Jetblue hiring... how and why?

[johnsonrod]

Sounds like JB would be OK if you were single and in great shape. If you have a growing family, health care becomes a bigger budgetary item and should be a consideration (especially if only one spouse works) when looking at job opportunities.

 

[viper01]

Go to SouthWest.

That's a typical response from someone that hasn't been at JB that long. Don't try to fix it, just leave. Great!

 

[Splert]

What question?

Post #82. The sentence that ends with a "?".

 

[ASA_Aviator]

Post #82. The sentence that ends with a "?".

Mine didn't. Did yours? I have no idea how much your health insurance went up.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

That's a typical response from someone that hasn't been at JB that long. Don't try to fix it, just leave. Great!

I have no problem fixing things. I have a problem with miserable SOBs like Splert. He should either shut up, or leave.

(Yeah, I'll tell you that to your face too.)

 

[kommutrdog]

We need people like Splert. The enthusiasm is admirable and needed. He just needs to check himself.

 

[Splert]

Let recap and start at the end and work our way back.

I asked: "Question did our health increase 300 - 900% this year"?

Newhire Juicer ends up saying:

1. "I have no idea how much your health insurance went up"?.

But that did not stop her from posting:

1. "Have you looked around the country and noticed that healthcare costs are going up for everyone"?

2. "Go to South[w]est."?

3. "What question"?.

I'm the SOB and that should check myself?

 

[FurloughedAgain]

I'll take a swing at this,

The "check yourself" comment might have something to do with the fact that you throw around "newhire" as an insult (insinuating that your opinion matters more due to your longevity). Also, why are you using the feminine pronoun "her"? Are you insinuating that you are superior to a female? Unless you have first hand knowledge that the other poster is in fact female, your attitude is insulting.

Your points may be valid, if true. But your delivery is where I think most of your readers would agree you should "check yourself".

 

[Splert]

The "check yourself" comment might have something to do with the fact that you throw around "newhire" as an insult (insinuating that your opinion matters more due to your longevity). Also, why are you using the feminine pronoun "her"? Are you insinuating that you are superior to a female? Unless you have first hand knowledge that the other poster is in fact female, your attitude is insulting.

Your points may be valid, if true. But your delivery is where I think most of your readers would agree you should "check yourself".

He doesn't know how much our health care has changed but felt free to swing away without any facts and you are more concerned about "her" and "new hire".

 

[gearjockey]

We need people like Splert. The enthusiasm is admirable and needed. He just needs to check himself.

I thought it was when he played the Captain card:

"You would tell your CA to STFU. Better read Section 14 of your PEA junior."

That's some funny shiite right there.

 

[Splert]

Our current health care is nearly last years $60 a month family plan. The company kept the same coverage and raise the cost to $580 a month (Orange Plan). $300 a month for the Green and almost $400 for the Blue Plan. The Orange is a HDMP with an FSA, Green is a HRA and Blue is a HSA. HSA and HRA have rewards that are funded by the increased cost to the employee which the company has said will only be offered for 3 years and then 'reevaluated'.

60 to 590 is nearly a 950% increase and ASA_whatever says: "Have you looked around the country and noticed that healthcare costs are going up for everyone" and finishes with: "I have no idea how much your health insurance went up".

I provided: www.lifeisbetterinblue.com as source material.

 

[clickclickboom]

Actually I think Splert makes perfect sense. I also personally think a new hire isnt qualified to make an educated decision or offer their opinion when they dont know any more about JB than what was offered by the new hire cheerleader committee.

Remember this is no different than any other publically traded company. The sooner you realize that the better. The 5 values BS, tagline of the month, or fake pretend we care pocket sessions are nothing more than an attempt to keep the uninformed, incompetent or apathetic from gaining any insight into reality.

If they were really exceeding employee expectations why would they need to pay 3rd party firms millions to " manage our expectations "

 

[ASA_Aviator]

I'll take a swing at this,

The "check yourself" comment might have something to do with the fact that you throw around "newhire" as an insult (insinuating that your opinion matters more due to your longevity). Also, why are you using the feminine pronoun "her"? Are you insinuating that you are superior to a female? Unless you have first hand knowledge that the other poster is in fact female, your attitude is insulting.

Your points may be valid, if true. But your delivery is where I think most of your readers would agree you should "check yourself".

He resorts to petty insults such as calling me a woman, but all that does is show how unevolved and ignorant he is. I feel sorry for him, but most especially, his first officers.

I've never said that I'm a no voter. My only point has been that this place isn't burning down. It's not a bad place to work. But I've gotta say, guys like him d@mn sure make me want to vote no out of spite. So you guys who are involved with the organization process, you need to get a handle on the vocal idiots. They are going to lose it for you...again.


(Disclaimer- Before you all jump my crap

I didn't say I was going to vote no out if spite. I said he makes me want to.)

 

[Splert]

He resorts to petty insults such as calling me a woman, but all that does is show how unevolved and ignorant he is. I feel sorry for him, but most especially, his first officers.

I've never said that I'm a no voter. My only point has been that this place isn't burning down. It's not a bad place to work. But I've gotta say, guys like him d@mn sure make me want to vote no out of spite. So you guys who are involved with the organization process, you need to get a handle on the vocal idiots. They are going to lose it for you...again.


(Disclaimer- Before you all jump my crap

I didn't say I was going to vote no out if spite. I said he makes me want to.)

If you vote no because of a internet bulletin board poster calling you a 'her' after you told those of us who have worked here for better part of decade to "STFU", "whaaaaaa', "Have you looked around the country and noticed that healthcare costs are going up for everyone" and then post you have no idea how much our plan increased in cost and reduced benefits then you are the sweet spot hire of the decade.

You will always be a no voter. That is okay just back up with facts.

 

[ASA_Aviator]

If you vote no because of a internet bulletin board poster calling you a 'her' after you told those of us who have worked here for better part of decade to "STFU", "whaaaaaa', "Have you looked around the country and noticed that healthcare costs are going up for everyone" and then post you have no idea how much our plan increased in cost and reduced benefits then you are the sweet spot hire of the decade.

You will always be a no voter. That is okay just back up with facts.

Again, never said I was a no voter.

 

[Splert]

I'll take a swing at this,

The "check yourself" comment might have something to do with the fact that you throw around "newhire" as an insult (insinuating that your opinion matters more due to your longevity).

Longevity provides context to many of the 'feelings' being expressed on FI.com.

On another thread another poster was labeling A320 pilots as demanding a B scale because of 3A. This poster is a relative newbie and does not understand the context of what has occurred over the past 8 years. The context is that it was the company that wanted to bring E190 pay up to A320 pay (2004 rates) and offered seat pay to us. At that time the PCRB was formed and looked at the issue and found and convinced the company that seat pay was NOT PSIA and in fact category rates were. The company wanted seat pay because it would link the A320 to the E190 not the E190 to the A320. Understand the difference???

Because of A320 pilots the rates were set in place as the CA 12 year rate is 100% and E190 12 year rate was 90% of the CA A320 rate and the FO was 66% of the CA rate. That is peer average formula.

Today the company is comparing E190 to E190 and says the E190 is industry leading when in fact it is peer average for it CATEGORY. It is the company that is trying to delink the 190 from the 90/66 metric. This new hire does not know what he is talking about when he is throwing A320 pilots under the bus and making up stories about them wanting a B scale.

Who has been of the tip of the spear making category comparison vs aircraft type comparisons to the company from the PCRB and current PVC. A320 Pilots.

When I was a new hire I listened and learned. Today it seems at least on this board the some newhire have all the answers but no facts or context.

 

[Flyby1206]

When I was a new hire I listened and learned. Today it seems at least on this board the some newhire have all the answers but no facts or context.

Unfortunately a newhire can cast a vote that has an equal weight to a 12yr CA. Our job is to provide facts and context to those who dont have it. No it is not easy. No they wont always listen the first time, but stay the course, remain calm and eventually rational/logical thinking will prevail.

You are one of our greatest assets because you have the facts and context many of us dont. Be a role model and others will listen. Be a loud barking attack dog and others will shy away.

 

[Splert]

How is the chicken farmer doing these days ?

 

[Smarta$$]

Longevity provides context to many of the 'feelings' being expressed on FI.com.

On another thread another poster was labeling A320 pilots as demanding a B scale because of 3A. This poster is a relative newbie and does not understand the context of what has occurred over the past 8 years. The context is that it was the company that wanted to bring E190 pay up to A320 pay (2004 rates) and offered seat pay to us. At that time the PCRB was formed and looked at the issue and found and convinced the company that seat pay was NOT PSIA and in fact category rates were. The company wanted seat pay because it would link the A320 to the E190 not the E190 to the A320. Understand the difference???

Because of A320 pilots the rates were set in place as the CA 12 year rate is 100% and E190 12 year rate was 90% of the CA A320 rate and the FO was 66% of the CA rate. That is peer average formula.

Today the company is comparing E190 to E190 and says the E190 is industry leading when in fact it is peer average for it CATEGORY. It is the company that is trying to delink the 190 from the 90/66 metric. This new hire does not know what he is talking about when he is throwing A320 pilots under the bus and making up stories about them wanting a B scale.

Who has been of the tip of the spear making category comparison vs aircraft type comparisons to the company from the PCRB and current PVC. A320 Pilots.

When I was a new hire I listened and learned. Today it seems at least on this board the some newhire have all the answers but no facts or context.

I think this is a little revisionist/incomplete history there chump. Lets take your history description to the next step, after the A320 pilots (I think they were just JB pilots (who happen to be flying the A320)) got the company to agree to give the E90 pilots a raise, they then sued the company for not giving the A320 pilots a raise also. So.... you can't bring E90 pay up to 90% of A320 pay, without triggering another A320 raise, which will again create a greater than 10% pay difference or B-scale. When the company tried to fix the B-scale, which you say was fought for by A320 pilots, the A320 pilots sued them demanding a raise that would re-create the B-scale. That was my point. You can't have it both ways.

 

[Splert]

Again no context.

90//65 was born in 2007/2008.

3A did not become a known entity until much later and is a function or qurik of the PEA not A320 pilots

Your rant is just that since E190s are entitled too just not post 2007 hires on either fleet.

 

[a320drivr]

How is the chicken farmer doing these days ?

That's funny. He's still in the DR camp cause its better than pinnacle.

 

[kommutrdog]

Guys,

Stop wasting your emotional and psychological energy arguing with each other as it's distracting you from the bigger fight:

Labor vs management.

Don't forget that and don't let the big blue corporate spin machine distract you.

 

[Smarta$$]

Again no context.

90//65 was born in 2007/2008.

3A did not become a known entity until much later and is a function or qurik of the PEA not A320 pilots

Your rant is just that since E190s are entitled too just not post 2007 hires on either fleet.

So correct my history. Are you saying that A320 pilots pushed for the higher E90 pay rates?

 

[banger]

I think this is a little revisionist/incomplete history there chump. Lets take your history description to the next step, after the A320 pilots (I think they were just JB pilots (who happen to be flying the A320)) got the company to agree to give the E90 pilots a raise, they then sued the company for not giving the A320 pilots a raise also. So.... you can't bring E90 pay up to 90% of A320 pay, without triggering another A320 raise, which will again create a greater than 10% pay difference or B-scale. When the company tried to fix the B-scale, which you say was fought for by A320 pilots, the A320 pilots sued them demanding a raise that would re-create the B-scale. That was my point. You can't have it both ways.

Your statement above is wrong on many counts. By the way the pilots didn't use court of any kind, we exercised our PEA rights by going to a neutral arbitrator agreed to by the company. It was JB who "sued" by taking the case to the NY supreme court where they lost.

 

[Smarta$$]

So did A320 pilots push for E90 raises?

 

[B6Busdriver]

I think this is a little revisionist/incomplete history there chump. Lets take your history description to the next step, after the A320 pilots (I think they were just JB pilots (who happen to be flying the A320)) got the company to agree to give the E90 pilots a raise, they then sued the company for not giving the A320 pilots a raise also. So.... you can't bring E90 pay up to 90% of A320 pay, without triggering another A320 raise, which will again create a greater than 10% pay difference or B-scale. When the company tried to fix the B-scale, which you say was fought for by A320 pilots, the A320 pilots sued them demanding a raise that would re-create the B-scale. That was my point. You can't have it both ways.

For the millionth time it wasn't a lawsuit. It's arbitration, simply using the process the company set up. The company could have fixed this years ago, instead their usual arrogant incompetence reared its ugly head. JetBlue is reaping what they have sowed.

 

[Smarta$$]

For the millionth time it wasn't a lawsuit. It's arbitration, simply using the process the company set up. The company could have fixed this years ago, instead their usual arrogant incompetence reared its ugly head. JetBlue is reaping what they have sowed.

Roger, not a lawsuit.

Splert said it was the A320 guys that pushed for E90 pay raises? Is that true?

Was it also these A320 pilots that pushed for the 90% E90 pay formula?

 

[B6Busdriver]

Roger, not a lawsuit.

Splert said it was the A320 guys that pushed for E90 pay raises? Is that true?

Was it also these A320 pilots that pushed for the 90% E90 pay formula?

I'm not sure why this is so important. As I recall there were pilots on both sides that worked on these rates. In the end it was what the company calls colaboration, I call it negotiating with a dictator. As our COO said, there are no negotiations at JetBlue, the PVC does not negotiate they colaborate. But I digress...

 

[banger]

Roger, not a lawsuit.

Splert said it was the A320 guys that pushed for E90 pay raises? Is that true?

Was it also these A320 pilots that pushed for the 90% E90 pay formula?

In 2007 over 115 pilots quit.
JB said "uh oh" and incresed new hire pay 26.7% to get peple to come here.
3A says if a new hire gets a raise, everyone gets the same raise.
No one else got the same raise.
Over 900 pilots saw this and used the arbitration clause in our PEA's to handle the disagreement.
Pilots win arbitration.

That simple.

 

[B6Busdriver]

I will never forget, I had a 190 Captain tell me after getting his 27% raise that "you Airbus guys got all the money last time so it's only fair." I laughed and said I'm happy you got the raise but the last time you are referring to was a 4% raise. So many have allowed themselves to be divided.