Who's Flying Your Airplane? NO OUTSOURCING

[Twisted Mind]

Good luck with that. Taking back outsourcing from contract carriers would require contract give backs and pay cuts for the elephants. And that aint happen. No one cares about the contract below themselves.

 

[Yuppyguppy]

Good luck with that. Taking back outsourcing from contract carriers would require contract give backs and pay cuts for the elephants. And that aint happen. No one cares about the contract below themselves.

Another inexperienced teen comment talking about stuff they know little about.

 

[Jetjockey]

Good luck with that. Taking back outsourcing from contract carriers would require contract give backs and pay cuts for the elephants. And that aint happen. No one cares about the contract below themselves.

Says you? Ok expert. Go back to your desk job management troll.

 

[NEDude]

Good luck with that. Taking back outsourcing from contract carriers would require contract give backs and pay cuts for the elephants. And that aint happen. No one cares about the contract below themselves.

I do not think this Dec 1 issue is about taking back flying from outsourced carriers. This is about new flying on CAL routes in direct violation of the CAL scope clause. Management is using a branding loophole (UAL vs. CAL) to blatantly violate a contract. Other than several friends flying for CAL, I do not have a direct interest in this specific case, but all pilots should be VERY concerned over the precedent this is setting. And that goes for majors, regionals, LCCs, etc.

 

[Twisted Mind]

Damn right Continental pilots must stand up for themselves. I wouldn’t put any faith in taking back what is already lost.

 

[Raoul Duke]

Expedited arbitration is scheduled.
If arbitrator rules with company, ALPA will take it to court and seek an injunction.
If arbitrator rules with ALPA, expect Jeff Lorenzo-Smisek to ignore the arbitrator and.....ALPA will take it to court and seek an injunction.

In the mean time, its hard to see how the line pilots would have much enthusiasm for going the extra mile for operational problems.

So you are saying that ALPA is not willing to accept binding arbitration? Sounding very USAPA to me. . .

 

[Cpt Oveur]

Doesn't it sound more likely that this phased withdrawal of United Express carriers would come as the result of not granting any new contracts, and not extending any of the current contracts?

CAL pilots held the scope line, and it has been no easy task. They are an example many of us should look to. The UAL pilots, hate to say it, but have a small responsibility to it. It's not their demise, and it can be something they can and will overcome. The blame game only points to things done in the past. If you want to get the flying back on property, isn't is more realistic to work with them, phasing their planes on to the mainline property, perhaps their pilots/flight attendants/mechanics as well?

 

[Ben Franklin]

If you want to get the flying back on property, isn't is more realistic to work with them, phasing their planes on to the mainline property, perhaps their pilots/flight attendants/mechanics as well?

That sounds like a slight variation of late 1980's/early 1990's history repeating itself.

Ask any stock analyst or history professor.. history NEVER repeats itself


Sincerely,

B. Franklin

 

[Cpt Oveur]

You're absolutely right, they're going to just cut a check to each of the 70+ seaters and say "thanks for your service." I don't know how much money United-Continental has in the bank, but I would bet they don't want to spend any fraction of it paying early termination fees to Skywest Inc, Republic Holdings, Trans States Holdings, or Mesa Holdings.

 

[SuperFLUF]

So you are saying that ALPA is not willing to accept binding arbitration? Sounding very USAPA to me. . .

You know not of what you speak.

The arbitration that will take place over the violation of CAL's scope clause is not binding. It is just expedited arbitration. An arbitrator is not a judge. Because of CAL mgmt's crafty wording of their "interpretation" of the contract this is categorized as a minor dispute and must be arbitrated before it goes to court.