What's 357 Done For You Lately?

[Megalops]

Being in this business 25 years and working with some of the most professional crews at TWA, the crews I work with at Republic (Chautauqua, Shuttle and Republic), rank right there with them.

I want to thank the Frontier crew who decided last summer to fly through a thunderstorm enroute from IND to DEN, thank you for not killing me. Apparently the crew nor the dispatcher was too concerned with a 50,000 foot cell, right on the filed route...GOOD JOB.

Before you insult a Republic crewmember, you better know, we are a family here, and this family saved F9's butt, so come down off your pedestal F9, because all you fly are Airbus, for a failing national

Oh how I wish RAH had not saved my butt, Truly you cannot fathom that wish. This is an issue of jobs stolen and seniority jumped, this is none of your business or concern so why don't you fuk along now. Really, you do not belong on this thread.

 

[SizzleChest]

AGAIN, this had nothing to do with FAPA! This was managements decision. Do not put this great evil B-crap on FAPA's plate.

Bolo & F9 Driver:
Are you sure FAPA had nothing to do with it? Did you read the FAPA BOD email that says they support what RAH is doing? Apparently IBT has communicated with the Arbitrator about this manuever around the SLI award.

 

[BUDDHA145]

Yup, you guys finally discovered the way to unify a historically scattered and cagey group. Congrats.

Dont forget the icing of "ALPA"!! lots of peeps in the RAH side where exited about stand alone union (FAPA)... all gone now. :smash:

 

[F9 Driver]

Bolo & F9 Driver:
Are you sure FAPA had nothing to do with it? Did you read the FAPA BOD email that says they support what RAH is doing? Apparently IBT has communicated with the Arbitrator about this manuever around the SLI award.

You mean the part where our union is protecting the best interests of its members - as we are being constantly reminded that the IBT did for the RAH pilots? I believe that the discussions focused on necessary staffing levels. The company threw the IBT a bone offering up a way for their membership to move to mainline before the seven year fence expires. "The decision to add staffing, and the method of adding those pilots, was made after discussion between your FAPA representatives and senior RAH management. We appreciate RAH management’s interest in discussing these issues with us prior to the decisions being made, and we agree that the process is in compliance with the current status of the FAPA and IBT CBA’s and the IMSL award."

Or the part where the IBT reps can't seem to have constructive discussions with the RAH management, and end up walking out to beg the arbitrator to revise his award in order to give them the tunnel under the fence ("maneuver around the SLI award," in your parlance) that they thought they saw - and wrongly promised their members?

We'll see what Eischen says to this attempt to revise his award and how this goes down if the STS happens, but I'm not going to be surprised if, because of the IBT's greed and avarice, it is a full seven years plus before anyone sees squat for improvement on the RAH side of the house. You'll have the IBT to thank for it.

 

[SF340Guy]

Nevermind, not worth it.

My union speaks for me!

 

[Bolo]

You mean the part where our union is protecting the best interests of its members - as we are being constantly reminded that the IBT did for the RAH pilots? I believe that the discussions focused on necessary staffing levels. The company threw the IBT a bone offering up a way for their membership to move to mainline before the seven year fence expires. "The decision to add staffing, and the method of adding those pilots, was made after discussion between your FAPA representatives and senior RAH management. We appreciate RAH management’s interest in discussing these issues with us prior to the decisions being made, and we agree that the process is in compliance with the current status of the FAPA and IBT CBA’s and the IMSL award."

Or the part where the IBT reps can't seem to have constructive discussions with the RAH management, and end up walking out to beg the arbitrator to revise his award in order to give them the tunnel under the fence ("maneuver around the SLI award," in your parlance) that they thought they saw - and wrongly promised their members?

We'll see what Eischen says to this attempt to revise his award and how this goes down if the STS happens, but I'm not going to be surprised if, because of the IBT's greed and avarice, it is a full seven years plus before anyone sees squat for improvement on the RAH side of the house. You'll have the IBT to thank for it.

+1 Very well said!

 

[Aerosurfer]

Why a captain actually questioned if I could sit in the back while jumpseating...until I informed the gate agent...who chewed him out in front of the whole cabin and crew?

I dont even understand this quote... Were you being questioned about being able to catch a ride or did you and the 'gate agent' feel you needed to be on the flight deck for everyone else's sake? WTF would the gate agent be upset or care?

We all have our %3ers that are clueless about Jumpseating, but then again you are a mainline pilot you should know this

 

[FSIGRAD]

I don't get this, you had an issue with the Captain while jumpseating so you went crying to a gate agent who came down and chewed out the Captain for you in front of passengers? Makes no sense.

 

[SizzleChest]

You mean the part where our union is protecting the best interests of its members - as we are being constantly reminded that the IBT did for the RAH pilots? I believe that the discussions focused on necessary staffing levels. The company threw the IBT a bone offering up a way for their membership to move to mainline before the seven year fence expires. "The decision to add staffing, and the method of adding those pilots, was made after discussion between your FAPA representatives and senior RAH management. We appreciate RAH management’s interest in discussing these issues with us prior to the decisions being made, and we agree that the process is in compliance with the current status of the FAPA and IBT CBA’s and the IMSL award."

Or the part where the IBT reps can't seem to have constructive discussions with the RAH management, and end up walking out to beg the arbitrator to revise his award in order to give them the tunnel under the fence ("maneuver around the SLI award," in your parlance) that they thought they saw - and wrongly promised their members?

We'll see what Eischen says to this attempt to revise his award and how this goes down if the STS happens, but I'm not going to be surprised if, because of the IBT's greed and avarice, it is a full seven years plus before anyone sees squat for improvement on the RAH side of the house. You'll have the IBT to thank for it.

The thing is is that they want the same thing Midwest/Lynx guys got. FAPA wants a double standard. You take the vacancy and then hold whatever the IMSL allows you to do when it is enacted. Why didn't FAPA have a problem with that before but now have a problem with it when it pertains to the IBT pilots they don't wish to represent? A bit of a double standard there, eh? What's good for Lynx/Midwest isn't good for IBT guys? IBT is just "protecting the best interests of its members" by filing with the arbitrator. Since FAPA hasn't the history of experience with RAH management, don't assume that constructive talks are even possible or were/weren't had. The IBT wanted what's fair and asked to continue the same deal as lynx/Midwest... the same thing FAPA doesn't want now. FAPA is just looking to splash the pot here... and what is this "mainline" you speak of? We are one right?

 

[trainer8]

The IBT357 NC just sent out a blast e-mail regarding the FAPA-ALPA raid. Very enlightening letter, especially since one of the NC members is a former YX NC member. If fact, he endorsed the YX SLI proposal. I wonder what has changed his mind about ALPA? Hmmmmm...