ASTAR'S Race to the Bottom

[erichartmann]

double post

 

[erichartmann]

Ahhh, but unlike the previous blue/grey conflict this time blue fired the first shot. BTW, more like 5 years.

I wonder if part of the problem isn't the diminishing customer base. We all seem to have a sense of desperation regarding our survival in this game of musical chairs. If DHL knew how to play the game and were actually growing we might not be at each other throats.

Erich -

You are right - it has been more like five years. And correct, too, about the lack of growth being the nutrient for the infection.

I guess we'll never see eye to eye on the scope issue. When we "fired the first shot" it was aimed directly at our employer - Astar/DHL - not at ABX. Had we been successful with our case against Astar/DHL, there really would have been very little chance of ABX pilots loosing their jobs; more likely a merger or a buy out or some negotiated settlement.

There may come a time that ABX pilots take aim at their own employer over scope issues. With the current situation involving ABX/ATI/CCIA that time may come soon and I hope you are able to enforce your contract. We were not able to and not only lost significant potential growth but incurred the your wrath as well which, it seems, will never be resolved.

DC8[/quote]

My wrath, as you put it, stems from several things. I think your "merger, buy out or negotiated settlement" idea was pie in the sky. I can think of other ways it could have played out, all of which would have ultimately cut costs for DHL/DPWN and been to ABX crewmembers detriment. There is also the fact that I felt your initial claim was baseless, though I certainly understand why you did it.

I will probably never forgive nor forget, but now that your group has apparently dropped its claim I would hope both groups can put the issue sufficiently behind them to work together. Given the current climate (no growth) I suspect this will be very difficult.

I continue to hold the belief that our scope problems with our management can be resolved without detrimental impact on ATI and CCI. We all work for what is in effect the same company. This was not the case with Astar/ABX and DHL and in my view makes the cases only superficially similar.

 

[hvydriver]

.[/quote] We all work for what is in effect the same company. This was not the case with Astar/ABX and DHL and in my view makes the cases only superficially similar.[/quote]

This is where you guys don't (or should I say just refuse to) get it. Our grievance was against DHL. Not ABF. It had everything to do with stopping DHL from buying growth instead of doing it organically, as was agreed to in our CBA with them. Hete has now put you guys in the same situation that we were in then. Except there are 3 players in your mix working for the same holding company. And just so you know, the 9th Circuit found in ALPA's favor to overturn the NLRB decision. 3-0. We dropped the grievance because it's more or less moot at this point. I'm going to go back to lurking since all this will be over soon. I'm tired of going in circles with you people. Good luck to all.

 

[FastHap]

I'm going to go back to lurking since all this will be over soon.

Be careful what you wish for...

 

[DC8CRIVER]

My wrath, as you put it, stems from several things. I think your "merger, buy out or negotiated settlement" idea was pie in the sky. I can think of other ways it could have played out, all of which would have ultimately cut costs for DHL/DPWN and been to ABX crewmembers detriment. There is also the fact that I felt your initial claim was baseless, though I certainly understand why you did it.

I will probably never forgive nor forget, but now that your group has apparently dropped its claim I would hope both groups can put the issue sufficiently behind them to work together. Given the current climate (no growth) I suspect this will be very difficult.

I continue to hold the belief that our scope problems with our management can be resolved without detrimental impact on ATI and CCI. We all work for what is in effect the same company. This was not the case with Astar/ABX and DHL and in my view makes the cases only superficially similar.

OK,

I guess we can agree to disagree. I do, however, appreciate the civilized dialog as opposed to what some others post on the boards.

In the end, none of us have chosen this situation that we find ourselves in and over here, we're focusing our sights on our common foe. Right now, we all have more urgent battles to be fought. These days, the enemy of my enemy is my ally.

DC8

 

[hvydriver]

Be careful what you wish for...

No Hap, I'm just tired of waiting for the other shoe to drop. Like Shooter, if I'm done, I'm out of aviation. I've got a job at the Harley shop waiting for me. It's a lot more fun than this is.

 

[shooter]

.

We all work for what is in effect the same company. This was not the case with Astar/ABX and DHL and in my view makes the cases only superficially similar.[/quote]

This is where you guys don't (or should I say just refuse to) get it. Our grievance was against DHL. Not ABF. It had everything to do with stopping DHL from buying growth instead of doing it organically, as was agreed to in our CBA with them. Hete has now put you guys in the same situation that we were in then. Except there are 3 players in your mix working for the same holding company. And just so you know, the 9th Circuit found in ALPA's favor to overturn the NLRB decision. 3-0. We dropped the grievance because it's more or less moot at this point. I'm going to go back to lurking since all this will be over soon. I'm tired of going in circles with you people. Good luck to all.[/quote]


What do you mean "you people"?

imp:

 

[shooter]

No Hap, I'm just tired of waiting for the other shoe to drop. Like Shooter, if I'm done, I'm out of aviation. I've got a job at the Harley shop waiting for me. It's a lot more fun than this is.

Sweet! A&8's?

 

[erichartmann]

This is where you guys don't (or should I say just refuse to) get it. Our grievance was against DHL. Not ABF. It had everything to do with stopping DHL from buying growth instead of doing it organically, as was agreed to in our CBA with them. Hete has now put you guys in the same situation that we were in then. Except there are 3 players in your mix working for the same holding company.

Hvy, you continued to regard DHL as your employer after the airline you work for was spun off. ABX did not continue to regard ABF, now part of DHL, as our employer. We were not part of DHL. We were and are a contractor. You wanted, in your own words, to force DHL, who was no longer your employer or parent company, to grow your seperate airline "organically" and cease doing business with ABX. Again, ABX was never part of DHL. ATI, CCI, and ABX are all part of ATSG. Astar and ABX were not part of DHL. That is the difference.

Our scope makes ATSG the successor company to ABX Holding, which in turn is the successor to ABX Air in so far as our CBA is concerned. Our scope, in turn, requires that the ATI & CCI pilots be on the same seniority list we are on. Your goal was to exclude us. Our goal is to include them. Very very different.

And just so you know, the 9th Circuit found in ALPA's favor to overturn the NLRB decision. 3-0. We dropped the grievance because it's more or less moot at this point. I'm going to go back to lurking since all this will be over soon. I'm tired of going in circles with you people. Good luck to all.

C'mon Hvy, you're being a bit disingenuous here. What the 9th circuit court did was rule in ALPA's favor on the side issue involving the NLRB & Ross Aviation raised by ABX management in an effort to stop your original (6th district if I recall correctly) federal case against DHL. Your original case, as I'm sure you recall, sought to compell DHL to appear at a grievance hearing regarding your scope. The orginal case is, I would guess, now moot since you have given up your claim under your new contract. I say again, we may never know what the outcome of that case might have been. What is clear is that you didn't "win" on your original grievance, at least not in federal court. Only time will tell if you won the organic growth fight.

 

[rotor&wing]

Our scope, in turn, requires that that the ATI & CCI pilots be on the same seniority list we are on.

Good Luck!! Let us know how that works out.