So was B19 right or wrong?

[B19 Flyer]

Hey, your sarcasm is not smart sarcasm, it is ignorant sarcasm because it is not applicable to reality. You're obviously not up to date. B19 does not count and is a lunatic. Opposing views? No problem. B19 dipsh;t? Problem.

Actually, anybody with an opposing view to unions is lit up on these boards because we are the minority. I'm not a lunatic. I have the exact same opinions of any manager responsible to keep any company in the black that supports the company as a whole and not one specific work group.

While you guys support your union and hate my opinions, the simplicity is that I say what current managers struggling through keeping a company afloat can only say in private. They all feel the same way as I do but can't say it out loud because it's not politically correct in a union environment. As I am no longer in a union company, I'm free to express my opinions. You just can't believe that my opinions are that of the majority of employees.

Call me all the names you want.. but I'm a valid representative of the majority within your company that don't belong to a union.

 

[B19 Flyer]

Give me a break Mr. Neutral, BLAMING UNIONS FOR EVERYTHING IS ALL B19 DOES!

I don't blame unions for everything, I point out the lies and conflicts that are caused by unions that union members would prefer not to be exposed.

These lies and conflicts are why those companies with unions are doomed to suffer turmoil and ongoing conflict. This isn't about blame, this is about what is best for you and your family.

A stable company without a union can adjust to the market place quickly and be able to protect it's assets.

There is no such thing as a stable company with a union. There is constant turmoil, negotiation of a contract, scope clauses limiting growth, work rules that don't allow economical use of assets and most importantly, a fixed cost that can't be adjusted to flow with the ebs and flows of an economy. Unions would rather see lives ruined than give a concession to a contract.

Once upon a time unions were there to protect those that could not fend for themselves. These were employees that had no choice in how they fed their families and were limited by geographical boundaries.

Every person on this board made a choice to be in aviation. The original union concept employees didn't. Unions have evolved from protecting those that couldn't protect themselves to a bargaining position that has no morals or ethics and stifles the core values of the company.

I don't blame unions for anything, my tag line has always been, "Be careful what you ask for."

Those at NJ and FLOPS have unions and have greater turmoil than all the other fracs combined. It's a quality of life issue, and those that are non-union may make little less in pay, but they can hold their heads high knowing that they didn't screw the company and the other employees in the process. They know they are part of the company, not against it. Unions are only out for themselves and could care less about any other person or customer of the company.

 

[B19 Flyer]

I am calling your BS, yes, AGAIN. The rest of your post is negated by your bull$h|t line.

Show exactly where "every" union pilot on this board.....hell, just show where any pilot said that NJ would never furlough. I suspect that you won't because you can't. Instead, you'll just be the usual coward that you are and try to, in used car salesman fashion, obfuscate your way out of being called out on the crap that you spew.

Why do you keep trying? You've failed as a pilot and now you're a failure as a management lackey.

I didn't fail as a pilot, and I also haven't failed in any aspect of my career. The exact line about pilots saying that NJ would never furlough was in direct response to how rich the clientele was and how they were so rich they could weather any economy. I guess we all know that the facts were quite different, eh?

 

[B19 Flyer]

**Disclaimer: The following is not meant to cast aspersions on the employees or clients of any fractional aviation company.


This seems to be the favorite phrase of the month by our friend. I guess he subscribes to the political concept that if you tell a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. Let's review, shall we?

Union​

Netjets: Chaos! Mayhem! Red ink! Er....um...oh yeah, that was 2009, the worst economy in three generations. Cost-cutting? Absolutely. Layoffs? Unfortunate, but necessary. Profitable again? I'll wait for the 10K filing at the end of the year but I'm expecting a pre-tax profit north of $175 million. Long-term? Still the biggest and best marketed but it all depends on the economy and that won't improve much until there's a major shift in fiscal politics.​

Flight Options: Chaos! Mayhem! Red ink! Oh yeah, that was BEFORE they were union. And the worst economy in three generations. Beat up employee group? Definitely. Crap management? For sure. Profitable again? Who knows but at least the company can market labor peace. Long-term? Find somebody that actually knows how to run a company and they might have a shot.​

Non-Union​

CitationAir: Growth! Profits! Hiring! Er....um...oh yeah, not so much. Parked airplanes. Laid off pilots. Rumors of sale or shutdown. And the worst economy in three generations. Long-term? Haven't a clue.​

Flex Jet: Growth! Profits! Hiring! Um....er....second verse, same as the first. Long-term? That Challenger 300 is a sweet airplane and is the best thing going for Flex. They will be back. Just as soon as the economy is.​

Avantair: Growth! Profits! Hiring! Well, yeah. I'm not Rain Man but I can do some math: (Turboprops cheaper than jets) + (Worst economy in three generations) X (Rich folks that won't ride the airlines anymore) = Successful niche market model. Long-term? Depends on how aggressive their management wants to get in challenging the market leaders.​

Bottom line: The success or failure of any fractional operation depends far more on the talent of its management and the health of the economy than whether a union is on the property. I'm not a member of a union (for about another 218 days) and I'm not a big fan but I fail to see a reason to rail incessantly against them. I know its futile to argue facts with our friend but hey, somebody has to.​

Remember... NJ was too big to fail.....that what everybody kept telling us. It's clear if it wasn't backed by BH, the massive lost from last year probably wouldn't have been taken so lightly. (lightly being only 500 furloughs and a smoke and mirror approach to golden pilot parachutes)

You forget that the last round of Part 121 industry leading contracts all met the same fate about 8 years ago. They were all cut back to "reality".

This one is no different, it will follow suit just like those did. The FLOPS contract will become closer to the real norm once the adjustments are made.

 

[waka]

I didn't fail as a pilot, and I also haven't failed in any aspect of my career. The exact line about pilots saying that NJ would never furlough was in direct response to how rich the clientele was and how they were so rich they could weather any economy. I guess we all know that the facts were quite different, eh?

Yes, you did fail as a pilot and you're a failure now at presenting the anti union opinion as a lame mid level manager.

I am calling your BS, yes, AGAIN. The rest of your post is negated by your bull$h|t line.

Show exactly where "every" union pilot on this board.....hell, just show where any pilot said that NJ would never furlough. I suspect that you won't because you can't. Instead, you'll just be the usual coward that you are and try to, in used car salesman fashion, obfuscate your way out of being called out on the crap that you spew.

Why do you keep trying? You've failed as a pilot and now you're a failure as a management lackey.

Yep, in your usual fashion, you dodge the question and/or request for proof to your lunacy, obfuscate and hope nobody calls you out, AGAIN.

This is how you approach life. This is why you're a failure.

 

[waka]

I'm not a lunatic.

"I'm not crazy" Charles Manson

:laugh:

I have the exact same opinions of any manager responsible to keep any company in the black that supports the company as a whole and not one specific work group.

No, you don't. There are actually managers that recognize a group's right to organize and willing to work with the union. They know that cooperation and compromise on both sides make the company successful.

You just can't believe that my opinions are that of the majority of employees.

Like the other poster said, you're a lunatic! This is self-delusional as you have ZERO idea as to the opinions of the employees at my company or anyone else's. Unless you can present some scientific polling data, as usual, you're just talking out of your @ss.

Call me all the names you want.. but I'm a valid representative of the majority within your company that don't belong to a union.

Do you think that repeating BS makes it more valid? You have no idea about the opinions of any company but your own.....probably not even your own actually. You're not a valid anything.

 

[gutshotdraw]

Hahahahahahahahaaaaaa

Guess that answers the question of this thread. WRONG

 

[fly4funcrj]

SWA seems to come to mind. They have a union and have worked with mgmt (for the most part). In return, just about everyone there seems happy AND SWA has posted 30+ years of profits.

 

[gutshotdraw]

It was made quite obvious today that our friend is wrong. Dead wrong. On many counts. But he will NEVER admit it. Happy trails 19.

 

[B19 Flyer]

SWA seems to come to mind. They have a union and have worked with mgmt (for the most part). In return, just about everyone there seems happy AND SWA has posted 30+ years of profits.

You can't use the SWA contract as an example. Nobody else has had the courage to attempt it because it's so closely tied to profit sharing. No profit, no sharing, low pay. Instead, most union contracts want the money up front so there is no "giving" back when things are not good. The SWA is one of the few out there that actually works because it flows with the business.