhaps ALPO national is twisting your tail. After all, from their perspective, it's not a FedEx / Legacy carrier going into the meat grinder - only a disposable Emery type outfit.

Nice if we can be friends and work together for a common goal, too bad if we can't. Lift is everything and speaks volumes.

 

[hvydriver]

Lift is everything and speaks volumes.

That's unfortunately the response I expected. ALPA cannot let a ruling stand that states they are a Labor Organization. We're not counting on any help from 1224, no matter what your latest hotline says.

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

If I gave the response you unfortunately expected do please enlighten me as to the response you wished for. Keep it sensible.

 

[hvydriver]

The "lift is everything" statement. Taken as written, it would seem to imply that ABX will simply run as much DHL material as possible, should we go on strike.

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

No. It's an invitation to talk to the peer group with whom you share a common interest without the hand of ALPO national up your rear end using you as a puppet.

On the subject of struck goods. Why bring a suit against the one carrier whose support could make or break you which renders the cost of said support unemployment for that carriers pilot group?

 

[shooter]

The "lift is everything" statement. Taken as written, it would seem to imply that ABX will simply run as much DHL material as possible, should we go on strike.

wait a minute hvy...you want ALL DHL lift to be Astar, but expect others that currently provide lift for DHL to stop because you are not getting all the lift? Please explain that to me.

 

[hvydriver]

wait a minute hvy...you want ALL DHL lift to be Astar, but expect others that currently provide lift for DHL to stop because you are not getting all the lift? Please explain that to me.

Sigh. One last time, and I'm done talking to the wall. There is no suit against ABX. Only a grievance against DHL. The "lawsuit" that was filed was ABX against ALPA for an Unfair Labor Practice charge. If successful, that suit will gut any and all scope language at all ALPA carriers. Our Sect.1 grievance was filed against DHL prior to the buy of ABX in an attempt to stop the purchase. I've not posted why we did it before but I'm going to now, because the reason we did it isn't pretty. Then I'm done trying to talk reason. When our MEC approached your President (the one with the pants trouble) back when the buyout talks were in progress about forming an alliance, he told our reps. that: "We're not interested. Not only are we going to take all your flying, we're going to take over all of Europe's as well." Now, with a response like that, you bet we were trying to stop the purchase with a grievance. Now, thanks to Joe, all Scope language under the RLA is at risk. Good luck.

 

[shooter]

Sigh. One last time, and I'm done talking to the wall. There is no suit against ABX. Only a grievance against DHL. The "lawsuit" that was filed was ABX against ALPA for an Unfair Labor Practice charge. If successful, that suit will gut any and all scope language at all ALPA carriers. Our Sect.1 grievance was filed against DHL prior to the buy of ABX in an attempt to stop the purchase. I've not posted why we did it before but I'm going to now, because the reason we did it isn't pretty. Then I'm done trying to talk reason. When our MEC approached your President (the one with the pants trouble) back when the buyout talks were in progress about forming an alliance, he told our reps. that: "We're not interested. Not only are we going to take all your flying, we're going to take over all of Europe's as well." Now, with a response like that, you bet we were trying to stop the purchase with a grievance. Now, thanks to Joe, all Scope language under the RLA is at risk. Good luck.

thanks for the response.

I guess my questions should be how do you plan to resolve the grievance against DHL? Is it with ABX or at the expense of ABX? And how are you currently going forward to the resolution with regard to the above?

I agree w/you that response is pretty crappy and uncalled for as presented. Is that the reason your whole group currently has that exact same mind set?

I'm just asking questions here, so don't take any of it as flame bait.

 

[hvydriver]

thanks for the response.

I guess my questions should be how do you plan to resolve the grievance against DHL? Is it with ABX or at the expense of ABX? And how are you currently going forward to the resolution with regard to the above?

I agree w/you that response is pretty crappy and uncalled for as presented. Is that the reason your whole group currently has that exact same mind set?

I'm just asking questions here, so don't take any of it as flame bait.

Shooter,

Yes, that is the reason that we feel the way we do. Quite honestly, we haven't spoken of that publically before because we feel that it would be playing right into DHL/ABX/Astar's hands. (The whole divide and conquer strategy.) However, now is the time to "Cowboy Up". As far as the DHL grievance goes, IF ALPA is successful in getting the Unfair Labor Practice charge overturned in the 9th circuit, we will proceed back to the 2nd Circuit, and continue with the grievance against DHL. (all of that, as you are aware, will most likely take years to resolve.) If they are unsuccessful in the 9th circuit, then any CBA that was signed prior to the infamous Ross Aviation group being removed from ALPA representation will have a scope clause that is unenforceable. As you know from all of my previous threads on this subject, we never intended to "kill" ABX. What we do expect is to be made whole monetarily by DHL. Fat chance of that, but you gotta do what you gotta do.

 

[shooter]

Shooter,

Yes, that is the reason that we feel the way we do. Quite honestly, we haven't spoken of that publically before because we feel that it would be playing right into DHL/ABX/Astar's hands. (The whole divide and conquer strategy.) However, now is the time to "Cowboy Up". As far as the DHL grievance goes, IF ALPA is successful in getting the Unfair Labor Practice charge overturned in the 9th circuit, we will proceed back to the 2nd Circuit, and continue with the grievance against DHL. (all of that, as you are aware, will most likely take years to resolve.) If they are unsuccessful in the 9th circuit, then any CBA that was signed prior to the infamous Ross Aviation group being removed from ALPA representation will have a scope clause that is unenforceable. As you know from all of my previous threads on this subject, we never intended to "kill" ABX. What we do expect is to be made whole monetarily by DHL. Fat chance of that, but you gotta do what you gotta do.

thx, I have never heard any of that happened before. But then again I'm not really in the know.

I'm just trying like heck to sharpen my business mind and get ready to open my doors by next summer. I hope to be working at ABX until I retire, but you never know and I need to do something else with my time anyhow. I will hope for both and never follow a DHL business model for myself.

No offense, but I'm batting for ABX until the game is over. Would be nice to work with Astar instead of being at a competitive level, but I think that ball is in your court to act first right now.

c ya, good luck.

 

[erichartmann]

Whatever. ALPA National won't let go of that suit, because if they let it stand, then it will defeat scope language in any and all ALPA agreements. You can thank Joe's attorneys for that. To beat a dead horse, check the dates. It was filed prior to DHL's purchase of ABE. Remember though, no concessionary contracts!

Yeah right! Joe's attorneys didn't file the initial lawsuit. Yours did. That suit was an attempt to get a grievance settled. How that would have ended up is anybody's guess. Bottom line is it looked like you were/are trying to take our jobs. Actions speak louder than words. Your actions serioiusly p.oed a lot of people you would like to have help from now. By filing both the grievance and the subsequent lawsuit you played right into DHL's hands, and put us in the same boat. You also gave Joe and Ford & Harrison a nifty trump to play on scope. Stupid, stupid, stupid. Can you say poorly thought through? :uzi:

 

[HeavyjetDC8]

Muddy waters at best with perhaps a bit of revisionist history going on. If the one with the troublesome pants did however utter the phrases as stated then fighting words they would certainly be.

And as for fighting words, something of a threat aimed at you-know-who on the Astar hotline and web site.

A familiar song of Polar/Atlas battle lines - whose freight is it?

I mean, If I were to fly an Astar aircraft full of DHL freight during a strike then yes, I'm a scab.
But if I fly my ABX aircraft full of DHL freight during a strike then I'm simply doing my job. Feel free to quote the last sentence and if wrong, tell me why.

The hotline would imply that alpa now speaks for and stands in judgment of all flight crew having arrogated wide new sweeping powers unto itself. Way to go alpo.

So, say UAL is on strike and their passengers rebook on DAL. Is the DAL flightcrew now in violation of alpa dictates?

I ask because it's best to get this sorted out before the crap hits the fan rather than during with endless argument afterward.

Exactly what does a striking Astar want from ABX?

 

[penguin22]

Just pay attention to what the attorneys are saying. Its all right here:

http://www.nlrb.gov/research/decisions/board_decisions/template_html.aspx?file=http://www.nlrb.gov/shared_files/Board%20Decisions/345/345-51.htm&size=164

These are all direct quotes:

"ALPA has sought, in its grievance and in its federal court counterclaim, to enforce an interpretation and application of the scope clause in its collective-bargaining agreement with DHL Worldwide and DHL Holdings in the following manner: to require DHL Holdings and DHL Worldwide to terminate its subsidiary’s contract with ABX, pursuant to which ABX provides flying services for Airborne, flying that has traditionally and is presently being done by Teamsters members, and to assign this flying to ALPA members.

ABX is the primary employer in ALPA’s grievance and counterclaim because ALPA seeks the ABX flying positions for its members.

In the present case, the tactical object of ALPA’s grievance and counterclaim is the air transportation service performed by the Teamsters pilots who work for ABX.

ALPA filed an answer and counterclaim seeking (1) an order to compel expedited arbitration of its grievance with DHL Holdings and DHL Worldwide, and (2) an injunction to restrain DHL Holdings and its subsidiaries from contracting air transportation services to ABX

The Respondent’s grievance and counterclaim have the clear object of forcing DHL/Airborne to cease doing business with ABX

During the course of that hearing, ALPA reiterated and made clear its position that only ALPA members employed by ASTAR could fly the freight for Airborne that had previously and was presently being flown by the Teamsters Union flight crews of ABX.


. In the present case, ALPA is allegedly threatening DHL Holdings and its subsidiaries, employers within the meaning of Section 2(2), (6), and (7) of the NLRA, with the object of forcing these employers to stop doing business with ABX

ALPA’s actions “were an unambiguous attempt to force [DHL], a neutral employer, to cease doing business with [ABX]

4. By filing a grievance and a counterclaim against DHL Holdings and DHL Worldwide with an object to force or require DHL Holdings and DHL Worldwide to cease doing business with ABX, Inc

Indeed, the result of the Respondent’s success would be to create a large number of new jobs for ASTAR "

 

[hvydriver]

Well, like I said before, we were trying to stop the deal. We did that after your most excellent President said what he said. If you believe me or not, I really don't care. If you bother to look at my posts over the past year or so, you will find that I have been even handed and fair. If that's not enough, so be it. We've got our mission. You go do what you think might be the right thing to do, and we'll see where it goes. I'm done.

 

[erichartmann]

Well, like I said before, we were trying to stop the deal. We did that after your most excellent President said what he said. If you believe me or not, I really don't care. If you bother to look at my posts over the past year or so, you will find that I have been even handed and fair. If that's not enough, so be it. We've got our mission. You go do what you think might be the right thing to do, and we'll see where it goes. I'm done.

I think you should check your dates and times. As I recall the initial ALPO lawsuit and Joe's countersuit were filed before President Pants assumed the position.

 

[hvydriver]

I think you should check your dates and times. As I recall the initial ALPO lawsuit and Joe's countersuit were filed before President Pants assumed the position.

Oops, you are right Eric. It was the Pres. prior to Pres. Pants. It's been awhile now. It was Nov. of 03. My bad. It was at the Heritage Resturant in Cincy. We filed, took a merger assessment, DHL sued, then ABX jumped on, and then the former Pres. said that at the Heritage. It's starting to be like playing telephone.

 

[JohnnyPilot]

What did pants say at the Heritage?

 

[Cargoav8or]

Honestly guys, we don't need you to picket with us. The lawsuit is irrelevant in this case. You just have to decide whether you want to be a scab or maintain your integrity. The lawsuit will continue. You and I, everyone for that matter, knows that no court will take your jobs from you and award them to us. You, your management are losing your jobs on your own with your spirit of noncooperation. Not performance, not fleet, cooperation. I know ABF knew how to do it. You have fought DHL at every turn, deicing, atc, "c" containers and the list goes on. This is info from first hand accounts of people who were at those meetings. I have even witnessed some of your boys while on a jumpseat stop short of the unloader and say "f**k DHL, they can move it themselves". Whether you like it or not you are employees and ABX does not call the shots. Dasburg in meetings has stated that he does not like many things DHL has done but he knows his place and is being rewarded for it. You are being slowly kicked to the curb from your own doing and the current situation with us is one more form on noncooperation. We have asked plenty of times, so now we make points and hope you notice. Seems you caught this one, good job.

I've never heard from any MEC member that the intent was to take a job from you. Our intent as described to me was that we did not want the sale at all. Unfortunately, alpa apparently had other motives and blunders. News flash, many of us dislike alpa as much as you, but the case has no choice but to continue on now. We must try to be made whole at least monetarily. I am sorry for the angst it has caused between the groups, but as shooter said, were not freight dogs because were all cuddly, or something to that effect.

Flame away, I have no doubt you will. God forbid you should step back and take an honest assessment of the situation. None of us are better off against each other but if we have to be, I'm batting for Asstar.

 

[hvydriver]

I mean, If I were to fly an Astar aircraft full of DHL freight during a strike then yes, I'm a scab.
But if I fly my ABX aircraft full of DHL freight during a strike then I'm simply doing my job. Feel free to quote the last sentence and if wrong, tell me why.

The hotline would imply that alpa now speaks for and stands in judgment of all flight crew having arrogated wide new sweeping powers unto itself. Way to go alpo.

I've got a great idea. Instead of asking us line dogs, why don't you ask your President? The definition of struck work in our instance was agreed upon by all ALPA carriers at the Cargo meeting, and by your leadership. He should be able to tell you precisely what it is. If not, I suppose we could trot out a letter from FedEx, Kitty Hawk, etc, testifying that your guys were there, and did agree on it.

 

[GoABX]

Read the WORDS

I keep hearing "I know the words say this, but this is what we really want."

The words of lawsuit say I want ALL of your sh!t, and you can have none. (DHL cannot do business with ABX, ABX will essentially be shutdown and all of us will be unemployed with the exception of a few dozen ANA guys)

The Astar pilots' words are 1) we are defending scope, 2) we are trying to force a merger, 3) Don't worry we can't carry the freight anyway.

If a judge rules in your favor, but realizing Astar can't instantaneously get 60 planes.....allows DHL 12 months to comply. (i.e. ABX will slowly be terminated) Will Astar pilots then have a job action to save our jobs? No, you guys will hit the lottery, double in size, and say "Sorry, Dude, that is too bad."


Everyone is say why can't we get along. But if you read what the words of ALPA lawsuit say, it is shocking we have gotten along this well. If someone came into my house and did this, they would not fair so well.

BY YOUR ACTIONS YOU ARE TRYING TO DESTROY US. BY YOUR WORDS YOU SAY YOU DON'T MEAN IT.

 

[penguin22]

Oops, you are right Eric. It was the Pres. prior to Pres. Pants. It's been awhile now. It was Nov. of 03. My bad. It was at the Heritage Resturant in Cincy. We filed, took a merger assessment, DHL sued, then ABX jumped on, and then the former Pres. said that at the Heritage. It's starting to be like playing telephone.

So the comment by our Pres that you’ve been using to justify your legal job grab was made AFTER you guys were already in court. Any self respecting union president would say the same thing to somebody who’s in court trying to steal our jobs

Here’s the timeline: You said yourself the comment was made Nov of 03, at the Heritage Restaurant

24. On June 16, 2003, ALPA sent a letter to John Fellows, CEO of DHL Holdings and DHL Worldwide.
25. Fellows responded to ALPA in an undated letter sent on or about June 27, 2003.
26. Pursuant to the correspondence referred to in paragraphs 24 and 25, a meeting was held on August 7 between representatives of DHL Holdings, DHL Worldwide, and ALPA.
27. At the conclusion of the meeting of August 7, 2003, the ALPA representatives handed the DHL representatives a letter and grievance dated August 7.
28. On August 11, 2003, DHL Holdings and DHL Worldwide filed a complaint against ALPA in the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York.
29. On August 18, 2003, ALPA filed an Answer and Counter Claims for Immediate Injunctive Relief. ALPA also filed a motion for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction. That entire action is now stayed pending resolution of the instant charge