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
Im Ready, UNION AT FLEX
- Thread starter pcab
- Start date
- Watchers 65
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
Fresh Air
Well-known member
- Joined
- Apr 22, 2011
- Posts
- 122
GlorifiedCabbie
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2013
- Posts
- 1,220
No union, you will loose your "Pay for Parking" perk. Kenn told us years ago, he pays a lot for gas at FBO's so they should take us back and forth.
993_Pilot
MIGS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2008
- Posts
- 569
History has a way of repeating itself:
WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- Four pilots are suing their employer, Flight Options, LLC, for firing them in retaliation for their union organizing activities. They filed a motion for summary judgment against the company in the Federal District Court in Cleveland, Ohio. The case is Thomas Bowden, et al. vs. Flight Options, LLC, Case No. 02-1768. Their employer, following the merger of Flight Options and Raytheon Travel Air in March 2002, fired the pilots, Thomas Bowden, William Brunet, Thomas Jeter and William Tumlin. Flight Options is now majority-owned by a Raytheon subsidiary. The pilots were members of the Raytheon Travel Air union organizing committee that attempted to unionize the pilots of RTA with the Teamsters through a campaign that resulted in an election before the National Mediation Board in January 2002. "These pilots were leaders in the Teamsters union effort at Raytheon Travel Air," said Don Treichler, Director of the Teamsters Airline Division. "They are all skilled, veteran pilots. Their professionalism cannot be disputed. Flight Options' reasons for firing them are completely without merit. Discovery in the case has confirmed what we knew -- that these skilled professionals were fired because they supported the union at Travel Air." Discovery in the litigation revealed that Flight Options targeted the pilots for firing. An e-mail circulated among its managers in March 2002 shows them scheming to manufacture grounds for terminating the plaintiffs and stating that they needed to change the reasons for firing Bowden because he had not yet attended an indoctrination session at Flight Options headquarters. Bowden was not terminated until late June 2002 and the alleged grounds for discharge did not occur until months after the March 2002 e-mail. Discovery also uncovered a blacklist of pilots compiled by a Flight Options manager on which the plaintiffs' names were marked. Another Flight Options manager who had been a manager at Travel Air testified that the employer asked Travel Air managers to identify troublemakers among the Travel Air pilots and that the plaintiffs' names were marked on that blacklist. Evidence shows that former Flight Options CEO Kenn Ricci engaged in a concerted anti-union campaign to defeat the Travel Air union election. The campaign involved intelligence gathered on the Teamster organizing effort; Ricci's monitoring of pilot Internet communications regarding the union; interrogation by Ricci of pilots about their opinions on the union; and threads by Ricci regarding what would happen if the union were voted in. Ricci admitted in a deposition that his anti-union campaign occupied most of his time following the December 2001 announcement of the merger and leading up to the January 17, 2002 ballot count. Evidence also shows Ricci made repeated statements that it was legal for him to fire pilots for organizing with a union. An August 2002 e-mail message by Ricci stated that Flight Options had a policy against hiring pilots from unionized carriers. In March 2002, Ricci threatened the pilot who served as the telephone hotline "Voice of the Union" during the RTA union election that he should not engage in organizing activity at Flight Options. That pilot left Flight Options to take a position at Teamster-represented NetJets. The evidence revealed clearly that Flight Options knew the plaintiffs were the union activists among the Travel Air pilots and that Flight Options was hostile to union supporters and retaliated against them. Flight Options asserted unwarranted grounds for the discharge of the pilots. Management was unable to produce a single manager who could testify to the conduct of Jeter and Tumlin that allegedly led to their firing. Flight Options managers contradicted themselves as to the reasons for Brunet and Bowden's terminations. Two Flight Options managers denied that Brunet engaged in the conduct during an indoctrination session for which he was allegedly fired. Ricci testified that he fired Brunet for "bad body language," but never discussed the matter with Brunet. Flight Options asserted four different stories as to why they fired Bowden -- stories which proved untrue. The Flight Options e-mail targeting Bowden for termination months prior to any of these alleged events shows that the company sought any pretext to fire him. "It is unusual for plaintiffs to seek summary judgment in a lawsuit but here the evidence is so strong that we think it demands judgment in favor of the plaintiffs," said the plaintiffs' attorney, William Wilder of Baptiste & Wilder, P.C. in Washington, D.C. Flight Options will have until October 15, 2003 to file its response to the plaintiffs' motion. The court will likely rule on the motion in November 2003. Trial is currently set for early December 2003 in Cleveland, Ohio. Founded in August 1903, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters is celebrating its 100-year anniversary as a representative and advocate for working families.
WASHINGTON, Sept. 22 /PRNewswire/ -- Four pilots are suing their employer, Flight Options, LLC, for firing them in retaliation for their union organizing activities. They filed a motion for summary judgment against the company in the Federal District Court in Cleveland, Ohio. The case is Thomas Bowden, et al. vs. Flight Options, LLC, Case No. 02-1768. Their employer, following the merger of Flight Options and Raytheon Travel Air in March 2002, fired the pilots, Thomas Bowden, William Brunet, Thomas Jeter and William Tumlin. Flight Options is now majority-owned by a Raytheon subsidiary. The pilots were members of the Raytheon Travel Air union organizing committee that attempted to unionize the pilots of RTA with the Teamsters through a campaign that resulted in an election before the National Mediation Board in January 2002. "These pilots were leaders in the Teamsters union effort at Raytheon Travel Air," said Don Treichler, Director of the Teamsters Airline Division. "They are all skilled, veteran pilots. Their professionalism cannot be disputed. Flight Options' reasons for firing them are completely without merit. Discovery in the case has confirmed what we knew -- that these skilled professionals were fired because they supported the union at Travel Air." Discovery in the litigation revealed that Flight Options targeted the pilots for firing. An e-mail circulated among its managers in March 2002 shows them scheming to manufacture grounds for terminating the plaintiffs and stating that they needed to change the reasons for firing Bowden because he had not yet attended an indoctrination session at Flight Options headquarters. Bowden was not terminated until late June 2002 and the alleged grounds for discharge did not occur until months after the March 2002 e-mail. Discovery also uncovered a blacklist of pilots compiled by a Flight Options manager on which the plaintiffs' names were marked. Another Flight Options manager who had been a manager at Travel Air testified that the employer asked Travel Air managers to identify troublemakers among the Travel Air pilots and that the plaintiffs' names were marked on that blacklist. Evidence shows that former Flight Options CEO Kenn Ricci engaged in a concerted anti-union campaign to defeat the Travel Air union election. The campaign involved intelligence gathered on the Teamster organizing effort; Ricci's monitoring of pilot Internet communications regarding the union; interrogation by Ricci of pilots about their opinions on the union; and threads by Ricci regarding what would happen if the union were voted in. Ricci admitted in a deposition that his anti-union campaign occupied most of his time following the December 2001 announcement of the merger and leading up to the January 17, 2002 ballot count. Evidence also shows Ricci made repeated statements that it was legal for him to fire pilots for organizing with a union. An August 2002 e-mail message by Ricci stated that Flight Options had a policy against hiring pilots from unionized carriers. In March 2002, Ricci threatened the pilot who served as the telephone hotline "Voice of the Union" during the RTA union election that he should not engage in organizing activity at Flight Options. That pilot left Flight Options to take a position at Teamster-represented NetJets. The evidence revealed clearly that Flight Options knew the plaintiffs were the union activists among the Travel Air pilots and that Flight Options was hostile to union supporters and retaliated against them. Flight Options asserted unwarranted grounds for the discharge of the pilots. Management was unable to produce a single manager who could testify to the conduct of Jeter and Tumlin that allegedly led to their firing. Flight Options managers contradicted themselves as to the reasons for Brunet and Bowden's terminations. Two Flight Options managers denied that Brunet engaged in the conduct during an indoctrination session for which he was allegedly fired. Ricci testified that he fired Brunet for "bad body language," but never discussed the matter with Brunet. Flight Options asserted four different stories as to why they fired Bowden -- stories which proved untrue. The Flight Options e-mail targeting Bowden for termination months prior to any of these alleged events shows that the company sought any pretext to fire him. "It is unusual for plaintiffs to seek summary judgment in a lawsuit but here the evidence is so strong that we think it demands judgment in favor of the plaintiffs," said the plaintiffs' attorney, William Wilder of Baptiste & Wilder, P.C. in Washington, D.C. Flight Options will have until October 15, 2003 to file its response to the plaintiffs' motion. The court will likely rule on the motion in November 2003. Trial is currently set for early December 2003 in Cleveland, Ohio. Founded in August 1903, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters is celebrating its 100-year anniversary as a representative and advocate for working families.
993_Pilot
MIGS
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2008
- Posts
- 569
Fired pilots and Flight Options settle lawsuit
by Gordon Gilbert
AIN - October 8, 2007, 10:17 AM
A lawsuit in which four former Raytheon Travel Air pilots alleged they were fired because of their union-organizing activities when the company merged with Flight Options in March 2002 was resolved early last month, just days before the case was scheduled to go to trial in Cleveland.
Representatives of the litigants said they were not at liberty to discuss details of the resolution, other than to say that the issues in dispute were resolved to the satisfaction of the parties involved. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters reportedly provided the pilots with legal representation in the lawsuit, so the fired pilots did not incur attorneys fees to pursue the litigation.
The case was an outgrowth of unionization efforts by Raytheon Travel Air pilots before the merger. A majority of the pilots there were apparently headed toward a pro-union vote, but instead voted it down on the eve of the merger in early 2002 largely because of a plea from then Flight Options chairman and CEO Kenn Ricci.....
The Travel Air Pilots fell for Kenn's smooth pitch, "Hook, Line & Sinker". We all know what has transpired since then, but this is your opportunity to learn from the mistake that took several years to correct. The fractional industry has matured since then and the combined group at Flight Options sure have learned their lesson. Hopefully the Flexjet pilots won't choose to learn the hard way.
by Gordon Gilbert
AIN - October 8, 2007, 10:17 AM
A lawsuit in which four former Raytheon Travel Air pilots alleged they were fired because of their union-organizing activities when the company merged with Flight Options in March 2002 was resolved early last month, just days before the case was scheduled to go to trial in Cleveland.
Representatives of the litigants said they were not at liberty to discuss details of the resolution, other than to say that the issues in dispute were resolved to the satisfaction of the parties involved. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters reportedly provided the pilots with legal representation in the lawsuit, so the fired pilots did not incur attorneys fees to pursue the litigation.
The case was an outgrowth of unionization efforts by Raytheon Travel Air pilots before the merger. A majority of the pilots there were apparently headed toward a pro-union vote, but instead voted it down on the eve of the merger in early 2002 largely because of a plea from then Flight Options chairman and CEO Kenn Ricci.....
The Travel Air Pilots fell for Kenn's smooth pitch, "Hook, Line & Sinker". We all know what has transpired since then, but this is your opportunity to learn from the mistake that took several years to correct. The fractional industry has matured since then and the combined group at Flight Options sure have learned their lesson. Hopefully the Flexjet pilots won't choose to learn the hard way.
GlorifiedCabbie
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2013
- Posts
- 1,220
Get ready for the next step. The intimidation will continue. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6n3XNpECTyQ
Peter_Griffin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Posts
- 85
Ran into an old friend today and got up to speed on everything happening.
Had there been a hope of a union back in the days of the TC era I wouldn't have jumped ship. We did get close though. Sorry to hear what's going on now but sounds like you might just have a winning drive on your hands.
Rumor has it the place is falling apart with open fighting on the Bluebelly and managers taking hours out of their days to answer rebuttals and questions. Let me guess its of the "we have always had your back why doubt that now" variety. Sounds like they are desperate. Wish I still had access. Good theater is one thing you could always count on from RH. Not the truth necessarily but some damn good theater.
Had there been a hope of a union back in the days of the TC era I wouldn't have jumped ship. We did get close though. Sorry to hear what's going on now but sounds like you might just have a winning drive on your hands.
Rumor has it the place is falling apart with open fighting on the Bluebelly and managers taking hours out of their days to answer rebuttals and questions. Let me guess its of the "we have always had your back why doubt that now" variety. Sounds like they are desperate. Wish I still had access. Good theater is one thing you could always count on from RH. Not the truth necessarily but some damn good theater.
Peter_Griffin
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2005
- Posts
- 85
Of course it is. News flash: if you have to keep reminding people you have their back, perhaps the one you're trying to convince is yourself. Maybe that's how he sleeps at night.
Sad about those guys being fired. Sounds like more on the way too, just to get the point across they only have your back as long as you're holding their d!ck in your mouth.
Being the only frac not unionized puts you at severe disadvantage in the industry. You are not a commodity, you are a capital expenditure. You are a glorified bus driver. You might have unique qualifications but you are still always replaceable for half the price if you don't position yourself well. Both high and low seniority guys need to remember that.
Flex pilots' problem isn't that they are non Union, it's that they have to deal with FLOPS and the union there.
Hmmm? Nope, that's not it at all.
Oh c'mon. You know I am always right.
In this case I wish you were. It would be a lot simpler.
GlorifiedCabbie
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 20, 2013
- Posts
- 1,220
doh
Jump seat shrink
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2003
- Posts
- 4,017
We would love to BID for the Gulfstreams! What we object to is having to INTERVIEW for the job we already have!
uke:
Share this page
Latest resources
-
-
-
-
-
AC 90-89C - Amateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing HandbookAmateur-Built Aircraft and Ultralight Flight Testing Handbook
- Neal
- Updated:
