RAH BB an Undercover Boss

[The Drizzle]

Interesting assertions. I like the cut of our jib, but believe me you don't want what was TA'd. Having seen only 2 sections of what was TA'd before they suspended negotiations, it was nothing short of absolute garbage.

 

[chqflyer]

Should be interesting though indeed. Somebody did the math and you'll need all the F9 guys, all the ME and Lynx guys and a couple hundred of the RAH guys just to get the drive started. I didn't double check the person's math, seemed like an interesting prospect. It'll be close.

I personally think that management has already succeeded in segregating us. That the F9 guys will always see the OG RAH pilot group as a lower entity. It already seems from our perspective that you are receiving better treatment, but that could just be 5 years of reserve under our contract talking. I'm as beat down as a dog can get.

I don't think you'd be hard pressed to find well over a thousand native RAH pilots up for a new union drive. The pain in the posterior would be the IBT threatening any one attempting to organize or discuss a card drive. The IBT has it in the bylaws that no teamster can EVER think of leaving the teamsters or face termination of employment as well as personal fines and legal action. Several fine individuals are currently under gag order until I believe 2020 due to a previous effort to form an in-house union.

 

[B727FA]

Just goofing with ya! Cheers to you.

No worries, brother...

 

[Jetjockey]

Just tell him his wife called. and she's ovulating. He'll run home to make another baby. What's the deal, she has another kid for every airline he acquires????

 

[Flying Illini]

There are several people "doing the math" and 199 RAH guys is not an accurate number. It is not even close, but that really doesn't matter.

I have witnessed several union drives, all of which have included the IBT in some fashion. Their tactics are very predictable, but that really doesn't matter either.

Here is the thing that everyone stuck in this quagmire needs to realize, and quickly.

If we all end up IBT, then we are all stuck with the same total POS contract that you gents have today. There will be a few MINOR changes to accommodate the airbus, but there will be an amalgamated CBA that is going to be based upon the Chautauqua 2003 POS CBA.

The pilots currently flying under the Chautuaqua CBA will get nothing in return, and the pilots flying under the current FAPA CBA will get hammered.

Then the IBT will need to restart negotiations from scratch because they have been sitting on their arses for years doing nothing with regard to the Section 6 negotiations. Had the IBT been negotiating the entire time, and hammered out some TA's or possibly even ratified a new CBA we could at least be working off of a relatively new sheet of music. Unfortunately, this is not the case.

RJET management is completely wetting themselves at the notion of the IBT prevailing in a union drive. The Company has already established the fact that they can do whatever, whenever they want.

VERY Very important part starts now......

Where do you want to start negotiations? Using your POS 2003 CBA as the baseline or using our CBA amended in 2009 with pay raises going out until the amendable date?

Whose scheduling section should we begin to negotiate from? Chautauqua or F9?

Retirement? How much does your DC plan pay? I get 6% on top of the 5% 401k match. Do you think you will be able to secure 10+% in retirement benefits immediately if we start with your CBA (hint, your current CBA doesn't even have a section titled "Retirement"). I realize that you get a company match on your 401k but the total package is less than half that of F9.

I think you get my point. I don't care what the "Union" is called when all is said and done. What I do care about is work rules and pay. Period. You have none of the above and we do.

If IBT prevails we are stuck with the IBT CBA.

If FAPA prevails we are stuck with the FAPA CBA.

If a third party prevails we are stuck in status quo and start with a clean sheet.

Anything is better than IBT prevailing. There is no excuse to give any support to a cause that will extend an already poor CBA.

I have said this a number of times but it bears repeating, I do not imply any negative tone towards the pilots flying under the IBT CBA.

This is just a logical, common sense decision. If you enjoy your current QOL, pay, and benefits under the current IBT CBA then you should vote for the IBT.

If you think that you would be better off starting from scratch or using another more mature CBA as the baseline then you should not vote for the IBT.

In the simplest terms, the current IBT members will get nothing if the IBT prevails except a continuation of the 2003 contract and an inferior baseline for future negotiations. If ANYONE else prevails the current IBT members will receive the benefit of negotiating from an enhanced position based upon the other CBA's in play.

Lastly, Hellar and Bedford and Oz and FH want this to eventually be an IBT shop. What does that tell you about the effectiveness of the IBT?

Interesting reading but it seems to contradict what I've been told by an F9 pilot and a former YX guy. They said that contract amalgamation is done in front of an arbitrator and we can pull any section from any of the current contracts to form our new contract. (FWIW~The F9 guy mentioned that the current RAH scope section would be retained) They both said amalgamation has has nothing to do with who the union is at the time as there will then be a card drive for representation.

My concern with a FAPA independent was mentioned above (and voiced by more than a few of my colleagues), that all former F9/YX pilots will forever see the original RAH pilots as lesser individuals and that will be reflected in the representation.

As far as ALPA goes. No way. Their merger policy is DOH. What if RAH goes out and acquires another airline that is ALPA? The majority of the current RAH pilots would take it on the chin.

Is IBT the right answer? Well, the old IBT certainly wasn't the right answer. The "new" IBT? It's far too soon to tell and they have such a large mess to clean up from the "old" IBT that it will more than likely be a year or two before we can make an accurate judgment as to how the IBT is doing.

 

[StaySeated]

ALPA merger policy is NOT DOH.

This quote is from the updated (5/09) merger language:

"Factors that must be considered in constructing a fair and equitable integrated seniority list in no particular order and with no particular weight include but are not limited to: career expectations, longevity, status and category."

If you read the last 20 years of SLI arbitrations you will find that "career expectations, longevity, status and category" has become the standard criteria.

If you don't want to read a bunch of old arbitrators decisions you can wait a month or two and read Eichen's decision. Career expectations, longevity, status and category will be reiterated a number of times.

You also stated the following...

"Interesting reading but it seems to contradict what I've been told by an F9 pilot and a former YX guy. They said that contract amalgamation is done in front of an arbitrator and we can pull any section from any of the current contracts to form our new contract. (FWIW~The F9 guy mentioned that the current RAH scope section would be retained) They both said amalgamation has has nothing to do with who the union is at the time as there will then be a card drive for representation."

There WILL NOT be an amalgamated CBA prior to a card drive. You CAN NOT blend CBA's until there is a representation election. PERIOD.

Per the RLA and the NMB, everyone's CBA will remain in effect if there is a new union elected. This status quo period will continue for the entire time that a new CBA is negotiated.

The only way there will be an amalgamated CBA is if the NMB determines that a Single Transportation System exists and the IBT prevails in the union drive.

 

[CX880]

If BB really will be on Undercover boss, how dumb do you have to be not to recognize your own CEO? Especially since his face is all over the headlines. Will they dress him up to look Amish?

 

[Flying Illini]

ALPA merger policy is NOT DOH.

This quote is from the updated (5/09) merger language:

"Factors that must be considered in constructing a fair and equitable integrated seniority list in no particular order and with no particular weight include but are not limited to: career expectations, longevity, status and category."

If you read the last 20 years of SLI arbitrations you will find that "career expectations, longevity, status and category" has become the standard criteria.

If you don't want to read a bunch of old arbitrators decisions you can wait a month or two and read Eichen's decision. Career expectations, longevity, status and category will be reiterated a number of times.

You also stated the following...

"Interesting reading but it seems to contradict what I've been told by an F9 pilot and a former YX guy. They said that contract amalgamation is done in front of an arbitrator and we can pull any section from any of the current contracts to form our new contract. (FWIW~The F9 guy mentioned that the current RAH scope section would be retained) They both said amalgamation has has nothing to do with who the union is at the time as there will then be a card drive for representation."

There WILL NOT be an amalgamated CBA prior to a card drive. You CAN NOT blend CBA's until there is a representation election. PERIOD.

Per the RLA and the NMB, everyone's CBA will remain in effect if there is a new union elected. This status quo period will continue for the entire time that a new CBA is negotiated.

The only way there will be an amalgamated CBA is if the NMB determines that a Single Transportation System exists and the IBT prevails in the union drive.

Sounds like I received bad info. Thanks for setting the record straight.

 

[Captain Morgan]

If BB really will be on Undercover boss, how dumb do you have to be not to recognize your own CEO? Especially since his face is all over the headlines. Will they dress him up to look Amish?

No, that would be sacriligous, you would have him dressed as a Cardinal or the Pope. All kidding aside, let's just all acknowledge this for what it really is, publicity.

 

[chqflyer]

No, that would be sacriligous, you would have him dressed as a Cardinal or the Pope. All kidding aside, let's just all acknowledge this for what it really is, publicity.

It really is just a free publicity stunt on some obscure tv show watched by about 12 people. If this was really worth anything, Gary Kelly would've already been all over it.