No comment on ASA PBS LOA yet?

[ASApuppy]

I feel we should be offering PBS and dual-qual in exchange for One-List. But, I live in a tree. Personally, I don't think it will ever be entertained unless Inc. wants it. The catalyst for this might come from a pilot shortage, if that ever occurs. Inc. will need to have difficulty in filling classes. Once that happens, they might realize the efficiency of swaping crews around rather than transfering airframes. From the standpoint of costs, imagine how many less reserves would be required corporate-wide if we had PBS, dual-qual, and One-list.

Only three more years until the penduleum starts swinging back this way. Gotta hope Congress enacts law requiring ATP, too.

 

[aircombat]

I feel we should be offering PBS and dual-qual in exchange for One-List. But, I live in a tree. Personally, I don't think it will ever be entertained unless Inc. wants it. The catalyst for this might come from a pilot shortage, if that ever occurs. Inc. will need to have difficulty in filling classes. Once that happens, they might realize the efficiency of swaping crews around rather than transfering airframes. From the standpoint of costs, imagine how many less reserves would be required corporate-wide if we had PBS, dual-qual, and One-list.

Only three more years until the penduleum starts swinging back this way. Gotta hope Congress enacts law requiring ATP, too.

They wouldn’t have a choice to “entertain” the idea if we threaten to strike. We can wait around for this to possibly come from Inc itself. That might be wishful thinking and would definitely be on their terms. Don’t forget if this goes down on Inc or Skywest’s terms it would be at best a partial staple.

We are spending all of our time giving up our leverage in order to try to become cheaper than Skywest. That’s nearly impossible and what will we be left with to negotiate a merger with?

I bet they will be hitting us up with the dual-qual in the near future. And sadly we will still be more expensive.

 

[OCP]

They wouldn’t have a choice to “entertain” the idea if we threaten to strike. We can wait around for this to possibly come from Inc itself. That might be wishful thinking and would definitely be on their terms. Don’t forget if this goes down on Inc or Skywest’s terms it would be at best a partial staple.

We are spending all of our time giving up our leverage in order to try to become cheaper than Skywest. That’s nearly impossible and what will we be left with to negotiate a merger with?

I bet they will be hitting us up with the dual-qual in the near future. And sadly we will still be more expensive.

How would we be able to strike just because one company, who is non union, won't merge lists? The process to strike is a LONG process with many many legal loopholes to jump through. You can't just threaten to strike any time you want to.

 

[aircombat]

How would we be able to strike just because one company, who is non union, won't merge lists? The process to strike is a LONG process with many many legal loopholes to jump through. You can't just threaten to strike any time you want to.

For the most part you can strike anytime you want and for any reason you want. Information on strike action can be found here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_action There might be several more minor restrictions imposed from the Railway Labor Act, info found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_Labor_Act . I’m not saying it would be quick or easy. During section 6 this summer would be a perfect time to address these issues. Giving them PBS now would just throw away that leverage and postpone the section 6 talks. I don’t know why people make up excuses why we "can’t" do something instead of trying to find a way to do it.

 

[buscap]

For the most part you can strike anytime you want and for any reason you want. Information on strike action can be found here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strike_action There might be several more minor restrictions imposed from the Railway Labor Act, info found here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railway_Labor_Act . I’m not saying it would be quick or easy. During section 6 this summer would be a perfect time to address these issues. Giving them PBS now would just throw away that leverage and postpone the section 6 talks. I don’t know why people make up excuses why we "can’t" do something instead of trying to find a way to do it.

While I didn't check your link, I doubt if you are taking the RLA into consideration.

 

[aircombat]

While I didn't check your link, I doubt if you are taking the RLA into consideration.

From how I understand the RLA you can’t strike outside of section 6 for “minor” issues. Defined as contract language disputes. However you can strike for “major” issues unless you have a no-strike clause in your contract. Yes you will have to deal with the NMB but you can still start the process. This is all a moot point because section 6 is going to start in a few months. We most certainly can make this our number one issue then and threaten to strike over it.

 

[JoeMerchant]

aircombat...You need to do some more research on the RLA...You're not even close...

 

[LazyLightnin']

aircombat...You need to do some more research on the RLA...You're not even close...

I think a lot of folks stopped following this thread about 40 inaccurate "aircombat" posts ago.

 

[aircombat]

What’s so inaccurate. I love how many statements are made without details. Are you saying we can’t strike in section 6 after being released by the NMB? If not why did we vote for strike authorization last time?

 

[PCL_128]

It's sad when I long for posts by JoeMerchant simply because he's far more informed than the likes of aircombat.

You can't strike until the NMB releases you, and they won't release you until you've spent several years negotiating in Section 6 and have reached an impasse (as determined by the NMB). Even then, you are NOT allowed to strike over scope issues. Demanding a merger is considered a scope issue, so you would not be authorized to strike by the NMB for that issue. Scope is considered a "permissive" area of bargaining, and you can only strike for "mandatory" areas of bargaining, such as pay, scheduling, retirement, etc. You could spend 20 years in Section 6, and the NMB still wouldn't allow you to strike if your stated demand was one seniority list.

Please read the RLA and get informed. It's really getting embarrassing.