But Dave will leave if we vote in a union....

[StarChecker]

As for job protection, it says in my contract that if I get furloughed the company will continue to pay my salary until my contract runs out. That's more security that I got when I was furloughed from my major ALPA carrier.

I have complete tolerance for others' opinions, but I have ZERO patience for ignorance. The ignorance you are publicly displaying regarding your own employment agreement is staggering.

It doesn't say ANYWHERE that we get paid through the end of our contracts. You get a lump sum of one year's severance with about 50 strings attached to it. And exactly what lawyers are you going to hire to get that money for you? Oh that's right...we have that $2 million laying around for us. Where is that $2 million? Who controls it? How is it distributed? Do we all have to get the same lawyer or do we have to get our own? By the way...it's $986 per pilot. Let me know how that works out for you.

Please go read the 2010 PEA. It's on the intranet. PLEASE get educated before you make such an important decision.

 

[cowboy55]

Splert I tried being civil with you but obviously your underlying objetctives are getting in the way. Take care and I am sorry you are so miserable in life. Best wishes.
Cowboy

 

[Splert]

Splert I tried being civil with you but obviously your underlying objetctives are getting in the way. Take care and I am sorry you are so miserable in life. Best wishes.

Cowboy

You have your facts wrong. The NTSB report will correct your misstatement of fact.

You also stated that a certain feature of the A320 does certain things.

You are wrong about that too.

Claiming to be civil while factually wrong doesn't make your opinion relevant.

 

[B6Busdriver]

Splert read your contract. Under Section 8. JOB SECURITY!!!!!!!!!!!! You have no clue what the truth is. Get your facts together before you call me a liar. Just goes to show your ALPA facts are probably inaccurate as well.

If/when we get bought you get paid for a year. Will it be 70 hours per month? We you be displaced to 190 f/o then get 70 hours of pay per month for one year? All question for your attorney.

If oil hits $200 a barrel and the company needs to furlough who goes first? Let's say you have 3 months left in your contract. Someone a 1000 numbers junior to you has 4 years left on their contract. Who hits the pavement first? Seriously, I am not trying to scare anyone. It's time to talk about facts, not what we hope is reality. Stop crying about what happened at Mesa or whatever ALPA carrier you worked for. Some of you think that paying dues gives a job even if your company is bankrupt or shuts down.

 

[dojetdriver]

So he gets income from a military pension...so ********************ing what? Everyone chooses their own path in life, and everyone else was equally able to shape their career path to they could earn a military retirement and be in a similar position.

Not entirely true. There are guys that may have had a vision or other physical deficiency (knee/foot/back, etc) that may have rendered them unable to get through the physical/PFT to enter the military.

Rez does a pretty good job of addressing your questions. But I'm curious, do you have experience in the airline world? Especially when there are contract negotiations, or worse, concessions going on and you can observe what he's referencing?

I've seen it both times when going through concessions. What worse is to be on a legacy JS and the CA is talking about the pay isn't a big deal to him since he's drawing his retirement, while the FO is about to get furloughed.

 

[pilotyip]

Not entirely true. There are guys that may have had a vision or other physical deficiency (knee/foot/back, etc) that may have rendered them unable to get through the physical/PFT to enter the military.

Yes it may be true, that some are not qualified, but that should not detract from those who elected to serve, afterall, they are 20-30 years behind civilians in starting their civilian careers.

I've seen it both times when going through concessions. What worse is to be on a legacy JS and the CA is talking about the pay isn't a big deal to him since he's drawing his retirement, while the FO is about to get furloughed.

his guy was out of place, and inconsiderate.

 

[dojetdriver]

Edited, failed it insert the bolded part that was later repeated at the end.

Yes it may be true, that some are not qualified, but that should not detract from those who elected to serve, afterall, they are 20-30 years behind civilians in starting their civilian careers.

Not entirely true. Comparing the apples to bowling balls military 20+ career path to that of a civilian. Also this is not a mil vs. civ peeing contest.

20+ military pilot exits with plenty of quality flight time to make him competitive for just about any job out there from a pure objective qualifications standpoint. He also has retirement paycheck coming in. Take the hiring situation circa 2007, CAL/NW/UAL/USAir are hiring, but first, as well as subsequent year wages are pretty crappy. DAL's wasn't too bad. If the pilot was a civilian coming from the regional, lower paid fractional/nonsched on demand outfit, they don't have the retirement paycheck coming to supplement the income. Even if they had put in multiple years at the previous employers, gone through a few furloughs, paycuts, etc. The retired military pilot has a leg up in the financial sense, and isn't really "20-30 years behind civilians" from the financial standpoint.

Like I said, this isn't a mil vs. civ peeing contest.

his guy was out of place, and inconsiderate.

Indeed he was, but for those that refute the mentality exists are simply ignorant and haven't seen it.

 

[ATR-DRIVR]

Splert read your contract. Under Section 8. JOB SECURITY!!!!!!!!!!!! You have no clue what the truth is. Get your facts together before you call me a liar. Just goes to show your ALPA facts are probably inaccurate as well.

ARBITRATION DECISION
Earlier today the CAL MEC was informed that arbitrator Richard Bloch ruled in favor of ALPA in the expedited arbitration over scope held earlier this month. The arbitration resulted from the group grievance filed regarding management’s post-merger decision to outsource flying using the CO designator code on 70-seat jets from Continental hubs. The Association saw this as a violation of the Continental CBA and an attempt by management to leverage its position in negotiations in favor of outsourcing.

On Oct. 20, 2010, the Company informed the Association of its intent to operate CRJ-700 and EMB-170 aircraft as United Express flights with the CO designator code into and out of Company hubs starting on Jan. 4, 2011. The Association subsequently met with the Company on Oct. 26 to request the Company’s contractual basis for the proposed operation, which they provided on Nov. 3, 2010. In short, the Company cited as their justification 1) that the Transition and Process Agreement authorizes the carriers to integrate their marketing and reservations, 2) that the Continental pilots’ scope clause excludes merger partners’ flying and 3) that the United pilots’ scope clause permits the use of 70-seat aircraft.

In the arbitration hearing that took place Dec. 9, 2010, ALPA attorneys Dan Orfield and Art Luby, our Alliance Committee chairman Alfredo Suarez and outside council Mike Abram presented a vigorous case and an abundance of evidence to support our position.

In our presentation to the arbitrator, our position was that the Continental scope clause makes clear that all flying, not only by the Company, but also for the Company, is to be performed by the Continental pilots, with specific delineated exceptions that can be found under Part 3. The Agreement makes clear that use of the Company’s code is alone sufficient to qualify a flight as Company flying subject to the scope clause. It states that flying by another air carrier can be an exception to the scope obligation, but only if is “authorized by” Part 4 (Express Carriers), Part 5 (Complementary Carriers and Foreign Air Carriers) or Part 7 (a carrier participating in a Complete Transaction).

The arbitrator agreed with our position, stating in his award,

“Placing the CO designator code on the UAX jet aircraft with a certification of fifty-one or greater seats to and from CLE, EWR and IAH is a violation of Section 1 of the Continental/ALPA collective bargaining agreement. The Company is ordered to cease and desist advertising and placing the CO code on such flights.”

We are of course pleased with the arbitrator’s decision and the fact that the language and intent of the CBA that was negotiated by ALPA was affirmed. We are additionally pleased that the system for resolving such disputes worked as intended and that our strategy for handling this issue was affirmed as well. No doubt there will be complex compliance issues following the arbitrator’s decision that we will be monitoring closely. We will continue to provide any updates as needed.

Happy New Year.
One Union. One Voice.

Um..yes, I'm sure they are....

 

[aewanabe]

a Anytime any one gets their panties in a wad because of English instead of content, I try to focus on how it does not make a big difference how the message is conveyed, and if sentences run on, so what. Stick to exchanging ideas, thoughts, and experiences is what it is all about. If I wanted a critique on my writing, I would take freshman English again.

The funny thing is I complemented your usual English, and you ignored the content completely... By the way, thanks for your service. I don't begrudge any benefits coming Veterans' way, as I believe you all earned it; the safety net does color one's view of acceptable compensation, however.

P.S., Go ALPA with the CO arbitration victory! Take that, Smisek!

 

[pilotyip]

The funny thing is I complemented your usual English, and you ignored the content completely... By the way, thanks for your service. I don't begrudge any benefits coming Veterans' way, as I believe you all earned it; the safety net does color one's view of acceptable compensation, however.

P.S., Go ALPA with the CO arbitration victory! Take that, Smisek!

I graciously accept your complement; my post was not to ignore your complement to post the absurdity of skipping post content to critique grammar. BTW I don’t know how my pension cushion effect the pay of a job I take when it is a union company, or a published pay rate.