Netjets Ain Article

[CatYaaak]

Yak,

To use your own quote:

If such statements are indicative of your brainpower, then frankly, you're doomed.


Sir, what is truly ludicrous, is your post.
I purposefully used as few words as possible to NOT be misunderstood. I did not, write, nor imply, that the 40 hour week was that of a corporate pilot. You interpreted that yourself, then proceeded to post based on your misunderstanding.

The 40 hour week is a common data point that we both may refer to. I do NOT know what ever corp pilot schedule is, just as you have no clue what mine is. We can however, compare our respective schedules to one common point, ie…a normal person’s 40 hour week.

Well, excuse me for not picking up on your stunning display of complete, total illogic when you veered off into the realm of irrelevancy and compared yourself to a 40 hr. workweek..something practically no pilot ever works. The issue at hand, of course, was YOUR union leadership...ASAP...comparing JetJets pilots' productivity to NBAA (read; corporate) salary averages in it's statement, which was the subject of the whole discussion and point of comparison. Yes, I must be an idiot....for assuming you could focus on the subject. And you say I meander?

But now that you've compared yourself to secretaries and insurance salesmen (for what reason, who knows), what's next?....perhaps the work schedule of dolphin tank dolphins? I do know by now you won't say anything to back up ASAP's claim, because it's nothing more than ignorant, union pablum that sounds good to the rank and file, but easily disproven because it's based on the idiotic premise that "productivity" in corporate aviation is based simply on hours flown per year, and nothing more. That screams ignorance.

Here's a little irony for you to pass along to whatever genius wrote that stupid apples-to-oranges claim; If "productivity" is measured in simply hours flown per year (as the claim infers), and a company needs crews or airplanes as much as an individual NetJets pilots or aircraft flies, they don't need NetJets at all. In fact, you'd make absolutely no economic sense to them. Even at your current low wages, your frac model is too expensive compared to operating their own department and equipment and hiring their own crews at NBAA salaries for that level of use.

But I sure hope you can follow a line on a taxiway or approach plate better than you can follow a line of debate. Of course, you union devotees aren't used to being disagreed with no matter what your leadership spews, let alone put forth facts to support it. It's all about parotting the same thing over and over and ever more loudly. That's all well and good...it's your house and you can trash it if you want...but only to the point you begin to leak your spewage into the real world by making ludicrous comparisons and arbitrary scablist threats. When that occurs, expect to be challenged.

 

[Live4flyng]

Hey Cat,

Do you have to work at being a D!ck, or does it come naturally? Tell us the real reason why you hate Netjets err.... "JetJets" so much.

If "productivity" is measured in simply hours flown per year (as the claim infers), and a company needs crews or airplanes as much as an individual NetJets pilots or aircraft flies, they don't need NetJets at all. In fact, you'd make absolutely no economic sense to them. Even at your current low wages, your frac model is too expensive compared to operating their own department and equipment and hiring their own crews at NBAA salaries for that level of use.

You must be wrong, or Netjets wouldn't exist. It's all about supply and demand. Obviously there is a huge demand for the "expensive" Netjets model. Please tell us old wise one how you can put a price tag on safety. It must not be as expensive as you claim, please make some economic sense for us already!

 

[CatYaaak]

Hey Cat,

Do you have to work at being a D!ck, or does it come naturally? Tell us the real reason why you hate Netjets err.... "JetJets" so much.

You must be wrong, or Netjets wouldn't exist. It's all about supply and demand. Obviously there is a huge demand for the "expensive" Netjets model. Please tell us old wise one how you can put a price tag on safety. It must not be as expensive as you claim, please make some economic sense for us already!

Before you begin to sound a lot more foolish, you should learn just what part of the business aviation market you cater to in terms of a company's travel requirements, and why very few outside that niche need or want you. For them, you DON"T make economic sense. The numbers speak for themselves and if you don't know them it's strictly your own fault.. they are well known, and don't vary much by anyone's accounting, that accounting being done by many who's business it is to account. On the high side of that use requirement (the number of hours in a year equivalent to what a NetJets pilot typically works), shares that are purchased are usually for supplemental lift purposes only for their own departments....not as a replacement. I'd hate to think that if you work there you haven't bothered to learn this most basic thing about your company.

Not sure what you're getting at with the "can't put a price tag on safety" issue. Is NetJets now claiming they offer a higher standard of safety than one's own flight department? You know, somehow that wouldn't suprise me either, cuz we've heard just about everything. It's useless to quibble about accident/incident rates frac vs. corporate....the numbers are so low for both even one event skews them.

Of course, there's many flight departments who operate squarely in the niche where fracs do make economic sense, but they opt to keep everthing in-house for the much higher level of security and operational control. Those two factors are an integral part of any safety equation and the frac system can't match a well-run in-house department in that regard. That's just the nature of things, but for many companies it trumps all other considerations, the higher relative costs notwithstanding.

 

[Live4flyng]

Before you begin to sound a lot more foolish, you should learn just what part of the business aviation market you cater to in terms of a company's travel requirements

I believe you are the one that needs to learn this.

The numbers speak for themselves and if you don't know them it's strictly your own fault.. they are well known, and don't vary much by anyone's accounting, that accounting being done by many who's business it is to account.

Who is this, President Clinton? So many words coming from you all the time with very little content.

On the high side of that use requirement (the number of hours in a year equivalent to what a NetJets pilot typically works), shares that are purchased are usually for supplemental lift purposes only for their own departments....not as a replacement.

Please explain what the use requirement has to do with the number of hours a Netjets pilot works. I thought we were discussing the fractional business model, not pilot flight/duty hours. As far as the supplemental lift comment, you are about 10 years behind in current events. Keep talking though, your ignorance is really showing.

It's useless to quibble about accident/incident rates frac vs. corporate....the numbers are so low for both even one event skews them./QUOTE] I agree with this statement. If you compare 91 to 135, the numbers tell a different story.

 

[CatYaaak]

I believe you are the one that needs to learn this.

Who is this, President Clinton? So many words coming from you all the time with very little content.

Please explain what the use requirement has to do with the number of hours a Netjets pilot works. I thought we were discussing the fractional business model, not pilot flight/duty hours. As far as the supplemental lift comment, you are about 10 years behind in current events. Keep talking though, your ignorance is really showing.
I agree with this statement. If you compare 91 to 135, the numbers tell a different story.

I don't compare 91 to 135..nobody lumps them together. Outside a handful of a few departments, my "supplemental lift" comments are accurate, and we were dicussing "productivity compared to NBAA companies" because ASAP brings it up and makes claims. For an answer to your other replies, see my post on the other thread.

 

[FlyFlyFly]

Back to the SCAB Debate

I for one could care less if the Teamster's decide to call me a scab. BFD. The place is run by a bunch of thugs and I am frankly surprised that a group of professionals would have anything to do with them. That being said, threatening to call me a scab because I carry a passenger that is a customer of Netjets is so unbelieveably ridiculous that it just makes me chuckle.

I guess you are going to track them and tag the JetBlue crew scabs as well if they fly them home when you strand them? Or Delta or whoever? Makes little sense. I would guess if you succeed in your quest and run NetJets out of business, then the very places you will you be looking for jobs will be chock full of scabs, and I would bet that a fairly good number of you will be hired by a scab.

If that happens, what will you do? You may very well find yourself working for a scab. What does a Teamster do then? I am really curious, would your strong sense of unity allow you to do it? Would you be selling out your brethren if you did?

Maybe these are questions that your wise and seasoned MEC might answer for you before they decide to start hanging monikers on people that have never set foot in a NetJets cockpit.

Your real problem is that you took people at their word and they let you down. Now that they have, you continue to stay saying yessuh boss rather than voting with your feet, much to the detriment of pilots at your company and everywhere else. Good luck with your struggle with management. I would try to find ways to keep the customer's insulated from the problems.

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

Good points FLY,

That is a good question:

If NetJets pays to have one of their passengers fly on xyz charter, is that crew scabs?

If NetJets pays to have one of their passengers fly on United, is that crew scabs?

Where's the logic?

Ace

 

[Diesel]

FLY FLY FLY must have just watched the movie hoffa. Way to go bud.

Just remember that IF we go on strike it's not just the pilots not showing up to work. It's the supplies from every trucker in the country. It's the overnight packages for parts on UPS. The list goes on and on.

Oh yeah and I forgot places like signature boston will all of a sudden have a lapse of memory on who needs to be fueled out on the ramp.

I'm sure catyaak and publishers will chime in here with their mindless dribble.

 

[h25b]

Where's the logic?

Ace

The question that eludes us all...

Simple answer:

There is no logic to it. Pure ignorance sprinkled in with a little desperation (or maybe the other way around).

signature boston will all of a sudden have a lapse of memory on who needs to be fueled out on the ramp.

What would make this different from any other day at Signature... ??? ... Like the world needs another reason to avoid Signature BOS... Please don't scare us...

Talk about mindless dribble !!!

 

[Diesel]

I was just pointing out that signature boston is going to have trouble fueling us. None of the fuelers will do it.

Of course i'll be enjoying my summer off. 3 months on bidable vacation. Looking forward to it.