Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

NetJets To Picket

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
What's the 401K match now and what do they want to take it to?
 
What's the 401K match now and what do they want to take it to?

They match 50% of whatever you contribute including the "catch up" contributions from the older folks. For example, you put in $15,000 and they put in $7,500.

They are not changing the contribution formula. They are switching the plan administrator. Accounts vary as to whether the contract required explicit permission from the union to do so or the company only needed to provide ample notification (I only report, you decide). Nobody is sure what the advantages or disadvantages of the new plan are.

But the picket is actually in support of mechanics, dispatchers and flight attendants attached to the Teamsters 284.
 
Last edited:
They are not changing the contribution formula. They are switching the plan administrator. Accounts vary as to whether the contract required explicit permission from the union to do so or the company only needed to provide ample notification...

The only ones who are having trouble "interpreting" this are the ones in management. The contract is crystal clear that it cannot be a unilateral change, and they've blatantly ignored that.

Here's the wording in the agreement:
The Company and the Union may change the Plan during the term of this Agreement by mutual consent, but no change will result in lesser benefits than those in existence at the time this Agreement is made.
There has not been mutual consent, nor has enough information been provided to us to even reach that consent. They're simply breaking the contract they signed with us.
 
The only ones who are having trouble "interpreting" this are the ones in management. The contract is crystal clear that it cannot be a unilateral change, and they've blatantly ignored that.


There has not been mutual consent, nor has enough information been provided to us to even reach that consent. They're simply breaking the contract they signed with us.

Not saying I disagree with you. But there seems to be some question as to whether the issue was run past the previous union retirement committee chair and there were no flags raised at the time. Looks like the company wants the NMB or a judge to decide. In confusion, there is profit...
 
Not saying I disagree with you. But there seems to be some question as to whether the issue was run past the previous union retirement committee chair and there were no flags raised at the time. Looks like the company wants the NMB or a judge to decide. In confusion, there is profit...

The retirement committee is not authorized, nor have they ever been authorized, to make CBA changes. This is a blatant lie by management and they know it.
 
Oh goody. I bet the public is really in the mood for six figure income morons picketing while there is 9 percent unemployment.
You're going?
 
Oh goody. I bet the public is really in the mood for six figure income morons picketing while there is 9 percent unemployment.

Dude are you in management or just really confused?

I need to protect this job. I have a family that depends on me.

Why do you keep coming at us with such ridiculous attacks?

Are you part of the new management team? that has no clue what they are doing?
I thinks so. so why don't you go away. nobody wants your opinion.

G4 look at the writing on the wall. management only wants to grow the charter management side of the company. and for the parent company to keep a CEO in charge of a company he has no clue about is very strange. except for the fact that maybe they want to bust all the unions. lets not forget said parent company has never had one of its 70 wholly owned company's make the Forbes top 100 company's to work for. so you do the math.

and go away...until you become a real pilot again.
 
Oh goody. I bet the public is really in the mood for six figure income morons picketing while there is 9 percent unemployment.

The public isn't the audience. The point is 1) to show Hansell that he can not bully us. We are united, and we will defend our contract. 2) Show the non-bargaining employees that it is possible to stand up to a dictator.
 
Oh goody. I bet the public is really in the mood for six figure income morons picketing while there is 9 percent unemployment.

What a shock, another NJI "moron." Please get a one of those hot private G Wiz jobs that only YOU can do. (Russia and Siberia and all of that)
You're not unemployed and I doubt you really give a s*** about the 9%.
You hate the Union and how your peeps(SE&BN) sold you out.
Good luck, B*.
 
OPE,
Come on silly......we dont talk to the hired help....let G4 alone.
Hi Bob.....
Yeah, I know.... "Please don't feed the bears". Still couldn't resist the cheap shot he set himself up for.

Don't know Bob though.
 
The public isn't the audience. The point is 1) to show Hansell that he can not bully us. We are united, and we will defend our contract. 2) Show the non-bargaining employees that it is possible to stand up to a dictator.


When y'all in the union world describe the company I fly for, I don't even recognize it. Just a different way of looking at things, I suppose. I have a great time, get paid a lot, and don't consider Hansell a dictator. I know BN, and think he is an excellent manager and a good person. I can't imagine a better company to work for. Sorry.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom