Netjets Globals

[be99fr8dog]

If you believe Section 19 is at all practical to the way our international trips operate, maybe you should bid the Global to find out what really goes on.

Maybe the company should have thought of that when they negotiated section 19.

You A teamers keep enjoying your extended day pay.

 

[OPECJet]

If you believe Section 19 is at all practical to the way our international trips operate, maybe you should bid the Global to find out what really goes on.

The company has the option to engage the union in getting relief. I don't believe for a minute NJASAP wouldn't work with them to accomplish something cost effective and workable.

 

[X-rated]

Like I said, contentious, and now divisive.

It's not about doing what's in the companies best interest, it's about hurting the company while complying with the contract so the union has a bargaining chip to get something they want later. I understand the company does it too, and it's just the way the game is played, but, it seems like a stupid way to run a business to me.

 

[imacdog]

If the company didn't take advantage of pilots then there would be no union.

 

[X-rated]

I'm not arguing that point, and I know the company does the same. It's still wasteful and counterproductive, but it is what it is.

 

[imacdog]

I'm not in this business to be as productive as possible for the company. I expect a certain level of time off, to be compensated for my work fairly, and to be allowed to do my job in a safe manner. To the company, things like time off, working conditions, and pay are wasteful and counterproductive. The goal is to find the right balance of productivity, quality of life, and pay that works for both parties. In a union shop, it's give and take. In a nonunion shop, you take whatever the company decides to give. Might work fine in a small company, but companies have proven themselves to unilaterally makes changes to the above that negatively impact their employees.

 

[gutshotdraw]

The company has the option to engage the union in getting relief. I don't believe for a minute NJASAP wouldn't work with them to accomplish something cost effective and workable.

Actually, I can recall at least one very specific instance where the company asked NJASAP for relief. It was for an around-the-world trip the owner (a valuable owner with big shares in big airplanes) had done with same crew, every year, for a decade.

The union told the company to pound sand and it cost the owner an extra $75,000 in crew swaps. So your theory doesn't hold water.

But what do I know? I'm just an A-Teamer.

By the way, we call it Bubba Club.

 

[jetlag7]

Actually, I can recall at least one very specific instance where the company asked NJASAP for relief. It was for an around-the-world trip the owner (a valuable owner with big shares in big airplanes) had done with same crew, every year, for a decade.

The union told the company to pound sand and it cost the owner an extra $75,000 in crew swaps. So your theory doesn't hold water.

But what do I know? I'm just an A-Teamer.

By the way, we call it Bubba Club.

That particular crew was invited to bid the 18-day schedule during the period in question. They had ample opportunity to do so and it would have provided a remedy to that particular problem while still working within the boundaries of the CBA. -- They refused.

 

[OPECJet]

Actually, I can recall at least one very specific instance where the company asked NJASAP for relief. It was for an around-the-world trip the owner (a valuable owner with big shares in big airplanes) had done with same crew, every year, for a decade.

The union told the company to pound sand and it cost the owner an extra $75,000 in crew swaps. So your theory doesn't hold water.

But what do I know? I'm just an A-Teamer.

By the way, we call it Bubba Club.

That's certainly one side of the story. I seem to recall a strenuous period following selective CBA compliance on the company's part, as well as trying to engage in sell-off / scope relief talks in efforts to furlough more pilots. This was ongoing around the time management made changes to the 401K without NJASAP input, as contractually guaranteed if I remember correctly. This approach was also on short notice, after the union had approached the company on the very subject and was told to "pound sand".

I freely admit I may be confusing events and lump them into the same timeframe. If so I'm open to correction, but do you expect NJASAP to be open to much of anything immediately after the company walked out of a meeting because they didn't want NJASAP's attorney present?

 

[Sammy]

Actually, I can recall at least one very specific instance where the company asked NJASAP for relief. It was for an around-the-world trip the owner (a valuable owner with big shares in big airplanes) had done with same crew, every year, for a decade.

The union told the company to pound sand and it cost the owner an extra $75,000 in crew swaps. So your theory doesn't hold water.

But what do I know? I'm just an A-Teamer.

By the way, we call it Bubba Club.

No disrespect intended, but why would you have knowledge of this or more importantly the amount of $75,000?