Strike Vote Called For at NetJets

[G100driver]

Either that or the Macallan was talking to him last night.

 

[TonyC]

Tony, a serious question. Are you saying that UPS as a company would be denied becoming a Fed Ex customer? I think that's what you are saying.

You are correct. During the UPS Teamsters strike of 1997, UPS did not use FedEx to move UPS freight. The UPS pilots union (IPA) supported the strike and refused to fly UPS freight. UPS freight was stuck in trucks and airplanes, in warehouses, on ramps and loading docks, etc., around the world. The only freight that was moved was moved by UPS managers.

That's not to say that savvy customers didn't flood FedEx service centers and become instant "loyal" customers of FedEx. Certainly there were many customers whose allegiances were altered.

Similarly, NetJets customers can always buy a ticket on Delta, American, or Greyhound, for that matter.

I was just wondering, if this is the case, how your illustrious leader planned to carry out his plan to move boxes on pax carriers a few years back. Thanks.

Excellent observation. You've observed one of the many reasons Fred had no chance of carrying through on those threats/promises. I assure you that it was nothing more than a publicity campaign to prevent FedEx customers from abandoning FedEx as UPS customers had abandoned UPS, and a bluff to scare pilots that didn't know any better. You simply cannot do what FedEx does every night using someone else's belly freight space. Facts aside, his scare tactics worked. You should Google "Silver Anvil" 1998 FedEx and have a read. Short version: the campaign/charade landed the PR company the highest award in public relations, the presitigious Silver Anvil award given by the Public Relations Society of America. (Interestingly, IPA won an award for their campaign against UPS. Hopefully we've learned a lot since then.)

Smoke and mirrors.




.

 

[rice]

Just a Couple of Thoughts

First off, Grizz/Deisel/El Chup,
You guys might want to get a leash around Starman before he really screws the pooch for all at NJ. You might want to check his gear for that infamous "pipe" too because it sure seems like he's been taking some heavy hits lately .
I kinda wonder if he's really an NJA pilot or just some company troll sent here to stir the pot because his rantings are so illogical. Either way it is some pretty good entertainment for a lazy day.
As I was reading this thread I started wondering about the owners and their thoughts about a potential strike. They may not give a rat's a$$ about the crews but I'm sure most if not all are aware that their aircraft may not be available for them in the near future. I would guess that most of the owners have been in contact with the company and are making some type of contingency plans if there should be a work stoppage.

Does anyone know if there is some type of escape clause for the owners if NJA cannot perform to their contractual obligations? Seems to me that a whole bunch of "Joe Millionaire" types might just bailout on the Frac plan if a strike inconveniences them. There are many other avenues for them to pursue which are just as safe and can be less expensive than NJA. What has ASAP/SU/1108 (whatever) done to communicate to the OWNERS (besides the billboard at TEB) that they regret any possible inconvenience?
I think that Starman and the others who share his views ought to spend less time accusing the 135 guys of possible SCAB issues and more time on letting the OWNERS know how much the pilots at NJA appreciate them as loyal customers.

 

[netjetwife]

How do we know they haven't communicated their concerns to the owners? I rather think some of them have read the newspaper ads and articles, billboards, brochure and picket signs produced thus far. Were any of US told of those plans before they took place? I wouldn't underestimate the abilities or determination of SU.

 

[johnny taliban]

I thought the answer to this question was fairly obvious, but since several of you have asked, I'll spell it out.

N O​

Tony,
thats great and all but I couldn't help but notice that you failed to address the union issue. You know, the union you HAVE, and the union I DO NOT HAVE. Could you please explain to me and everyother 135 driver how it is we are suppose to refuse to fly Netjet trips if our companies book them? It sure is easy to preach "integrety" and "character" when you KNOW your not gonna get fired. Takes a real big man to refuse to fly brown boxes with that union of yours .

Johnny

 

[TonyC]

Tony,
thats great and all but I couldn't help but notice that you failed to address the union issue. You know, the union you HAVE, and the union I DO NOT HAVE. Could you please explain to me and everyother 135 driver how it is we are suppose to refuse to fly Netjet trips if our companies book them? It sure is easy to preach "integrety" and "character" when you KNOW your not gonna get fired. Takes a real big man to refuse to fly brown boxes with that union of yours .

Johnny

As ignorant of 135 operations as I have been accused of being are some of you when it comes to the operation of a union. Being a member of a union does not protect anyone from being fired. It improves the odds of getting the job back, but there's no guarantee. We've had quite a few fired.


How do you refuse to fly NetJet trips? Well, I suppose you could say, "I'm sorry, but I can't fly that trip." I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I would find it too distracting to fly struck work to be able to safely accomplish the flight. Frankly, I think safety is very important, and I would hope your employer agrees.

I don't think anybody in this thread has threatened anybody else as much as they've attempted to spell things out, inform people of what's what. Once you've got all the facts, you make your own choices, you do what your conscience dictates, and you live with what you do. Nobody said doing the right thing was always easy.



.

 

[h25b]

As ignorant of 135 operations as I have been accused of being are some of you when it comes to the operation of a union. Being a member of a union does not protect anyone from being fired. It improves the odds of getting the job back, but there's no guarantee. We've had quite a few fired.


How do you refuse to fly NetJet trips? Well, I suppose you could say, "I'm sorry, but I can't fly that trip." I don't want to put words in your mouth, but I would find it too distracting to fly struck work to be able to safely accomplish the flight. Frankly, I think safety is very important, and I would hope your employer agrees.

I don't think anybody in this thread has threatened anybody else as much as they've attempted to spell things out, inform people of what's what. Once you've got all the facts, you make your own choices, you do what your conscience dictates, and you live with what you do. Nobody said doing the right thing was always easy.

Please, it's starting to get late and I just ate. So we're down to the old reliable, "let your conscience be your guide" huh ? I'd invite you to take a look at the 135 forum where it would seem everyone has already made up their mind. Your mental if you can't understand that. Distracting, I think most will find it entertaining.

As for a union getting a person their job back... That's not always a good thing, I reference your FedEx dudes in TLH. Only in a union shop would a guy expect to go back to work after wrecking a 727 while deviated from SOP. In case your wondering, NO I am not infallable, but I do operate my aircraft professionally at all times according to S.O.P. and would expect anyone in my department to do the same or expect to be terminated (especially if they totalled an aircraft in the process). That's all, done trying to enlighten dim skulls.

 

[Starman]

Either that or the Macallan was talking to him last night.

It was Bookers but the effect was the same.

 

[TonyC]

As for a union getting a person their job back... That's not always a good thing, I reference your FedEx dudes in TLH. Only in a union shop could a guy go back to work after wrecking a 727 while deviated from SOP . In case your wondering, NO I am not infallable, but I do operate my aircraft professionally at all times according to S.O.P. and would expect anyone in my department to do the same or expect to be terminated (especially if they totalled an aircraft in the process) . That's all, done trying to enlighten dim skulls.

Well, since you'll never make such an egregious mistake, it's easy to condemn those guys, right?? (I'd be interested to hear which part of SOP you think they deviated from.)

FedEx doesn't just fire guys for crashing airplanes. FedEx fires Captains for refusing to carry a jumpseater. FedEx fires Captains for refusing to ride on an airplane that he feels is in danger due to a typhoon overhead. FedEx fires Captains for making judgment calls based on the best available information at the time and at the place. FedEx fires Captains for taxiing too slowly. The list goes on. Don't lecture me on whether it's good or bad for a union to get a pilot's job back. You apprently have no clue.

Either way, it's not relevant to the topic at hand.

 

[h25b]

Well, since you'll never make such an egregious mistake, it's easy to condemn those guys, right?? (I'd be interested to hear which part of SOP you think they deviated from.)

FedEx doesn't just fire guys for crashing airplanes. FedEx fires Captains for refusing to carry a jumpseater. FedEx fires Captains for refusing to ride on an airplane that he feels is in danger due to a typhoon overhead. FedEx fires Captains for making judgment calls based on the best available information at the time and at the place. FedEx fires Captains for taxiing too slowly. The list goes on. Don't lecture me on whether it's good or bad for a union to get a pilot's job back. You apprently have no clue.

Either way, it's not relevant to the topic at hand.

Does it matter which part of the S.O.P. they deviated from?

No, not really... This has been well covered in every CRM course I've EVER had as a proven way to bend metal/kill people. Evidently the NTSB found it relavent, it was one of their contributing factors.

FedEx doesn't just fire guys for crashing airplanes ???

From the looks of their record as of late, maybe they should. Who knows, might work.

 

[johnny taliban]

I would find it too distracting to fly struck work to be able to safely accomplish the flight

Your joking right? Engine failures;level 5 thunderstorms;running multiple checklist;approaches in mountainous terrain are Noooo....problem. Do that in your sleep I bet . Brown box in back, just can't focus .

I suppose if you were working for a charter company you would just walk in to the bosses office and tell him that you have a moral problem picking up some Netjet pax up in Teterboro because they are on strike. Never mind the fact that you are not a affiliated with any union. Doubt it.

Johnny

 

[h25b]

Your joking right? Engine failures;level 5 thunderstorms;running multiple checklist;approaches in mountainous terrain are Noooo....problem. Do that in your sleep I bet. Brown box in back, just can't focus

.

Johnny

LMAO ...

 

[414Flyer]

So some NJA pilots, possibly along with the teamsters goon squad, expect that some charter pilots, many of which are paid better then the NJA pilots, be willing to fall on their swords and risk their jobs, for NJA pilots.

But those same NJA pilots accepted lower than industry pay, and now decide they want higher pay, but they want it partially by demanding other better compensated pilots jeopardize their jobs.

If that low pay is such an imperative that you expect other people to risk THEIR jobs, then they did you take those jobs to begin with?

There is just so much irony in this. This cant be the thoughts of the average NJA pilot.

 

[TonyC]

Does it matter which part of the S.O.P. they deviated from?

No, not really... This has been well covered in every CRM course I've EVER had as a proven way to bend metal/kill people. Evidently the NTSB found it relavent, it was one of their contributing factors.

The point is, you're making an accusation here (clearly an attempt to divert attention from the serious topic at hand) where you don't have a clue. Did you read anything about VGSI systems at Tallahassee? I didn't think so. Perhaps you should refrain from throwing stones at the crew until you know what you're talking about.

FedEx doesn't just fire guys for crashing airplanes ???

From the looks of their record as of late, maybe they should. Who knows, might work.

I can see we have a little communication problem here.

FedEx doesn't just fire guys for crashing airplanes. Yes, they fire them for crashing airplanes. They also fire guys for far less serious infractions; I included a few of them as examples. Hopefully, you just missed that in your haste to answer my post. I'd hate to think you're being too stubborn to try to understand.

I suppose if you were working for a charter company you would just walk in to the bosses [sic] office and tell him that you have a moral problem picking up some Netjet pax up in Teterboro because they are on strike. Never mind the fact that you are not a affiliated with any union.

Well, I'd go to the boss's office, but that's just me.

Seriously, though, that sounds like a reasonable plan. I'd also include the safety aspect. Furthermore, I'd explain that it's the right thing for "our" company to do, not just me personally. It would be in the best interest of all involved if our charter company would decline, in a polite, professional, business-like manner, to perform these "charters" until Netjets is able to resolve its labor dispute. Doing it ahead of time will allow you to save face, your boss to save face, and the charter company to save face. It prevents you from having to make a tough decision in the heat of the battle.

Companies come and go, jobs come and go, but I still have to look at the same face in the mirror every time I shave. Think about the face you'll be looking at.

 

[pilotyip]

Suppose I am a charter operator, decline the business, never, they are always looking for more revenue, many charter operators often live from the last booked flight. Pass up more money, not a likely event. Again Adam Smith and the reality of the market place make the likely hood of passing up a charter when airplanes are availalbe is very low.

 

[Gulfstream 200]

The point is, you're making an accusation here (clearly an attempt to divert attention from the serious topic at hand) where you don't have a clue. Did you read anything about VGSI systems at Tallahassee? I didn't think so. Perhaps you should refrain from throwing stones at the crew until you know what you're talking about.

I can see we have a little communication problem here.

FedEx doesn't just fire guys for crashing airplanes. Yes, they fire them for crashing airplanes. They also fire guys for far less serious infractions; I included a few of them as examples. Hopefully, you just missed that in your haste to answer my post. I'd hate to think you're being too stubborn to try to understand.




Well, I'd go to the boss's office, but that's just me.

Seriously, though, that sounds like a reasonable plan. I'd also include the safety aspect. Furthermore, I'd explain that it's the right thing for "our" company to do, not just me personally. It would be in the best interest of all involved if our charter company would decline, in a polite, professional, business-like manner, to perform these "charters" until Netjets is able to resolve its labor dispute. Doing it ahead of time will allow you to save face, your boss to save face, and the charter company to save face. It prevents you from having to make a tough decision in the heat of the battle.

Companies come and go, jobs come and go, but I still have to look at the same face in the mirror every time I shave. Think about the face you'll be looking at.

Tony,

Netjets has been scabbing our industry for YEARS.

What makes you think ANYONE is going to have a hard time looking in this "mirror" you keep talking about!!! - in fact, with thier laughable threats, it seems many charter pilots cant wait to stcik it to em' - taste of their own medicine.

Im not in the charter world, but I certainy have no respect for them...good luck on your "strike" but in all reality - WB is gonna hand them the same piece of $hit he has before. Why? - They already demonstrated their value by working for peanuts....so be it.

and if you seriously think any charter operator gives a $HIT about them, you are completly out of touch with this sector of the industry. Those guys live day to day and cant wait for more revenue...its a cutthroat business.

 

[buttercup]

So some NJA pilots, possibly along with the teamsters goon squad, expect that some charter pilots, many of which are paid better then the NJA pilots, be willing to fall on their swords and risk their jobs, for NJA pilots.

But those same NJA pilots accepted lower than industry pay, and now decide they want higher pay, but they want it partially by demanding other better compensated pilots jeopardize their jobs.

If that low pay is such an imperative that you expect other people to risk THEIR jobs, then they did you take those jobs to begin with?

There is just so much irony in this. This cant be the thoughts of the average NJA pilot.

I can assure you that it's not the thought of the average NJA pilot!! The real concern should lie with the 18 percent of the pilot sluts at NJA that voted "YES" on the TA that was inked a few months back.. The TA that offered 69K at year 5. The real concern lies with potential scabs at NJA...

 

[TonyC]

Tony,

Netjets has been scabbing our industry for YEARS.

Oh, really? Which picket line have they crossed?

Don't be so ignorant.

What makes you think ANYONE is going to have a hard time looking in this "mirror" you keep talking about!!! - in fact, with thier laughable threats, it seems many charter pilots cant wait to stcik it to em' - taste of their own medicine.

In the first place, I've only mentioned a mirror once. Where do you get the "keep talking about"? You should try to approach this in a less emotional manner.

Second, there have been no threats. Folks have simply explained what struck work is, and what the consequences of flying struck work are.

Finally, it would seem that no amount of logic will persuade you in either direction so long as you have the attitude of "sticking" it to other pilots, corporate, fractional, or otherwise. I enjoy life too much to let that kind of an attitude fester and boil. I believe it's a far more noble pursuit to lend aid to other pilots than to serve them "their due." I'd like to think there are folks out there that would help me in time of need, as well. I'm human - - I make mistakes - - I might need help someday. Aren't you human, too?

 

[Gulfstream 200]

Oh, really? Which picket line have they crossed?

Don't be so ignorant.


In the first place, I've only mentioned a mirror once. Where do you get the "keep talking about"? You should try to approach this in a less emotional manner.

Second, there have been no threats. Folks have simply explained what struck work is, and what the consequences of flying struck work are.

Finally, it would seem that no amount of logic will persuade you in either direction so long as you have the attitude of "sticking" it to other pilots, corporate, fractional, or otherwise. I enjoy life too much to let that kind of an attitude fester and boil. I believe it's a far more noble pursuit to lend aid to other pilots than to serve them "their due." I'd like to think there are folks out there that would help me in time of need, as well. I'm human - - I make mistakes - - I might need help someday. Aren't you human, too?

stick your picket line Tony, we dont need one in this sector. We dont really care! It dosent take a Union rep telling his morons how stupid it is working for 1/3 the wages he should be...they knew what they were doing.

Netjets was always thought of as a stepping stone job, an escape for CFI and Regional burnouts....they all thought they were going to United, so they scabbed the corp arena to grab some PIC jet time in a Citation. They all thought it was a temporary job. YES I said SCABBING, they work for 1/3 the wages they should. Union bull$hit or not--- thats a SCAB. Hence they have no credibility now.

So please stop the "look in the mirror" and "you have to live with yourself" BS. Its the Netjets pilots who couldn't walk by a mirror for the last 10 years...we go to work just fine knowing we make industry standard wages...didnt take some lame a$$ union to get me that, it took self worth.

and AGAIN, they had a surprising amount of support...a surprising amount....until they started threating the same "brothers" they shat on for years....

Would any of us cross a picket line (of 12 people Im guessing)...nope..why would we? ...but are WE going to stop our livelyhood to support a bunch of folks we consider SCABS already?

no way.

Trust me, Im not out to stick it to anyone...I dont fly charter and Im never going to a fractional - ever....but I simply wont support thier union banter about the 135 world...

anyways Tony...Im sure we just have to agree to disagree and move on!

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

OK, listen up all you 135 operators:
I think at this point you should do EXACTLY what NetJets union wants you to. Go to your company and suggest that they don’t take any NetJets sell-offs during a strike. Explain to your company that, long term, this is what is best for the 135 industry. If no one flies NetJets pax, some (or many) will sell, not renew, etc. GOOD FOR THE 135 WORLD. Believe me, they aint going back to airlining.

I find all this entertaining also, however, the rapid fire posts from the non-fractional guys is making us seem like a bunch of pansies. Leave it be. Let them flounder. It’s perfect!

Ace

 

[Brett Hull]

So I'm a bit confused. I work for a strictly part 91 company. Our principals have an 1/8 share of a NutJets Citation X. If they go on strike and I fly my boss, am I a scab?

We had a NutJets G-200 pilot at the hangar the other day dropping off resumes looking for contract work during his 2 weeks a month off. I should have told him we'd use him - and pay him $50 a day. He probably wouldn't have understood and agreed to it, though.

 

[Yank McCobb]

Darn right you are. In fact, you are a scab just by virtue of your posting of that picture of Brett Hull during the NHL lockout. So what you do or don't do with regards to your "principals" and their 1/8 share is moot.

 

[Brett Hull]

Dang it! I guess i'm on "the list". I played hockey last night, too. I guess I'm on the list twice.

 

[Live4flyng]

OK, listen up all you 135 operators:
I think at this point you should do EXACTLY what NetJets union wants you to. Go to your company and suggest that they don’t take any NetJets sell-offs during a strike. Explain to your company that, long term, this is what is best for the 135 industry. If no one flies NetJets pax, some (or many) will sell, not renew, etc. GOOD FOR THE 135 WORLD. Believe me, they aint going back to airlining.

I find all this entertaining also, however, the rapid fire posts from the non-fractional guys is making us seem like a bunch of pansies. Leave it be. Let them flounder. It’s perfect!

Ace

Sounds like a prefect plan to me ACE.

 

[Ultra Grump]

OK, listen up all you 135 operators:
I think at this point you should do EXACTLY what NetJets union wants you to. Go to your company and suggest that they don’t take any NetJets sell-offs during a strike. Explain to your company that, long term, this is what is best for the 135 industry. If no one flies NetJets pax, some (or many) will sell, not renew, etc. GOOD FOR THE 135 WORLD. Believe me, they aint going back to airlining.

I find all this entertaining also, however, the rapid fire posts from the non-fractional guys is making us seem like a bunch of pansies. Leave it be. Let them flounder. It’s perfect!

Ace

Someone on this thread finally used their head for something other than a hat rack! I've said before that I won't personally consider 135 guys going to their planes and doing their jobs scabs. That said, if you guys really don't care about our union or scablist, why so many venomous posts?

If we (NetJets pilots) have been "scabbing the industry for years," and NetJets resulted in the loss of your lucrative corporate/charter jobs, then the best thing you could do is support our strike by not flying NetJets selloffs. If NetJets can't get anyone to fly our pax, NetJets will shut down. This will then result in more corporate and charter jobs. Those pax will need to fly somewhere once NetJets is gone, right?

 

[fracstar]

hahaha

 

[FAcFriend]

who gets 63 vacation days a year?

 

[Ace-of-the-Base]

Someone on this thread finally used their head for something other than a hat rack! I've said before that I won't personally consider 135 guys going to their planes and doing their jobs scabs. That said, if you guys really don't care about our union or scablist, why so many venomous posts?

If we (NetJets pilots) have been "scabbing the industry for years," and NetJets resulted in the loss of your lucrative corporate/charter jobs, then the best thing you could do is support our strike by not flying NetJets selloffs. If NetJets can't get anyone to fly our pax, NetJets will shut down. This will then result in more corporate and charter jobs. Those pax will need to fly somewhere once NetJets is gone, right?

Exactly. Everyone is getting misplaced anger. Your (our) fight is not with the employees of NetJets, it's with the predatory tactics of the corporation. I say kill two birds with one stone: support your fellow pilots, while sticking it to the ones who tried to screw you out of a job (if you feel the need). Sometimes we get so wound up in the fight, we forget who we're fighting.

Now that being said, some of the NetJets guys are a little too quick to sell their 'brothers' down the road. Really selfish if you ask me. I hope they're not speaking for all of you (I know they're not speaking for Diesel).

Ace

 

[fracstar]

hahaha

 

[Starman]

Maybe I am wrong, a vacation equals 7 off, 7 on, 7 off which equals 21. If you have 3 vacations per year that equals 63. Each vacation is 21 days long.

Put down the pipe.