Federal court upholds ban on pilots disrupting United service during contract talks
If the above is true, why hasn't the consumer seen the discount, BTW the UAW has made plenty of concessions of late to compete. The sad part of this story is consumer sentiment for the domestics needs to improve. Much like the fractional in question.
News Flash.....low wages dont=profits or a superior product. Perception, followed up with a stong CSI is the key to profitability in this or any market.
Easy business with right group of people behind you.
If you note, one of my biggest problems with unions is that they don't flow with the balance sheet of the company.
As you state above, the UAW has made concessions of late to compete. Had they stepped up to the plate earlier, how many overall union and non-union jobs may have been saved or could the organization have had the ability to adjust quicker to the changing market?
That can also be said of United, Delta and American labor unions. They took concessions when they were either forced to or about to be forced to. Before it got to that point, and is the current case of autoworkers, many non-union workers were sacrificed and lost their jobs first because of the high cost of the contract and the lack of action by unions.
My point about unions is that they inhibit the ability of a company to adjust quickly to the marketplace. The best
Non-union imported auto workers have a lot more job stablilty than the UAW workers do and are paid about the same yet the cost per hour to produce a car is a staggering amount less.
Now... to get this thread back on track, the courts in Illinois backed United to prevent the slowdowns. While this isn't specifically about the mechanical write up campaign that is being supported on this thread, it is about "holding to the letter of the contract" and the overall effect being to disrupt the airline operations. As I've stated before, the courts are no longer willing to play these union games.
Federal court upholds ban on pilots disrupting United service during contract talks
6:55 PM CDT, March 9, 2009
United Airlines notched a legal victory Monday when a federal appeals court let stand a preliminary injunction that bars the carrier's pilots union from interfering with United's operations.
The restraining order keeps union leaders and members on their best behavior heading into contract negotiations that open in April and are expected to be contentious.
The Air Line Pilots Association is prohibited from instigating or encouraging any work stoppage, sick-out, slow down, work-to-rule campaign or a concerted refusal to accept overtime assignments.
The lower court also ordered the union and its leaders to take all reasonable steps within their power to prevent pilots from taking those actions.
United won the restraining order from a U.S. District Court in Chicago last fall after a group of its junior pilots allegedly engaged in a "sick-out" in July after learning that their jobs would likely be eliminated as the Chicago-based carrier furloughed 950 active pilots.
Judge Joan Lefkow found that the union had participated in a campaign to disrupt United operations over the previous two years by pressuring pilots to stick to the letter of their contract and refuse overtime assignments when United was short-handed.
In its appeal, the union contended that Lefkow had ignored a six-month statute of limitations on purportedly unlawful job actions and that an injunction wasn't necessary since the sick-out had ended months earlier. However, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit agreed with Lefkow that stronger measurers were warranted.
United has since asked Lefkow to make the injunction permanent. An ALPA spokesman said the union had not decided whether it would appeal Monday's ruling.
