NetJets To Picket

[fischman]

2nd >> we are not negotiating a contract yet.

We may not be, but management is...:erm:

 

[gret]

At 58 years old, I would consider this one of the most desperate moment of my life walking around with a sign saying that my employer has tried to screw me. The haven't and if you think they have, you are an idiot for working for them. I have always thanked my employer for giving me a paycheck...and if you don't, go to work for somebody you do want to thank!

Man up. What I understand is they changed the friggen manager of a employee benefit plan which means jack in life.

..and the idiot that keeps posting concessions never work...it is called negotiating. You don't want to deal, they will find someone else that will and you lose! Too many pilots and not enough jobs. Your contract means nothing if there isn't any money to pay you.

 

[CA1900]

At 58 years old, I would consider this one of the most desperate moment of my life walking around with a sign saying that my employer has tried to screw me. The haven't ...

At 58, I would think that the absolute gutting of your 401k program would be of prime importance to you.

Man up. What I understand is they changed the friggen manager of a employee benefit plan which means jack in life.

The fund administrator is really irrelevant. It's the funds (or lack thereof) that we have a problem with. The ones offered by Fidelity gave us much, much better growth than the ones Schwab is offering us. They offer plans with more funds, and even a totally self-directed option, but the company has deliberately opted us out of those. And they're not permitted to make these changes without our concurrence. That was the agreement they made with us, and which they're reneging on.

..and the idiot that keeps posting concessions never work...it is called negotiating. You don't want to deal...

Sure we do. Every contract we've negotiated has had us giving and taking as part of the negotiating process. We all know that.

You're missing the context. By concessions, we're not talking about normal contract cycles. When management comes in and says, "Give us this or we'll furlough/cancel airplane orders/whatever," that's an attempt at a concession.

Virtually every time, it's a flat-out lie. Aviation history is full of examples where the employees gave up valuable provisions in the contract, only to have the company do what they were going to threaten anyway. Look at American Airlines for a perfect example.

Your contract means nothing if there isn't any money to pay you.

Of course. But it also means nothing if it's not vigorously enforced. We have a contract with the company, and they're not abiding by it. If you told your cable company that you've decided to pay less than the monthly rate, they'd cut you off for non-payment of services. We don't have that option, thanks to the horrible Railway Labor Act under which we have to operate. An informational picket is one of the few methods the law allows us at this stage.

 

[realityman]

CA1900,

Great response! FI would be a better forum if we had more folks like you presenting logical well-thought discussion without the emotion or vitriol. Hopefully others here will follow your lead. We can disagree amongst ourselves, but it can be done in a civil manner.

Gret,

Just to expand a little, as I posted on a different thread, how many times and in how many ways do we allow them to violate our contract before we take action (other than simply filing grievances)? We have limited tools available to us. Unfortunately, far fewer tools than management has available to them. Given the track record of this EMT, if we don't start stepping it up a little right now, this 401K thing will only be the tip of the iceberg. If they just decide (once again, in violation of our CBA) to alter our medical benefits so that it somehow costs us money out of our pockets, will THEN be a good time to picket (or take other action)? Think it can't/won't happen? They just wiped their collective a**es with our CBA with this 401K switch. Really THINK about what they did! And then tell me what will stop them from making further changes if we don't start using stronger methods to express our displeasure. They sure as hell don't seem to afraid of the minor grievance process. And unfortunately, we can't take it to the courts because the RLA requires this to try to be worked out in the minor dispute process before we can take it to court, which could take a very long time. Very public displays of our anger may be one of the best tools we have right now to stop anymore of this crap from happening. Yes, it MIGHT harm our business. But maybe that should have been thought out a bit more by management before they decided that our CBA means nothing.

By the way, we're just days away from this 401k switch and we STILL have no real details about the new program. In addition to what CA1900 mentioned about the funds, they have said there may be fees associated with certain funds with Schwab. Thing is, they have given us ZERO info about where those fees will be, and how much. That could be a huge detriment to many of our 401k's. But hey, I'm glad for you it's just "switching administrators, and what's the big deal?".

Yes, I will be out there walking circles.

 

[CRAWDADDY]

So the company is willing to incur grievances and lawsuits so that they may change the friggen manager of a employee benefit plan which means jack in life.

You're right. I may not want to work for a management team that dumb.

 

[rajflyboy]

At 58, I would think that the absolute gutting of your 401k program would be of prime importance to you.

The fund administrator is really irrelevant. It's the funds (or lack thereof) that we have a problem with. The ones offered by Fidelity gave us much, much better growth than the ones Schwab is offering us. They offer plans with more funds, and even a totally self-directed option, but the company has deliberately opted us out of those. And they're not permitted to make these changes without our concurrence. That was the agreement they made with us, and which they're reneging on.

Sure we do. Every contract we've negotiated has had us giving and taking as part of the negotiating process. We all know that.

You're missing the context. By concessions, we're not talking about normal contract cycles. When management comes in and says, "Give us this or we'll furlough/cancel airplane orders/whatever," that's an attempt at a concession.

Virtually every time, it's a flat-out lie. Aviation history is full of examples where the employees gave up valuable provisions in the contract, only to have the company do what they were going to threaten anyway. Look at American Airlines for a perfect example.

Of course. But it also means nothing if it's not vigorously enforced. We have a contract with the company, and they're not abiding by it. If you told your cable company that you've decided to pay less than the monthly rate, they'd cut you off for non-payment of services. We don't have that option, thanks to the horrible Railway Labor Act under which we have to operate. An informational picket is one of the few methods the law allows us at this stage.

Good Post Mr 1900

 

[rajflyboy]

CA1900,

Great response! FI would be a better forum if we had more folks like you presenting logical well-thought discussion without the emotion or vitriol. Hopefully others here will follow your lead. We can disagree amongst ourselves, but it can be done in a civil manner.

Gret,

Just to expand a little, as I posted on a different thread, how many times and in how many ways do we allow them to violate our contract before we take action (other than simply filing grievances)? We have limited tools available to us. Unfortunately, far fewer tools than management has available to them. Given the track record of this EMT, if we don't start stepping it up a little right now, this 401K thing will only be the tip of the iceberg. If they just decide (once again, in violation of our CBA) to alter our medical benefits so that it somehow costs us money out of our pockets, will THEN be a good time to picket (or take other action)? Think it can't/won't happen? They just wiped their collective a**es with our CBA with this 401K switch. Really THINK about what they did! And then tell me what will stop them from making further changes if we don't start using stronger methods to express our displeasure. They sure as hell don't seem to afraid of the minor grievance process. And unfortunately, we can't take it to the courts because the RLA requires this to try to be worked out in the minor dispute process before we can take it to court, which could take a very long time. Very public displays of our anger may be one of the best tools we have right now to stop anymore of this crap from happening. Yes, it MIGHT harm our business. But maybe that should have been thought out a bit more by management before they decided that our CBA means nothing.

By the way, we're just days away from this 401k switch and we STILL have no real details about the new program. In addition to what CA1900 mentioned about the funds, they have said there may be fees associated with certain funds with Schwab. Thing is, they have given us ZERO info about where those fees will be, and how much. That could be a huge detriment to many of our 401k's. But hey, I'm glad for you it's just "switching administrators, and what's the big deal?".

Yes, I will be out there walking circles.

Right on Reality man >> but you and I and the other 2500 need to do something about the non action that has been going on for the last 3 or 4 years. We need to get out and vote next time. Get rid of the problems.

 

[rajflyboy]

We may not be, but management is...:erm:

but we are NOT and hopefully will not for a long time. We pay dues for enforcement of the contract.

 

[Pervis]

I find it curious this talk of concessions to "save the company". The only concession he company seaks with NJASAP is scope relief. Maybe someone can explain how allowing more than 44 days/year of outsourcing without penalty will gain us more job security.

Here's a little reminder about real history. NJA management cried poverty until the 2005 CBA, and said any more than they offered in 2004 would destroy the company. The first full year post 2005 CBA brought the highest level of profit in the history of the company.

Fast forward to current day. While sales continue to suffer, we are PROFITABLE for the very first time relying more on operational efficiency than sales. Ignoring the former, IMHO, was the single biggest mistake RTS made. Once sales pick up, profit will go through the roof, assuming we sustain the efficiencies we gained in the last 2-3 years.

Go read Marty Levitt's book and you may have an epiphany. For those who need a little extra help, he wrote "Confessions of a Union Buster". The parallels between this book and today are obvious enough to make the staunchest union opposition to go hmmmmm.

 

[rajflyboy]

I find it curious this talk of concessions to "save the company". The only concession he company seaks with NJASAP is scope relief. Maybe someone can explain how allowing more than 44 days/year of outsourcing without penalty will gain us more job security.

Here's a little reminder about real history. NJA management cried poverty until the 2005 CBA, and said any more than they offered in 2004 would destroy the company. The first full year post 2005 CBA brought the highest level of profit in the history of the company.

Fast forward to current day. While sales continue to suffer, we are PROFITABLE for the very first time relying more on operational efficiency than sales. Ignoring the former, IMHO, was the single biggest mistake RTS made. Once sales pick up, profit will go through the roof, assuming we sustain the efficiencies we gained in the last 2-3 years.

Go read Marty Levitt's book and you may have an epiphany. For those who need a little extra help, he wrote "Confessions of a Union Buster". The parallels between this book and today are obvious enough to make the staunchest union opposition to go hmmmmm.

We already get all that. The problem is contract enforcement.