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