Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

Republic Airways file federal suit against pilots union

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

inflightboi175

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Posts
151
Three airlines operated by Indianapolis-based Republic Airways Holdings Inc. are suing a pilots union over a website they say is damaging their reputation and hindering efforts to hire pilots.

Chautauqua Airlines Inc., Republic Airline Inc. and Shuttle America Inc. want a federal judge to issue a permanent injunction forcing the International Brotherhood of Teamsters Local 357 to take the website down.

The airlines charge in their lawsuit filed Wednesday that the site, www.RAHContractNow.org, makes several false statements meant to scare away prospective pilots.

Republic Airways and the union have been locked in contentious contract negotiations since 2007, as pilots continue to work without a new agreement.

Pilots complain they haven’t had a pay raise in more than four years, and they want better scheduling and seniority rights.

In December 2010, the union withdrew its negotiating proposals and tentative agreements, and negotiations started over again. The airlines and the union have been in mediation under the oversight of the National Mediation Board since June 2011.

Due to a shortage of pilots, the airlines said in their suit that they’ve recently begun recruiting new ones amid a very competitive market. But the union launched the website in an effort to disrupt the recruiting efforts, the airlines charged.

“As a result of these inaccurate statements,” the airlines said, “Republic has had an increase in the number of pilots who have not called back for interviews and dropped out of the application process.”

A spokeswoman for the union said it could not comment on pending litigation.

The airlines said the website falsely states that in the event of a strike they will fire probationary pilots. The airlines further charge that the union is issuing a veiled threat to prospective pilots by stating on the site that accepting jobs with the airlines would undermine the union’s efforts to disrupt their operations.

“Pilots who read this will reasonably conclude that the union may retaliate against them if they accept employment with plaintiffs,” the airlines’ complaint said.

They said it takes about three months to recruit and train a pilot. If the airlines are unable to recruit enough pilots now, they argued, service will be interrupted.

The airlines charge that the union is violating state and federal labor laws, and also allege that it is committing breach of contract and defamation.

In addition to the injunction, they seek monetary damages.

The three airlines filed the suit in the U.S. District Court Southern District of Indiana in Indianapolis.

http://www.ibj.com/republic-airlines-file-federal-suit-against-pilots-union/PARAMS/article/33538
 
Haha.. the IBT website states, "Incredibly long upgrade time. Currently 5 years."

Many many many many many many many many many years... at least five.
 
Haha.. the IBT website states, "Incredibly long upgrade time. Currently 5 years."

Many many many many many many many many many years... at least five.

5 years is an eternity when you're trying to get by on 20-25k a year while commuting to eternal reserve in Podunk, Kansas. If you dare move to Podunk, Kansas, the domicile would immediately close and you'd be displaced to some other glorious, one-horse town that's at least a two leg commute.
 
What's the reason you haven't asked to be released from mediation? After more than five years of negotiations, you have some expectation that all of a sudden it's going to get wrapped up???
 
Well RJet management better be careful too. While in section 6 negotiations there has to be a status quo. Giving new hires bonuses and a higher hourly wage against the CBA is illegal.
 
5 years is an eternity when you're trying to get by on 20-25k a year while commuting to eternal reserve in Podunk, Kansas. If you dare move to Podunk, Kansas, the domicile would immediately close and you'd be displaced to some other glorious, one-horse town that's at least a two leg commute.

Go talk to a Comair pilot.
 
What's the reason you haven't asked to be released from mediation? After more than five years of negotiations, you have some expectation that all of a sudden it's going to get wrapped up???


Just because you ask to be released doesn't mean the arbitrator will say ok, your right.. and even if they were to get released there is a 30 day cooling off period before anything can be done i.e.; strike, chaos etc...
 
I love the fact that the website is doing it's job, educating pilots. Educated pilots make better decisions. It just so happens that RAH mgmt doesn't like it when all the facts are put down on "paper" for others to see.

Keep airing out the dirty laundry, Local 357!!!!
 
I'm not a lawyer but I'm finding it hard to imagine RAH prevailing. If anything, a court would only go to further affirm that all of the points on the website are, in fact, true.

Nor is there any "veiled" threat - just the cold truth that a new-hire has zero recourse to keep one's job while siding against unfair labor practices.

Looks like truthful and sound advice to me.
 
How about the fact that management couldn't get away with the new payraises via an hourly rate since that would violate the RLA. So ,they create a signing bonus to get around signing a new contract? If that doesn't tell you how messed up things are at RAH, then I don't know what will?
 
wasnt CHA that fired pilots out of seniority back in 2001 from the saab fleet. They kept junior jet fos.

They said those pilots were probationary pilots and they just could do that.


So whats up Brian B.....You did it before, you will do it again.

Facts are facts
 
wasnt CHA that fired pilots out of seniority back in 2001 from the saab fleet. They kept junior jet fos.

They said those pilots were probationary pilots and they just could do that.


So whats up Brian B.....You did it before, you will do it again.

Facts are facts
True....although I believe it was an "act of war" clause that was implemented in the aftermath of 9/11. This basically was a loophole, like so many in the contract, to get around having to retrain pilots on different equipment. Cheaper to fire than to train pilots with longevity that would go in at a higher hourly rate and displace other pilots that would incurring moving and other various expenses.

Quite possibly one of the most immoral and disgusting things I have ever witnessed in this industry. I can think of a few almost equally detestable things that have occurred through the years in this industry and oddly enough, at least half of them have been brought on by RAH. And no matter what the reverend puts out in a memo referring to his spotless virtues,I personally will not ever forget that moot fact. He fired good hardworking pilots out of seniority to save a dollar.

I wish www.rahcontractnow.org was on Wiki so that little fact could be added to the laundry list of unconscionable things RAH has done to the very people that have built it.
 
Holy crap. They're suing you guys over THAT website???? When I clicked the link, I thought I was going to see some crazy site that had all kinds of exaggerations and perhaps questionably illegal statements like fly 30 mile finals with the gear down or stop picking up overtime or whatever. But all the site does is tell a little history and warn guys of what is going on. The Reverend can sue over such a tame site???? Is he that desperate? What's next? Is he going to sue me for discouraging my kids from getting into aviation?

Good luck to you guys. Let us know how things go with the litigation.
 
I don't generally believe in biting the hand that feeds me. But when it's dog-food soaked in anti-freeze, I say expose their ways to the prospective sled dogs.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top