Airlines and Unions

[Astra Guy]

Ok guys/gals, here are several questions. Do you think membership in your union helps your company retain profitability? Do you think that your union rewards those who are the best in the business or do they reward those who have the seniority to hang on during lean economic times regardless of their worth?

 

[FurloughedAgain]

I think that the union has done more damage to the profession, to the stability of the industry, and to my own career expectations than any of us could have ever imagined.

The association has so profoundly impacted my view of this so-called "career" that if I could find any other vocation (or if I had any other marketable skill) i'd quit flying in an instant.

Just my opinion.

 

[Astra Guy]

Thanks Furloughed,

I wondered if anyone would even respond. I am have not worked in your environment but I thought I wanted to at one time. I have had some experience with unions in my early working days and it was apparent from the first encounter that the party line was don't do more than is expected since it will raise the standard for everyone else to live up to.

I believe that unions had their time and place some time ago. I do think that if the driving force of any business is not to reward the workers that excel and reward those with more seniority only there is something wrong. It sure does not afford one to believe in the addage that the cream rises to the top. I don't know how to fix the problem but there are those in industry that do. I know that we have manufacturing plants that are both union and non union. The non union guys are paid better and seem to enjoy being part of a team. I can't say the same about the union plants. They seem more worried about retaining their position while wasting time.

It does seem odd to me that this guaranteed pay for 75 hours/month for those on reserve when they only fly 30 or so is detrimental. The problem is that some of these folks would love to stay on reserve forever simply because they can make ends meet while putting forth little effort.

I am sure there will be some attacks here, but I am a big boy.

I do think there needs to be some changes so folks like you don't have to face this situation over and over again.

 

[spanky2]

I came to the airlines after 20+ years of military flying. "Union" was a 4-letter in the military and butt of many jokes. I went to my airline training with an open mind...unions (in my case ALPA, the big-boy) had an important place in the industry regarding safety. That is their roots, still critical, but IMO they have strayed from that origin. ALPA rattles its swords, touts job security, back the PAC, etc ... and here I am (along with thousands more) FURLOUGHED. IMO, ALPA (as an institution) thrives on turmoil and distrust...it is the fuel for their negotiations. They want me to "need" the union to fight the evils of mgt. What have they done for me lately ? I recently read an article in Ailrine Pilot where ALPA Pres Duane Woerth says that ALPA has lost millions of $$ from loss of dues from over 8000 furloughs. So, seems to me that ALPA only cares about $$.

IMO...ALPA is a dinosaur. They need to evolve or die.

IMO...ALPA is the "borg" ... goal is TOTAL assimilation of all pilot unions to get more $$ and hold mgt in fear of a national strike. Resistance is futile.

 

[TonyC]

It does seem odd to me that this guaranteed pay for 75 hours/month for those on reserve when they only fly 30 or so is detrimental. The problem is that some of these folks would love to stay on reserve forever simply because they can make ends meet while putting forth little effort.

You're absolutely right. There should be no reserve, and every pilot should have a published schedule of flying that they can stick to.

And when an airplane breaks... or a delay occurs due to weather that extends a pilot beyond his FAR limits - - before the pax arrive at their destination, or before the boxes are delivered. Well, better write that into next month's schedule, because there will be no reserves to pick up the unscheduled flying.

No reserves to fill in when a pilot goes sick. No lazy, greedy reserves to fix the schedule when the schedule changes.

Is your company willing to take that risk?

 

[Publishers]

Old Subject

This is one of the subjects that can be debated forever and forever.

There is no question that unions thrive on making management the enemy. One approach to bringing diverse parties together is the "greater threat" theory. Create a big enough outside enemy and your members, troops, group, whoever will become tighter.

The fact is that unions today are big business and in many ways no better or worse than those they supposedly represent.

they often remove the incentive to excel and create an atmosphere of mediocrity. They stick employers with people that they often do not want and who tend to poison the others.

Do they create higher wages, I suppose so but they make it by contract and without any relativity to performance and or to the overall economy you operate in. In a good many cases, they kill the golden goose they have signed.

There is also the issue of size and numbers. Pilots and others get all excited with the rhetoric at some of the large airlines and want to translate it to their small company. Does not happen. The union is interested to the extent you have numbers. Total people you have times total average pay. In the end, that is what the dues will be based on and that is their interest.

In the end, companies like Southwest and Airtrans grow not because of lack of unions but because their employees want to excel and beat the others. If they become large and lose that attitiude, there will always be another one coming up from behind.

 

[spanky2]

Comes down to leadership, at the union and at mgt. SWA is HEAVILY unionized and are doing pretty darn good. SWA pilots have their own union, SWAPA.

 

[Ualexpress]

It does seem odd to me that this guaranteed pay for 75 hours/month for those on reserve when they only fly 30 or so is detrimental. The problem is that some of these folks would love to stay on reserve forever simply because they can make ends meet while putting forth little effort.

Your lack of airline experience is obvious in this statement. So are reserves not to be paid to be avialiable for the company when needed? So if a reserve does not get called for the month and flies 0 hours they should get zero? Do corporate pilots who are on call 24/7 get paid if they are not used? It is called maintaing a schedule and the costs of a reserve pilot who only flies 30 hours a month is the cost of doing business. Being on reseve is probably the most undesirable part of an airline pilot's career and being paid at least a minimum salary is fair. It is basically a salary (75 X hourly rate) to be avialiable for the company when someone calls in sick or when when irregular operations require your use. What does jetblue (non-union) pay its reserves? I guarantee it is not what they fly and only that. I guarantee it is 70 or 75 hours (whatever their min is, not sure). So I am sorry if you think reserves should not be paid a minimum salary.

 

[Publishers]

Inhouse

Inhouse unions-- for the purposes of this discussion, I tend to discount inhouse unions. The principal reason for that is they usually can respond quicker and more on target to company specific problems.

The trouble with ALPA and the rest of these is that they serve too many masters to the benefit of a few.

 

[surplus1]

I think that the union has done more damage to the profession, to the stability of the industry, and to my own career expectations than any of us could have ever imagined.

As you already know, I have been and I am a frequent critic of several of the union's policies. However, I cannot agree with your statement.

We must recognize that ALPA is not a living thing. ALPA is a collection of people. The Association itself has not damaged the profession. On the contrary, in its long history, under responsible leadership, it has been an immense benefit to airline pilots everywhere in more ways than we can count.

I don't have to tell you that ALPA is run by airline pilots. When the wrong people gain control of the Association, it is they that pervert its standards and misdirect its purposes. In other words, in more recent times, we ourselves have done the damage to ourselves. "[The pursuit of] money is the root of all evil."

We do not need to abandon our goals and desert our country because it has gone astray. We need to redouble our efforts and restore it to the traditions of its founders.

The association has so profoundly impacted my view of this so-called "career" that if I could find any other vocation (or if I had any other marketable skill) i'd quit flying in an instant.

Just my opinion.

Try not to be bitter or disilusioned. Recognize that not everyone that flys is the ideal person with the qualities that we admire. Not everyone is suited to set our collective direction, support our collective values, and control our destiny. It is not the Association that has failed and negatively impacted our careers or our profession. It is the people that WE have put in charge of it.

Sometimes the wrong people wind up in the wrong jobs. As a result our cherished institutions change course and begin to destroy the very things that we love most. Our responsibility is not to flee in despair, but to fight them, remove them, and restore our union to the correct path. It is not easy, and it takes time, but it has to be done.

At times it takes the extreme of Civil War to make the required changes, but the sacrifice is justified by the light of a restored Union.

I hope you will join in that effort. It's worth it.

 

[wms]

No reserves to fill in when a pilot goes sick. No lazy, greedy reserves to fix the schedule when the schedule changes.

It does seem odd to me that this guaranteed pay for 75 hours/month for those on reserve when they only fly 30 or so is detrimental. The problem is that some of these folks would love to stay on reserve forever simply because they can make ends meet while putting forth little effort.

The airlines need reserves whether there is a union or not. There are many unknowns which require that flexibilty with the work force. Being paid a guarantee for sitting reserve is not being paid to fly, but being paid to be available when the company needs you.
If there was no minimum pay a company could put most pilots on reserve and only pay for the hours they flew. Minimum pay motivates the company hire and schedule effectively and use reservists efficiently. If this is not being done it's because the company is not doing a good job at scheduling, not because pilots are lazy, which we are, or we'd be doing something else.
If it wasn't for unions you'd only get one day off in seven, and not necessarily at home. You'd have no protection for refusing to do something that wasn't right. You'd be scheduled for 16 hour days with no meals. ETC. You'd have no forum for legitimate concerns.
I'm not a union maggot, but I'm glad to have support when I need it, and I use it to get my dues worth.

 

[logolight]

The trouble with ALPA is that they tend to side with the major airlines more than the regionals because they profit more from union dues from higher wage pilots. The other problem is that contract negotiating between a major and a regional becomes a conflict because they are both being represented by the same union. And it's the union that has to protect both of its' carriers from each other. That makes things very complicated.

 

[de727ups]

My union

There is no doubt in my mind that my job is a better job because of my union and our contract that spells out what the company can and can't do. Gawd help us all if we didn't have an organized pilot group. I don't even want to think about it.

 

[enigma]

Astra Guy

Are you totally out of touch with reality? Do you not understand the reason for having a reserve pilot force? Do you think that companies would eliminate reserves if ALPA went away?

Has your department ever experienced an ill employee. Are all of your employees supermen who show for ever trip?

Do you dispatch your Astra with ZERO extra fuel? Somehow, I imagine that you carry at least 45 minutes of fuel over the expected burn. But you question companies that staff in the same manner. Worse, you insinuate that the employees themselves are the cause of the reserve force.

It is attitudes like yours that allow the union to remain in place. If it wasn't for managers who would run employees into the ground, unions would die off. Or become partners as it would seem that SWAPA has done.

You still don't know what I think about unions, but you do know what I think of managers who act like slave masters.

More later on the union thing.

enigma

 

[njcapt]

I think that the union has done more damage to the profession, to the stability of the industry, and to my own career expectations than any of us could have ever imagined.

The association has so profoundly impacted my view of this so-called "career" that if I could find any other vocation (or if I had any other marketable skill) i'd quit flying in an instant.

Just my opinion.

I really should know better than to get involved in this particular discussion, but I wanted to point out something that seem pertinent in your case. Not to trivialize your job situation, but a union is the reason you were furloughed rather than terminated. Only a collective bargaining agreement dictates that you have recall rights. Without an agreement, an instance where you produced too much stank in the corporate headquarters crappper while in the presence of the chief pilot could result in your not being called back. This, while the biggest CP but kisser gets an upgrade.

I'm not sure how you rationalize that a union has seriously affected your career goals, but that should probably wait for another thread.

 

[surplus1]

Thanks Furloughed,

I wondered if anyone would even respond. I am have not worked in your environment but I thought I wanted to at one time. I have had some experience with unions in my early working days and it was apparent from the first encounter that the party line was don't do more than is expected since it will raise the standard for everyone else to live up to.

With all due respect I must disagree. I would argue that it is not your "experience with unions" that gives you this view, it is your experience with people.

I believe that unions had their time and place some time ago. I do think that if the driving force of any business is not to reward the workers that excel and reward those with more seniority only there is something wrong. It sure does not afford one to believe in the addage that the cream rises to the top. I don't know how to fix the problem but there are those in industry that do. I know that we have manufacturing plants that are both union and non union. The non union guys are paid better and seem to enjoy being part of a team. I can't say the same about the union plants. They seem more worried about retaining their position while wasting time.

We differ again. It is not unions that have "had their time and place". They are perhaps even more necessary today than they were yesterday. In the older world integrity was a quality that we cherished. You could shake a man's hand and depend on his word. In today's world most people scoff at the idea of integrity and depending on a man's word is considered stupid. The demise of unions has led to an ever increasing rise in the very same greed, opression and exploitation of workers that originally resulted in their founding.

It may be true that the cream doesn't rise to the top in a union shop. It is also true that the cream doesn't rise to the top in the management shop, or the non-union shop. What does rise, is greed, power, and all the associated evils that come from the pursuit of money, the lack of integrity and the absence of restraint.

It is the why of the theivery that devastates companies like Enron, WorldCom, and Arthur Anderson (which represent only the tip of the iceberg). It is why companies like Wal-Mart, exploit their workers, lock their people in, pervert local politicians, destroy small businesses, rewrite and pervert the laws of eminent domain, so that one family may get richer by the billions on the backs of the very public that is the source of their wealth. It is the reason that companies like Tyson Foods, buy another company that is well run, profitable and the life blood of an entire community, then destroy it and all of the people that live there, because they want not just a profit, but more profit.

It is why we cannot trust our brokers and financial advisers, who will steal our investments to enrich themselves by lying and cheating and violating the law.

Unions are not the cause of these problems. WE are the cause, whether we belong to a union or whether we do not.

A "merit system", which is what you seem to advocate, is a figment of the imagination. There is in fact no such thing. As a military man you should know that. Promotions do not come on the basis of the cream rising to the top. They come as a result of the right "politics" and the ability of your wife to please the wives of those already in power. Tow the line, kiss the right posteriors and one day you too may become a General. Don't do it and you'll surely retire as an obscure Lt. Colonel.

The abuse and misuse of power and money is rampant througout our society. In our politics (both national and local), in our businesses, in our military, and yes, in our labor unions.

Unions don't cause these endemic problems. Moral decadence does, and it is regretably rampant. I'm not a preacher, but one doesn't have to be to tell the difference between right and wrong. If you decide to direct your disatisfaction on a ficticious enemy that you call a labor union, it will not cure the malady. "Let him that is without sin cast the first stone."

It does seem odd to me that this guaranteed pay for 75 hours/month for those on reserve when they only fly 30 or so is detrimental. The problem is that some of these folks would love to stay on reserve forever simply because they can make ends meet while putting forth little effort.

You appear to be a corporate pilot. If that is true, I'm quite sure that you do not fly 75 hours per month either. You probably recieve a salary, in exchange for which you make yourself available to be used, if and when, and how, your boss decides. In some months he may use you more than others. I doubt that you refund all or any portion of your salary, in the months that you only make 2 trips. On those months, and most others, you sit around the company hangar and wait, where you may do some "busy work", putting forth "little effort". You call yourself and "asset to the company", which justifies (in your mind) the reason for the existence of the airplane you fly and the job you hold. In the corporate Board Room, the CFO regards you as a "luxury" and a liability. When times are good, the company can "afford" to maintain you as a perk for its top executives. When times are bad, you may very well appear for work one day, only to discover that the flight department has been shut down, the airplane sold, and a severance check is on your desk. Perhaps you rose to your position as the cream of the crop, but no one that matters knows that, nor do they care. You, just like us, are a "work unit". You will be used as required and then discarded or replaced by a more compliant "unit".

You are permanently "on reserve" and your salary is the equivalent of the 75 hour salary that an airline pilot receives and calls a "guarantee". The company pays him to be "available", just as your company pays you to be "available". Whether or not they use you, is beyond your control. It is also beyond the control of the reserve airline pilot. A cost of doing business.

I don't mean any of that as an attack on you personally, nor an attack on what you do. It is merely a different perspective than the one you seem to harbor. I'm quite sure that you are "worth" whatever they pay you. By the same token, we are "worth" our 75-hour guarantee. [By the way, it is not 75 hours at all carriers. That varies with the contract of employment].

I do think there needs to be some changes so folks like you don't have to face this situation over and over again.

Yes, there should be some changes. Management should get on with running the business, instead of worrying about their tax-free pensions, bonuses while the company is losing billions, and golden parachutes when they fail at what they were hired (and paid exorbitant salaries) to do. Maybe our seniority system does not always allow the cream to rise to the top, but when we fail at what we do, the consequence is not a bonus and a golden parachute. Somehow I think I prefer a pastuerized liquid to one that allows spoiled cream to float on the top.

I really don't think we need to make apologies for the existence of labor unions. They have been created, in the main, by the malfeasance of executives. The cream apparently soured before it got to the top.

 

[Draginass]

If managements were enlighted and practiced good leadership, there would be no need for unions. You will find that companies that have lousy labor relations almost ALWAYS have incompetent management. I don't enjoy giving $200 a month to union dues. Jet Blue is a good example of what good leadership can do. Now, that said, I don't believe for a second that it's because Needleman is a good guy. It's because he's smart and wants to put off unionization of his employees as long as possible.

That said, Bush and the corporations are doing their best to slowly choke unions. In turn, a lot of union employees and especially airline employees have abused their union protections, which make it all the easier to be attacked.

Now let's say for the sake of arguement, that tomorrow all unions were outlawed. What do you think would happen to safety, crew pushing, intimidation, capricious firings, etc? Unfortunately, the airline business has recently not attracted foresighted, capable or ethical executives. The FAA and government is ineffective and apathetic in enforcement of safety standards and reliably only repond to tragedies and bad press.

That said, it's clear where the industry, and in reality, the rest of the economy is going under Mr. Bush's leadership.

1. Corporations are trying to divorce themselves from defined pension plans. They want to shift that burden to the employee. However, expect senior executive compensation to continue to climb past the 400 times average worker. It's a closed system of patronage where BOD's scratch each other's backs.

2. Corporations and Mr. Bush want to "globalize" labor. His latest attempt to legalize immigration criminals accomplishes two of his goals . . . cheap, compliant labor for his corporate exec friends, plus trying to gain favor of the Mexican American vote. He'll probably next want to give immigration criminals the right to vote. In the executives' mind, there is no loyalty to employees or sense of national identity. Work should go to the lowest paid employee that's capable of performing the work. With advances in technological and transportation, that's possible and cost-effective. With the demise or emasculation of the unions, I'm sure the airline industry executives would love to have throngs of eastern european and south american pilots get work permits in the U.S. so they could drive compensation down dramatically. Even better, if cabotage could be killed, airline executives could shift to "global" corporations with the airline crews be able to work anywhere in the world at will, and you can bet that without limits, those crews would be very lowly compensated.

In the end, it will result in a relatively few highly paid people, with the rest of us (some even highly educated and skilled) at very low compensation.

The government and corporate executives are working towards a two tier society. You watch.

If you don't believe it, phone a "call center" in India and talk to "Richard" who's real name is Rajad, or go to Walmart or even Sears and pick up 100 items. What percentage is make in China. Go to a furniture store and look at the furniture. Looks good at a distance, but when you look at it closely, it says "Made in China" and it's really cheap junk.

Unions? Sometimes they are their own worse enemy. Good system? No, not really. But the alternative that the so-called American corporate executive has in mind is a lot worse.

 

[TransMach]

Example of the Union

Here's an example of how the union (in this clase Retail Clerks Local 770, AFL-CIO) has helped everyone out with their protracted strike in Southern California.

15 SEP 03 - I paid $3.50 for a 4 pound chicken, my wife and I pay $138.00 every two weeks for our health care insurance as a federal employee. The Retail Clearks pay nothing for theirs but their employer wants them to share in the spiraling upwards cost of health care. Each part time employee would pay about $25.00 per month as reported by the L.A. Times.

15 NOV 03 - I paid $6.50 for a 4 pound chicken, my wife and I pay $138.00 every two weeks for our health care insurance as a federal employee. The Retail Clerks insurance is going to run out in 2 weeks. Strike benefits are $200.00 per week for a previous full time employee. Vons, Ralphs and Albertsons are losing a ton of money.

15 JAN 04 - I paid $6.75 for a 4 pound chicken, my wife and I pay $149.00 (new benefits year) every two weeks for our health care insurance as a federal employee. The Retail Clearks have no insurance, and strike benefits have ceased. Other labor groups, on a national level, are making contributions to Local 770 to assist in the strike action. Vons, Ralphs and Albertsons are losing a ton of money and have started hiring permanent replacements after talks have stalled and the union has rejected management's "Last, Best and Final Offer".

So who won the war?

Transmach

 

[merikeyegro]

...

In the end, it will result in a relatively few highly paid people, with the rest of us (some even highly educated and skilled) at very low compensation.

Last I checked, this system of government is called...


...FASCISM. Look it up and tell me what you think. Then type in "Bush and Hitler." I was absolutely astounded at the similarities. I had no idea...

 

[CFI'er]

You forgot the team of "Hillary & Bill" that got us in this mess in the first place.

Union's are like women, can't live with em, can't live without em.

For all the G.W. bashers: Where would we be if "Big Al G" had won?