Question Regarding NJA sell-off trips

[BuckMurdock1]

PREFACE: This is NOT any attempt to stir the pot, intimidate, etc. ...and I don't have dog in this fight anymore as NJA honored a resignation letter mandated by my current employer which nullified my recall rights. I've got plenty of furloughed friends still unemployed....just an honest question:

Does NJASAP collect the names of sell-off charter pilots for future consideration? I'm not gonna try to equate some "XYZ Charter" pilot who happens to be assigned to a NJA sell-off in the middle of their day to an airline pilot crossing an active picket line during strike...clearly apples vs. oranges. The fact remains, however, that they are flying trips that a furloughed NJA pilot otherwise would.

More specifically, I was wondering if NJA ever found themselves in a hiring situation again if the union could reference a list against candidates' names.

This isn't limited to NJA, btw. Any fractional with furloughs and a union/collective bargaining unit.

 

[Club ORD FO]

Aren't the charters happening because of a lack of planes (or the right plane in the right place at the right time)? has nothing to do with a lack of pilots if that is the case, and thus no furloughed NJ pilot is harmed in the making of said charter

 

[gunfyter]

According to the Berkshire annual report Netjets continues to own more jets than required for operations.

 

[OPECJet]

According to the Berkshire annual report Netjets continues to own more jets than required for operations.

We have a winner!!!

To the OP, this topic is a slippery slope, my friend. If you compile this list, you're going to find pilots on it that are also on the current NJA seniority list. These pilots have done nothing wrong (unless they purposely try to hide the fact that they're working NJA sell offs, and even then it's questionable). Your argument and sole target is the originator of these sell offs. He's soon to be out of the picture, and hopefully his caddy won't be far behind.

 

[jtf]

The only list that I have heard the union making is the one that includes the tail number and whatever other trip specific info about sell-offs so the union can try to verify whether or not the company went over their contractually agreed upon number of sell-off days. I have heard no whispers of a list of pilots of those airplanes. We understand that sell-offs are a required part of the model, but we aren't going to let the company do as many as they want and put ourselves out of work.

 

[glasspilot]

Take the OPs point to it logical conclusion: There is a strike. The company charters 100% of flights because they have to. Are those charters struck work? I'd say no as the massive cost of those charters is exactly what the union would want to force the company to the table.

InHouse and outside pilots coming in to fly QS planes would be scabs. Not the pilots of Big Wings Charter Co. flying BWCC planes.

Those are the facts as I understand them...

 

[OPECJet]

Take the OPs point to it logical conclusion: There is a strike. The company charters 100% of flights because they have to. Are those charters struck work? I'd say no as the massive cost of those charters is exactly what the union would want to force the company to the table.

InHouse and outside pilots coming in to fly QS planes would be scabs. Not the pilots of Big Wings Charter Co. flying BWCC planes.

Those are the facts as I understand them...

I would disagree with that. IF there were a strike, it would all be struck work in my book. We're not in a strike though, so the word "scab" has no place in this thread and I hope that term goes no further in it than this post.

 

[glasspilot]

That would be like saying passengers going to delta when united strikes would make delta pilots scabs. That's not how it works. The charter pilots are fine as long as they are not QS planes. This is really simple and every frac pilot should be familiar with it.

 

[jonjuan]

That would be like saying passengers going to delta when united strikes would make delta pilots scabs. That's not how it works. The charter pilots are fine as long as they are not QS planes. This is really simple and every frac pilot should be familiar with it.

Nope-sorry pal. If united strikes, and pax decide to go to delta, big deal. As long as delta pilots in your example, don't fly actual united trips. In the same vein, during a nja strike, if charter pilots then fly what would have otherwise been nja trips due to the strike, then they would most likely be strike crossers.
Not too good on the comprehension, I see.

 

[gret]

Nope-sorry pal. If united strikes, and pax decide to go to delta, big deal. As long as delta pilots in your example, don't fly actual united trips. In the same vein, during a nja strike, if charter pilots then fly what would have otherwise been nja trips due to the strike, then they would most likely be strike crossers.
Not too good on the comprehension, I see.

glasspilot comprehension is just fine. Trips are already flown on charters (pilots are on furlough) so what's the difference? The owners will just call EJM or somebody else to fly "your trip".

The mere thought of tracking down pilots working for other companies and inferring this is crossing a picket line is devious, childish, and demonstrates an inability to face reality. Many posts have been made about how great it is working at NJ and how inferior charter and other frac companies are when it comes to working conditions, salaries, safety, etc., and many of your owners closed their own flight departments which put pilots out of work...and now you want their support? Bridges have been burnt and it is highly doubtful that anyone is going to rise up and jeopardize their jobs on your behalf, especially when the odds of NJ's ever hiring again are slim to none.

Going on some type of work stoppage may be what the doctor ordered to shrink this thing down to a manageable size without the company taking a hit...after all, the pilots are the ones that won't fly and one would guess that the owner contracts have something in them that relieves the company of any liaibility.