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

Union mindset

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
RJ,

Actually, I do get a vote. Two, as a matter of fact. The sytem board is made up of two DALPA reps (my votes), two company guys, and an arbitrator.
 
Delta furlough grievance

FlyDeltasJets said:

Every example given are instances when the company is prevented from flying airplanes. That is clearly not the case. If it were, then ASA would not have grown by 32% YOY. You cannot claim forced majure for only certain types of airplanes.

FDJ;
This is exactly the distortion of fact that illustrates the lack of principle by which ALPA operates. Overall passenger miles are down. I think what angers you mainline guys more than anything is the fact that the natural reaction of passengers to cut back flying drives more business to the smaller airplanes. ASA is growing because it is more economical to utilize smaller planes to fly reduced loads of passengers. Passenger miles are down because the passengers have the same concern for their safety that pilots do.

The only decision passengers can make if they are concerned that Capt. Mohamed Atta will be in command of their next transcontinental 767 is NOT to fly. Pilots have the ability, through ALPA, to demand reinforced cockpit doors, sidearms and other measures. Just like the passengers reaction is a 180 degree opinion change from prior to 9/11, so is the pilot reaction. Both passengers and pilots seek to protect themselves from a deadly and unpredictable threat.

If this doesn’t qualify as force majeure then nothing ever will. Here is a quote I posted earlier and post again because it sums up ALPA’s true position very well.

"Capt. Stephen Luckey, longtime chief security official for the pilots group, acknowledged that the union's position is a 180-degree reversal. "That was on Monday," Luckey said of ALPA's earlier opposition. "We're at war now. We weren't at war on Monday."

Why are pilots allowed to seek actions that increase the chances of their survival but passengers are not? It is the threat of al Qaeda attack, and an interest in self-preservation, that is driving down passenger miles from the pre 9/11 levels, not economic reasons.
 
FDJ:
Actually, I do get a vote. Two, as a matter of fact. The sytem board is made up of two DALPA reps (my votes), two company guys, and an arbitrator.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but the DALPA reps are there to present their case to the arbitrator. The company reps are there to present THEIR case to the arbitrator. That doesn't sound like a democratic voting process to me. But let's assume I'm wrong, and it is. Ok, so 'you' vote for the grievance, the company reps vote against it, and who decides? The arbitrator will make the final ruling. It's up to the arbitrator, no matter how you slice it. By the way, I don't 'hope' you lose. I merely believe that you will.

Nothing we say here will change anything, but that doesn't give you the right to be rude and insulting when someone posts an opinion that differs from yours.
 
RJ,

Yes, you are wrong. Each of the 5 man board gets a vote. Granted, the arbitrator's is the only vote in doubt.

Secondly, I don't think that I have been rude and insulting to anyone. I'm not sure where that came from. I was a little short with Dave, and apologized for that.
 
RJFlyer,
I agree with most of your points. In your previous post, you were not being very specific. You essentially said there is a direct correlation between unionization and profitability which is not the case with Southwest. Why do you think Southwest and its' unions have a better relationship than most? I believe the difference lies within management. I would be willing to wager that if Southwest furloughed, their CEO would hold road shows in the pilot lounges and explain to the pilots why they are furloughing and answer any questions thrown at him. Leo has not made any effort to talk to the pilots and I believe his lack of interpersonal skills and ability to communicate with employees has a direct affect on the management/employee relationship. Delta management seems more comfortable suing its' pilots and violating the contract they signed rather than trying to form a healthy working relationship.
 
First, I think it is fair to say that ALPA is not perfect, and just like any institution it has problems, but it also has a lot more pluses than minuses. The simple economic fact of the matter is that it will always be a balancing act, nobody honestly wants to "kill the golden goose." This has been reflected in numerous pilot groups taking concessionary wages, or going without raises for 5 years, so the pendelum has not always swung in a take mode for pilots. Certainly it is a challenge to obtain public support for a labor group that averages over $100K, but that has always been the case, and even despite the public's view, or Congress, the economic reality has always prevailed: no fly no money for both parties that invariably an agreement is reached. But before anyone gets to that drastic level, the Railroad Labor Act, ensures that the process is a long drawn out one, that really favors management in terms of not requiring an incentive to negotiate in a timely fashion. Still, the key element to remember is that ALPA does more than simply manage strikes, it has a slew of important committees that work to enhance airline safety both from the cockpit to airline system issues. In fact, you could compare work rules and wages with major international carriers like British Airways, Cathay Pacific, and you can see why their pilots are envious of their ALPA buddies. Also SWA is unionized, but just like any labor group they are looking at reaping more financial benefits. My hats off to those guys who fly 6 hops in one day and then roll into a 10 hour layover to get up the next day and do it again, been there done that and it is tough. Finally, even more important you need to ask yourself why is there a need for pilots to be unionized? Granted a bad union can even be worse than working without a union contract, but overall, the simple result is that an organized work force has more strength to negotiate. Why is that so wrong? How do you think America's labor force got a 40 hour work week and child labor laws? The benevolence of corporate america is writ large in the Enrons, Sunbeams, Lorenzo style CEOs. etc that there should not be much pause from anyone. The simple reality is that a corporation has to serve the bottom line, yet in the process it doesn't neccessitate the total sacrifce of the individual worker there has to be some give and take. Honestly, corporate officers have it much better than all of us, with their stock options that are treated differently than an employees, better retirement plans, and of course that wonderful concept the golden parachute. My corporation is not all evil they provide me with my job, but I also provide them with my service: we both need each other, therefore I recommend a healthy vigilance of both corporate actions and union actions.

"We must hang together or we certainly shall hang together" Ben Franklin
 
Re: Need for Unions

kilomike said:
I have read with interest everyone's remarks about the union issue. I believe that we need to have strong unions to prevent workers from being cheated out of a decent livelihood.

How the (unprintable) can someone live on $7.50/hour and support a family??
Kilomike

Kilomike,
I don't know how someone can live on $7.50 an hour, but everytime one of those $7.50 an hour flying jobs opens up, there is a line of applicants a half mile long trying to get that $7.50 an hour. Now just who do you think is responsible for pilots getting paid $7.50 an hour? Heck as little as two years ago, pilots were willing to pay the airline for the privilege of working. Sorry to burst your bubble, but wages are set by what people are willing to work for. When pilots stop taking jobs that pay welfare wages, then pilots will stop getting paid welfare wages. It's pretty simple.
regards
 
Enigma,

Yes, you made a good point. If people refused to work for starvation wages, pay would go up. Unfortunately, there are too many people willing to do so.

Regards,
kilomike
 
73GDog:
Why do you think Southwest and its' unions have a better relationship than most? I believe the difference lies within management.
Yes, and with the employees as well. A good working relationship (or lack thereof) is a 2-way street. If both sides approach issues from a cooperative standpoint, instead of an adversarial standpoint, lots more gets accomplished and everyone comes away feeling like a winner. Unfortunately, that is the exception rather than the rule in the airline industry.
Delta management seems more comfortable suing its' pilots and violating the contract they signed rather than trying to form a healthy working relationship.
Who is suing, and for what? Whether they are violating the contract is obviously up for debate. And again, forming that healthy working relationship is a 2-way street. I haven't seen the Delta pilots holding out any olive branches.

FDJ:
Ok, so maybe I'm wrong about the vote thing, I'm sure it won't be the last time I'm wrong about something. But I'll repeat myself, in case you missed it: "let's assume I'm wrong. . . the arbitrator will make the final ruling. It's up to the arbitrator, no matter how you slice it." That hasn't changed, even according to you.
Luckily Dave, our furlough grievance is none of your **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** business, so I don't have to waste my time explaining our position yet again. We understand that you don't support our furlough grievance. We don't care.
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear in my earlier post. I'll try again. You don't get a vote. I don't care what you think of our case. Rant away.
Though it was directed at DaveGriffin, since he is in a similar position to many of us on this board, your comments would apply to us as well. I found your sudden lack of tact and tolerance rather surprising, and yes, rude and insulting. I am sorry if that offended you, just calling it like I saw it.
 
RJFlyer,
Delta sued its' pilots last year for failing to fly overtime. I have seen the pilots extend several olive branches since 9-11. SILs', and agreeing to delay crew rest seats for the 777 are but a couple. This aside, it is the CEO's responsibility to extend the olive branch. He is the leader of the company and the burden lies with him.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top