US Airways "I'm on board lanyards?"

[altimaklr]

Pinnacle CRJ900 CA rates are higher than US Airways E190 rates... They really are an embarrassment.

 

[ackattacker]

I wouldn't badmouth the RJ pilots too much, most of them make more than the top FO salary at US Air.

This is not a true statement. Top FO salary at US Air is $109/hour plus 10% into a retirement fund. Very low to be sure compared to other majors but show me an RJ pilot making that much.

 

[altimaklr]

Current CR9 CA pay rate goes to $106 and will be $119 in 5 years. Add checkairman pay on that and it'll go up another 20% or so.

 

[Flyprdu]

Pinnacle CRJ900 CA rates are higher than US Airways E190 rates... They really are an embarrassment.

Here we go again. Pinnacle logic at work:

The hourly rate is the rate. It's not with overtime, or check airman pay. It is what it is.

9E guys are so quick to tell you how much they earn. They just fail to mention that they're working 22 days a month to get it.

Max 9E 900 pay = 106
Max US 190 pay = 125

It's not close. Does that suck for a major? You bet. But let's not delude ourselves, shall we?

 

[PuffDriver]

At least this RJ pilot accepts his binding arbitration award, even if he isn't happy with the conditions/restrictions. I wouldn't badmouth the RJ pilots too much, most of them make more than the top FO salary at US Air.

Now you want to compare f/o salary at USAir with captain salary at regionals. 20 year f/os at Airays make more than 20 year capatins on the RJ. Plus, you are likely working your hind end off to do it--if you even are. Additionally, there are many other aspects to consider other than pay, although I know that is what RJ pilots consider most important. it is here that USAirways has some of its best kept secrets.

In short, YAWN. RJ pilot-I-know-it-all syndrome

 

[ThrottleJockey1]

Ackattacker,
10% into retirement. Be careful how loud you say it, you might have to explain what happen to your guys pensions.

 

[ackattacker]

Ackattacker,
10% into retirement. Be careful how loud you say it, you might have to explain what happen to your guys pensions.

That is a true statement. Of course I better be quiet around United and Delta pilots, too.

How's the pension plan going over at Express? Gonna take a lump-sum, are you, maybe cruise the world in your new yacht?

Point is things are bad enough at Airways but there's no need to make them seem worse than they are. When you compare apples to apples you are still better off at Airways than at a regional.

 

[Dornier 335]

No mo' "I'm on board" lanyards in August.

A memo came out on 11 July outlining that every US Airways employee and their subsidiaries will get a new US Airways/Star Alliance lanyard. All other lanyards will not be permitted to be worn.

Currently a wide variety of lanyards, badge backers and clips are worn by employees to secure their
company-issued ID and airport badges. This causes confusion as it doesn’t present the professional look
that we are striving to achieve in accordance with our goals to consistently deliver Reliability,
Convenience and Appearance for our customers. It also is, quite frankly, creating divisiveness among our
workforce as lanyards, badge backers and other ID holders are often used to promote individual and
organizational agendas that are counterproductive to creating a positive working environment for all
employees.

 

[OPECJet]

If everyone man's up and throws 'em in the trash, there's safety in numbers.....

Just sayin.

 

[OPECJet]

I'm also reasonably sure your union lanyard is protected under federal law.

 

[ackattacker]

I'm also reasonably sure your union lanyard is protected under federal law.

Hmmm, perhaps. I suspect they would argue that the lanyards "exacerbate employee dissension."

As noted in the Board’s 2007 decision of P.S.K. Supermarkets, Inc., absent “special circumstances,” you cannot prohibit your employees from wearing or displaying union paraphernalia, such as hats, t-shirts, buttons and stickers, at work. “Special circumstances” include situations where the display of union insignia might “jeopardize employee safety, damage machinery or products, exacerbate employee dissention or unreasonably interfere with a public image that [an] employer has established, as part of its business plan, through appearance rules for employees.” Employers that require uniforms, however, may enforce their uniform policy if there is a sound business justification for the requirement. Thus, an employee who interacts with customers may be required to wear the employer’s hat and shirt exclusively if a special circumstance exists as the Board held in a 1995 case, Meijer, Inc. But “customer exposure to union insignia, standing alone, is not a special circumstance which permits an employer to prohibit display of such insignia.” P.S.K. Supermarkets, Inc. Even in circumstances when a uniform appearance (i.e., hat, shirt) is justified, you cannot lawfully prohibit employees from wearing union buttons, stickers or lanyards unless the display is unreasonably large or the message is obscene or otherwise disparaging. An exception to this rule is that if it is employer property and the employer has a uniformly enforced rule against writing or placing stickers on company property, employees do not have the right to deface company property (such as a hard hat, file cabinet, locker, etc.) with union stickers. As is the case for other rules, you cannot enforce these rules in a discriminatory manner. Thus, for example, as the 2009 case of Cintas Corp noted, if you allow your technicians to visit customers wearing some non-company logo cap, you will not be able to prohibit an employee from wearing a union cap.

 

[OPECJet]

That could certainly be used given the sword fight going on at mainline, but PDT / PSA could have some trouble with that rule.

 

[ackattacker]

That could certainly be used given the sword fight going on at mainline, but PDT / PSA could have some trouble with that rule.

I don't think the company would win a NLRB challenge and they know it. The right to wear Union insignia is clearly established through decades of precedent and NLRB decisions. But in the meantime, they have clearly demonstrated their intention to take hostages and new rule is essentially a trap.

 

[BOX OFFICE]

I don't think the company would win a NLRB challenge and they know it. The right to wear Union insignia is clearly established through decades of precedent and NLRB decisions. But in the meantime, they have clearly demonstrated their intention to take hostages and new rule is essentially a trap.

I'm also reasonably sure your union lanyard is protected under federal law.

When you accepted the job, in the forms you signed you agreed to abide by all company policies, including the uniform policy. Further, the company has the right to amend such policies. You named the loophole in the federal law, and therefore company policy trumps any applicable 1st amendment challenge. Furthermore, the supreme court has affirmed on several circumstances that 1st amendment rights don't apply in private forums (company property). You can say/do what you want, but you can still be fired.

 

[B-J-J Fighter]

Don't the Easties routinly damage machinery?