The Brits show Americans the way. STRIKE!

[Rez O. Lewshun]

My post was not intended that the rla needs to be thrown out, but amended. There has to be some process to allow self help at some point. This in itself is weighted against labor with the endless time frame the nmb is allowed to park negotiations.

Welcome to the United States. Now that you've put your eggs into Labors baskets, it sucks to realize that those who control power and wealth don't give a damm about you and I. Kinda like a 7 year old kid realizing she is black in 1930s Alabama. In one epiphany, innocence is lost.

I do not believe ALPA has any desire to change the status quo either. ALPA is in my opinion a failed organization when it comes to representation.

ALPA is the best shot we got. You think ALPA sucks. But your reasoning is because you do not understand CapHill and you cannot manage your expectations. You'd better learn to like ALPA because nothing else is going to get a career for you.

If you look at the history of the profession there is nothing better. ALPA is like govt/democracy... it sucks, but it is better than the alternative.

The reason why the RLA sucks in part is because pilots won't follow the leadership out of the foxhole. One pilot charging management like a maniac doesn't cut it. 70+% pilots charging management gets the job done and the RLA moving. You chiding ALPA helps or hinders?

The two things and the ONLY two things that motivates management to give us the CBA we deserve is govt pressure and grassroots movements from its employees (pilots). ALPA is simply the deal broker once management cries uncle.

 

[Beaver79]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8411214.stm

British Airways cabin crew vote for Christmas strike

British Airways cabin crew have voted overwhelmingly in favour of strike action in a dispute over job cuts and changes to staff contracts.
The strikes are set to begin on 22 December and run until 2 January.
Cabin crew voted by nine to one in favour of the strike action, with an 80% turnout.
BA's chief executive Willie Walsh said the decision was "cynical" and betrayed "a lack of concern for our customers, our business and other employees".
Len McCluskey, assistant general secretary of the Unite union, said: "It goes without saying that we have taken this decision to disrupt passengers and customers over the Christmas period with a heavy heart."
He stressed that the union was keen to continue negotiations.
"We will wait, ready to meet, anytime, anywhere, 24 hours a day, to try to see if we can resolve the dispute."
Contacting passengers

BA's chief executive Willie Walsh said the company would be doing everything it could to limit the effect of the strike action.
"We are going to look at all our options [to minimise disruption]; operational, legal and industrial relations options," he told BBC News.
BA offered passengers who are booked to travel during the strike period - or 48 hours either side of it - the chance to rebook their flights at no extra cost.
Otherwise it said it would inform customers of changes to its schedules by email or SMS text.
"We will use the contact details supplied at the time of booking, so we ask customers to please ensure these are correct and up-to-date," BA said in a statement.
Mr Walsh said he had told the Unite union he was available for talks, but was uncompromising on the central issue of the dispute.
"The changes that we introduced in the middle of November will not be reversed. Those changes enabled us to offer voluntary redundancy to 1,000 cabin crew and those people have left the business."

Cuts concerns

Unions are unhappy about job cuts and changes to staff contracts, which they say they have not been consulted on.
BA has reduced the number of cabin crew from 15 to 14 on all long-haul flights, and has frozen pay for two years.
Unite said that the cuts involved imposing "significant contractual changes" on cabin crew employees, resulting in extended working hours, and reduced wages for new starters.
BA says it urgently needs to cut costs to ride out its dire financial situation. Last month it revealed it had lost £292m in the first half of the year - the worst period in its history - and said it would have to cut a further 1,200 staff.

Go ahead and strike. Let me know how that works for you. Chances are with todays economy and political (read as gov't interventionist attitude), a labor action would lead to: A) dissolving the airline due to overwhelming costs vs revenues or B) the president stepping in to say the action is "illegal" (in his view since the gov't believes it knows best). Either way, it will probably not end well. But hey, go for it and "prove" your point - and if you are hungry at the end of it, don't whine.

 

[Lear70]

Go ahead and strike. Let me know how that works for you. Chances are with todays economy and political (read as gov't interventionist attitude), a labor action would lead to: A) dissolving the airline due to overwhelming costs vs revenues or B) the president stepping in to say the action is "illegal" (in his view since the gov't believes it knows best). Either way, it will probably not end well. But hey, go for it and "prove" your point - and if you are hungry at the end of it, don't whine.

Suuuurrrre, skippy.

The shareholders of Airtran (just as an example) would likely not take kindly to dissolving a $700 Million company that has, historically, generated over $100 Million a year in profits for nearly the last decade (and is projected to continue doing so) for pilot raises that would still leave the company profitable.

The same goes for many regionals. There's simply no way a CEO would allow the company to go out of business over reasonable employee raises. It's called "Fiscal Responsibility to the Shareholders". A CEO who violated that would find him/herself not only out of a career (no one would ever put that person at the helm of a major airline again) but quite likely on the end of a personal lawsuit from the shareholders.

Running a bankrupt company into the ground over a strike is one thing. Running a perfectly profitable company into the ground over it is something else entirely. Something that a couple decades or so in the 121 world tends to each one, as does the study of the airline industry history.

Lastly, Obama isn't going to intervene in any carrier's work stoppage except for one of the legacies and even then he can't label it "illegal". It's called "The Railway Labor Act". When released into self-help, it's as legal as it gets.

Now if you want to talk about Obama intervening and ordering flight crews back to work, under "hardship of the traveling public" or something similar, that's another story entirely. However, that doesn't last forever, either. Unless he wants to attempt to amend the RLA, he'll eventually have to allow the strike if the parties can't come to an arrangement.

This is the system under which we live. I suggest you study it better if you want to be a part of it. A defeatist attitude such as yours which leaves no room for the improvement of our industry isn't really welcome. Seriously.

 

[waveflyer]

Well said Lear(!)
there is no time for that attitude.

 

[bubbers44]

Clinton stopped the last AA pilots strike 20 minutes after it started. I was on the picket line. It wasn't a forever stop but it made a statement that we had to resolve the situation. It was resolved and we ended up resolving the situation. Looks like we have done a full circle and will have to do it again.

 

[Dumb Pilot]

Go ahead and strike. Let me know how that works for you. Chances are with todays economy and political (read as gov't interventionist attitude), a labor action would lead to: A) dissolving the airline due to overwhelming costs vs revenues or B) the president stepping in to say the action is "illegal" (in his view since the gov't believes it knows best). Either way, it will probably not end well. But hey, go for it and "prove" your point - and if you are hungry at the end of it, don't whine.

Put down the management koolaid dude, BA is not going anywhere and their employee groups will keep on earning more than double what you earn simply because they don't believe that nonsense you just posted, attitude like that is the reason why we are the lowest paid airline workers of all the industrialized nations

 

[pilotyip]

stop that!

Go ahead and strike. Let me know how that works for you. Chances are with todays economy and political (read as gov't interventionist attitude), a labor action would lead to: A) dissolving the airline due to overwhelming costs vs revenues or B) the president stepping in to say the action is "illegal" (in his view since the gov't believes it knows best). Either way, it will probably not end well. But hey, go for it and "prove" your point - and if you are hungry at the end of it, don't whine.

This is FI, stop dealing in reality, this board lives on hope, not reality

 

[Lear70]

This is FI, stop dealing in reality, this board lives on hope, not reality

Nothing of what he posted is reality, and the last part of what he posted is actually completely incorrect regarding the RLA.

Just because you're anti-union doesn't mean you need to support that guy/gal's incorrect assumptions about the RLA and profitable companies. I thought you were more interested in "reality" than rhetoric?

 

[pilotyip]

Not anti-union

Nothing of what he posted is reality, and the last part of what he posted is actually completely incorrect regarding the RLA.

Just because you're anti-union doesn't mean you need to support that guy/gal's incorrect assumptions about the RLA and profitable companies. I thought you were more interested in "reality" than rhetoric?

I was supporting his call to go ahead and strike. I am a union realist, as a former ALPA and Teamster member I have seen what unions can and can not do. They can not make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear.

 

[Lear70]

I am a union realist, as a former ALPA and Teamster member I have seen what unions can and can not do. They can not make a silk purse out of a pig’s ear.

Can't argue with you there, but totally capitulating to management isn't the answer, either...

Unfortunately, not every airline can be like SWA in terms of management/pilot labor relations. 99% of them these days require some type of force to get the process moving. I don't make the rule book, I just live within it.