NJ pilot union suing company over use of vendor aircraft?

[getonit]

Heard this rumor recently and curious if it has factual background?

 

[Live4flyng]

Just might be

 

[Mach92]

Scope violations every day. Yes its factual

 

[gunfyter]

Suing or filing a grievance?

 

[ce750drvr]

grievance.

 

[ghostrider64]

However there is a rumor of "owners" suing Netjets because of Marquis....Something about sub lease $'s not coming back to the "owners"

 

[suen1843]

Someone in the know is going to have to explain this one to me. If the company does not have one of their own aircraft, or cannot schedule a crew within time limits, what is the problem with selling off the trip to a vendor. I really don't think it would save any money for the company....probably costs more than operating their own equipment. How does scope come into play here.

 

[yosemite]

What it's about...

The basic tenets of a union are:
(a) protect the member's rights, and
(b) protect the member's jobs.

"Scope" can be very simply defined as "(b)"... protect the member's jobs.

You're right, if all things were equal it wouldn't hurt anything for them to use a vendor to fly a trip... but things are NEVER equal when working for the 800 pound gorilla.

Our scope clause allows the company to use vendors only in specific extreme use cases. The problem is that they have created a situation wherein they are always behind the 8-ball now and they are trying to use this clause to solve their problem when it isn't their right to do so.

With the advent of the card program, they have oversold the capacity of the airplanes in the fleet, or pilots available, to fly the workload being generated. They will not buy new airplanes, and because of their constant poor treatment and disrespect of the pilot group, they have created a situation wherein most pilots refuse to work overtime and they can't hire more to fill the gaps.

This is a problem created by their own bad management decisions and poor policy execution. They are trying to apply a temporary salve by using (violating) a provision of a contract, which according to Federal law, they do not have the right to use.

The obvious solution is to increase the size of the fleet. Also as obvious, they need to treat the pilot workforce with respect and work with us to achieve a fair contract. This would create a workforce more willing to work with the company to get things done, and would provide a positive influence for increasing the size of this same workforce... in other words, "JOBS".

Increasing payroll and workforce isn't the cheapest solution to the problem, but don't take my response as just being "unionist" in nature. These two items are definitely a part of their problem, and part of their solution. They just choose to ignore it right now. However, in the mean time, Federal law says they do not have the right to ignore this and solve their problem by selling off work we should rightfully be doing.

THAT is what it is all about...

 

[netjetwife]

Excellent post Yosemite! I would just like to add that when the company sells off trips while pilots are sitting around FBOs and/or hotels, those pilots tend to become very frustrated. Many of them are relieving their boredom by filing grievances... Not to make light of the situation, but really what do they expect?? That NJ pilots will sit back, doing nothing (literally) while vendors fly THEIR px??? Absolutely it's about jobs...and fairness....and respect! Not to mention, integrity--keeping their word by following the contract and demanding the company does the same. Cheering 'em on! NJW

 

[suen1843]

Excellent post Yosemite! I would just like to add that when the company sells off trips while pilots are sitting around FBOs and/or hotels, those pilots tend to become very frustrated. Many of them are relieving their boredom by filing grievances... Not to make light of the situation, but really what do they expect?? That NJ pilots will sit back, doing nothing (literally) while vendors fly THEIR px??? Absolutely it's about jobs...and fairness....and respect! Not to mention, integrity--keeping their word by following the contract and demanding the company does the same. Cheering 'em on! NJW

Let me get this straight. You are saying that NJ has a crew and airplane sitting in, say TEB, and a pax wants to go from TEB to DAL. Is the company really flying in a vendor aircraft and crew to fly that trip? There has to be more to this. Why would NJ spend all that extra money (I do know that if a vendor a/c is used the customer only pays their contracted hourly rate).

 

[netjetwife]

I don't have examples of specific locations; I'll leave that to the NJ pilots. What I am saying is that some of the pilots believe (obviously those filing grievances do) that they could have been used much more productively than they were on days that flights were sold off. They see the percentage of sell-offs as unacceptable. Basically that was my husband's reason for filing his grievance. I'm following it enough to know that it is considered a scope problem and that the cards are in the middle of there, too. I'm saying that Yosemite's post sounds familiar to me. I've heard the same explanations at home and the NJ pilots are standing up for their rights, as well they should! THAT is what I am saying... NJW

 

[x402]

Let me get this straight. You are saying that NJ has a crew and airplane sitting in, say TEB, and a pax wants to go from TEB to DAL. Is the company really flying in a vendor aircraft and crew to fly that trip? There has to be more to this. Why would NJ spend all that extra money (I do know that if a vendor a/c is used the customer only pays their contracted hourly rate).

Let's say that a busy weekend is coming and demand really does exceed NJA's ability to meet that demand. They book BLOCKS of time from vendors so they will be availible when they are needed. When the plan changes they use the vendors to cover flights on non busy days.
Personally, I have ferried 3 hrs to BACK UP a vendor flight.
Lack of strategic planning, poor daily operational planning, poor mx scheduling and just general 'we don't care about the cost' waste, is how you get there. Oh yes, it helps the bottom line look worse and we're in negoitations.

 

[Grizz]

Let me get this straight. You are saying that NJ has a crew and airplane sitting in, say TEB, and a pax wants to go from TEB to DAL. Is the company really flying in a vendor aircraft and crew to fly that trip? There has to be more to this. Why would NJ spend all that extra money (I do know that if a vendor a/c is used the customer only pays their contracted hourly rate).

Suen,

Once they've bought the time from a vendor, they use that rather than flying a NetJets crew that is available. The problem is, the contract they signed with the pilots many moons ago doesn't allow for that except in very limited situations. Thus the class action grievance on section 1.4 of our contract.