Union coming at Flexjet!

[HiSpeedFlyer]

Absolutley the most ignorant and asenine post you have written yet, B!

Oh, B, do tell how us your reasoning that they were sacrificed when the company overhired, the economy tanked, the company continued to spend and spend until our company was one day from solvency? Top it off, the individuals previously running this company did not see it coming?

That's right, the damned contract and the the damned union. Blame them. Its all their fault!

Get your head out of your union bashing posterior and maybe, just maybe, we can engage in an intelligent conversation. Prove your statement with facts, B, and I'll stop riding you.

Still waiting for your response, sweetie.......uke:

 

[B19 Flyer]

Still waiting for your response, sweetie.......uke:

Sorry for the delay getting back to you, I've been busy doing other things, and haven't logged in lately. I'll correct your ignorance now.

This has been discussed ad nauseum before on these boards. NJA had a higher pilot to airplane ratio than anybody in the fractional industry. As I remember, it was something like 6.1 per airframe compared to 4.3 in the rest of the industry. This equates to an additional 1.8 pilots per airframe than any other fractional in the industry.

This is driven by the contract, nothing more. If you knew ANYTHING about how to run a company, which is clear that you don't, you don't hire any more pilots than you need based on the financial requirements of the company which includes scheduling, training, duty time and benefits (vacation).

Every minute of reduction from FARS in the duty day costs the company more pilots, every additional training day costs more pilots. ANY limitation on when a pilot can operate an airplane via the work rules in the contract, costs more pilots. "Work rules" are what the financial driver is, not the wage. The wage however is driven up by the number of pilots necessary to fulfill the schedule. Ever dollar of wage is matched by taxes and benefits at most companies by around 60% or more. In other words, for every $1.00 of wage, the company has to dish out $1.60.

Manning models are driven by the contract sweetheart, and nothing more. There isn't a company on earth that is going to hire a single body more than it needs to.

No need to apologize, I accept your lack of understanding as you just being who you are.

 

[ozpilot]

As I remember, it was something like 6.1 per airframe compared to 4.3 in the rest of the industry. This equates to an additional 1.8 pilots per airframe than any other fractional in the industry.

6.1? Source?

I just ran the numbers that were current as of last Friday. The # of pilots at Netjets and the fleet size is confidential, but I can tell you it's way less than that.

 

[G4dude]

G4, any post you or I make on this board will be met by, well, you can read the fabrications, half-truths, and plain lies that follow a post. It's why I don"t post here very often. When the pro-union BS just gets overwhelming is when I try to inject a little common sense and balancing viewpoint
WL

Have you noticed how the union crazies spew vitriol in our direction, and we never reciprocate? Pretty funny. Many gold tie Union NJA guys have approached me on the road, warning me to avoid the union message board, telling me it is inhabited by lunatics. There are many who think as we do, but are afraid to say anything because of the thugs. And then they have the temerity to challenge us to use our real names. Thanks for your supporting post, warlord.

 

[warlord19]

“Have you noticed how the union crazies spew vitriol in our direction, and we never reciprocate? Pretty funny. Many gold tie Union NJA guys have approached me on the road, warning me to avoid the union message board, telling me it is inhabited by lunatics. There are many who think as we do, but are afraid to say anything because of the thugs. And then they have the temerity to challenge us to use our real names. Thanks for your supporting post, warlord.”

G4Dude, if I worked at say, FlightOptions, I would be wholly in favor of a union if it is actually as bad a place to work as it APPEARS to be. But speaking in general terms, modern unions only look out for themselves and could care less about their affect on fairness and competitveness...it’s only “give me, give me, and give me more.” I hate repeating myself, but Bombardier is one of the best places to work in Canada, and, be extension, Flexjet a good place to work in the U.S. There are times when they work your butt off, but they pay me a good chunk of change to do it. And I’ll be the first to say there are a few things that need modifying/changing. The few cry-babies we have make most of the noise here on this board and, I’m sure, will start their moaning as soon as they read this. If enough of our pilots want a union, then it will come(along with an immediate 2.5%(?) decrease in GROSS WAGES). I guess a few of our really sharp morons are posting on the bathroom walls at TEB, but I wouldn’t expect anything less. They will try to bully and intimidate you G4, but stick to your beliefs, and I’ll do the same. Be careful out there.
WL

 

[gret]

6.1? Source?

I just ran the numbers that were current as of last Friday. The # of pilots at Netjets and the fleet size is confidential, but I can tell you it's way less than that.

Number of pilots before the lay-offs...3,200...number of planes in US fleet..504...produces a ratio of 6.35...after the lay-offs it drops to 5.35. Info is probably not as current/accurate as yours. This info is derived from published reports if you look for it, so it isn't that confidential.

Fleet numbers have not been adjusted for parked a/c (don't know how many) which would drive the ratio up.

 

[ozpilot]

Gret,

The # of pilots I got from the February seniority list. Your right - not confidential, if you know where to find it. The no of aircraft is constantly changing. I got the latest number from last Fridays Business Update that is sent to all NJ pilots. That is confidential.

 

[gret]

I think a better measuring tool is the number of hours flown fleet wide divided by the number of pilots. This levels the playing field company to company as one probably has a higher utilization rate than another.

I've seen one Part 91 a/c with 9 full time pilots and they were run hard and hung up wet. The a/c did over 1,000 hours with most of it international every week and there was no way it could operate with a "standard number of crewmembers". The owner never stopped, but had to be home every Friday night regardless.

 

[gunfyter]

...I'll correct your ignorance now.

This has been discussed ad nauseum before on these boards. NJA had a higher pilot to airplane ratio than anybody in the fractional industry. As I remember, it was something like 6.1 per airframe compared to 4.3 in the rest of the industry. This equates to an additional 1.8 pilots per airframe than any other fractional in the industry.

This is driven by the contract, nothing more. If you knew ANYTHING about how to run a company, which is clear that you don't, you don't hire any more pilots than you need based on the financial requirements of the company which includes scheduling, training, duty time and benefits (vacation).

Every minute of reduction from FARS in the duty day costs the company more pilots, every additional training day costs more pilots. ANY limitation on when a pilot can operate an airplane via the work rules in the contract, costs more pilots. "Work rules" are what the financial driver is, not the wage. The wage however is driven up by the number of pilots necessary to fulfill the schedule. Ever dollar of wage is matched by taxes and benefits at most companies by around 60% or more. In other words, for every $1.00 of wage, the company has to dish out $1.60.

Manning models are driven by the contract sweetheart, and nothing more. There isn't a company on earth that is going to hire a single body more than it needs to.

No need to apologize, I accept your lack of understanding as you just being who you are.

I'll correct your ignorance now.

500 non union, support people were let go. Why was the company carrying 500 people we didn't need? They had no union contract.

I know you will find some way to blame this on the union....

 

[gret]

I'll correct your ignorance now.

500 non union, support people were let go. Why was the company carrying 500 people we didn't need? They had no union contract.

I know you will find some way to blame this on the union....

I have no idea what you wrote.

Why can't you just give up and acknowledge that differing opinions exist?