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

UAL wins temporary injunction against pilots

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

Skippy

Well-known member
Joined
Jan 14, 2002
Posts
561
9:55 am this morning

ual was going back to the judge to grant a PERMANENT injunction, as if the temporary one wasnt enough.
 
Court issues injunction against United pilot union

United wins injunction against pilot union over sick-outs blamed for summer cancelations

  • <LI class=byline>Joshua Freed, AP Airlines Writer
  • Tuesday November 18, 2008, 9:55 am EST
MINNEAPOLIS (AP) -- United Airlines said on Tuesday that a federal judge has barred its pilot union and four pilots from activities that disrupt the airline's activities.


United had accused some pilots of abusing sick time and refusing to fly extra hours. Sick-outs in particular are not allowed under the Railway Labor Act, the federal law that governs airline labor relations.
United said the judge in Chicago found that the actions of the Air Line Pilots Association had violated the act, and issued a preliminary injunction on Monday against four pilots and the union. United said it would next seek a permanent injunction.
Over the summer United blamed the pilots for the cancellation of 329 flights between July 19 and July 27. The carrier said that cost it about $8 million in lost revenue and $3.9 million in operating profit. United filed the lawsuit on July 30.
A spokesman for the United branch of ALPA did not immediately return a phone message seeking comment.

"While there is always room for discussion and tough give-and-take about our business, deliberate actions that unfairly or unlawfully impact our customers and employees -- and that keep us from achieving our full potential -- will not go unchallenged," Chief Operating Officer John Tague said in an e-mail to United employees.
 
"refusing to fly extra hours"? Since when were pilots EXPECTED to fly extra? Management keeps the staffing artificially low, counting on the greed flyers. When they don' t show up, guess what is going to happen...canceled flights due to lack of crews.
 
Oh boy....just one more nail in the coffin. Guess I may not be going back someday.

What a f'ing joke.

Good luck everyone. Tilton is there to stay....or kill what's left of a once great company.

RV
 
"refusing to fly extra hours"? Since when were pilots EXPECTED to fly extra? Management keeps the staffing artificially low, counting on the greed flyers. When they don' t show up, guess what is going to happen...canceled flights due to lack of crews.

Yeah, one would think that. Unfortunately, the judgment says otherwise. Basically, the company came up with several years' worth of data concerning flying voluntary overtime (we call it JRM/SRM) and said, "look at these bad, bad pilots! Before we had XXX amount of pilots accepting JRM/SRM assignments, and now we only have X amount of pilots accepting it. That's a job action!"

And that's what sucks about the RLA. If the company can prove to a judge that past practices were X and now they're Y, even if such past practices were completely voluntary, that can be construed as a job action. One example of many as to why the RLA needs to be at least brought into the 21st century, if not abolished altogether.

Also, as many of you will eventually read in the memorandum opinion and order, you will see posts from "private, password protected" internet forums used as evidence AGAINST said posters AND their union. Be very careful about what you put into writing either in e-mail form or on internet forums.
 
Yeah, one would think that. Unfortunately, the judgment says otherwise. Basically, the company came up with several years' worth of data concerning flying voluntary overtime (we call it JRM/SRM) and said, "look at these bad, bad pilots! Before we had XXX amount of pilots accepting JRM/SRM assignments, and now we only have X amount of pilots accepting it. That's a job action!"


The problem with an analysis like that is past practice might have been before we took all the cuts in BK and pilots were only flying 75 hours a month. Easy to pick up overtime when you are only working 12-13 days a month. Kinda hard to expect the same amount of overtime flying when lines are built flying 16-17 days a month. Momma don't like it.
 
Didnt the pilots shoot themselves in the foot by pushing for a sickout? I assume that is why 4 pilots were specifically named by the Court/UAL?
 
Fu(K the RLA.

Airplanes don't move without pilots.

Its time we had some respect.

That is the exact kind of attitude that got the pilots in trouble in the first place! Fly what you want (or not), fly the contract, and don't trouble yourself with what any other pilot chooses to do or not to do--UNLESS your MEC has specifically directed a legal withholding of service.

If we would all just adhere to those general guidelines, no company could ever get anywhere with their stupid complaints.
 
Gotta love this business... If 2009 is a brutal year for the economy, watch UAL change drastically (i.e., merger, major restructuring via sold off parts or liquidation). I am glad I got out when I did.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top