Alpa at Flex?

[GlorifiedCabbie]

Let it happen in its own time. You guys do more to dissuade those who are on the fence.

So be it. If these guys haven't seen the train wreck about to happen by now , they never will. I hope they will not bring everyone down to their level.

 

[luckydog]

Luckydog, here it is: http://us.practicallaw.com/6-514-5448?q=&qp=&qo=&qe=

I'm familiar with the link. The case has some similarities to the DAC/FJ/FO situation, but I'm sure it can be argued that it is dissimilar enough not to be a factor. The lawyers will work it out.

It thought the ironic aspect of the case was that it was an IBT affiliate trying to do a staple integration to another IBT represented work force. They were the ones trying to argue that McCaskill-Bond didn't apply.

 

[doh]

Since IBT does not have a unified merger policy, it was possible to end up in exactly this situation. Now the court has set precedent, closing the doors will not put them in a staple situation.

 

[SDCFI]

Luckydog, here it is: http://us.practicallaw.com/6-514-5448?q=&qp=&qo=&qe=

I'm not a lawyer and I didn't stay at a HIE last night but I don't see how that case applies to us. First off Flexjet did not acquire FO, and they are not shutting down FO or combining the operations on one cert (which I think was the original plan). Also no FO pilots have been or are being furloughed. The question is: what is the legal precedent that requires a seniority list merger in the case that single carrier is determined and the vote goes non-union? You would still have two separate pilot groups on separate op certs with separate dispatch/maint/ops. If it was that easy why haven't regionals like Envoy that is wholly owned by AAG filed and forced a seniority merger with AA? You can't get any more single carrier than that relationship.

 

[Peter_Griffin]

I'm not a lawyer and I didn't stay at a HIE last night but I don't see how that case applies to us. First off Flexjet did not acquire FO, and they are not shutting down FO or combining the operations on one cert (which I think was the original plan). Also no FO pilots have been or are being furloughed. The question is: what is the legal precedent that requires a seniority list merger in the case that single carrier is determined and the vote goes non-union? You would still have two separate pilot groups on separate op certs with separate dispatch/maint/ops. If it was that easy why haven't regionals like Envoy that is wholly owned by AAG filed and forced a seniority merger with AA? You can't get any more single carrier than that relationship.

The question is be whether or not they actually maintain separate ops and dispatch (Like Envoy and AA) or whether they are merging it all. I think what's been stated on this and other threads is that has all but been done with the exception of the pilot lists and a final move of ops to Ohio. I believe its the OneSky vision at issue including FBOs and charters in the mix.

BTW, ran into a FLOPS crew the other day who told me they are crewing (and flying in their paint) exclusive FX contracts for metal FX doesn't even own. So it sounds to me like there is a way to get more single carrier than the AA situation. If true, that will be the wasp that bites the Flex guys in the a$$ and they'll be soon praying they had a union yesterday.

I no longer have a pony in the race but I am very curious to see how this all turns out. I certainly don't miss the blind eyed koolaid drinkers who will never see what is plainly before their eyes, a special blend reserved just for the blue bellied bunch. How ironically apropos they chose to be be identified that way. I'd say I hope they enjoy the kick in the balls that's served on the side but found in my years there very few had any.

 

[luckydog]

BTW, ran into a FLOPS crew the other day who told me they are crewing (and flying in their paint) exclusive FX contracts for metal FX doesn't even own.

That's been going on for a few months now. I have no idea what the owner contract on that deal would look like.

A few owners might be fooled but enough will see the bait & switch that it won't be the end of the world. Its a Flight Options aircraft being flown by Flight Options crews with an FX tail number. As long as the 135 brief includes the 'Operated by Flight Options LLC' its all legal. Flexjet could fly FJ aircraft with FLOPS tail numbers also, but why would anyone do that...

 

[warlord19]

AAh PG, another aviation genius and morals arbitrator who has all the answers and not a clue. Wished the world had a few more hi-fallutin idiots like you.
WL

 

[SDCFI]

That's been going on for a few months now. I have no idea what the owner contract on that deal would look like.

A few owners might be fooled but enough will see the bait & switch that it won't be the end of the world. Its a Flight Options aircraft being flown by Flight Options crews with an FX tail number. As long as the 135 brief includes the 'Operated by Flight Options LLC' its all legal. Flexjet could fly FJ aircraft with FLOPS tail numbers also, but why would anyone do that...

This is FI.com so obviously take this with a grain, or a pound, of salt but I was told by someone who flew a Flexjet owner that had bought into a P300 that there were two contracts. One with FO through I believe 2016 and then Flexjet after that. Does that amount to a hill of beans? No clue but that's what I heard.

 

[Peter_Griffin]

AAh PG, another aviation genius and morals arbitrator who has all the answers and not a clue. Wished the world had a few more hi-fallutin idiots like you.
WL

Aaahhhh, my old nemesis warlord I haven't missed you.

But the fact is, if I were wrong or off base you wouldn't even take the time to try and obfuscate.

The time for a flexjet union was yesterday. It's actually too late. They are f'd beyond belief for taking more than 2 days after that chicklet toothed carpetbagger bought them out. They didn't even apparently read his book or pay attention to history. Ricci's a taker not creator. Effing idiot kool-aid drinkers. If I didn't know so many great guys there I'd almost feel vindicated.

 

[warlord19]

Peter, Peter, for a fool with no supposedly no horse in the race, you certainly have a load of horse sh*t to sell. Your certainly entitled to your "informed" opinion....however, it appears the FPOC will not even participate in an open forum discussion of the merits of joining the IBT. And your apparent visceral hatred of KR and everything non-union reveals your empty soul.
Cheers

 

[Peter_Griffin]

Peter, Peter, for a fool with no supposedly no horse in the race, you certainly have a load of horse sh*t to sell. Your certainly entitled to your "informed" opinion....however, it appears the FPOC will not even participate in an open forum discussion of the merits of joining the IBT. And your apparent visceral hatred of KR and everything non-union reveals your empty soul.
Cheers

Well this is probably the only place you and I will ever agree. If that is indeed true that they will not participate in a forum then they are dumber than dirt.

I have no personal let alone visceral hatred of KR. I believe that's reserved for the people he's screwed and that list is long. You are correct however that I do have disdain for all things non union in aviation. I've seen to many times the great disadvantages to the pilot group that results, especially over the long haul.

But you've always enjoyed fellating the egos of upper management mistaking yourself as one of the in group. Here's a shocker: you are as equally on the chopping block as those you've helped put there. You are nothing to them. But here at least you have a little variety this time and I hear your people like variety.

 

[Peter_Griffin]

That's been going on for a few months now. I have no idea what the owner contract on that deal would look like.

A few owners might be fooled but enough will see the bait & switch that it won't be the end of the world. Its a Flight Options aircraft being flown by Flight Options crews with an FX tail number. As long as the 135 brief includes the 'Operated by Flight Options LLC' its all legal. Flexjet could fly FJ aircraft with FLOPS tail numbers also, but why would anyone do that...

You're missing the point lucky. If that's not management setting up for single carrier I don't know what is. Looks to me your lists will be merged whether you like it or not and since FLOP is the only party unionized the advantage in that matter will go to them.

Why do you people refuse to see the plain and simple when it is laid out for you like a road map?

 

[Dirty Squirrel]

This is FI.com so obviously take this with a grain, or a pound, of salt but I was told by someone who flew a Flexjet owner that had bought into a P300 that there were two contracts. One with FO through I believe 2016 and then Flexjet after that. Does that amount to a hill of beans? No clue but that's what I heard.

Truth. Straight out of the Flexjet sales department from a sales guy who used to work for Options.

 

[luckydog]

You're missing the point lucky. If that's not management setting up for single carrier I don't know what is. Looks to me your lists will be merged whether you like it or not and since FLOP is the only party unionized the advantage in that matter will go to them.

Why do you people refuse to see the plain and simple when it is laid out for you like a road map?

No, I see the point. I see it very clearly.

KR has said he doesn't want a union at FJ but his every action brings the prospect of a vote closer.

He said he wanted the lists merged but then changed his mind. I'm sure he knows there will be an integration, just as I'm absolutely sure there will be an integration.

I'm also absolutely sure the integration will be "fair and equitable" but as the FJ owners flee the program, the fences will be jumped as the new OneSky becomes the old Flight Options in all it's glory. The dumbing down of FJ and dilution of it's culture will lead to an exodus of owners and be the downfall of a pretty OK place to work.

All this sounds like arguing who gets to be the captain of the Titanic as it takes on water.

 

[doh]

I'm not a lawyer and I didn't stay at a HIE last night but I don't see how that case applies to us. First off Flexjet did not acquire FO, and they are not shutting down FO or combining the operations on one cert (which I think was the original plan). Also no FO pilots have been or are being furloughed. The question is: what is the legal precedent that requires a seniority list merger in the case that single carrier is determined and the vote goes non-union? You would still have two separate pilot groups on separate op certs with separate dispatch/maint/ops. If it was that easy why haven't regionals like Envoy that is wholly owned by AAG filed and forced a seniority merger with AA? You can't get any more single carrier than that relationship.

AA and Eagle maintained separate Presidents, VP Flt Ops, DOs, etc. AA took a "hands off" approach to Eagle operations. We have the same managers for both groups. For example, Mike Silvestro is in charge of both pilot groups. AA always said they would run separate ops at Eagle. Ricci has said at every opportunity he wants combined ops. That is the difference. And it is never one airline buying another airline. Go reread the ruling. It is a parent company buying an airline and owning another airline already.

 

[doh]

Peter, Peter, for a fool with no supposedly no horse in the race, you certainly have a load of horse sh*t to sell. Your certainly entitled to your "informed" opinion....however, it appears the FPOC will not even participate in an open forum discussion of the merits of joining the IBT. And your apparent visceral hatred of KR and everything non-union reveals your empty soul.
Cheers

I wish I could tag Peter Griffin here too. I would leap at the chance to participate in an Open Forum. What is being proposed by management is a CLOSED FORUM!!! They want to stage this dog and pony show at a venue where they have exclusive control over who will be admitted, thus giving them exclusive control over the questions asked. That allows them to have canned, polished, prepared answer, while at the same time handing us a set of "gotchas". I will not show up for anything like that. Open forum, where all parties may attend, or no thanks. The Teamsters, by the way, are not the third party. The third party is the labor law firm management is using to run their anti union campaign. The Teamsters are the fourth party that we chose because they are the ONLY ones that represent fractional airlines. There is no other union, despite the ramblings of management to the contrary.

 

[doh]

Hmmm, silence. Reveal BS for what it is and the rats scatter back to their dark holes.

 

[Peter_Griffin]

I wish I could tag Peter Griffin here too. I would leap at the chance to participate in an Open Forum. What is being proposed by management is a CLOSED FORUM!!! They want to stage this dog and pony show at a venue where they have exclusive control over who will be admitted, thus giving them exclusive control over the questions asked. That allows them to have canned, polished, prepared answer, while at the same time handing us a set of "gotchas". I will not show up for anything like that. Open forum, where all parties may attend, or no thanks. The Teamsters, by the way, are not the third party. The third party is the labor law firm management is using to run their anti union campaign. The Teamsters are the fourth party that we chose because they are the ONLY ones that represent fractional airlines. There is no other union, despite the ramblings of management to the contrary.

Well now that's a completely different story than the one that was presented. I'm glad to hear you would jump at the chance to meet. The only group that should avoid it is the one with something to hide and why I made the dumber than dirt comment since it might just be the only forum in which you can trap KR and his long list of lies, half truths and honest feeling about his employees. You would be quite stupid to not want that. Thanks for straightening that up.

But now that we know the true story, let me guess: you've offered to meet on level playing ground several times but the rules keep changing. You agree to all the negotiable terms and then they change again. It's FUD 101.

How interesting that Warlord19 knew to come back at just the right time with just enough inside information to steer the conversation. HMMMMMMM... And lucky for them he is too stupid to see they are using him. There's always a few dumb (or greedy) ones they can count on to do they're bidding. Also FUD 101.

More FUD 101. Let me also guess he is using management picked cronies (like warlord) on here, bluebelly and perhaps even the union site to direct the weak among you into believing there is little support for a union or that you have picked the wrong union. I bet there's also quite a few accusations that the organizing group is destroying the camaraderie among pilots and that only losers support the drive effort.

Yep, all bush league stuff. Tighten up your bootstraps. As you get closer to the goal it gets nastier. But just remember the nastier it gets, the more you are winning.

You only have two fighting for their jobs right now. Expect to double or triple that when they think you are close to submitting for a vote. It's their last ditch effort, make people fear for their jobs.

 

[GlorifiedCabbie]

Latest update is that there are 5 hostages now. If you think any Flex pilot can avoid being the next target of KR by just doing your job and following the rules, you are mistaken. The new standard is "you will carry the write ups".

 

[doh]

Peter, you must be psychic! Or just familiar with management tactics...