Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

NetJets Strike Passes By 93%

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
FamilyGuy said:
Why do you perceive the verbal communication from the chief pilots as threats and coercion but your "friendly little chats" with pilots who want to work overtime is just talking?

Because we can't fire each other dillhole. Quid pro quo's, intimidation, "counsling"; these are all events that have been demonstrated by management (CP or other) over the years. This is what happens when one party has the power to fire the other.

Pilots are peers. We levy our opinions upon each other but at the end of the day it is a Democracy we live here on the labor side.
 
FamilyGuy said:
Cant comment since you are not in Manufacturing? Then why did you bring it up as an example when you tried to defend your lame argument?

Umm... Well... I was talking about aviation when you brought up manufacturing and cars. My points centered around aviation employees when you introduced another sector of industry NOT RELATED TO NETJETS. My references made to other industies as a whole (as compared to aviation) were not directed towards the automobile industry as a specific example. The comments were pertaining to the broad spectrum of ALL U.S. Jobs; Manufacturing, Service, etc.... not specifics. You and Dispatcher need to learn the difference between Micro and Macro.

FamilyGuy said:
US based or Foreign Based is irrelevant. The point is that Ford, GM, Chrysler, Toyota, Honda, Mercedes, Hyundai all operate auto manufacturing plants right here on American soil, employing American citizens. The unions, which have a stranglehold on the Big 3 US manufacturers have been wholly unsuccessful in converting any of these transplant auto factories.

Again. I don't profess to know anything about the automobile industry. I speak aviation. Aviation employees remain the HIGHEST Unionized group of workers in the country.

FamilyGuy said:
Again, either the unions have a compelling message or they do not. The facts clearly show that unions are in decline and have been fading to oblivion for 60 years!

In general, yes. True. Not relevant though.

In aviation... No. Sorry, you can't build a case for that.


FamilyGuy said:
As for aviation, yes, currently a majority of employees are unionized. But its just a matter of time before that changes. Read the news and check out the other sections of this board. There's widespread discontent with the union's inability to stop the erosion of wages, benefits, scope, and other advantages that unions have claimed in the past.

Well, let me see.

Let's look at a list of airlines (off the top of my head) that are considered at least 2nd generation airlines that have employees who have Unionized.

USA 3000 (Apple Vacations prodigy)
Republic (spinoff of Chatauqua)
MidAtlantic Airways (New division of US Airways)
Southwest (the original and the only)
NetJets (who are these guys?:cool: )
Freedom Airlines (Union busting attempt by MESA and cOrnstien).

How many airline employee groups have decertified their Union representation... ever?

ZERO, which is exactly how many words get spoken to Moisture by NJA pilots during his weelky profta speech.

Airline management and employees go through periods of bargaining trends. There are times of employee give back trends (now and the early 90's) and there are times of labor gains (1999-2000). It is cyclical.

Labor groups continue to raise the bar and muster bargaining paower from other peer employee groups in the industry (in good times). Likewise, management teams lower the bar according the accomplishments of other management teams in times of give backs.
 
FamilyGuy said:
Hawkered - good point. Answering union dogma with anti-union dogma isnt going to bridge the differences between the two groups. I apologize...


Someone is fishing.
 
FamilyGuy said:
Cant comment since you are not in Manufacturing? Then why did you bring it up as an example when you tried to defend your lame argument?

FLYLOW22 said:
Umm... Well... I was talking about aviation when you brought up manufacturing and cars. My points centered around aviation employees when you introduced another sector of industry NOT RELATED TO NETJETS. My references made to other industies as a whole (as compared to aviation) were not directed towards the automobile industry as a specific example. The comments were pertaining to the broad spectrum of ALL U.S. Jobs; Manufacturing, Service, etc.... not specifics. You and Dispatcher need to learn the difference between Micro and Macro.

WRONG. You should go back and check the timeline....its all there in black and white. You introduced Manufacturing as a topic on page 11 post #162. At least get the facts straight.

FLYLOW22 said:
Again. I don't profess to know anything about the automobile industry. I speak aviation. Aviation employees remain the HIGHEST Unionized group of workers in the country.

WRONG AGAIN. Actually teachers are the highest unionized group of workers in the country. Aviation does have a high percentage of workers who are unionized though. The entire transportation industry is around 25%. You can get more data on the Bureau of Labor Statistics site here:

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/union2.nr0.htm


You are correct that no aviation unions have been decertified so far. I havent claimed that the unions have decreased in aviation, only that there is a high level of discontent in the aviation union community at the inability of the union to stop the erosion of pay, benefits, etc. It was simply a prediction on my part that if this trend continues that workers will grow dissatisfied and lead them to question why they are paying dues.

As for the commentary on saying zero words to Boisture, that's simply your loss. Not too many people get an opportunity to talk to Mr. Boisture, and I dont think I would squander the opportunity. What is the purpose in saying nothing? To express displeasure? I think everyone knows you're not happy.
 
Ultra Grump said:
FamilyGuy:

I'll answer one of your questions, since I don't have time to get to all of them:

Precisely because the workforces at GM, Chrysler, and Ford are unionized. In order to prevent a union drive at their facilities, the Japanese- and Korean- owned factories must at least match what the unionized force is getting.

Actually its fairly common for non-unionized workers in an industry to get LESS pay and FEWER benefits than unionized workers. Here's a quote from a recent article in the New York Times on transplant auto factories in the south:

Union jobs at the Big Three plants pay a dollar or two more an hour - about $26 an hour compared with $24 or $25 an hour for the nonunion jobs at the foreign plants. But compensation at the American automakers swells to an average of $55 an hour when health care, cost of living and other benefits are counted, compared with $48 an hour, on average, at Toyota.

You can find the entire article here:
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/22/automobiles/22auto.html
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/22/automobiles/22auto.html?ex=1122782400&en=21ff7119b8ed9755&ei=5070

Ultra Grump said:
If the UAW went away, I'm sure people would be happy for a while, but soon the wages would start to shrink, the benefits would start to disappear, and quality would begin to suffer from newly-demoralized workers. Then guess what would happen? Union drives. As much as you'd like to see unions go away, unfortunately for you, they're here to stay.

The irony is that several studies have found that non-union workers are happier and more satisfied with their jobs than their union counterparts, even though they get less pay and fewer benefits.
 
Hogprint said:
Famguy posted:



Our union has delivered on most things, just not pay. The other frax best us only on pay, and it's just a couple of grand more a year.

Don't forget NJ was the frax industry for a long time. They set the bar low, and the other frax have only had to match or slightly better the deal.

Just ask a FOp's or Flex guy about their work rules compared to ours that the union was instrumental in negotiating.

The other frax may be questioning their wisdom of staying non union, especially if we get an industry leading contract.

Hogprint - I'm getting a conflicting message here. You state that the union delivered the best work rules and operating conditions of any of the frax operators and are just a couple thousand below them in pay. It sounds like the union did a good job historically outside of the pay issue - so why the intense dissatisfaction?
 
dsptcherNJA said:
You're not just beating a dead horse here, you're digging it out of the grave and wacking at the bones now.

FLYLOW22 said:
Hmmm. A "Boisturism".

Worth ain't worth that much.

No, I dont think he's old enough to get credit for that phrase...

"flog (or beat) a dead horse. Though he supported the measure, British politician and orator John Bright thought the Reform Bill of 1867, which called for more democratic representation, would never be passed by Parliament. Trying to rouse Parliament from its apathy on the issue, he said in a speech, would be like trying to 'flog a dead horse' to make it pull a load. This is the first recorded use of the expression, which is still common for 'trying to revive interest in an apparently hopeless issue.' Bright's silver tongue is also responsible for 'England is the mother of Parliament,' and 'Force is not a remedy,' among other memorable quotations. He was wrong about the Reform Bill of 1867, however. Parliament 'carried' it, as the British say." From the "Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins" by Robert Hendrickson (Facts on File, New York, 1997.)
 
FamilyGuy said:
No, I dont think he's old enough to get credit for that phrase...

"flog (or beat) a dead horse. Though he supported the measure, British politician and orator John Bright thought the Reform Bill of 1867, which called for more democratic representation, would never be passed by Parliament. Trying to rouse Parliament from its apathy on the issue, he said in a speech, would be like trying to 'flog a dead horse' to make it pull a load. This is the first recorded use of the expression, which is still common for 'trying to revive interest in an apparently hopeless issue.' Bright's silver tongue is also responsible for 'England is the mother of Parliament,' and 'Force is not a remedy,' among other memorable quotations. He was wrong about the Reform Bill of 1867, however. Parliament 'carried' it, as the British say." From the "Encyclopedia of Word and Phrase Origins" by Robert Hendrickson (Facts on File, New York, 1997.)

Hey Clavin, aren't you needed back at Cheers?
 
I think all of you guys need to get LAID. Tempers are high..... I suggest one of you try getting laid by a woman, then you can be on the top or the bottom.
 
Family Guy

I actually like your intellectual arguments and I feel that you're very sincere in your convictions, but you're straying...again.

Are you really interested whether my baby can afford a new pair of shoes, or do you want to just, "do the right thing" for a bunch of fat cats.

I received a very long and well delivered page today on my company pager and really, I thought it was well written and showed us the gravity of the situation. The fact that you know that its happening is a relief to many of us. Some of us thought you genuinely didn't care!

American Airlines had one of the worlds hardest leaders, but he was loved..and hated at the same time. Robert Crandall fought for the dominance of the silver bird in Washington, and with route structure, ETOPS economics and even sports advertising. If you would ask any American pilot that remembered life under him, they'd probably give some reference to their own anatomy as personal sacrifice to have him back, just to recapture those wonder years.

Netjets doesn't have leadership right now that shows that kind of conviction. They seem to clock in and clock out, and not really even care. Let me explain:- You've been working a problem at a remote airport in Montana all day long with maintenance control, it's the third plane you've been on for the tour that's broken down, passengers are coming in an hour. The MEL covers the problem and both crew members agree that it's safe to take the 'plane. You call an Assistant Chief Pilot and tell him you're good to go. He doesn't know anything about the problem, doesn't understood the MEL and hasn't even been briefed by the arm chair warrior that just left his air-conditioned confines.

Sure: it takes years to get a good customer and seconds to lose one, but how do we go back to the passengers who are waiting to go to a charity function in New York and continue to smile?!

You get what you pay for!! You have to pay a pilot that can show up for work and know that his wife has a car with a working set of brakes and an engine that won't let go. You have to pay a pilot that can afford the insurance deductibles for life's unfortunate events that take us by surprise. You have to pay a pilot so that s/he can afford a retirement outside of the government sponsered ponzi scheme called Social Security and you have to grow the team with all the fan fare of the Dallas Cowboy Cheerleaders at the closing moments of a fourth quarter tie-breaking field goal!!!

Thats what leadership is!! It's not "telling", it's not lecturing, it's not coming up with great new ideas...it's about treating people the way you would like to be treated and not taking personal offence to peoples' personality quirks, or even their own unique beliefs. It's about tolerance, patience, the ability to make an example of others through the actions of oneself, and the ability to practice one's craft better than most, at the same time, remaining humble!!

God knows..I fail at this myself, but you are being paid to be great Family Guy, and for that money, we all expect greatness.

What good is it coming up with "financials" when we are being charged 50 bucks for a quart of oil in Westchester? Or seeing orders for our aircraft running off to Europe? How can you equate the cost of a sell-off, when the majority of those are to our sister company EJM?

If I carry a wallet and I change the pocket from one side of my butt-cheeks to the other, have I just cost myself its contents, or did I just double my fortunes? Thats how stupid it looks when we show up to White Plains!!

Family Guy, have the strength of your own convictions to be honest and fair in your dealings. Do not be sideswiped by corporate immorality or tongue twisted into arguments with people that piss you off on these forums.

Just Git 'R Done!

Time will heal...if its not too late!!
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top