Net Jets Savannah

[semperfido]

why wouldn't they just spin the G's off and avoid your union hassles?

 

[gunfyter]

Because if the do that they cannot operate under the interchange agreement. As long as there is an interchange agreement they are subject to the single carrier. And reality is they have to keep the interchange because that is what the Shareowners bought. That is what was sold.

Spinoff is NOT an option. Paying me what I want IS.


As said before I am perfectly happy if everything remains as it is on that side. But will do anything and whatever it takes to to force the company to fix things on this side.

 

[CatYaaak]

If that type of relationship had existed from the start, none of us would have the heartache we do over this. But it's not that way. We interfly NJI passengers seamlessly under part 91. They do ours the same way. Marquis Jet sells cards under both programs seamlessly. Until recently, a significant amount of NJI support was conducted out of Bridgeway. This was and is one company with two pilot employee groups. One union and one non-union. Say what you want, it's against the law to have that happen and now that we've got some elected leaders with balls, it's going to stop.

The existence of an interchange agreement or flying owners from NJI carries little weight. Like you said, Part 91. These interchange agreements have existed for years under those rules and the tax code, many corporate flight departments using them to enable non-owners from one company to fly on someone else's aircraft outside the definition of holding out for common carriage, thus avoiding the need to obtain a 135 certificate and operate under those rules while doing so. Essentially, that's what you do for your "owners" within NJA and between NJA and NJI. It's certainly not unique to your company, nor was the allowance in the regs written for you.

It will be interesting to see how, if at all, labor law developed and lifted from common carriage transportation applies to you; groups engaged in the private flying of private owners operating under private transportation rules using legal, private transportation agreements. Since what you're doing isn't all that unique...maybe you had the impression only you were doing it?....I wouldn't be too sure about that "slam dunk" thing.

 

[CatYaaak]

Because if the do that they cannot operate under the interchange agreement. As long as there is an interchange agreement they are subject to the single carrier. And reality is they have to keep the interchange because that is what the Shareowners bought. That is what was sold.
QUOTE]

To invoke "Single Carrier" you would first have to be involved in "Common Carriage" in the eyes of the government/law for those flights. The word "Carrier" in transportation law isn't a vague, catch-all term, it means something very specific. It's not what you're doing when you're fly owners....it's Part 91. The issue of whether fractionals flying "owners" met the definition of holding out for common carriage and who has operational control was hotly debated and resolved years ago...they are not involved in Carriage except for bona fide Part 135 flights. This is seperate and apart from operating to Part 135 standards and boundaries even while flying under Part 91..that is your company policy, and nothing more.

When two corporate Part 91 flight departments have an aircraft interchange agreement, they don't become "Carriers" let alone a single Carrier...it's the interchange agreement itself that enables them to avoid meeting that definition and therefore the requirement to obtain and operate under a Part 135 certificate when flying named non-owners who can reciprocate.

NJA could certainly re-write an interchange agreement with a spun-off Part 91 company for the mutual use of aircraft engaged in Private transportation, or anyone else for that matter if they were willing. Once again, you're trying to deem private flying, "carrier" operations and therefore can invoke "single carrier" restrictions. Will that work with a judge? I guess we'll see.

 

[AA717driver]

Gunfyter--I hope you guys do get what you deserve. I talked to a friend last night who just got off IOE and they beat her to death. You work hard and should be able to afford to play hard on your days off.

I just bristled at the thought of toying with the careers of the NJI people on the chance it might change the behavior of NJA management at the bargaining table.

Having witnessed first hand the aftermath of three seniority list integrations, you should be very wary of embarking on that process. It can ruin cockpit relations for decades. It can turn a decent place to work (pay and workrules aside) into a hellish place to be.

Good luck.TC

 

[NJA Capt]

why wouldn't they just spin the G's off and avoid your union hassles?

They are already spun off. The point is to bring them back.


Let’s try another example for you corporate guys:

Company A has a flight department at airport A. The company decides to purchase a few more airplanes, add a new group of pilots, but still flying the same execs, using the same flight planning, and mutual office and maintenance space. But, they have decided to pay the new guys a little more than the guys that have been with the company many, many years longer.


Want better examples?

How about Bank of America and Wachovia?

When these banks began merging (not with each other), did they continue to operate separate flight departments, carrying the same (new) group of people? NO. They combined their operations.

All of you are hypocrites to tell us that you would not be a little miffed if your company started a new operation that paralleled your own, and performing the same function that you do, and then paid the “new hires” more than your veteran pilots. Then you turn around and blame the original pilots for trying to streamline the organization.

I don't work for NJI and never have....As such, I flew as a NJI Captain on our share aircraft for over a year...

A bit of a contradiction...

 

[GVFlyer]

I don't work for NJI and never have....As such, I flew as a NJI Captain on our share aircraft for over a year...

A bit of a contradiction...

No it isn't. Gulfstream was my employer and the majority of my flying was doing flight test. I periodically flew demonstration flights and for some of those flights we used our Share aircraft if our dedicated Gulfstream demonstration aircraft were not available. Ultimately, the sales execs resold the shares to customers to use as bridge aircraft while they awaited the completion and delivery of their new Gulfstreams.

GV

 

[Live4flyng]

Are you sure you are happy?

Sure you can, I've been hearing, watching, and reading about you "figuring it out for yourselves" for about 15 years now. Watched you go from outright PFT to training contracts, listening to your giddiness in numerous crew lounges of becoming Teamsters, seen the fleet grow, read the glowing articles, but one thing has remained constant through time and changes; you keep agreeing to go to work for the lowest wages in business aviation. THen the whining begins, followed quickly by a persecution complex.

One day you're proclaiming you're "labor" and bang your anti-management drums, not afraid to pi$$ off who's in back due to beefs with your own real employer. On these days you're direct-revenue flying. The next day however, you morph and claim some kind of psuedo-corporate pilot status (declaring that you fly people "who can afford to pay more and doing the same job") because it suits your needs when demanding higher salaries, since you suddenly discover what NBAA salaries are. Conveniently, you forget those NBAA salaries have been gained through years of bargaining and holding out for more $$ on a strictly non-unionized basis by many individuals over a long period of time. Did you think they just magically got that way?

Now here on this thread and apparently in court, you're gunning for people who actually made a better deal, who got MORE from management like you wish you could, and whole point of contention is that they didn't do it your unionized way and therefore, somehow, "did something to you" in the process. I guess inventing a bad guy pilot group keeps the rah rah emotions running high in the union hall and those like Griz happy, but you're simply lashing out at those who obtained their deal the same way those NBAA salaries....the same ones you want.... were obtained. The way you didn't have the 'nads to do.

The biggest joke of revisionist history on this thread is the nonsense that EJI was formed as a "Lever" to be used against EJA's unionized pilot workforce. That whole "lever" scenario only works if a company brings in non-unionized workers to work for LESS pay than the unionized force, not more as was the case. They raised the wage bar for at least part of your outfit despite your unionized side's never-ending supply of people willing to work for next to nothing, who then later pretend they're gonna do something about it. Why would EJA/NJA management want to get rid of your union anyway?......you're the cheapest labor on the market and have been for over a decade.

The reason they got more $$$ was because EJI's requirements were Gulfstream experience (meaning PIC) demanded by Gulfstream, preferably with int'l ops. EJA couldn't supply those specific requirements from their own ranks, mostly being made up of with ex-Brasilia/Saab-turned-Citation pilots who'd seen plenty of ground between Atlanta and Macon, but that's about it. Besides the few ex-military Gstream pilots around, it remained to poach people with this experience from the ranks of corporate flight depts.

These typically weren't/aren't your gung-ho union types like you find bred in the commuter/regional airline world where most of EJAs pilots came from...they were already making good salaries they negotiated themselves, and most treated pretty well. The desire to have a schedule with hard days off was by far the biggest attraction for most of them if a livable salary was offered. They weren't there to get their first, or build, jet time to brush up their airline applications like most EJA pilots were.

You think I'm a management stooge? Perhaps you should step back and look more clearly at the situation. Which one of us made our respective employers happier in terms of beancounting? Me, who held out for enough $$$ and terms regarding QOL issues, or you, who willingly agreed to go work for substandard union contract wages your management can only smile at. Now which one of us is the stooge, and which one of us is happy?

You haven't been sitting around for 15 years listening to me, I haven't been doing it that long. The one thing you claim remained constant over the years is about to change, and you seem to be upset about it. Not sure if it is a generalization on your part or not, but I haven't claimed to be "labor" one day and a "corporate pilot" the next. Statements like that make you a stooge. I don't run around stereotyping corporate pilots, but you seem to derive some sort of personal satifaction from it when it comes to NJA pilots. History will soon be made at NJA through negotiations regardless of what you think or say. What will your thoughts be when you see 400 QS airplanes parked across the country by NJA union pilots? I'm sure you will think something negative to say.

 

[gunfyter]

I just bristled at the thought of toying with the careers of the NJI people on the chance it might change the behavior of NJA management at the bargaining table.

Having witnessed first hand the aftermath of three seniority list integrations, you should be very wary of embarking on that process. It can ruin cockpit relations for decades. It can turn a decent place to work (pay and workrules aside) into a hellish place to be.

Good luck.TC

TC,

I don't know about everyone else but I Single Carrier is not what I want. BUT To get what I want I may have to go after something that I don't really care about....

A strike could be far more detrimental to the G-IV operation than the single carrier. IMO the level of discontent is more than sufficient for a strike. we now have in place some of the same leadership that lead United's pilot's through a strike in the 1980's. You would recognize the names from the article FROM WOODEN WINGS that many union pilots have read.

Mr Cat, I like your theory about common carriage. I hope you are correct because if you are we can then FILE suit to get out from under this Railway LABOR ACT... and commence the Strike Vote. .

 

[CatYaaak]

TC,

Mr Cat, I like your theory about common carriage. I hope you are correct because if you are we can then FILE suit to get out from under this Railway LABOR ACT... and commence the Strike Vote. .

This is why it's so muddied. The relationship you have with your employer, NJA, is governed by the Railway Labor Act because you unionized and entered into collective bargaining with NJA for your services. You didn't enter into any agreement with the Owners of the aircraft. It's the owners who have the interchange agreement between each other....you aren't part of that equation.