ILN ops

[penguin22]

Of course a NLRB judge would see it that way. She has no choice. .

not to be nitpicky, but......

SHE, Judge Loretta A. Preska, is a U.S. District Court Judge, Southern District of New York.

HE, Judge Joseph Gontram, is the Administrative Law Judge for the NLRB

 

[penguin22]

Show me the flying...

Sorry, that flying is ours.

 

[AV8OR]

"I'm just pointing out for everyone to see ALPA's job grab attempt."


How bout just a "job hang on to". If this was a job grab it's absolutely the crappiest one in history.

I don't know why you didn't join the complaint. You appear to agree it's intent and legal position.

Yall keep hashin it out. He11, I'm probably gonna be gone before this crap gets settled anyway.

 

[erichartmann]

there happens to be a bunch of lawyers (with real legal training) that disagree with the above assumption. your post above shows your knowledge of the law....zip.

Ahh, lawyers, with real legal training...

99% of all lawyers make the rest look bad.​

Know the difference between a lawyer and a catfish? One is a bottom feeder, the other.... a fish.​

The only good lawyer is your own, until, of course, he loses your case.​

"The first thing we do, lets kill all the lawyers..." Shakespeare's Henry VI.​

One lawyer living in a small town will starve. If a second comes to town they will both get rich.​

Ever wonder about lawyer jokes?

For what it's worth, I'm told several lawyer's of my aquaintance essentially share my opinion of your case.

The point.

The point is that lawyers are professional debaters. Its how they earn their living. Lawyers are paid to argue your case which amounts to your point of view. Unless you case is wholly without basis under the law and totally with merit I'm sure you can find a lawyer to argue it, and I wouldn't bet you couldn't do so even if the case had no basis or merit.

A lawyer aquaintence once told me if the law is on your side you argue the law. If the law is against you argue the merit. If you have both on your side dazzle them with your brilliance, if neither, do your best to baffle with bullshi!

As someone else pointed out, many of us will be long retired by the time this is settled.

 

[erichartmann]

"I'm just pointing out for everyone to see ALPA's job grab attempt."


How bout just a "job hang on to". If this was a job grab it's absolutely the crappiest one in history.

I don't know why you didn't join the complaint. You appear to agree it's intent and legal position.

Yall keep hashin it out. He11, I'm probably gonna be gone before this crap gets settled anyway.

Had you been quickly sucessfull, the net effect would likely have cost me my job. It may yet. The freight you were demanding to fly was the freight I was flying. From my POV, crappy or not, it's a grab.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

I have a couple of questions...

I'm assuming that the ABX/IBT contract contains some sort of language that governs scope. Does it not specify that ABX pilots, and only ABX pilots, fly Airborne freight? If so...and if Airborne had been the dominant company in the merger of Airborne and DHL...who would now have first dibs on flying the combined freight? ABX pilots, or the former DHL pilots?"

Next question...and this is assuming that your contract contained a section on successorship...does the contract between ABX/IBT and Airborne not apply to any company that takes over Airborne? In other words, had Airborne (not ABX) been sold to another company (it wouldn't even have to be another airfreight company...it could be "Guido's Pizza" for the sake of this discussion) would they not incur the obligation to employ ABX pilots along with the sale? Or could Guido say, "Hey, I don' know nuthin' 'bout no 'contract.' 'Dat was with 'dem other guys. All I know is 'dat I got my own guys, see?" and bring in his own drivers?

Legalities aside, you have 3 entities (DHL, Astar, and ALPA) who have negotiated contracts independently of 3 other entities (Airborne, ABX, and IBT) who have done the same. Even if you had all 6 of those entities in the same room at the same time, it would be virtually impossible to work out an agreement free of conflict and that was fair to all. When such conflicts arise, it's the responsibility of each side's respective lawyer to represent their memberships interest to a Judge. It's not a "job grab," it's their job, period.

As a practical matter, as long as there are two companies (and two unions) of similar size on the property, the flying will likely be apportioned similarly. Just thank your lucky stars there aren't three.

Whoops...I forgot about Polar...

 

[ABXbooger]

Following the sam logic as Dan, why don't we file a suit claiming breach of scope, because a lot of the flying Astar does was the Airborne Express flying that our scope covered. I have no problem allowing Astar to continue flying what they had prior to the ABF merger, ABF as an airline was flying a lot more freight priot to the merger that everyone is now, DHL and ex-ABF freight combined. Things keep going this way, there won't be enough freight for them to fly anyways...

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

Following the sam logic as Dan, why don't we file a suit claiming breach of scope, because a lot of the flying Astar does was the Airborne Express flying that our scope covered. I have no problem allowing Astar to continue flying what they had prior to the ABF merger, ABF as an airline was flying a lot more freight priot to the merger that everyone is now, DHL and ex-ABF freight combined. Things keep going this way, there won't be enough freight for them to fly anyways...

That was exactly my point...not everybody can have everything they were entitled to under their respective contracts. ALPA has an obligation under their charter to represent the interests of their pilots, just as IBT does their own. In the end, no matter what happens in court, things probably won't change much. In the meantime, the lawyers have done their job.

It's prettty obvious that at some point, falling revenues will force DHL Int'l to enter into a "strategic alliance" with either UPS or FedEX that will make DHL's entire US operations...ahem..."redundant." At that point, the argument about "who flies what" will become moot, as DHL will no longer exist as a stand-alone company.

This ship is sinking. It doesn't matter whether she goes down by the bow or the stern, we're all gonna be treadin' water soon.

 

[Cargoav8or]

Yes, why don't you?

Following the sam logic as Dan, why don't we file a suit claiming breach of scope, because a lot of the flying Astar does was the Airborne Express flying that our scope covered. I have no problem allowing Astar to continue flying what they had prior to the ABF merger, ABF as an airline was flying a lot more freight priot to the merger that everyone is now, DHL and ex-ABF freight combined. Things keep going this way, there won't be enough freight for them to fly anyways...

 

[penguin22]

Yes, why don't you?

That's the whole point here, isn't it?

Of course there's scope in our contract, including successorship language. And when DHL, along with Astar, came along we too could have sent our lawyers out on a hail mary job grab attempt. Instead, we simply accepted the reality of the situation... DHL is coming, and they're bringing Astar.

And that's the point. ALPA, waving Fellows letter in their greedy little hand, chose to go for it all, at the expense of putting ABX out of business. Instead of accepting reality and partnering with the other pilot group involved, they tried to put them out of business.

A major blunder by ALPA, if you ask me. They haven't won a thing, most likely never will, but they sure alienated the very pilot group they will need the most support from.

 

[erichartmann]

I have a couple of questions...

I'm assuming that the ABX/IBT contract contains some sort of language that governs scope. Does it not specify that ABX pilots, and only ABX pilots, fly Airborne freight? If so...and if Airborne had been the dominant company in the merger of Airborne and DHL...who would now have first dibs on flying the combined freight? ABX pilots, or the former DHL pilots?"

Next question...and this is assuming that your contract contained a section on successorship...does the contract between ABX/IBT and Airborne not apply to any company that takes over Airborne? In other words, had Airborne (not ABX) been sold to another company (it wouldn't even have to be another airfreight company...it could be "Guido's Pizza" for the sake of this discussion) would they not incur the obligation to employ ABX pilots along with the sale? Or could Guido say, "Hey, I don' know nuthin' 'bout no 'contract.' 'Dat was with 'dem other guys. All I know is 'dat I got my own guys, see?" and bring in his own drivers?

Legalities aside, you have 3 entities (DHL, Astar, and ALPA) who have negotiated contracts independently of 3 other entities (Airborne, ABX, and IBT) who have done the same. Even if you had all 6 of those entities in the same room at the same time, it would be virtually impossible to work out an agreement free of conflict and that was fair to all. When such conflicts arise, it's the responsibility of each side's respective lawyer to represent their memberships interest to a Judge. It's not a "job grab," it's their job, period.

As a practical matter, as long as there are two companies (and two unions) of similar size on the property, the flying will likely be apportioned similarly. Just thank your lucky stars there aren't three.

Whoops...I forgot about Polar...

There was such language. About two years prior to DHL buying Airborne, Airborne reorganized, probably to facilitate the sale. Airborne Freight Inc., the former parent company of ABX Air, officially became Airborne Express. A new entity, Airborne, Inc., was created . Airborne Inc. was a holding company. Airborne Express and ABX Air became subsidiaries of Airborne Inc. The names of the officers did not change i.e. the folks running the former Airborne Freight Inc. were still running Airborne Express, and they were now running Airborne Inc.

Local 1224 went to management and asked for new letter specifically binding Airborne Inc. to to our contract as the new parent. The manager's of Airborne Inc. declined to give such a letter. Local 1224 went to court. The Federal judge ruled that the point was moot because there was no violation of the scope language i.e. no other pilot group was actively engaged in doing any flying that was arguably ours. In her remarks she indicated that even had the point not been moot she would have ruled against the union. In essence, despite the successorship language contained in the CBA she said Airborne Inc. was new entity not bound to the contract. Further, she indicated that Airborne Express, as the wholly owned subsidiary of Airborne Inc. and no longer the parent of ABX Air, was also no longer bound to our contract.

So, as I understand the situation now, DHL has purchased Airborne Inc. and its subsidiary Airborne Express. This was the ground operation of the entity DBA Airborne Express. The air side of that entity was ABX Air. ABX Air was spun off as a separate public company.

DHL, before, during and after the purchase of Airborne, Inc. also did some corporate restructuring. I haven’t really keep track of all the changes. Suffice it say as I understand it the corporate entity which existed at the time DHL signed on as a party to the CBA at DHL Airways no longer exists legally. Certainly DHL Airways is no longer legally the subsidiary of DHL. ABX Air chose to go the NLRB route in contesting the suit filed by ALPA. Personally, once all of that is resolved, if the courts eventually toss out the NLRB ruling I think ABX Air use the ruling against IBT to contest it further. In the meantime, ABX Air is looking for business elsewhere in an effort to reduce its dependence on DHL should ABX eventually lose.

 

[penguin22]

It's prettty obvious that at some point, falling revenues will force DHL Int'l to enter into a "strategic alliance" with either UPS or FedEX that will make DHL's entire US operations...ahem..."redundant."

Now that's funny. Wishful thinking on your part, Junior.

 

[Whistlin' Dan]

Now that's funny. Wishful thinking on your part, Junior.

Wishful thinking on MY part? Get real.

Like FedEx and UPS, DHL's domestic operations are served by an airline. Two airlines, in fact. The larger of the two doesn't have industry-standard cargo doors on many of it's airplanes, a deficiency that will take millions of dollars, and years to correct. At least their planes can land in fog. Ah, technology!

The other airline has cargo doors in all their planes, but they can't land in fog. They could probably get certified to land in fog, but there doesn't seem to be any rush to do so. Meanwhile, the morale is so low at both airlines that some pilots are openly beginning to take pleasure in the service failures of their respective carriers. This, even before the major pay cuts that will likely be imposed upon them by their management. Ah joy!

Like FedEx and UPS, DHL has a hub. Except it's not in a major city where there would be ready access to transportation and a workforce. No, DHL's hub is in the middle of a rural cornfield, where there's little access to anything but...CORN. At least the labor is cheap in rural America. So cheap, in fact, that certain rampers have recently been caught supplementing their income by performing sex acts in the cargo containers between inbound flights. Ah, free enterprise!

Others (presumably the males) are supplementing their low wages the old-fashioned way...by employee theft. Which, by some accounts, is up by 2,500% since the move to ILN. Ah, industry!

DHL's customer satisfaction levels have been falling steadily for the past few years. It's become so bad, in fact, that they've lost several major customers in the past year alone. The only asset of stand-alone value that DHL either owns or controls are their International operations. They say they're committing a billion dollars (U.S.) to compete with UPS and FedEx. But industry analysts say it will take 3 to 5 times that amount...money that DHL either doesn't have, or is too cheap to part with.

Now, who's dreaming?

 

[DC-9er]

the morale is so low at both airlines that some pilots are openly beginning to take pleasure in the service failures of their respective carriers. This, even before the major pay cuts that will likely be imposed upon them by their management.

Obviously you have no clue whats going on at ABX. Wrong on both points

 

[shooter]

Wishful thinking on MY part? Get real.

Like FedEx and UPS, DHL's domestic operations are served by an airline. Two airlines, in fact. The larger of the two doesn't have industry-standard cargo doors on many of it's airplanes, a deficiency that will take millions of dollars, and years to correct. At least their planes can land in fog. Ah, technology!

The other airline has cargo doors in all their planes, but they can't land in fog. They could probably get certified to land in fog, but there doesn't seem to be any rush to do so. Meanwhile, the morale is so low at both airlines that some pilots are openly beginning to take pleasure in the service failures of their respective carriers. This, even before the major pay cuts that will likely be imposed upon them by their management. Ah joy!

Interesting you do not point out all the money and years required to bring your airline up to "industry standard". If you think you can just go out and "get" CatII/III certification I have some news for you. Tell me how long before your airline became "standard" when you were to comply with RVSM requirements? Your statements can be interpreted as derogatory and if you think you will get a warm fuzzy response from ABX you need a pee test. You can dislike ABX, its okay to not like your competitor. In this case both ABX and Astar are taking the same packages to their destinations which is for the customer that butters both of our bread. We both need DHL to succeed.
I am sorry to hear morale is low at Astar. I believe the morale becomes low at ABX only when we see how DHL is losing all of the Airborne business which (as you should know) can result in a loss of jobs at ABX AND Astar. And when we read that the pilot group of Astar is suing DHL to take away freight from flying on ABX you can not expect hugs and kisses. So I do not think ABX is taking pleasure in your service failure as much as those facts.

Like FedEx and UPS, DHL has a hub. Except it's not in a major city where there would be ready access to transportation and a workforce. No, DHL's hub is in the middle of a rural cornfield, where there's little access to anything but...CORN. At least the labor is cheap in rural America. So cheap, in fact, that certain rampers have recently been caught supplementing their income by performing sex acts in the cargo containers between inbound flights. Ah, free enterprise!

This is where you see the most teeth come out. What you see as taking pleasure as stated above is nothing but a slam to where many ABX employees live. This "cornfield" is their home and you are doing nothing but insulting it. And when you speak of the ramp workers I will say they are a colorful bunch. Many who were not here before the DHL integration, this quality you speak of came from the CVG pool. I am not familiar with the hooker operation, but it sounds like an isolated event not a reflection of the majority workforce.

Others (presumably the males) are supplementing their low wages the old-fashioned way...by employee theft. Which, by some accounts, is up by 2,500% since the move to ILN. Ah, industry!

I hear this figure thrown around by many Astar postings. Where does your percentage come from? I ask not because I doubt you rather question DHL security. And if you think theft is exclusive of this hub you are naïve.

DHL's customer satisfaction levels have been falling steadily for the past few years. It's become so bad, in fact, that they've lost several major customers in the past year alone. The only asset of stand-alone value that DHL either owns or controls are their International operations. They say they're committing a billion dollars (U.S.) to compete with UPS and FedEx. But industry analysts say it will take 3 to 5 times that amount...money that DHL either doesn't have, or is too cheap to part with.

You are 100% correct. DHL is screwing the pooch so bad that we all will be looking for work if the German operations do not come over and clean some old dust out of the office. I think the industry analysts are wrong. DHL needs to compete with UPS and FedEx, not out size them. They need to secure the customer base they have not lost and then look toward growth. I can promise you that would NOT take 3-5 billion dollars.

Now, who's dreaming?

I believe you are dreaming. Your posts reflect that you are sitting back, arms locked behind your head with eyes closed saying Ah, technology; Ah, joy; Ah, free enterprise; Ah, industry. Good luck living your life as bitter and carnivorous as you seem. Maybe you need to stay down in the Northern Kentucky area.