What's the problem with GJ?!?!

[Dumbluck]

If your not rated in one of the above aircraft, "the animosity caused by you being on the aircraft constitutes a safety of flight issue."


that is one of the best most proffesional statements I've read, (maybe not the reason for denial)

Not to Hijack the thread, but a couple of times while trying to JS, I've heard the Captain of the flight, ruthlessly tear a js'r a new hole. uncalled for and completely unproffesional. when I say uncalled for I mean swearing and name-calling if it had happened in a bar there would've been punches thrown

 

[SkyBoy1981]

As far as the "THIS is where you mainline folks failed to secure your own jobs by standing up and demanding scope to keep your jet flying"

Let me play GJ pilot:

"You didn't take this pay and these work rules so now your regretting right"?

Sound familiar?

You're comparing apples to coconuts. TSA does have scope preventing alter-ego's from taking their flying. The formation of G0-Jets is a clear and blatant violation of TSA pilot's contract with management. You're comparing that to regional jet pilots that took away mainline flying. So tell me where YOUR contract was broken? Oh wait...it wasn't...because there was never anything in your contract to limit it to begin with. So my question is, how can you hold RJ pilots at fault for taking your flying when you never restricted it to begin with? There is a very clear difference here.

 

[Terry Hunter]

You're comparing apples to coconuts. TSA does have scope preventing alter-ego's from taking their flying. The formation of G0-Jets is a clear and blatant violation of TSA pilot's contract with management...

Pardon the confusion, if the GJ action has an ounce of illegitimacy, wouldn't ALPA be waiting on the court steps to file a protest first thing in the morning? I'm not clear on why ALPA is not pursuing legal action, or are they?

I'm sorry that TSH exploited this loophole in the TSA scope. Fight TSH mgmt, you must; not GJ pilots.

 

[h25b]

The formation of G0-Jets is a clear and blatant violation of TSA pilot's contract with management.

Well you may think so, but this TSA pilot knows otherwise... Please read and if you have a problem with that take it up with him. I mean, heck, he works there ???

h25b- that info. has been posted on here by myself and several others a long time ago. YOU ARE RIGHT. It does say Trans States Airlines, Inc. Which I along with many others here thought was the company we worked for. I had no idea there was a f'n Trans States Holdings. They don't tell you that sort of thing in the interview.

 

[SkyBoy1981]

Well you may think so, but this TSA pilot knows otherwise... Please read and if you have a problem with that take it up with him. I mean, heck, he works there ???

I see. Well...if they indeed do not have the language in their contract that ALPA has been leading everyone to believe that they have, then I would have to agree that TSA's pilot group is at fault for that. I really haven't seen any hard evidence that shows one way or the other.

 

[fuelflow]

The TSA MEC, not the pilots through a vote, ratified the contract in 2000 with the weak scope in it.

The real crime was when the MEC extended the contract for 2 years around 2003, again with no pilot vote, understanding full well what happened with Mesa/Freedom and Chautauqua/Republic. They are fighting a losing battle and have convinced the TSA pilots that they will win.

 

[h25b]

I see. Well...if they indeed do not have the language in their contract that ALPA has been leading everyone to believe that they have, then I would have to agree that TSA's pilot group is at fault for that. I really haven't seen any hard evidence that shows one way or the other.

I guess we can only go with what someone on the inside says. If you haven't already come to the conclusion that ALPA hasn't a clue, then you're too far gone for my to save you now.. They're just following the standard ALPA playbook. Draw everyone out until the last possible moment, throw the regional pilots to the wolves, and collect as much revenue in dues as possible.

Here's another person that sees clearly... Read below....

The TSA MEC, not the pilots through a vote, ratified the contract in 2000 with the weak scope in it.

The real crime was when the MEC extended the contract for 2 years around 2003, again with no pilot vote, understanding full well what happened with Mesa/Freedom and Chautauqua/Republic. They are fighting a losing battle and have convinced the TSA pilots that they will win.

 

[BoilerUP]

Here's another person that sees clearly... Read below....

I can't believe you are giving credibility to anything fuelflow says by saying he has "clarity" on the issue. You are blaming the pilot group and union leadership for this "failure", when it wouldn't be an issue if TSA management had some basic ethical practices and beliefs toward their employees.

TSA could have easily given the Go Jet flying to the hard-working Trans States ALPA pilots that helped earn the profits to get Go Jet started in the first place...but they chose not to. TSA management offered ALPA a contract extension which amounted to concessions on an already outdated CBA to secure the Go Jet flying, and this extension essentially offered seniority integration and job protections to Go Jet pilots. TSA ALPA wisely told them to pound sand. If TSA pilots had approved this POS concessionary contract extension, it would have further validated the regional whipsaw, emboldened management throughout the industry, and TSA pilots would have been called worse than Mesa pilots had ever dreamed.

This is not a slippery slope argument, this is fact.

Just because HK and his cronies used a loophole in a CBA doesn't make his actions right or ethical, even though they might be legal. TSA pilots have every right to fight the existance of Go Jet, as it is a major threat to their jobs and will be used as as a whipsaw (it already has been). Go Jet pilots accepted employment knowing this. The outcome of the Single Carrier Petition will solve this issue once and for all.

And we're all still waiting to see details of Go Jet's current pay agreement and IBT contract negotiations.

 

[tjsatter]

And we're all still waiting to see details of GJ's current pay agreement and IBT contract negotiations

.

There is no current pay "agreement" They are paid whatever the company feels like which is less than the TSA pilots get for the same work in a 50-seater. For starters they get block rather than block or better. For United flying into ORD this alone typically makes a 10% difference +/- in pay. They have worse bennies, less days off, less vacation and they are employed at the will and whim of management: they can be fired at any time for any or no reason.

There is no IBT contract negotiations. The premature recognition was rescinded and anything further is on hold pending resolution of other issues. The single carrie thing before the NMB for starters.

As time goes on it seems clear that the contract the "Holding" company was trying to bypass was the TSA/CBA. The thing with AMR/APA was extra gravy.

tj

 

[h25b]

I can't believe you are giving credibility to anything fuelflow says by saying he has "clarity" on the issue. You are blaming the pilot group and union leadership for this "failure", when it wouldn't be an issue if TSA management had some basic ethical practices and beliefs toward their employees.

Let me give you some advice... Never leave your current job to work at ANY non-union job. Your rose-colored, "they shouldn't do that to me" attitude while noble, is pretty pathetic...

If the pilot group/MEC at TSA signed on to a weak scope clause who else are you supposed to blame ??? Since when did TS management ever have basic ethical practices ??? Gee whiz man, get real. It's never been that great which is all the more reason they should've paid more attention to their scope clause language. If you put your faith in to management to "do the right thing" you're asking for trouble and if that were the case there'd be no reason to have a union in the first place... For crying loud junior, what are you paying union dues for then ???