Flex Jet read file

[slowtation capt]

To add insult to injury, they blocked a deal that would have added bigger Cessna planes to the fleet that would have been a pay raise for me and many others that got bumped. I pay dues for what?

FR8, go suck a d.ouche!

They didn't block a thing, they simply refused to sign an LOA that the union lawyers knew if they signed that they would definetely get sued over in the near future and put the company in no postion to get sued by saying, looky here the union signed this loa, go after them. Uncle Kenny played it perfectly, he knew the union would never sign that letter, he knew that what he was asking and what he was planning was illegal. He knew the union wouldn't sign and he won. Uncle Kenny made it his requirement for the loa to be signed for him to do the deal. If Uncle Kenny is so sure of his legaleze and the gray areas, why didn't he do the deal and say fu union, here it is. He bought Flex without an email to the pilots, and says he is keeping them seperate. He has a plan, and he is planning to divide this union. He has got this allready half pu*@sy as@ pilot group fighting. If some of the pu*@sy pilots would get their fu*@cking head out of Ricci, Salata, Montie, Kainraid's as@, they would see that those guys will never be there for the long run, and what happens when they are gone and someone new is in charge, again. How many changes of management has there allready been. They might be your buds and they might help you out when you do something stupid like suck an engine plug and fly for 5 days without telling anyone, and then when someone outside the situation tries to do the right thing, he gets crusified. Ask a certain Phenomal pilot, mister buddies with management, well he was forced to turn in his resignation. Stop helping the company, stop 14+,10+, getting anal reamed on day 8 (because I just wanna go home), and get this value blue light pilot group to 100% solidarity.

 

[hammer2]

Yes i will say it one more time! The flex jet pilots currently enjoy a higher standard of pay and work rules fought for by netjets and flight options pilots!

So should the pilots a Flex be punished for this?

 

[Praetorian]

Gret, Doh, Flex jet wife, anybody else at flex. Reap what you sow! Congratulations on not having paid any union dues to anyone yet. I hope you can stand back and enjoy not having to be in the frey up to this point. good luck protecting your salary into 2014. Thank you for the general promotion of fractional pilot salary..........freight!

Fr8 Dog,

I agree with a lot of what you've been saying, but lashing out at the Flex pilots is only playing into KR's hands. If he ends up being forced to merge the two companies, he will want us at each other's throats.

The only way through, what now increasingly looks like the beginning of a war, is for all of us, both Flex and FO pilots to stick together. The Flex pilots aren't the enemy.

 

[FR8DOG777]

No I do not. You are right Flex pilots are just pawns like the rest of us. All I was upset about is a different view of things and the gains you made in pay and lifestyles due to the battle we have fought for fairness. I got caught up in an argument with one of your crews in the fbo that was anti-union. It's time for the Flex pilots to roll up there sleeves and start helping all the fractional pilots to be on par with industry standard pay and work rules. I apologize for placing all the pilots there in the same category. When Kenn starts a taking you better fight back is all I am saying.

 

[jetwash]

As soon as Kenn installs the optimizer program on the Flex scheduling computers there will be a wake up call for the Flex Pilots. When they start to experience the 14 hour duty days with min 10 hour rest 7 days in a row they will then finally start to understand what the Options pilots have been saying.

I am now hearing that crews are doing multiple fatigue calls at options in a tour.

 

[JokerFuel]

We currently have "The Optimiser" in our scheduling software at Flex. We quite often work max duty/min rest scenarios for entire rotations. Not to mention that our current duty and rest requirements are poorly written and grey at best. In the past we were almost daily subject to the 0300 wake up call from scheduling. All of these things have evolved and are evolving....for the better I might add. Sometimes you get that zero dark thirty call, and often things change. That's just the nature of what we do as Fractional pilots.
It's unfortunate that one of our pilots, or an entire crew chose to be confrontational with a FLOPs crew on the road. In fact it's embarrassing. Don't lump us all into that category. In fact I've had nothing but pleasant experiences with the FLOPs crews I've met.
Perhaps it is true that we have reaped the benefits of the struggles our unionised counterparts have endured, but make no mistake that each time our pay an QOL issues have expanded, it was under the threat of a union drive. The fact that we aren't unionised doesn't imply a lack of solidarity among the pilot group. A unionised Flexjet simply hasn't been a necessity. Perhaps it someday will be, or perhaps it won't.
I for one don't know what the future holds. At present things look bright for us. I suppose it's all in how you choose to view things.
Now there are some things I'd like to know from from the Flight Options side of things. Could someone cut and paste the exact verbiage from your contract that would drive the 1108 to apply an integrated Flight Options/Flexjet crew seniority? Under what precedent would this apply? Please explain how the flying we do under a separate 135 certificate is considered a violation of the current FLOPs contract. Honestly, I'm not trying to argue or bait anyone with this. I'd really like an education and so would many of my contemporaries.
Next time you run into a Flex crew on the road please feel free to approach us. We've all got an interest in whats to come.

 

[jetwash]

Could someone cut and paste the exact verbiage from your contract that would drive the 1108 to apply an integrated Flight Options/Flexjet crew seniority? Under what precedent would this apply? Please explain how the flying we do under a separate 135 certificate is considered a violation of the current FLOPs contract. Honestly, I'm not trying to argue or bait anyone with this. I'd really like an education and so would many of my contemporaries.
.

Here you go....



2. If Directional maintains or acquires a controlling interest in an air carrier that performs
fractional or JetPASS card holder flying of the type covered by the Flight Options/IBT
CBA, the acquired air carrier shall be consolidated utilizing the procedures for Successor
Transactions set forth in Section 1.5 of the Flight Options/IBT CBA. A ?controlling
interest? for purposes of this LOA means the ownership of an equity interest representing
more than 50 percent of the outstanding capital stock of the Entity, or voting securities
representing more than 50 percent of the total voting power of outstanding securities then
entitled to vote generally in the election of such Entity?s board of directors or other
governing body.

 

[Praetorian]

When Kenn starts a taking you better fight back is all I am saying.

I think he's already "taking". From what I hear plans are in the works. It's best not to f##k with the IBT. Time to circle the wagons.

 

[Club ORD FO]

Here you go....



2. If Directional maintains or acquires a controlling interest in an air carrier that performs
fractional or JetPASS card holder flying of the type covered by the Flight Options/IBT
CBA, the acquired air carrier shall be consolidated utilizing the procedures for Successor
....

In the definitions section does it cover "air carrier"? That seems to be the question. or loophole, or whatever

 

[gret]

In the definitions section does it cover "air carrier"? That seems to be the question. or loophole, or whatever

Bingo...Flex Jet isn't an "air carrier" using the customary definition...Jet Solutions is and the owner of this entity going forward will matter.

 

[J3guy]

If flops wants to push for an integration that's fine. But they'll have to live with the ensuing decertification vote. Honestly folks, there seems to be a lot of hate spewing from the pro union folks on these boards lately, and it's not encouraging guys like me to want to join you. Chill out a bit.

 

[GooseHZ]

J3
Please don't make a judgment based on the emotional post made on FI. The pilot group at FLOPS have endured massive amounts of stress over the last few months. Lie after Lie from Kenns himself and his hand picked management about the CA deal. We have lived under Kenns mangers for years and know exactly what they are capable of. Please keep an open mind when you are discussing the coming merger with FLOPS crews. We all need to come together and work out the differences between our pilot groups and form a strong Union. Speaking from 14 years of experience at FLOPS the thought of working under This management group without the protection of CBA is terrifying.

 

[DirtyBeech]

These type of threads with FO pilots bickering with one another, ill informed posters blathering about Flex getting the optimizer, hint: we've been working under the sodomizer for years, and ******************************'s ranting about how Flex pilots should lick their shoes for our QOL improvements is not furthering your cause.

I'm pro union, but anti-stupid. Right now all I see is stupid. If Ken sticks it in with no lube then you'll get a unionized Flex pilot group. Nothing will happen if it's pretty much the status quo. Time will tell.

 

[CL300Pilot]

Below is the scope from the FLOPS contract and I am looking for clarity. First, the contract is between FLOPS, the 1108 and FLOPS parent company. From the definitions at the bottom, it shows that FLOPS parent company is "Flight Options Holdings II, Inc.

So, since the contract does not mention Directional Aviation Capital in the scope, how can there even be an argument that Flex would have to unionize, especially since we were purchased by DAC and not Flight Options Holdings II, Inc.? Thank you.


1.1 Introduction
1.1(a) Pursuant to the certification by the National Mediation Board in Case No. R-7072 dated March 3, 2006, this Agreement is entered into by and between Flight Options, LLC (hereinafter “Flight Options” or “Company”) and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Airline Division (hereinafter “Union”) as representative of Captains and First Officers of the Company, (hereinafter “Pilot(s)”) pursuant to the terms of the Railway Labor Act, as amended (hereinafter the “Act”) in the mutual interests of the Pilots and the Company to promote the safety and continuity of air transportation, to further the efficiency and economy of operations, and to provide for orderly collective bargaining pertaining to rates of pay, rules or working conditions, between the Company and its Pilots. TA 03/24/09
1.1(b) This Agreement shall supersede all previous Agreements by and between the Company and the Union or any other labor organization or individual with respect to the Pilots described above and shall constitute the sole Agreement between the Company and the Union. Any and all agreements made by the parties shall be reduced to writing and signed by the authorized representatives. An “authorized representative” of the Union shall be any authorized agent of the Teamsters Airline Division, including the President of the Executive Board of Local 1108, or his designee. TA 03/24/09
1.2 Scope of the Agreement
1.2(a) Except as otherwise provided in this Section, all present and future revenue flying performed in and for the service of the Company, its Affiliates, or the Company’s Parent, including present and future flying performed on behalf of the Company, its Affiliates, or Parent pursuant to any agreement or arrangement towhich the Company, any of its Affiliates, or Parent holds a majority interest, shall be performed by Pilots named on the Flight Options Pilots Seniority List in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and any other applicable agreement between the Company and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Airline Division. TA 10/30/09
1.2(b) The Company will actively employ a minimum number of Line Pilots on the Flight Options Seniority List that is commensurate with the Company’s fractional hours under Management and JetPASS card holder hours. The number of Line Pilots required will be measured quarterly by dividing the fractional Hours under Management and JetPASS card holder hours at the end of each quarter by 800 hours, then multiplying by 4.0. TA 10/27/09

1.10(i) “Parent” means an Entity that controls another Entity. The Flight Options LLC parent company is Flight Options Holdings II, Inc, and “Parent” does not include any entity that controls Flight Options Holdings II, Inc.
TA 10/31/09

 

[outerfix]

1. DIRECTIONAL CAPITAL, LLC
LETTER OF AGREEMENT Between DIRECTIONAL CAPITAL, LLC and INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS and the PILOTS in the service of FLIGHT OPTIONS, LLC as represented by INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS, AIRLINE DIVISION
This Letter of Agreement is made and entered into by and between Directional Capital, LLC (hereafter referred to as ?Directional?), and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, and the Pilots in the service of Flight Options, as represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Airline Division (hereafter referred to as ?IBT?).
WHEREAS, Directional owns a controlling interest in Flight Options Holdings I, Inc. (hereafter referred to as ?Holdings I?).
NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed that: 1. Directional shall not establish a new air carrier to do fractional or JetPASS card holder
flying of the type covered by the Flight Options/IBT CBA, unless such flying operations
1
are flown by Pilots on the Flight Options Pilot Seniority List in accordance with the Flight Options/IBT CBA (as it presently exists or as subsequently amended).
2. If Directional maintains or acquires a controlling interest in an air carrier that performs fractional or JetPASS card holder flying of the type covered by the Flight Options/IBT CBA, the acquired air carrier shall be consolidated utilizing the procedures for Successor Transactions set forth in Section 1.5 of the Flight Options/IBT CBA. A ?controlling interest? for purposes of this LOA means the ownership of an equity interest representing more than 50 percent of the outstanding capital stock of the Entity, or voting securities representing more than 50 percent of the total voting power of outstanding securities then entitled to vote generally in the election of such Entity?s board of directors or other governing body.
3. This Letter of Agreement shall continue in full force and effect until Directional ceases to own a controlling interest in Holdings I.
4. This Letter of Agreement shall become effective on the date of signing and shall remain effective concurrent with the duration of the Flight Options/IBT CBA unless earlier terminated in accordance with paragraph 3 above.

 

[jetwash]

Below is the scope from the FLOPS contract and I am looking for clarity. First, the contract is between FLOPS, the 1108 and FLOPS parent company. From the definitions at the bottom, it shows that FLOPS parent company is "Flight Options Holdings II, Inc.

So, since the contract does not mention Directional Aviation Capital in the scope, how can there even be an argument that Flex would have to unionize, especially since we were purchased by DAC and not Flight Options Holdings II, Inc.? Thank you.

TA 10/31/09

Yes you are correct, the contract is between 1108 and Flight Options.
But,

The LOA section 1-001 (page 209) is between IBT 1108 and Directional Capital which deal with Directional buying another fractional. That is probably where the confusion is coming from. There are 17 LOA's after the 30 sections in the contract, they are on pages 209 to 290.
You might not have the full agreement that include the LOA's.
I hope that helps.

 

[gret]

The lawyers will figure it out, but Flex wouldn't appear to be covered from reading the above. Attribution (linking of entities) stops at Flight Options Holdings II, Inc. and Directional would not be deemed an affiliate in anyway.

This would make sense as any conglomerate, or private equity firm, would have safeguards built in that would prohibit one of their subsidiaries with a union from impacting an acquisition that isn't unionized.

There would be some loss of synergies by not combining the operations and management will have to evaluate the pros and cons.

The subsequent post regarding the LOA adds more color and it would appear that you are back to the question as to whether Flex is considered an "air carrier".

Silly question, but has anybody been told directly by the company what is going to happen...or is everything that has been posted pure conjecture at this point?

 

[Photoflight]

Yes.

We've been told by KR and many others that Flight Options and Flexjet will be two completely independent companies targeted at different market segments.

 

[993_Pilot]

No reason not to believe anything Kenn says. After all, Kenn also said that Flops will always be the highest paid pilots in the industry, and we all know that is true. LOL!

 

[gret]

Yes.

We've been told by KR and many others that Flight Options and Flexjet will be two completely independent companies targeted at different market segments.

Thanks Photo...but has anyone in a position of authority addressed the issue of the union and Flex?

It would seem that they (mgmt and the union leaders) would want to clear the air ASAP to avoid the confusion. They had to considered this issue before finalizing the acquisition and it seems strange that this issue is even a question.