If/When Spirit Strikes

[PCL_128]

Well run down the financial justifications for a strike or for that matter what Spirit's pilot group is asking for.

That's not what I was asking you about. I was asking you to justify your claims that ALPA is a failed organization by offering some suggestions for how ALPA should be doing things differently. You have failed to provide even a single suggestion.

All I have been told is Spirit has justification to strike is based on Spirit's profit statement from last year. Pretty simplistic. You say their will be no strike, but there is still plenty of talk about one. Rez seems to be "girding his loins" and that is how this thread started in the first place. This I view as a problem that needs a solution. Rambling? Seems pretty specific. Well what do you know about Spirit's finances and Oaktree Capital? That is second time I asked you that question.

ALPA's Economics & Financial Analysis (E&FA) Department is responsible for examining a company's finances, and they always have to sign confidentiality agreements in order to do so. MECs and Negotiating Committees have to do the same. As you're no doubt aware, companies aren't fond of opening their books to the eyes of everyone in the world. They provide what the law requires to the SEC, but that's it. ALPA is not free to give out more information than is already available publicly. You elect leaders that you trust, and then you trust their judgement when they tell you that the airline is fully capable of funding the contract that you are demanding. If you don't trust your leaders, then elect new ones.

So please forgive me if I don't have the deference you expect for your sage opinion.

I really couldn't care less what you think about my sage or not-so-sage opinions. I just want you to answer some simple questions about what you would do differently. You have consistently failed to do so. That indicates that you have nothing constructive to add, just run of the mill anti-union drivel.

Finally interesting to notice how you are all over my a$$ yet you got a guy here making some pretty heinous accusations about former and current guard and reserve pilots, and not a word from you. Thanks for supporting us.

I thought it was pretty off-topic, so I saw no need to get involved. I think Rez's comments are being misunderstood, though. I think he's just referring to the small group of pilots that do have an attitude problem about receiving a pension check and not caring about upholding the profession. I don't think he's talking about all guard and reserve pilots, or all military pilots in general. To the contrary, I think most former military pilots, after spending a few years at the airlines, are great union members that quickly come to realize that management has no concept for leadership and cares nothing about taking care of their people. In other words, a whole different world from the military.

 

[AirCobra]

Today I got the new Airline Pilot. Two things struck me as very interesting. Page 12:

Air Wisconsin employees represented by ALPA, the IAM, and the CWA met in Milwaukee in late Jan. to launch a labor coalition at the airline. The coalition is designed to communication among the employees groups, develop a common bargaining strategy, and eliminate the threat of management pitting employee groups against each other. "It's time we stand together as employees of Air Wisconsin-not alone as pilots, mechanics, dispatchers, and flight attendants of Air Wisconsin" says Capt. Joe Ellis, the pilots' MEC.

Well gosh. I thought that was a stupid idea from a moron who didn't know what they were talking about. I thought that would make us like Teamsters and that won't work at Spirit, nor at any airline in general. I thought it would weaken ALPA. You guys going to let Capt. Ellis know his statement is moronic?

Some of you guys should shut your mouths and open your ears every once in awhile. Maybe it time you listen. Just because someone may have a few gray hairs does not mean they have gone senile. It might mean they have been around the block a few times, and have experience.

Second interesting point from the ALPA Code of Ethics.

Statement 4. An Airline Pilot will conduct his affairs with other members of the professions and with ALPA in such a manner as to bring credit to the profession and ALPA as well as to himself.

a. He will not falsely or maliciously injure the professional reputation, prospects, or job security of another pilot.

Statement 4 violations. So lets see here we got ALPA members degrading and ridiculing pilots from the USAPA, ALPA leadership saying ALPA members who are military reservists are gaming the system, then calling this blatant accusation "constructive criticism", and an open threat from an ALPA memeber to attempt to get me fired or not hired if they only knew my identity, not to mention a host of name calling. All of this goes uncommented upon by people too concerned with expressing self righteous indignation.

Well what's wrong with ALPA? Maybe its that some of you don't know how to follow your own code of ethics. Its supposed to be a brotherhood, not a cafeteria where you pick and choose what part of our code and canon you are going to abide by. How do we fix ALPA PCL? Well you can start with demonstrating some professionalism. Care to join me in helping our brother who may have lost his way in regards to military pilots, or our brother who may lost his way in regards to threatening the jobs of pilots, or the many of our brothers who have hurled insults or resorted to name calling, or our brother that belittles fellow members of our profession who happen to be in another union?

 

[PCL_128]

Today I got the new Airline Pilot. Two things struck me as very interesting. Page 12:

Air Wisconsin employees represented by ALPA, the IAM, and the CWA met in Milwaukee in late Jan. to launch a labor coalition at the airline. The coalition is designed to communication among the employees groups, develop a common bargaining strategy, and eliminate the threat of management pitting employee groups against each other. "It's time we stand together as employees of Air Wisconsin-not alone as pilots, mechanics, dispatchers, and flight attendants of Air Wisconsin" says Capt. Joe Ellis, the pilots' MEC.

Well gosh. I thought that was a stupid idea from a moron who didn't know what they were talking about. I thought that would make us like Teamsters and that won't work at Spirit, nor at any airline in general. I thought it would weaken ALPA. You guys going to let Capt. Ellis know his statement is moronic?

I hate to break it to you, but labor coalitions are nothing new. ALPA has been employing them for years. Northwest and Mesaba are probably the best examples, and they worked great. The problem is that it requires the willingness of the other labor groups to get involved, which means that you can't get them put together at every airline, but they work great at carriers where the other labor groups are willing to get on board.

Well you can start with demonstrating some professionalism. Care to join me in helping our brother who may have lost his way in regards to military pilots, or our brother who may lost his way in regards to threatening the jobs of pilots, or the many of our brothers who have hurled insults or resorted to name calling, or our brother that belittles fellow members of our profession who happen to be in another union?

Again, I think you've misunderstood Rez on the military issue, but that's between the two of you. Regarding threats to other pilots' jobs, that's obviously not appropriate, but I must have missed the posts in which that happened on this thread. About USAPA, I don't think anyone is violating the ALPA Code of Ethics simply by pointing out the lack of ethics involved in the entire USAPA movement.

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

AC and YIP-

Why is it you are willing to travel the world to kill people in war, coerce them into a certain behavior and action but when it comes to your fellow Americans and pilots who are simply trying to feed their families, keep their house, get reasonable healthcare and a decent retirement you expect them to be subservient?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Or how does a minority group of pilots who snub hard working volunteers trying to keep this job a profession help unity? When you got MIL guys and pilots with sugar mamas who just fly as a hobby job and really don't care about making a living.... how does that help with unity? Can you answer this please?

These are your accusations and your personal prejudice. I made $12,000 last year form my service in the Reserve's and a retired O-4 probabaly pulls in about $45,000 a year (even combined that with starting FO pay it comes in well belowsenior Captain pay for a guy nearing his 50's), so WTF are you talking about?

Not you obviously..

There have been tighter controls but in the 90s I've heard more than one reserve/guard guy say.. "if I don't get the days off I want I'll just tell scheduling I got to pull a guard weekend...."
USERRA regulations are the same, there are no tighter controls so WTF are you talking about? Being in the Reserves is work, it is not a day off. You want a smaller active duty force, well who do you think picks up the load from everything from air defense, SAR, and humanitarian relief, not to mention two wars, and Kososvo? If someone tells their employer they are going to drill and then they don't that is punishable under the UCMJ. So WTF are you talking about? Ever worked with ALPA and military affairs, and USERRA to protect guardsmen and reservists from hostile employer actions and prejudice like you have expressed?

I am talking about airlines who began requiring orders from the unit CO.... due to a few bad apples...

Why is it when any constructive criticism of the MIL is brought up you can't accept it, but then you claim that ALPA should accept criticism... more hypocrisy on your end...
Its not constructive criticism, its you making accusations based on your personal prejudice. If you know guys in the reserve doing what you just mentioned, call their unit. If you are wrong maybe you will get a harassment complaint filed against you. If you are making the accusation it is up to you to prove it. The balls in your court.

Naw, you can rat out your fellow service men and fellow pilots, that is not my style...

In fact we've been waiting for days now for you to offer constructive ALPA criticism and solutions... but you failed. Take note: any constructive MIL criticism is met with accusations of being unpatriotic, socialist, ungrateful, and with invitations to leave the state. Whereas, you are being asked multiple times to constructively criticise. Please... address the following:
I never said anything of the sort. You made baseless accusations that I quoted. Everything I stated were your words, not mine. You have a problem with the military. Your criticism is not constructive, its accusatory based solely on your personal bias.

You never labeled me a socialist?

Three direct replies here:

You've stated that you think Spirit pilots should not use the strike route, not seek out support from non-Spirit pilot groups and form alliances and coalitions with other Spirit labor groups. Ok, fine... where is the coercion or influence in this game plan to get mgmnt to negotiate fairly and timely?

You said we should support Spirit if they strike. Where was the question should Spirit strike in the first place, or how far do we go to prevent a strike.
​

That is up to the Spirit pilots not you. If they decide to strike, I say we support them.

Mike said his information about Spirit's financials and profits were based on LPA information, and the fact that Spirit made a profit was justification for a strike. Since Spirit is not publicly traded I wanted to know more about ALPA's methodology in determining if a strike is warranted based on financial information, what ALPA knows about Oaktree Capital, and if ALPA's demands are reasonable or too conservative. Negotiating based on last years profits, and commenting that Spirit is strong because it is purchasing new aircraft seems a bit questionable to me as a primary justification. To move forward with support for a strike I believe ALPA should demonstrate a much better grasp on the situation. Mikes reasoning did not give me the feeling he fully understood what was going on. If that is ALPA's failure or his I don't know. A strike may be the only alternative and a better understanding of Spirit's financial may mean you are asking for too little, but who knows with the level of understanding that has been exhibited here. My skepticism is only due to Spirits rep as a cut rate bargain basement airline, and that they aren't as well off as you like to think solely based on some ALPA generated data. That is just my opinion. All I have to say is "it's Spirit we are talking about" to justify my opinion and people will know what I mean. I think we need more financial data to justify the strike position. Unless we all really don't care and good riddance to another bottom feeder airline.

In addition you stated a radical cultural shift in ALPA? What exactly do you mean by this? and HOW will it get done?
We start by recognizing our failures, analyzing what went wrong and not making the same mistakes the next time. Think about the last three strikes we had. United, Comair, and Northwest. Where are those airlines today? Collapsing, Collapsing, and merged with Delta. Nothing can be learned from this? Just blame management is all we have to offer? Was collapsing, collapsing, and merged with Delta what we thought would happen? Was it our long term goal, to sacrifice for short term gain? Did we expect Delta pilots not to support Comair? Did we want 40% of domestic flying going to lower paid pilots. Why are they flying those routes in the first place if we are all ALPA. How did management pull that one off? Okay if all the airlines sucked and got what they deserved, good riddance to the bottom feeders. I think we are going to run out of bottom feeders before too long if this keeps up. What's up with scope, age 65, pensions? People sound the alarm and are shouted down.

Again, that is Spirits call to make. Not yours. The financials is not your concern. If the pilots at Spirit feel it is time to strike, will you support them, yes or no.

But again and as usual, you deflect. You stated that a Spirit wide labor coalition, not support from other pilot groups was best. I ask again, how is this going to leverage Spirit management? Where is the coercion?

You also stated that changing the CFR and the old and new ways. But you have yet to state that you participate in ALPA or UP PAC. Why? And if you won't do the PAC how do you expect ALPA to change CFRs?
Rez how many discussions have we had about your litmus tests? Whatever I did or didn't do you will mock me for, it's your thing to set a standard that no one meets and then admonish them for it.

So you never backed the ALPA or UP PAC. Got it. It was $5 measly dollars per month. What? You were too cheap? Or too obedient to your patriarch; UAL mgmt.

When have you ever said you should have done more, or done things differently. Few people make themselves out to be the great paragon of virtue that you do. Its not an insult, its just the character of your posts. I will give you my litmus test. Apologize to all ALPA members for you false accusations and mischaracterizations of military service. You can start here anonymously with a few posts in a couple of different threads. Join or create a committee at your airline to protect the rights of reservists harassed by management, and well... basically coworkers like you, and become an expert in USERRA and support the ESGR.

I already supported MIL pilots as a jumpseat chairman and making sure they could get to/from guard weekends (they drop out of CASS) and as a status rep when they return from service and the company wants to throw them online with minimal training, lower seniority or an FO position when it should be CA.
​

Not sure why you have to defend bad apples... then again, criticism and the truth seem to be difficult for you....


And we are back to the beginning... no reasonable criticism of ALPA or the ability to offer solutions.....

You spoke of this needed radical shift at ALPA.... what do you mean and how does it get done?

 

[AirCobra]

I hate to break it to you, but labor coalitions are nothing new. ALPA has been employing them for years. Northwest and Mesaba are probably the best examples, and they worked great. The problem is that it requires the willingness of the other labor groups to get involved, which means that you can't get them put together at every airline, but they work great at carriers where the other labor groups are willing to get on board.

But last week they were moronic, untenable, and a suggestion that would only be made by somone who didn't know what they were talking about. Guess things change fast.


Again, I think you've misunderstood Rez on the military issue, but that's between the two of you. Regarding threats to other pilots' jobs, that's obviously not appropriate, but I must have missed the posts in which that happened on this thread. About USAPA, I don't think anyone is violating the ALPA Code of Ethics simply by pointing out the lack of ethics involved in the entire USAPA movement.
He said military pilots game the system. What is there to be misunderstood? He said military pilots drive down wages. What is there to be misunderstood?

 

[AirCobra]

AC and YIP-

Why is it you are willing to travel the world to kill people in war, coerce them into a certain behavior and action but when it comes to your fellow Americans and pilots who are simply trying to feed their families, keep their house, get reasonable healthcare and a decent retirement you expect them to be subservient?

Yeah like that evil MEC over at Air Wisconsin who pretty much said the same thing I did. Maybe you and your pals can get him fired.

 

[AirCobra]

Naw, you can rat out your fellow service men and fellow pilots, that is not my style...

No your style is to make unsubstansiated allegations. Very professional!

 

[AirCobra]

I already supported MIL pilots as a jumpseat chairman and making sure they could get to/from guard weekends (they drop out of CASS) and as a status rep when they return from service and the company wants to throw them online with minimal training, lower seniority or an FO position when it should be CA.
​

Not sure why you have to defend bad apples... then again, criticism and the truth seem to be difficult for you....

Yeah but then if a Reservist is activated for a few months right after they are hired or while sitting reserve you cast aspersions on them and tell everyone to be on the lookout. Once again, very professional?

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Still waiting:

How is a labor coalition better than a strike?

What is this radical shift needed in ALPA and how do you get it done?

 

[:-)]

Rez, YIP, AC, what???? You boys on reserve or something?

 

[PCL_128]

But last week they were moronic, untenable, and a suggestion that would only be made by somone who didn't know what they were talking about. Guess things change fast.

I never said any such thing.

He said military pilots game the system. What is there to be misunderstood? He said military pilots drive down wages. What is there to be misunderstood?

Like I said, this whole argument is between you two.

 

[Lear70]

I know many military pilots who DO "game" the system, if that's what you want to call it. If they get furloughed, they often have prepared their reserve or guard unit gig to fall back on. At my current carrier, when flying got scarce and money went with it, two of our military reservists went back to active duty rather than stick around.

It aggravates employers because suddenly their staffing gets messed up but hey, if they're not going to salary employees or agree not to lay them off, then they'll just have to deal with it. I personally think it's great that the company HAS to hold their jobs as a Federal Law - my aggravation with companies who don't salary their employees or have a decent compensation level is pretty high right now - I'm making the same thing as I did over a DECADE ago flying the same aircraft, which is nearly a 40% pay cut from what that income could buy then... If they paid a fair wage even in tough times, the military guys wouldn't just up and leave them short of pilots.

3 things that come to mind:

1. People who get aggravated at this type of "gaming the system" are probably the same people who would do it if they had that option.
2. I have no interest in flying in any country that ends in "-stan", and I'm appreciative of the military service of those who do, so I have a hard time getting upset if they aren't willing to expend negotiating capital to protect against furlough, etc.
3. Yes, many military pilots who have pensions or guard/reserve income and benefits add to the votes of people who will accept sub-standard contracts. However, many military pilots are some of the staunchest supporters of aggressive bargaining to return our incomes to pre-9/11 levels.

So no, I wouldn't call it a "personal attack", just the way Rez happens to feel on the issue. I personally think we should disregard most of the military pilots input on health insurance unless that pilot actually pays for and uses the company insurance. If you don't use it? Your input in the Wilson Polling shouldn't be counted (and I'd like to see that question included in the Wilson Polling to be used to exclude that demographic ONLY for that issue - no reason to count the input of people who don't use something and, therefore, don't care about it one way or another or would sacrifice it to obtain something else they DO want).

At most carriers, military pilots are in the minority, so they don't sway much of the vote. Not that I don't think they have anything constructive to offer, I just believe in negotiating for what the majority wants and when the majority is non-military, I don't have to worry about much of the negative impacts towards my personal goals. If I did, I'd either have to suck it up and deal with it or find a different airline. Just the way it works...

And that's all I have to say about that...

 

[Mamma]

Lear 70, usually you have something intelligent to offer and your posts are extremely informative but I think you came up WAY short on this one. I am really confused by what you define "gaming" as but in general it is a negative term. Mil guys are not gaming the system by doing military work. In my circumstance, the company asked us to take a military LOA so they could keep a few more non-mil guys from getting furloughed. They asked the pilot population in general if any could take a 1-2 year normal LOA to help with furloughs. I took the mil LOA so I don't feel I am "gaming" the system? Sure some game the system but just look around to see why. When times are good at the airlines, reserve units post huge vacancies. They run short of pilots because nobody wants to do the difficult work of flying mil planes for less money. It takes a considerable amount of time to stay proficient and current in a C-17 or fighter aircraft and the vacation hot spots are less than desireable. As far as health care goes, are you out of your mind?????? I could just imagine the phone call from Wilson Polling: "Are you a retired veteran? Oh, you are. Well, since you have health care, your input is not needed. Thank you and have a nice day." WTFO! What about those that have insurance from their wife who works? Do we throw them out too? I were to apply your logic that military guys with health care would throw everyone under the bus, then how about this phone call: "Hello, this is Wilson Polling. We are polling in reference to line bidding. Are you in the top 20% of seniority? Oh, you are. Sorry, we don't want your input because you can always get what you want. Have a nice day." Lear, how else can we drive a wedge in a pilot group? Do you have any other great ideas to foster unity instead of throwing out an entire group because you don't like what a couple of them have to say on an issue?

Now, to be fair, your posts in the past have always been excellent so I think you just had a moment where you did not think something through all the way. Also, if you know any military guys, I would almost be certain that most would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it. The military does not foster the me me me types. The military develops team players and fosters the "help one another" virtue. Not everyone is perfect and there are certainly guys who abuse the system, but by and large, I think you have us wrong.

 

[Lear70]

Lear 70, usually you have something intelligent to offer and your posts are extremely informative but I think you came up WAY short on this one. I am really confused by what you define "gaming" as but in general it is a negative term.

Guess I should have been more clear,,,

SOME people might consider it "gaming" the system. I do NOT, that's why I put it in quotes. I consider it a valid way for military pilots to mitigate the circumstances of pay cuts or furloughs, and God bless 'em for going over to countries I wouldn't ever want to visit and fighting for us. That's why I said I don't blame them at all, especially when companies are going to cut pay or furlough people anyway.

As far as health care goes, are you out of your mind?????? I could just imagine the phone call from Wilson Polling: "Are you a retired veteran? Oh, you are. Well, since you have health care, your input is not needed. Thank you and have a nice day." WTFO!

I knew that one would get some attention. Like I said, it's about whether you USE the benefits or not. If someone isn't using the benefits, then polling them on whether they're good or not, need work or not, or are important or not really doesn't apply to that person, does it?

What about those that have insurance from their wife who works? Do we throw them out too?

Depends. If they WANT to use the benefits but don't because they're cost prohibitive when compared to their spouse's benefits (like at AAI), and they WANT better insurance, fine. If they're not using the insurance and have NO interest in using the insurance in the future then no, I don't want their vote to disregard insurance gains to get more pay or a better retirement package to screw with the other 80% of the pilot group who IS interested in insurance.

I just don't like the idea of people who have no dog in the hunt trying to decide how to determine the negotiating committee's priorities in health care discussions in contract negotiations.

[FONT=&quot]

If I were to apply your warped logic that military guys with health care would throw everyone under the bus, then how about this phone call: "Hello, this is Wilson Polling. We are polling in reference to line bidding. Are you in the top 20% of seniority? Oh, you are. Sorry, we don't want your input because you can always get what you want. Have a nice day."[/FONT]

It's not the same logic because, in your example, the senior 20% IS interested in MANY things regarding line bidding, including time lines of initial bids, awards, SAP, and Pref Bid (God forbid). What I'm talking about is allowing a demographic who doesn't use a section of our contract AT ALL and has no interest in using it in the future to have input on how to bargain for things in that section. Arguably, insurance is the only thing I can think of that falls into that category...

Now, to be fair, your posts in the past have always been excellent so I think you just had a moment where you did not think something through all the way. Also, if you know any military guys, I would almost be certain that most would give you the shirt off their back if you needed it. The military does not foster the me me me types. The military develops team players and fosters the "help one another" virtue. Not everyone is perfect and there are certainly guys who abuse the system, but by and large, I think you have us wrong.

I'm not disparaging military pilots AT ALL. I have never said a SINGLE negative thing about our fighting men and women... hell, I tried to join the Corps straight out of college and got disqualified for having pins in my ankle from a snow skiing accident in high school, even though I was running 7-10 miles a day with the group of guys who were trying to join the Corps from our Aviation Department at MTSU.

I have *NEVER* tried to drive a wedge in between the pilot group, and wasn't intending to here.

What I *DID* say was that, as a civilian without military benefits, I just dislike the idea of people who don't USE Insurance benefits trying to tell our NC how they should focus on them when those people arguably have no earthly clue how the insurance works and what the pitfalls are, except for the angst that's going on now with the new $200 B.S. deductible (which everyone likely knows about). The way the Wilson Polling data works, they just ask you how important Insurance is to you on a scale from 1-5. If a lot of people say it's "Not important at all" because they have military insurance and don't USE the airline's insurance and have no plans to, and another demographic with spouses who have good insurance say "Not very important", then our NC gets the wrong idea that Insurance doesn't necessarily need to be a focus if those two demographics are large enough portions of the pilot group.

I don't think that's happened at AAI, but by asking that ADDITIONAL questions, "Do you USE the company insurance?" AND "Do you PLAN on using the company insurance?", you give the NC a whole different idea of how the question applies to the pilots who DO use the insurance. Not necessarily that their input needs to be thrown out, but that it may have skewed the data...

I hope that was more clear... Sorry for the confusion.

 

[Mamma]

Sorry for the misunderstanding on your intentions. I was not trying to say you have a negative view of military guys but that you were incorrect in that mil guys would throw the group under the bus because they are covered. I don't know anyone who thinks that way. Rez says he talked to a couple that would, but they are in a huge minority. I actually hold company health insurance as do many of my mil friends so I do have a dog in the fight. When I am just a normal reservist, the company plan is my primary plan. Probably for the same reason most airline pilots don't use their FAA doc for routine medical care. Many reservists also commute to their unit and do not live by a military medical facility. Last, I think if we excluded those with plans it is dividing the group because health care is a negotiated benefit that everyone pays for in one way or another. I don't like creating divisions because the company always finds a way to exploit them.

 

[AirCobra]

You would have to go back to Rez's original post. His contention was that new hire Fed Ex guys that were also military reservists needed to be monitored. I guess he has some heartburn with new hires getting activated for several month stints and thus perhaps avoiding sitting reserve or avoiding too much time as FE and being able to bid FO upon their return. Mamma is 100% right. Go to baseops.net and look at the employment adds for Reserve units. Virtually all say expect to be gone on extended trips or to put in a lot more than 2 days a month. Rez is wrong because he is trying to cast suspicion on someone solely because of their military status, not because of any act they have committed. He can think whatever he wants about who drove down pay for pilots like blaming retired military guys, all the while flying for a regional that is soaking up mainline flying, so PCL is right and that may be a matter of opinion between us. But telling people to be on the lookout, or to more closely examine any new hire that is also a reservist when you have no indication they have done anything wrong, well that is not just a difference of opinion, I believe that violates ALPA's code of ethics.

 

[AirCobra]

Still waiting:

How is a labor coalition better than a strike?

What is this radical shift needed in ALPA and how do you get it done?

I told you why. You told me why you don't think it is. Do you think the MEC at Air Wisconsin is wrong or misguided, or do you think a coalition will work at AW and not at Spirit?

Let me ask you something else. Do you think wages can be driven up by enough people leaving that a company can get anyone to fly for them so they have to pay more to attract and keep people. That is how the military has worked, and corporations too. Do you think that can be effective as a strike? Like what if United did its $31 an hour recall in 2006 and not just 20 or 30% didn't take the recall, but no one did. Now if my ALPA brothers at (name of airline here) Express weren't willing to swoop in and take all those jobs form guys that turned down recall, do you think United would have been forced to offer more money to get people to come back and stay?

 

[Lear70]

Sorry for the misunderstanding on your intentions. I was not trying to say you have a negative view of military guys but that you were incorrect in that mil guys would throw the group under the bus because they are covered.

I certainly never meant that at all... I wasn't thinking that they would "throw the other side under the bus", but that their input in Wilson Polling just speaking for their own situation without any ill intent might skew the data.

I don't know anyone who thinks that way. Rez says he talked to a couple that would, but they are in a huge minority. I actually hold company health insurance as do many of my mil friends so I do have a dog in the fight. When I am just a normal reservist, the company plan is my primary plan. Probably for the same reason most airline pilots don't use their FAA doc for routine medical care. Many reservists also commute to their unit and do not live by a military medical facility. Last, I think if we excluded those with plans it is dividing the group because health care is a negotiated benefit that everyone pays for in one way or another. I don't like creating divisions because the company always finds a way to exploit them.

All good points, and something for me to ponder... Always open to the other side of the issue, I've just had a mil guy or two make comments about "not giving a damn about insurance because I get mine through the military, I care about pay", etc. While I know they're likely not the majority, that's what put me in that frame of mind...

And I agree, ANY division is exploitable, and that doesn't help us at ALL, especially now. Sorry to have initially sounded that way, didn't intend to. Dangers of the message board, once again. :beer:

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Sure some game the system but just look around to see why. When times are good at the airlines, reserve units post huge vacancies. They run short of pilots because nobody wants to do the difficult work of flying mil planes for less money. It takes a considerable amount of time to stay proficient and current in a C-17 or fighter aircraft and the vacation hot spots are less than desireable. .

You prove the point.....

So the MIL guys, when times are good at the airlines don't pull guard duty.... supply/demand? Simply put their needs are met, however, when the times are tough, then the guard unit is well staffed. So what motivates a MIL pilot?

The point is... when you are in new hire class, living off of credit cards and hanging with the FAs because they know how to make Top Ramen 30 different ways.... with the wife wondering WTF are you doing and the discussion of low wages and no healthcare till you pass your checkride or 6 months into employment..... and a MIL guy with retirement, health, etc... says... ______________.

either you like Tap Ramen or you don't......


It is all about whether your needs are met....