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

Abx?

  • Thread starter Thread starter xspud
  • Start date Start date
  • Watchers Watchers 32

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
Register   Log in
"...proffer for an Osaka base". I hope this is still posturing by the company and not an attempt to ram thru a shortsighted, ill-conceived plan. I believe I'll pass too.
 
inplaneview said:
"...proffer for an Osaka base". I hope this is still posturing by the company and not an attempt to ram thru a shortsighted, ill-conceived plan. I believe I'll pass too.
Click to expand...

Based on what I have heard so far I have no plans to bid such a proffer. I think I'm probably senior enough to aviod a "junior man" assignment.
 
What about those Junior folks that cannot pass. If or should I say when, they junior man all the FO slots, the junior FO could not bid out, because of the inability to downbid. They could not bid back to the 9 and bump a junior new hire.

I am all for growth, but at what cost.
 
Bitter said:
What about those Junior folks that cannot pass. If or should I say when, they junior man all the FO slots, the junior FO could not bid out, because of the inability to downbid. They could not bid back to the 9 and bump a junior new hire.

I am all for growth, but at what cost.
Click to expand...

So what are you saying bitter? Senior crew who don't want to do it should bid it to save the poor junior crewmember? Get real! It may be a raw deal but that's the way a seniority system works. You can always vote with your feet.

I am in no way saying I find the cost of this growth acceptable. If I liked the "deal" I would bid it.
 
erichartmann said:
So what are you saying bitter? Senior crew who don't want to do it should bid it to save the poor junior crewmember? Get real! It may be a raw deal but that's the way a seniority system works. You can always vote with your feet.
Click to expand...

Ahhhh. There's the good ole Teamsters 1224 mentality that we all know and love. Me me me me me me me. I got mine. Screw you.

Contrast this against the last sentence in the latest email from the union that is pleading:

"Above all, when it comes times to ratify this agreement, remember that your decisions will affect not only the lives of you and your family but by everyone junior to you on the seniority list."

Yeah. Right. 1224 members thinking about what's best for the entire membership (especially those junior to them) and the future membership beyond what they can get for themselves right now. :puke: :laugh:

Now that's funny right there....I don't care who ya'are.

This is the farthest thing from a "union" I have ever seen.

The senior guys probably don't want to bid it until they can get it guaranteed in writing that they can go over there for 30 days, get paid for 15 days of overtime, and then come home and fly more overtime on their days off out of their domicile.
 
erichartmann said:
So what are you saying bitter? Senior crew who don't want to do it should bid it to save the poor junior crewmember? Get real! It may be a raw deal but that's the way a seniority system works. You can always vote with your feet.

I am in no way saying I find the cost of this growth acceptable. If I liked the "deal" I would bid it.
Click to expand...

You misunderstood what I was saying. I never said the Senior should save the Junior....I did not even intend to imply it.

What I was driving at, was that a junior crewmember would be locked into this for a very long time, due to the inability to down bid. The only way out of Japan would be to hold 767 ILN or upgrade. That would/will take years. While new hire 9 FO's junior to them would have a better deal, with a stateside base. This would surely be making a mockery of seniority. To junior to avoid it, to senior to get out of it!!

We need to negotiate an ability to downbid, so the junior folks can get out of a domicile, that no one wants. We don't like the deal any more than you........voting with our feet is not a very sympathetic option. Try to think with some unity in mind......
 
If a junior pilot was "forced" into the 767 Japan, why couldn't he bid out at first opportunity? He didn't bid it, did he?

And eric, come on, what is up your a$$? the first mention of anyone senior having to deal with a junior person and you snap! Oh, I'm sorry you did make this company the great one it is. We should all have to suffer so you can do what you want.

The company is going to screw this up and blame us. Investors should be very seriously looking at our management and ask them why this didn't happen.
 
ABXbooger said:
If a junior pilot was "forced" into the 767 Japan, why couldn't he bid out at first opportunity? He didn't bid it, did he?
Click to expand...

Not really the issue. Forced into it or not, you cannot downbid.

If the Japan domicile is a reality, the junior folks are there to stay, while new hires take there vacated seats in ILN.

So.....say yes to the ANA flying, but not a Japan domicile.

Anyone know if they have to recall the furloughs to fill unfiled proffers?
 
Last edited:
I pulled out the contract and couldn't even find the article that says we can't downbid, though as far as I know we can't unless surplused. There probably isn't any language about a crewmember who is assigned having the right to downbid? Anyone know the pertinent articles? If I read the contract correctly, management has the right to assign or hire into any unbid vacancies, their choice.

I'm not sure we'll get that far, though. As the SPC Comittee letter said, "This is an important opportunity that requires answers up front, much talent, and an open dialogue to pull off in a short period of time." This week's meetings will be critical. We'll find out if it's even possible to get answers and have dialogue.

I think it will be a shame if we don't. If ANA ends up with egg on it's face ABX is going to take a major credibility hit. It may be a long time before we see an opportunity like this again. I don't see anywhere that the union or pilot group has obstructed this deal, either. I think the majority of the group wants us to get this contract, even if they don't want to do it themselves. But the silence from management has, as usual, been deafening. If I depended on the company channels of communication, I would be completely uninformed. And the arrogance of the domicile presentation (ie: "we don't have to negotiate anything") is breathtaking. And I speak as one who is actually interested in bidding this; I am willing to move over there. But the lack of answers is scary.
 
I doubt that there will be a foreign domicile. Just too many problems and complexities that management hasn't though about. Then, when they try to sell it to the pilot group, they receive a very cold reception when they can't answer any of the crew's questions. I'd bet on either a LAX domicile or an international division in ILN.

I believe that the e-board is well aware of the problem of someone getting stuck in this and being unable to get out. I think a way out will be high on their priority list.
 
Bitter said:
We need to negotiate an ability to downbid, so the junior folks can get out of a domicile, that no one wants.
Click to expand...
Who says you can't downbid? You can ... I think you're limited to one downbid in your career, but I don't know why you'd need more than that.
 
The downbid option is due to the fact the 76 is STILL considered a "new" aircraft b/c the company wants to continue to hose us with the 76 scheduling side letter. Otherwise, this issue is still irrelevant as being junior manned into a seat is not the same as bidding the seat and then trying to downbid.
 
I can only find 2 instances of "downbidding" in the contract:

1) Anyone in any seat can bid the 767 because it's "new" equipment. A.21,S.H

2) A surplus crewmember can bid into any equipment, seat or domicile and bump a junior crewmember. A.11, S.F

So a crewmember who is assigned the 767 (because a vacancy is unbid per A.11,S.E) does not have the right to bid the DC9 even if there is a vacancy. They could bid the 767 in another domicile (obviously wouldn't happen for a long time).

That's the way I read the contract, do I have it right?
 
If they open this domicile the way they did Miami under Art 14.B.2. then they would take only those currently qualified in type and seat. If this is the case then the junior 767 Captains and F/Os would be the ones to get hosed. It would be a stretch for management to try and say this new domicile would not affect manning levels but then again look at their track record.
 
Are they going to wait for 'authority' before they proffer and spool up? It takes 6-8 weeks to make a crew member. Hopefully, they don't wait until approval and then just plan on hosing the current crews and backfill. It's not like the 4 planes we are getting in the next 3 months can be autopiloted or radio controlled.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Back
Top