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

ASA Class

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
Just curious why you think so crjskipper- why would ALPA kill something benaficial like that? I would sincerely hope that they wouldn't do such a thing. Actually, I would hope that they would approach management and ask for the change.
 
Just curious why you think so crjskipper- why would ALPA kill something benaficial like that? I would sincerely hope that they wouldn't do such a thing. Actually, I would hope that they would approach management and ask for the change.
for the same reason they would not allow voluntary furloughs from the 70 like the company offered....cause it wouldn't be fair to EVERYONE....now be a good little socialist and get back to working for the common ALPA good.
 
for the same reason they would not allow voluntary furloughs from the 70 like the company offered....cause it wouldn't be fair to EVERYONE....now be a good little socialist and get back to working for the common ALPA good.

The union would have supported it if those on the ATR and 50 were allowed the same provisions, but management did not want that to happen. It was designed to make the union look bad, basically, because it was something they could not approve in its current form.

As for the hypothetical situation involving extra pay for LAX crewmembers... no other airline does it, and I don't see management offering it. Nothing to see here, move along.
 
As for the hypothetical situation involving extra pay for LAX crewmembers... no other airline does it, and I don't see management offering it. Nothing to see here, move along.

Although not quite the same, CAL does offer 2nd year pay for GUAM based new hire f/o's. It may be apples to oranges, but the fact is there is someone else that is doing this.
 
It was designed to make the union look bad, basically, because it was something they could not approve in its current form.

quote]ALPA needs no help at all doing that.

So why don't YOU do something about it and get involved with ALPA! Why don't you voice your opinions at Monday's LEC meeting, 10am, at the Doubletree Hotel. Should be a good one. The Fab 4 will be there, and I'm almost positive Joey will be there too tagging along with his older girlfriend.

VOTED IN FAVOR!
 
sad part is even if the company agreed to pay nh's 2nd year pay in lax the union would say no. promise

I'd like to see the company offer it, then we can see what the union would say. Until then, I guess we'll never really know.

However, I think it would be great if the company offered some sort of cost of living adjustment to first year f/os out there.
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top