Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

IBT Lawsuit

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

gutshotdraw

ZERT Wilson CQB User
Joined
May 6, 2005
Posts
3,226
Saw the announcement today that IBT has filed suit against DAC/FO/FJ for stonewalling negotiations for a joint CBA and the seniority list submitted by 1108.

DAC/FO/FJ called IBT's seniority integration "patently unfair" despite that list apparently receiving unanimous approval fom the pilot representatives of both FO and FJ.

So, can somebody give me the Cliff's Notes version of:

A: The method used by 1108 to create the list that was submitted.

B: The method that management would rather use that is supposedly more "fair"?

Some of us on the outside are curious as to how the various SLI's were constructed and who is who in the whole battle.

I know this is a touchy subject but maybe somebody can explain it first without the usual hate, vitriol, and spin.

THEN, everybody can start flinging poo at each other.

Thanks, and good luck.
 
I think there's two issues.

1. The IBT is supposed to create and agree to fence agreements BEFORE a combined seniority list is made. This makes since I think because otherwise thered be an immediate and almost total reshuffle of pilots and airplanes.

2. The company claims the new seniority list is unfair to the FLoPs pilots who transferred to Flex thier choice is to go back to flops and keep thier original senility number which would force 4ish dozen training events and leave Flex short staffed. Or they can stay at Flex and keep thier Flex seniority number which puts them all at the very bottom of the proposed seniority list of nearly 700 pilots.
 
Last edited:
I think there's two issues.

1. The IBT is supposed to create and agree to fence agreements BEFORE a combined seniority list is made. This makes since I think because otherwise thered be an immediate and almost total reshuffle of pilots and airplanes.

2.
The company claims the new seniority list is unfair to the FLoPs pilots who transferred to Flex thier choice is to go back to flops and keep thier original senility number which would force 4ish dozen training events and leave Flex short staffed. Or they can stay at Flex and keep thier Flex seniority number which puts them all at the very bottom of the proposed seniority list of nearly 700 pilots.


So what isnt fair about giving the transfers a choice, just putting them at the bottom or top wouldnt be fair, give em a choice- stay in your shinny new jet or go back to FLOPs.
 
"Original senility number"

Hahahahaha! Freudian slip? We have more than a few that fit in that category.

Just seems like I need a scorecard to keep the players straight since we're not privy to some of the history of transfers, Red Label, etc. etc.
 
Saw the announcement today that IBT has filed suit against DAC/FO/FJ for stonewalling negotiations for a joint CBA and the seniority list submitted by 1108.

DAC/FO/FJ called IBT's seniority integration "patently unfair" despite that list apparently receiving unanimous approval fom the pilot representatives of both FO and FJ.

So, can somebody give me the Cliff's Notes version of:

A: The method used by 1108 to create the list that was submitted.

B: The method that management would rather use that is supposedly more "fair"?

Some of us on the outside are curious as to how the various SLI's were constructed and who is who in the whole battle.

I know this is a touchy subject but maybe somebody can explain it first without the usual hate, vitriol, and spin.

THEN, everybody can start flinging poo at each other.

Thanks, and good luck.

The method used was longevity / years of service. Management hasn't said what they would rather see, but what they take exception with is that under the SLI, the Flight Options pilots on temporary leave to fly Flexjet airplanes have to make a choice of staying there and using their longevity at Flexjet, or returning and using their longevity at Options. What it really boils down to is that they want to be able to leave their hand-chosen, mostly anti-union, "Friends-of-Kenn" pilots in the Gulfstreams and Globals who were awarded those positions out of seniority, and of course stall the negotiations further.
 
Everyone knows management's issue with the transfers. They want to give them an unfair advantage over the rest of the pilots. But many don't understand the fences before IMPLEMENTATION clause. Management would have you believe the pilots can't even say "integrated seniority list" until the fences have been agreed to. That is a lie. The seniority list we, the pilots, have agreed to is perfectly legal. It simply has to wait for fences to become effective. Nothing prevents, or prevented us from negotiating a list. Lack of fences prevents that list from being implemented. Fences themselves are subject to expedited arbitration, which management is trying to dodge. This will all be worked out in the lawsuit. The judge will kick the whole thing back to arbitration, and we will settle this.
 
DOH since you seem to be on the know. How long will that all take approximately ? And now there's talk of a furlough today which I'm sure will complicate the issue
 
Shanes, call your p2p rep for an update. I'm not trying to be evasive, but this is something for p2p.
 
Everyone knows management's issue with the transfers. They want to give them an unfair advantage over the rest of the pilots.

Ricci tried to do an end-run around 90% of the Flex/Options pilots by giving the transfers "super seniority". Now that court procedings have been ongoing for some time, I look foreward to the Federal Judge's decision. The company says they will be transparent, but they failed to keep the pilots updated like they promised to do. I hope the judge can see thru Ricci's charade. Ricci is a good talker but falls short when it comes time to deliver for all the pilots.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top