If/When Spirit Strikes

[:-)]

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....