Why would someone qualified as a 727 capt. go to PNCL instead of taking another 727 capt. job? Are you not highly qualified for other jobs? (because he is an idiot)
Wow. You ASSume an awful lot, but since you didn't ask I'm going to go easy on you.
I was flying for a 121 Supplemental Freight operator (Express One) furloughed off the 727 just prior to 9/11, I had a 2nd UAL interview lined up and my 1st DAL interview but needed somewhere to work until they came up. Netjets offered the job but I had already flown fractional for Flexjet and they only thing I HADN'T done was 121 flag passenger operations, so I went with PCL, as they promissed lots of street CA hiring behind me. Then 9/11 happened and NO ONE was hiring for a while.
So yes, I had a lot of options for about 90 days, then after that was just lucky to have a d*mn job. Thanks for asking.
I know of a few cargo companies in need of current qualified 727 capts. and could make about 90+k a year. And have more days off than PNCL. By the way, you sure do have a lot of posts on this webboard. Maybe its time to grow up and have a real life.
This board is my distraction and way to keep in touch. I type about 130 wpm so responding to someone like you takes about 5 minutes then I'm back to wrenching on my cars (hobby).
Oh, by the way, I'm 35 and currently an F/O at airTran, but thanks for the heads up on the 727 jobs. There weren't any for a long while then the ones that WERE available were all expat gigs or had very few (if any) guaranteed days at home. No, thanks.
While partially correct on your interpretation of law, you are still missing the points here.
Just as you are missing mine?
The issue of striking has never been tested. Each and every time the company will make a plea for an injunction. And like it happened in both the NWA FA case and the Mesaba case, the judges have ruled in favor of the company. So there is no "automatic right".
You are correct except for that last part.
If you will actually READ the judge's ruling, in both cases, the judges SPECIFICALLY avoid any discussion of the RLA. In both cases, the judges treat the employees as creditors and as such, the company has automatic protection from them and can restructure their contracts as they see fit.
This was also the first time in history (speaking in general terms of the last 3-4 years) that right to strike under bankruptcy was ever tested. We lost. That doesn't mean we would automatically lose once the company came OUT of bankruptcy. Different set of circumstances, as MSA could no longer consider its employees 'creditors' and claim a protected status under bankruptcy law.
As for the company seeking an injunction from the NMB, maybe you have failed to notice that 2 of the 3 members of the NMB are Republicans, one who used to be a lobbyist for NWA. So they are going to support the pilots' struggle? Riiighhhhtt.
I hadn't failed to notice, I have over a dozen pending grievances still at PCL. I'm well aware of the current status of the NMB. HOWEVER, the NMB must follow established RLA wording to the letter. Contracts are open to interpretation, most the RLA is not and has established case history for many decades and that wording would have to be re-written and new case history established in order for the NMB to require the pilots to return to work.
Unfortunately, we won't know whether it would have worked or not.
And what you are suggesting is for the Mesaba pilots to wait it out, let the company exit from bankruptcy, battle in the courts for another year or so. ALL UNDER AN IMPOSED contract.
Yup.
I know, easy for me to say from my position. The problem is NO ONE has the fu*king balls to make a stand. PM any of my previous PCL coworkers and ask them how many times I've flat refused assignments I felt were in violation of the contract, at risk of being suspended or terminated.
I don't believe in 'Fly Now, Grieve Later', I don't believe in capitulating to 'Fight another day'. And I'm willing to put my entire career on the line to do it. I ask my fellow pilots to do the same, or don't bother even talking to me about how upset you are about the company or the contract.
If you don't have the balls to act on all the chest thumping that was going on here for the last year +, then I don't want to hear your b*tching.
The difference between imposed and agreed contracts is a couple of percent of cost savings under a 49 saab fleet. The real savings is 5% in contract rates. But the big difference between imposed and agreed is a 14.2 Million dollar claim for the pilots.
5% for Saab rates, how much of a cut for those CRJ's you're supposed to be getting? How much do you lose in COLA increases every year? How much in lost COLA and reduction from current book rates cumulative by the ammendable date? My bet is cumulative over the entire term it's something of a 15-18% loss over current book.
Seeing as how the PNCL claim was purchased by Goldman Sachs at 40 cents on the dollar, Mesaba pilots have a decent chance at getting a lot if not all of their money back (depending on seat and aircraft). How does that compare with the concessions taken by the NWA pilots?
[/quote]
Suuuurrrrrre. If you believe you'll ever see more than 5 cents on the dollar into your pocket, you need to put down the crack pipe.
The ALPA spin team is evidently still alive and well...
Slam away, I gotta get back to wrenching...
