NetJets Recalls

[jtf]

Just selling off the scope on the cheap. They have pay rates for the crj900 and emb 175, but they look to be willing to sell that away for still less than the contract they got in 2000. Giving away the flying you should be doing for a few bucks is what it's killing the industry, but there they go again. If we sell scope at NJA in the next negotiation, I am pretty sure I will be fired before I get furloughed for fist fights with at least one who voted the scope away.

 

[AftCG182]

Figured it out on my own... Thanks-

 

[imacdog]

Yes it is, which is why the subcontracting needs to be extremely limited.

 

[realityman]

I rather not negotiate for a few more years. Not until we accelerate from the recession and start to grow again.

In today's climate, it's nothing but "bad news bears" if we negotiate now. The EMT is going to go after our benefits (make us start paying some if it, probably reduce coverage and push more expenses on us), and I'm sure the 401k 50% match will get attacked. Next they will want new scope and try to screw us like how the reginals killed the jobs over at the majors. Then they will change the wording for the downgrades and about 700 of us will get downgraded. And will it pass? Sure. They will promise a large increase in pay for captains and even higher increase for the super senior guys and there will be just enough votes to get this thing through.

First off, the company can't do any of that stuff simply because the contract is amenable. Our union would have to present it for a vote by the membership. I realize confidence in our union is pretty low, but having been here for over 15 years and knowing the players involved, I can give you my personal assurance that they would NEVER put out something like that for the membership to vote on UNLESS they were absolutely positive it would go down with a 98%+ "no" vote. That would send a great message to the company that they're barking up the wrong tree.

As for buying off the senior votes with big raises, really?! As one of those senior guys, I know better than to vote for a big raise while taking it in the shorts on scope, 401K, medical, vacation, etc.... Yeah, there might be a few who would accept that deal, but again, knowing quite a few senior folks I can tell you it wouldn't be many. Not nearly enough for something like that to pass.

But honestly, I don't see the company offering big raises to anybody, so I'm not too worried about them buying many folks off.

Is the company going to want concessions on pretty much everything? Of course!! But the question is, is it really something to worry about? I don't believe so. Who cares what they ask for? We'll probably be asking for the exact opposite of what they're asking for. This is called a traditional labor-management relationship. I wish we didn't have it, but we do. When was the last time you heard of ANY unionized company going into negotiations where the company walked into the room and said they'd be happy to work with the union on a good new contract? They ALWAYS walk in asking for breaks, even when things are good. And when was the last time a union walked into negotiations and initially said they'd be happy to work with the company on a crappy new contract?

They'll fight. We'll fight. Whoever has better determination will come out on top. It's nothing to lose any sleep over though. Everything the company will do is EXPECTED. The real question is, will we be able to effectively counter it?

 

[rajflyboy]

First off, the company can't do any of that stuff simply because the contract is amenable. Our union would have to present it for a vote by the membership. I realize confidence in our union is pretty low, but having been here for over 15 years and knowing the players involved, I can give you my personal assurance that they would NEVER put out something like that for the membership to vote on UNLESS they were absolutely positive it would go down with a 98%+ "no" vote. That would send a great message to the company that they're barking up the wrong tree.

As for buying off the senior votes with big raises, really?! As one of those senior guys, I know better than to vote for a big raise while taking it in the shorts on scope, 401K, medical, vacation, etc.... Yeah, there might be a few who would accept that deal, but again, knowing quite a few senior folks I can tell you it wouldn't be many. Not nearly enough for something like that to pass.

But honestly, I don't see the company offering big raises to anybody, so I'm not too worried about them buying many folks off.

Is the company going to want concessions on pretty much everything? Of course!! But the question is, is it really something to worry about? I don't believe so. Who cares what they ask for? We'll probably be asking for the exact opposite of what they're asking for. This is called a traditional labor-management relationship. I wish we didn't have it, but we do. When was the last time you heard of ANY unionized company going into negotiations where the company walked into the room and said they'd be happy to work with the union on a good new contract? They ALWAYS walk in asking for breaks, even when things are good. And when was the last time a union walked into negotiations and initially said they'd be happy to work with the company on a crappy new contract?

They'll fight. We'll fight. Whoever has better determination will come out on top. It's nothing to lose any sleep over though. Everything the company will do is EXPECTED. The real question is, will we be able to effectively counter it?

Pretty much the deal!

 

[jetlag7]

Don't know the significance of May 6th...sorry

That weekend was the Berkshire shareholders meeting. Everything was "just peaches" prior, but now that nobody from the EMT will be standing in front of the board for some time, the negative FUD campaign is starting to ramp up leading into Section 6.

Looks like they waited a month before launching the first turd across our bow... Did you read yesterday's ops update? Can't believe they threw the Falcon guys under the bus like that.

Poor planning and mis-management on their part does not constitute an emergency on our part. Nor does it give them the right to use our hard-working professional flight crews as scapegoats for their shortcomings.

 

[BentOver]

Glad I'm not the only one who saw that..... I like how the CBA cost the company so much money in sell-off fees... AND cost them one of their sell-off days (like it's gonna matter this quarter)...

FUD, and nothing more.. They're idiots who think the pilots don't know what's up.