FO/Flex how would you vote to integrate??

[TWA 2 ASA FO]

You have zero faith. Some of us are trying to improve things around here. Seams like you don't have much more to contribute than your negative attitude.

I have watched the track record of the IBT in the fractionals.

Netjets - dropped the IBT for an in house union
Citation Shares - slowly winding down
Avantair - in the process of voting in the IBT

I understand that all of these were not the IBTs fault, but the IBT sure doesn't seem to bring stability to fractional companies.

 

[Fresh Air]

If all of your furloughed pilots get to vote you have a larger group.

If your group isn't as divided as it appears you could force it on us.

Numbers don't lie.......they are accurate.

So, if a vote happens and the union is voted out will you squeal because your non-union agenda has been FORCED on us FO crews? I thought not. It's only an outrage if your preferred side loses. Democracy cuts both ways.

For the record, I also hope the two pilot groups are never merged. In a merger some folks always get hosed in the seniority integration, no matter how fair they try to do it. The bitterness never goes away, because seniority is everything to a pilot. Here's hoping things stay the way they are.

 

[slowtation capt]

I have watched the track record of the IBT in the fractionals.

Netjets - dropped the IBT for an in house union
Citation Shares - slowly winding down
Avantair - in the process of voting in the IBT

I understand that all of these were not the IBTs fault, but the IBT sure doesn't seem to bring stability to fractional companies.

Hmmmm, didn't the IBT get NetJets the contract that in turn got you your pay that you currently have?
After that they decided they were big enough to self support an in-house and keep all their dues to their own.

 

[jetwash]

I misspoke. Your current contract wouldn't be forced on us, just your next one if the IBT is voted for. I know we would be involved in the negotiations, but I have zero faith that your next contract would be a vast improvement over your current contract.

If the next contract of the combined group is not to your liking then you vote NO and tell the negotiators you want more.

I can tell you that no flight options pilots that I know of are going to accept anything less in pay and benefits then what you have right now. So your worries of taking a pay cut in the next contract are misplaced. That is unless you and other Flex pilots vote to accept a paycut which I don't think will happen.

That is the best part of the CBA, you get a vote in the decision.

 

[slowtation capt]

Your current contract wouldn't be forced on us,

I am going to go ahead and say that you are going to find a way to argue this from the "contract" that KR gave you guys.

"if another crewmember does not sign a Crewmember Employment Agreement their seniority will not be protected which may positively impact your seniority."

forced
f?rst/
adjective
adjective: forced

1. obtained or imposed by coercion or physical power
   
   
   
   

co?er?cion
kōˈərZHən,-SHən/
noun
noun: coercion; plural noun: coercions

1. the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats - " does not sign; their seniority will not be protected"
   
   
   
   
   

 

[993_Pilot]

...I have zero faith that your next contract would be a vast improvement over your current contract.

You have no faith in a contract negotiated with management that you can have input and vote on, and yet you have full faith in the benevolence of the very same management team for your individual "contract" going forward?... Sounds rational to me.

 

[TWA 2 ASA FO]

I am going to go ahead and say that you are going to find a way to argue this from the "contract" that KR gave you guys.

"if another crewmember does not sign a Crewmember Employment Agreement their seniority will not be protected which may positively impact your seniority."

forced
f?rst/
adjective
adjective: forced

1. obtained or imposed by coercion or physical power
   
   
   
   

co?er?cion
kōˈərZHən,-SHən/
noun
noun: coercion; plural noun: coercions

1. the practice of persuading someone to do something by using force or threats - " does not sign; their seniority will not be protected"
   
   
   
   
   

Agreement

1.the act of agreeing or of coming to a mutual arrangement.
2.the state of being in accord.
3.an arrangement that is accepted by all parties to a transaction.
4.a contract or other document delineating such an arrangement.
5.unanimity of opinion; harmony in feeling: agreement among the members of the faculty.

Contract

1.an agreement between two or more parties for the doing or not doing of something specified.
2.an agreement enforceable by law.
3.the written form of such an agreement.
4.the division of law dealing with contracts.
5.Also called contract bridge. a variety of bridge in which the side that wins the bid can earn toward game only that number of tricks named in the contract, additional points being credited above the line. Compare auction bridge.

We were being employed by a new company.

Did you not have to sign some sort of agreement or contract when you were hired at FO. I have at every other aviation company I have worked for. It spells out what they expect from you and what you can expect from them.

We could have chosen not to agree to it and left FJ. Funny part is, it was just a written agreement signed by two parties (aka a contract) that put into writing all of the things that we already had in various other places. It was signed by each individual crewmember and the president.

 

[slowtation capt]

Agreement

1.the act of agreeing or of coming to a mutual arrangement.
2.the state of being in accord.
3.an arrangement that is accepted by all parties to a transaction.
4.a contract or other document delineating such an arrangement.
5.unanimity of opinion; harmony in feeling: agreement among the members of the faculty.

Contract

1.an agreement between two or more parties for the doing or not doing of something specified.
2.an agreement enforceable by law.
3.the written form of such an agreement.
4.the division of law dealing with contracts.
5.Also called contract bridge. a variety of bridge in which the side that wins the bid can earn toward game only that number of tricks named in the contract, additional points being credited above the line. Compare auction bridge.

We were being employed by a new company.

Did you not have to sign some sort of agreement or contract when you were hired at FO. I have at every other aviation company I have worked for. It spells out what they expect from you and what you can expect from them.

We could have chosen not to agree to it and left FJ. Funny part is, it was just a written agreement signed by two parties (aka a contract) that put into writing all of the things that we already had in various other places. It was signed by each individual crewmember and the president.

No I didn't sign anything when I was hired at Flops, never was required. KR didn't require it, back then not signing an agreement was part of his "management by trust".

 

[slowtation capt]

2.an agreement enforceable by law.

Which you will have to pay half of the fees if you determine the company violates your "agreement"

 

[GlorifiedCabbie]

Sign it or it may POSITIVELY impact your seniority? Freudian slip there really means NEGATIVELY.

And how much input did you have prior to the final draft? My guess is zero.

 

[slowtation capt]

Slowtation... I must admit I'm struggling with why a single carrier status is necessary from the unions point of view. Can't the union and company just agree on some fences that allow us to keep doing our flying and you keep doing yours? KR wants single carrier because he thinks the union will have a chance of getting voted out, which is definitely a possibility. So why is the union got forward with it? It seems risky doesn't it?

Well, because KR wants single, he wants this to be merged. So the Union could beat their chests and big the big bad bullies that everyone wants to believe they are and just refuse to do it.
Or they can work with the company like they are to protect both sides to achieve a goal that KR wants and would benefit the growth of these companies into this Onesky branding.

Just following up with the proof

"DAC plans eventually to consolidate Flight Options and Flexjet into a single Part 91K fractional and Part 135 charter operation, according to DAC principal Kenn Ricci."
"Normally, we?d try to delay a single operating system, but we want [it], the sooner the better"
http://ainonline.com/aviation-news/...t-options-flexjet-owner-aims-single-operation

 

[slowtation capt]

I have watched the track record of the IBT in the fractionals.

Netjets - dropped the IBT for an in house union.

Hmmmm, didn't the IBT get NetJets the contract that in turn got you your pay that you currently have?
After that they decided they were big enough to self support an in-house and keep all their dues to their own.

May 1, 2008, 12:07 PM


The ?Strong Union? leaders who helped NetJets pilots obtain an industry-leading contract three years ago resigned from the local representing the fractional pilots? IBT Local 1108?in mid-March in the wake of ?a resurgent decertification movement? being led by a group called the NetJets Association of Shared Aircraft Pilots (NJASAP).
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...8-05-01/netjets-pilots-seek-independent-union

 

[slowtation capt]

I have watched the track record of the IBT in the fractionals.

Avantair - in the process of voting in the IBT

I understand that all of these were not the IBTs fault, but the IBT sure doesn't seem to bring stability to fractional companies.

Even including Avantair as part of this is, is the most absurd comparision that you could begin to make. This is about the farthest stretch anybody could try to make. You truly are management material, I just hope that suckers don't try to believe your stretched out lies.

Avantair Failure:

" Part of the problem was that the company seems to have ssimply not charged enough. In a letter to owners in June this year the company indicated its pricing was too low saying "Our business model assumed efficiencies that never materialized and a pricing schedule based on those efficiencies."

Operational Issues

"While finance and pricing was part of the problem, the issue that really caused the company to fail was operational. The company grounded its entire fleet for three weeks in the fall of 2012. According to the FAA this was due to "at least in part because of problems accurately tracking the time in service of life limited parts, and because of the questionable reliability of its maintenance record keeping system."
Overall this grounding meant customers couldn't access their aircraft for three weeks."

"But further problems in June caused the fleet to be grounded again and the company furloughed pilots and other employees. Rumors abound that the company only had a few airworthy aircraft, out of its 57 aircraft fleet. The FAA stated the grounding was due to "at least in part because of AvantAir's problems in accurately and reliably tracking the time in service of life limited parts, and problems in transferring accurate time in service records for parts "cannibalized" from some Piaggio P-180 aircraft to other Piaggio P-180 aircraft in AvantAir's fleet." This apparently led to owners and card holders facing delays, short-notice cancellations and flights that failed to materialize"

Read more: Avantair Bankruptcy & History - Jets & Planes

 

[gutshotdraw]

In a merger some folks always get hosed in the seniority integration, no matter how fair they try to do it. The bitterness never goes away, because seniority is everything to a pilot.

I can say from experience that this statement is ABSOLUTELY correct.

Three and a half years on and the bitterness, resentment, petty jealousy, and "get-even-with-em-ism" keeps rolling to the surface. Even in the face of a common adversary.

 

[TWA 2 ASA FO]

May 1, 2008, 12:07 PM


The ?Strong Union? leaders who helped NetJets pilots obtain an industry-leading contract three years ago resigned from the local representing the fractional pilots? IBT Local 1108?in mid-March in the wake of ?a resurgent decertification movement? being led by a group called the NetJets Association of Shared Aircraft Pilots (NJASAP).
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...8-05-01/netjets-pilots-seek-independent-union

You yourself have said that a union is only as strong as it's members. It sounds like the NJ members were pretty strong and got a good contract.

It also sounds like they realized what a anchor the IBT was. Even after they got an industry leading contract they still dropped the IBT. If the IBT was worth anything, why would NJ drop it? Looks like they realized where the strength was, and aparently it was not from the IBT.

 

[slowtation capt]

You yourself have said that a union is only as strong as it's members. It sounds like the NJ members were pretty strong and got a good contract.

Can't have a strong union, when there are people like you that turn, twist, fight, and divert people's attention's away from making a strong union.

It also sounds like they realized what a anchor the IBT was. Even after they got an industry leading contract they still dropped the IBT. If the IBT was worth anything, why would NJ drop it? Looks like they realized where the strength was, and aparently it was not from the IBT.

Excellent twist on my post, as any true manager would do.

- If the IBT was worth anything, why would NJ drop it?

"25 percent of NetJets pilots? union dues?a sum estimated at nearly $1.5 million this year?goes to the IBT. ?The pilot group?s perception is that representation by an independent union?is a better use of dues monies than continuing the current representation structure,?

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...8-05-01/netjets-pilots-seek-independent-union

 

[TWA 2 ASA FO]

Can't have a strong union, when there are people like you that turn, twist, fight, and divert people's attention's away from making a strong union.




Excellent twist on my post, as any true manager would do.

- If the IBT was worth anything, why would NJ drop it?

"25 percent of NetJets pilots? union dues?a sum estimated at nearly $1.5 million this year?goes to the IBT. ?The pilot group?s perception is that representation by an independent union?is a better use of dues monies than continuing the current representation structure,?

http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-n...8-05-01/netjets-pilots-seek-independent-union

Great article, but you of course left out the part that doesn't bode well for your cause.

Before rebutting Hoffa?s assertions item by item, the NJASAP directors wrote, ?This public vetting of false information by the Teamsters is likely to make other pilot groups and others represented by the Teamsters more aware?we had hoped for an amicable split without airing the Teamsters? dirty laundry.?

Olsen separately alleged that the IBT was largely unresponsive to the needs of the NetJets pilots.

I am sure that these pilots at NJ knew 100X more about the IBT than I ever hope to and claim the Teamsters were publicly lying to the NJ pilots and didn't care about them.

 

[slowtation capt]

Great article, but you of course left out the part that doesn't bode well for your cause.

Before rebutting Hoffa?s assertions item by item, the NJASAP directors wrote, ?This public vetting of false information by the Teamsters is likely to make other pilot groups and others represented by the Teamsters more aware?we had hoped for an amicable split without airing the Teamsters? dirty laundry.?

Olsen separately alleged that the IBT was largely unresponsive to the needs of the NetJets pilots.

I am sure that these pilots at NJ knew 100X more about the IBT than I ever hope to and claim the Teamsters were publicly lying to the NJ pilots and didn't care about them.

I did not quote it because it wasn't pertinent to what I was debating.
That part of the article is for a different debate.
I included the link to the full article, anybody that clicked on the link easily would read that part of the article, thus I did not purposely leave it out.

 

[GlorifiedCabbie]

Typical debating trick. Make a false claim and then try to make you defend it. Which is impossible. Enjoy the day.

 

[TWA 2 ASA FO]

I did not quote it because it wasn't pertinent to what I was debating.
That part of the article is for a different debate.
I included the link to the full article, anybody that clicked on the link easily would read that part of the article, thus I did not purposely leave it out.

So, the part about the Teamsters being largely unresponsive to the NJ pilots needs wasn't pertinent. I think that was probably a huge reason they let the IBT. Bet that is why it was included in the article.