well that was quick.....

[Pervis]

Yea, but you can still go on strike under the RLA, and we are talking about NJ which I don't think is covered by RLA.

Yes, Netjets is covered by the RLA. Makes no sense, as we have little impact on a national scale, but we are. The NLRB has to release us, just like any airline, to seek self help, or in other words, strike. Do you think we would have wasted 4+ years negotiating for that POSTA in 2004 if we could have forced the issue more aggresively?

 

[fischman]

Yea, but you can still go on strike under the RLA, and we are talking about NJ which I don't think is covered by RLA. BTW FDR dealt with one strike threat in Dec 1943, the railroad union was going to shut down the rail system on New Year’s Eve, right during the build up for D-Day. FDR said let'em strike, they will all be drafted into the Army on 1-1-44 and be paid Pvt.’s wages and be forced to operate trains, if they don’t operate the trains, they go to the Pacific or Europe. Guess what, No strike.

NetJets falls under the RLA.

 

[fischman]

Not true, the threat of a work stoppage will often make a company sign a contract they know that is not in their best interest. They hope things will work out.

In 1994 the UAW pushed GM into a deal it knew it could most likely not fulfill. It gave unlimited medical and COLA to retirees. GM knew a lengthy strike might drive them into BK. They had exhausted the equity markets, and borrowing was the only solution. Much like living off your credit cards. So they bet on maybe things would work, but they knew in the end they were in trouble. The power of a potential union strike drove them to make a bad management decision. They were rescued for a number of years by selling high mark-up SUV’s. But they that market collapsed and the end was in sight for GM.

As they lost market share to foreign rivals, Detroit's auto makers and the UAW lost the power to set standards on labor costs. Yet during the prosperous 1990s, they seemed reluctant to accept the fact that their business model -- with its expensive defined-benefit health and pension programs -- was driving the domestic industry toward ruin. The UAW and its biggest employer have effectively conceded that their golden age of dominance is over.

GM executives consistently acknowledged that it couldn't be competitive in North America without a fundamental change in its labor-cost structure.

The UAW got a harsh lesson in the consequences of bankruptcy proceedings when former GM parts unit Delphi Corp. sought Chapter 11 protection in 2005, and pushed through substantial job and wage cuts under a deal subsidized by GM.

GM's obligation to provide health care for 412,356 union members, retirees and surviving spouses lies at the heart of the 1994 agreement. Even after a partial overhaul of retiree health-care benefits in 2005, GM still faced a $51 billion obligation to UAW members. Health-care obligations added more than $1,900 to the cost of every GM vehicle sold in the U.S. in 2006, a heavy burden given that many GM vehicles sold for less than competing Toyota vehicles.

Like I said, GM management was part of the negotiations. Only a BAD MANAGER would have agreed to such a ridiculous deal.

 

[pilotyip]

Yes, Netjets is covered by the RLA. Makes no sense, as we have little impact on a national scale, but we are. The NLRB has to release us, just like any airline, to seek self help, or in other words, strike. Do you think we would have wasted 4+ years negotiating for that POSTA in 2004 if we could have forced the issue more aggresively?

really, that surprises me, you do not hold out for public convenience, any way who ever said NRLB made sense. And guessing on what would have happened if had been allowed to be more agressive, it just that; a guess.

 

[rajflyboy]

You peeps need to realize that there is a giant difference between Private Unions and Public unions

The stuff that is going on within Public Unions is utterly disgusting. Making the taxpayers pay for their giant retirements whilst the rest of us have 401k's with no defined pensions > and then we have to pay for these public union defined (LIFELONG) retirements through taxation.

Good like people of Ohio because you will have much higher taxes in the future. Too bad because you sheep that live there deserve the higher taxes because you voted yes for this BS prop 2 last Tuesday.

 

[waka]

You peeps need to realize that there is a giant difference between Private Unions and Public unions

The stuff that is going on within Public Unions is utterly disgusting. Making the taxpayers pay for their giant retirements whilst the rest of us have 401k's with no defined pensions > and then we have to pay for these public union defined (LIFELONG) retirements through taxation.

Good like people of Ohio because you will have much higher taxes in the future. Too bad because you sheep that live there deserve the higher taxes because you voted yes for this BS prop 2 last Tuesday.

There is no such thing as a private union or a public union. If you mean that there are unions that represent public sector employees vs unions that represent private sector employees, then yes....but your point on public vs private is moot. However, as far as unions go, there is no difference. This is echoed by the AFLCIO as well as many labor movement organizations.

As for Prop 2, Kudos to the citizens of Ohio! Justice and reason has prevailed.

 

[pilotyip]

As for Prop 2, Kudos to the citizens of Ohio! Justice and reason has prevailed.

I suppose that is one way to look at it. However the fact the unions spent $35M to ensure the issue would be defeated, is an other way to look at it. The left leaning FDR and F. Lagardia both said public employees should not be unionized for there is no incentive on the political side to control costs.

 

[rajflyboy]

There is no such thing as a private union or a public union. If you mean that there are unions that represent public sector employees vs unions that represent private sector employees, then yes....but your point on public vs private is moot. However, as far as unions go, there is no difference. This is echoed by the AFLCIO as well as many labor movement organizations.

As for Prop 2, Kudos to the citizens of Ohio! Justice and reason has prevailed.

Well

You just proved what an uninformed SHEEP you are. There is a huge difference between a public sector union and a private sector union.

again you need to get the facts. Taxpayers are picking up these giant pensions because GOVCO cannot afford them. In the private sector these companies go bankrupt. Get a clue

 

[rajflyboy]

There is no such thing as a private union or a public union. If you mean that there are unions that represent public sector employees vs unions that represent private sector employees, then yes....but your point on public vs private is moot. However, as far as unions go, there is no difference. This is echoed by the AFLCIO as well as many labor movement organizations.

As for Prop 2, Kudos to the citizens of Ohio! Justice and reason has prevailed.

So you agree that someone making 50G a year and has to work well into his or her 60's in a private sector job with only a 401k to live on should have to pay taxes so that a public sector employee can retire at 55 and collect a pension thats well over 50G a year for the rest of his life.

Ohio is already broke >> and is going to be much deeper in debt in the very near future

 

[brokeflyer]

I am sure you believe that is true. There are other's who believe that is not true. There is long history of companies with great union contracts that are no longer in business or used BK to break the contract to ensure the companies survival. BTW With all your insights into management practices, you should move into management and make the company a better place to work; you owe it to your fellow pilots,

im retired now.