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

Stop extending Nja brothers

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
Register   Log in
DC-4 said:
Hey Cav
First off thank you very much for doing that, second if I may ask what fleet are you on, just wondering.
Click to expand...

No problem. I couldn't look in the mirror if I did. My fleet? Well, we have lot's and lot's of them and we do a lot of work.
 
I get the feeling standing here on the sideline, that even if all the blue hairs were grounded, it wouldn't bring a furlough back. This emt would probably let the house of cards cave in before they admit defeat by bringing just one furlough back. It would make hiring waaaaaaay down the Road a bit more interesting.
 
av8trinabarrel said:
I get the feeling standing here on the sideline, that even if all the blue hairs were grounded, it wouldn't bring a furlough back. This emt would probably let the house of cards cave in before they admit defeat by bringing just one furlough back. It would make hiring waaaaaaay down the Road a bit more interesting.
Click to expand...

I'm with ya on the fact that even if this or the rumor I've heard (age 65) came to pass (not likely anytime soon since our fine "leaders" in DC can barely keep the 'essential' parts of the Gov't open, let alone get anything done legislatively), It certainly wouldn't trigger a NJA recall by itself. I'm just curious regarding rough #'s, straw poll, whatever: how many blue-haired gummers do you have aged 66+ currently. 100? 150? 200? More?
 
Interesting commentary...you want help by not extending, then you are disrespectful, and wishing harm, to the older gentlemen who are still working and being asked to extend.

If I were in their position, you have made my choice much easier.
 
gret said:
Interesting commentary...you want help by not extending, then you are disrespectful, and wishing harm, to the older gentlemen who are still working and being asked to extend.

If I were in their position, you have made my choice much easier.
Click to expand...

Unless my airline folds, I don't need the help and will stay put. As I've said before, I have many friends who would probably go back when recalled because they happen to be working a crappier gig than NJ and for less $. It is mainly for their sake that I keep my dog in this fight (and generally out of principle also).
Aside from using the term "gummers", etc. ..how am I being disrespectful? When I was 16 and my grandpa called me a "whippersnapper"; I took no disrespect. I'll be a gummer one day myself. Sooner than later if my brushing habits deteriorate. I submit that these people, by continuing to work as PIC of a high-performance business jet (in many if not most cases with a full military &/or airline pension) for "fun" or "extra $" ARE BEING GROSSLY DISRESPECTFUL TO ME AND THE OTHER MIDDLE-AGED WORKING STIFFS WHO ARE SIMPLY TRYING TO FEED THEIR FAMILIES! They further disrespect safety itself when they choose to continue to fly while knowing that their skills/reaction time/memory/physical capabilities have deteriorated to a marginal level with respect to this job. They take advantage of the knowledge that they will not be busted out in training for fear of age-discrimination perception. I know--I saw it first-hand during my short time there.

You say I'm trying to "harm" them?! #1- I'm not a congressman who will be potentially voting in subcommittee on a measure to enhance aviation safety and bring the Pt. 135/91k world in parallel with Pt. 121 in this regard.
#2- Forcibly leading someone who is too stubborn, greedy or arrogant (thinks that the universal effects of aging could never apply to them) to the appropriate situation of enjoying the "golden years" with family and exploring other hobbies/interests ...including flying--(privately, in your own plane) is "harmful"...how?!??

Just to put this into perspective guys; there is a huge push for age 65 retirement legislation in the TRUCK DRIVING INDUSTRY! Can't be too long before legislators collectively apply the two against a common-sense 'reasonableness' test.
 
Buck...the point was that when people ask for help by not extending, you don't kick them in the nuts at the same time.

The age issue does have to be dealt with...hopefully soon and professionally. We all should all want this as eventually, it will apply to everyone because the clock just keep ticking.:)
 
Xcorporate said:
"Asking for help by not extending".....solidarity at its finest.
Click to expand...

Gret- this post kinda says it all. Nobody should have to ASK! This should be a basic solidarity-based staple in any aspect of this or any industry; if anybody on furlough, DO NOT P/U open time or extend. Period.

Whole point of this whole thread. Admittedly, I contributed to a little thread drift with a semi-related subject.
 
Thanks all for posting and keeping this going.


Solidarity is what this is all about.

All for the greater good of the pilots at Nja
 
Figures lie and liars figure.

MetJets loves figures....
 
jetlag7 said:
"Officially" the count is 10 so far....

Unofficially, they exceeded 11 some time ago....
Click to expand...


NJASAP should have spent more time and resources figuring out a way to track this stuff better... They've had 4 years to figure out a way.

As far as I can tell they rely on:

1) Pilots on the road "noticing" a sell-off

2) the company "not lying" about it...As if people actually believe the company can't figure a way to make the numbers work in their favor...

Instead NJASAP spends more time and resources on bylaw referendums, votes, polls, internal bitching, government affairs etc etc etc..
 
Here is my conspiracy theory on how they can always not have 11 days of selloffs:

On days when demand is marginally high but they believe with no glitches all flights could be handled internally ... when possibility of sell off comes on one of those days... Sales can act as a charter broker. "Don't use your share time for this trip ... it would be better for you to charter and save your card time or share time for another trip/day.

So they sell an EJM charter and it never gets recorded as a selloff because it never reduced the time on a card or share.

Thats my theory because otherwise I do not know how they can possibly have not sold off on more than 11 days this past quarter. I also believe EJM sales and NJ sales may have combined staff.

I don't know if there is any way to defeat this strategy
 
There is not. That is why they keep doing it. It is also why DS wanted to renegotiate the sell off clause. Then the union stonewalled him on that. DS actually said if they did not it would destroy nja. Then all of a sudden he dropped it and sell offs have not even been close since. Why do you think that is. Not to mention our weak d-ck union will do nothing anyways they have a volunteer in a non existent part of our union tracking it. On that part if the union is called the FWG.
 
DC-4 said:
There is not. That is why they keep doing it. It is also why DS wanted to renegotiate the sell off clause. Then the union stonewalled him on that. DS actually said if they did not it would destroy nja. Then all of a sudden he dropped it and sell offs have not even been close since. Why do you think that is. Not to mention our weak d-ck union will do nothing anyways they have a volunteer in a non existent part of our union tracking it. On that part if the union is called the FWG.
Click to expand...

Pretty much sums it up....

I knew the sell-off clause wouldn't be worth it's weight in paper when NJASAP was soliciting pilots to report suspicious activity at FBO's.

Or when Union guys would come to the furlough side saying things like, "Don't worry, the company wouldn't dare lie, it would cost them too much in grievance litigation"... yeah, because grieving sell off lies (which can't really be proven anyways) and then waiting 6 months or more to go to arbitration always works in the pilots favor:laugh:

Anyway, I wouldn't be too disappointed when sell-offs equal 10 (or 11) but fall short of the magic #12.....
 
One easy way to track this going forward, it seems, would be to work into the future CBA that ANY revenue-producing flight on behalf of NJA (which includes contracted sell-offs) MUST carry the call-sign "ExecJet". Then it would be a matter of easily scanning flight aware.com on a frequent basis for any "ExecJet" call sign which is not a QS.
 

Share this page

Latest posts

Latest resources

Latest media

Carbon Cub FX-3 Shenandoah Valley
Carbon Cub at Kittyhawk
FX-3 in the backcountry
IFR Panel in a Carbon Cub FX-3
Cub-Provo-UT-c.jpg
Back
Top Bottom