Unionize? Is that the question?

[KingKong]

Just wondering, based on the on going discussion on JB contract/pay, of you JBers, who would favor a union?

 

[Flying Freddie]

Nice try to divide the group. Go flame some one else. Have a nice day.

 

[KingKong]

Your right, it's probably to soon to be asking this question. However I do think, the question may come up in a more formal way, that is, a few years down the road. I respectfully retract my thread.

 

[Publishers]

Under

This is under the heading of look we have created this miserable situation that has the industry in the toliet and we want you to come do things like we do because it is so successful.

 

[enigma]

If Jetblue management deserves a union, I'm sure they will get one. If management treats their employees well, the employees will vote down ALPA or anyone else who tries to organize.

The question becomes one of whether or not Neeleman and company truly value their employees as much as they say, or if their principles are just lip service. I doubt that pay will be a reason to unionize. In other words, B6 can get by with lowballing pay as long as they don't abuse their people. When you start hearing about: favoritism in bid awards, favoritism in upgrades, people being forced to train on days off, forced to change domiciles without proper reimbursement, denied vacation when adequate reserves are in place, consistently shorted pay, etc. Then you can start to look for union activity.

The only exception I see is the possibility of unionizing for merger protection as we did at Spirit seven years ago. However, I doubt that any current ALPA carrier has the financial wherewithall to attempt a purchase of the big Blue machine. It's more likely that B6 would be the buyer, not the buyee. In that case they don't need merger protection.

Contrary to other statements, I think your question is a fair one.

regards,
enigma

 

[LAXSaabdude]

This is under the heading of look we have created this miserable situation that has the industry in the toliet and we want you to come do things like we do because it is so successful.

Right. The whole reason the airlines are in trouble is because of the unions.

You sure play both sides of the issue, don't you? When unions try to help their employees realize their fair share of the fruits of their efforts, you say they "don't create value for the company, therefore they don't deserve it".

Yet when the company is in trouble, you are the first to bash the employees for their "greed", blaming them first and foremost for the problems of the company.

Get it straight. Management manages the company. If there is a problem it is their fault. Plain and simple, no one else's.

LAXSaabdude.

 

[Publishers]

Wrong

Wrong

My comment was related to the fact that "Union" is proffered as a solution to a perceived Jetblue problem ie. to rates not yet really paid for aircraft not delivered.

Don't tell me that there are not a bunch of posters here that seem to resent the fact that the LCC's seem to be doing OK and who at every turn are suggesting that these guys need to become more like the legacy carriers.

Anyone who really understands my position knows that I believe the source of today's problems were the managements of pre-deregulation who failed to manage costs of labor as there was little incentive to do so. Of all the airlines at the time, only Crandal at AA came up with a plan to transition effectively into a non regulated market.

There are many problems with the industry, just the union and pilot issues seem to be the focus of this group.

 

[bafanguy]

I have to admit that I'm NOT a student of the subject, but as I sit here, I cannot think of one successful airline, non-union pilot group that's been around longer than 10 years ( pick any time frame long enough to have weathered an industry cycle). I'm not sure about Frontier. Someone can fill in the gaps in my knowledge of history.


This doesn't make the case for unionization. As a previous poster said, mgmt must NOT abuse the troops on several fronts. The one thing history does show is that mgmt can't seem to do this.

As an historical example, Delta had, at one time, a rep for long-term, great pilot/mgmt relations yet they had ALPA from its infancy. SWA has had a union but I don't know when it came along. Lamar Muse can't have helped things much there.

At one time, I worked for Grove Webster, a real aviation pioneer from way, way back ( look him up ). His battle cry: " No pilot of worth more than $1000 a month."

If keeping a union out depends on mgmt's willingness to work at keeping people happy, then unions it will be, especially these days. It would be nice to not need them, but this isn't the Good Ship Lollipop here.

The bloom will come off the rose at JB; it's a matter of time, unfortunately. They haven't been around long enough to tell for sure and they've got the heady rush of kicking the legacy carriers in the pants...that must be fun !!

Sad state of affairs, actually. Some situations are just the nature of the beast.

 

[Publishers]

unions

There are several types of unions in relationship to pilots. ALPA is one (Industry wide), APA at AA is a company one, Teamsters at Netjets (Nationwide multiple industry.

While there may be some good things about the various types, one thing that remains is the slowness that having organized labor brings in reacting to events. This is compounded by having more than one at companies like UAL where you may have 4 or 5 on the property. The ability to react is reduced plus everyone is looking to see how the others react. There becomes the pride factor where we want as much as the next guy and of course no one wants to get into the fact that job a may not be as important as job b.

In a heavily cyclical business, we all end up chasing the right place plus we throw all the seniority issues into the mix.

In the end, it is the reason that a new company without all the baggage has a decent chance against the established burdened down carriers.

 

[LAXSaabdude]

While there may be some good things about the various types, one thing that remains is the slowness that having organized labor brings in reacting to events. This is compounded by having more than one at companies like UAL where you may have 4 or 5 on the property. The ability to react is reduced plus everyone is looking to see how the others react. There becomes the pride factor where we want as much as the next guy and of course no one wants to get into the fact that job a may not be as important as job b.

In a heavily cyclical business, we all end up chasing the right place plus we throw all the seniority issues into the mix.

So what are you saying? When a company is downsizing, they should be able to furlough by fleet type or domicile? That would be "reacting quickly" all right, but what about the human aspect? Is it fair to furlough someone with 20 years experience in favor of someone with 2 years, just because the senior person was in the wrong place at the wrong time?

LAXSaabdude.

 

[Hugh Jorgan]

Right. The whole reason the airlines are in trouble is because of the unions.

That's like saying the reason we have crime problems is because of police.


And Enigma is right. A union won't be voted on by a group of employees who feel they are being treated fairly. Should be interesting to watch.

 

[CSY Mon]

Union or no union...?

When I started with Evergreen way back when we had no union....Fair enough, the rules were well known, don't like the conditons, don't show up for class.

Saw guys being fired here and there with no warning and no recourse.
That kind of system did keep disipline among the ranks...Sure did.

Lots of grumbling however, and of course anybody wishing so were free to leave.

I did after 3 years 'cause of some stuff I did not agree with.

Scroll forward a few years to a union carieer: We had ALPS voted in the year before, 97 or so...I did a stunt that would have gotten my arse fired with Evergreen, but the ALPA lawyers saved my arse and my pay-check.

As an individual it is hard to stand up against managment, whether ya are wrong or right.
With union backing ya sleep better.

Union is not just about mucho pay and big time contract and all that.

ALPA is no guarantee of hog-heaven...Look at Eagle.

FED-EX did not need or want ALPA as Fred paid pretty good and the whole thing was expanding, things looked good...All the Purple guys were content.
Then the Tigerman came along...Don't grab a tiger by the tail they said.

After another merger-dog-fight, ALPA came into the picture, then was voted out, and now back on property.

And the point is..?
This thread is about Jet-Blue?

The JB guys seem to be so happy about the cool-aid and the future that no union is needed.
(Relax, this ain't no flame bait, just observations from postings on this here forum)

If it stays that way, so much the better....Once the union is voted in, then there is politics on the premises...(duh), guys fighting for union power, then militant confrontations with managment, then no more warm and fuzzy feelings among the troops, 'cause grievances are still pending, and negotiations and such are up in the air.

As for the new JB EMB pay-scale.....:

Neither APA, nor ALPA did fight the early B-scales enough to kill the baby before it was born...We all accepted it and took the job anyway, hoping it would go away...It did...16 years later.

Don't tell the JB guys that they are lowering the bar, it was already done long time ago.

Ya dudes remember that the B-scales was for LIFE?

Well, the next contract, the next contract, and the next one after that chipped away on the B-scale...Down to the 5 years a while ago..Then finally gone August 2000.

"Union" being the senior guys, agreed on a B-scale for the junior guys.
Once the junior guys got p!ssed off enough, they started running for office and got things changed around.
More senior guys retired, higher percentage of voters being junior guys voted loud and clear.

History tends to repeat itself.

 

[Publishers]

said

That said, B scale was the thing that allowed American Airlines to become what it is today. If ALPA had stopped B scale, the landscape of airlines in this country would be very different.

 

[CSY Mon]

Yup, and B-scale is roaring its ugly head again with the new 100 seat rates....
(I know, it will allow for fast growth and quick upgrades, a win-win for the new pilots.... )

Anyway, we all bought into it last time and JB or anybody else is not short on applications.

Suppy and demand.