World Doing "Struck Work" Against ATA???

[Got2Fly]

The ATA poster was tracking our flight route and crew. Then calling them scabs. First they try to steal our seats, and now they call us scabs. Might be time to shut that door.

I think we have done enough,

Bel

What is with the "THEY" stuff?

I'm an ex ATA pilot. Was there 16 years.

ONE guy posted this on our forum. It mystifies me that because one guy posts something like this you paint the whole group with a broad brush. You also fail to mention that our own pilots took him to task over it on the same thread.

NO, we (99% of us) don't consider World or NAA guys scabs. Some of our own guys have been hired by both airlines. I wish I was one of them! We wish them all the best. We wish all the WORLD and NAA guys the best. I hope what happened to us doesn't happen to you.

Every airline has a few guys who spout off on their forum, don't they? And ALL of us have probably spouted off a time or two when we got a little miffed about something. It just seems juvenile to me to make a statement that "THEY are calling us scabs" when one poster made that comment. And besides, I think he was assuming it was a former ATA pilot who ferried it.

Got2Fly

 

[Bellerophon]

I will make it simple for you. They = ATA pilots.

They stated on several forums right after the ATA shutdown that WOA crews flew stranded AMC pax and this help management shut down ATA.

They then filed a lawsuit to lay claim to our seats.

Now they post a flight flown by World crews and call them scabs.

So instead of saying, Hey sorry about that Bel, you call me names.

Time to shut the door,

Bel

 

[stupidpilot]

I have heard that you cannot go on strike for a military charter. Anyone else know if this is true or not?

 

[1800 RVR]

Keep your lid on Mr. Thread Police (from some of your other topic condemning posts).

Just for that mister, you're under arrest! You have the right to remain silent! (might think about using it)

There, I feel like Barney Fife!

 

[bigsky]

I have heard that you cannot go on strike for a military charter. Anyone else know if this is true or not?

That is basically a true statement. world had a strike most recently in 2006 and at the time we called the union when assigned a flight....If it was a legitimate military flight we were cleared to operate it.

 

[Tristar]

I will make it simple for you. They = ATA pilots.

They stated on several forums right after the ATA shutdown that WOA crews flew stranded AMC pax and this help management shut down ATA.

They then filed a lawsuit to lay claim to our seats.

Now they post a flight flown by World crews and call them scabs.

So instead of saying, Hey sorry about that Bel, you call me names.

Time to shut the door,

Bel

OK, now you're starting to tick me off. Yes, as has already been said several times, everyplace has it's 5-10% - World, North American and Southwest do too. So let's just forget that.

Regarding "wanting your seats." Check with your EXCO, they and ATA MEC were in discussions regarding a common seniority list for months. The underlying premise behind seeking a common list for all three carriers was that GAL could and would use one carrier against another, and that having that common list would greatly reduce that threat. It could have just as easily played out the another way (in fact, most I spoke with thought North American would be the first whipping boy). The common list would have given more stability and security to all off the pilot groups.

Another significant detail you overlook is the fact that ATA's CBA required that any other carriers owned/operated by ATA/ATAH/GAL be on a common seniority list, and required ATA/GAL to go to arbitration if the single list issue wasn't resolved. It was not, and when the MEC pressed for arbitration, the company hid under the skirt of the bankruptcy judge. THAT is what the suit was about.

Let me ask this: If things were reversed, would you expect the EXCO to just walk away without attempting to enforce World's CBA? I seriously doubt that you would, and I certainly hope they would.

Personally I never thought the suit had a chance, but I'm glad the MEC did their job and attempted to enforce ATA's contract. Even if they had won in court, I seriously doubt that it would have resulted in anything other than a payment by GAL to the ATA crewmembers.

Also as has already been pointed out, numerous ATA pilot took issue with the original post. But instead of acknowledging that, you throw up more incindiary statements, many made in the shock of the hours or days following ATA's abrupt shutdown.

So instead of saying, "Hey sorry about getting the shaft ATA pilots," you say "Time to shut the door."

Your arrogance is simply unbelieveable. If the state of this industry should teach us anything, it's be humble, for there but for the grace of God go I.

Yes, there are some ATA pilots who wouldn't want to work for any GAL company, and certainly some with an axe to grind. There are also many who just want a job and are hoping not to lose their house. I am awed by the compassion you display toward those pilots [sarcasm off]. Perhaps a look in the mirror is in order, and ask yourself if you want to see that written about you if you were suddenly on the street.

Addendum: As I re-read this post, I realized I probably need to put you in the category of my first paragraph. You must be a member of the 5-10% club to come off with as ignorant and arrogant an attitude as you do. Note to self - disregard any other blathering by Bel.

 

[HalinTexas]

Tristar, don't confuse the issue with facts.

I was accused of being a 10%'er once. I think it was last summer when I was raising a stink over the fact that ATA-ALPA was dragging its feet over seniority integration. If they'd have started it in June of last year, things may turned out quite differently.

Of course, our demise rests completely on Karnik's (and Dennison's because he hired him) shoulders.

 

[Tristar]

Oh, and by the way Bel, the key word I heard used most often in discussions regarding the list integration was: Fences.

No one (disregarding the 1 or 2 nuts - and they were widely regarded as just that) I spoke with wanted your precious seat. What they did want was a viable means to protect the careers of all pilots at GAL. This would have included a means by which displaced pilots from one carrier would move to another, retaining longevity (for pay) but not seniority (relating to bidding for aircraft, position, schedules, ect).

Oh damn, there goes Bel's theory about HIS God given seat.

 

[HalinTexas]

Things can't be all that great at NAA since 'skoog' has left for a Panama job.

 

[Bellerophon]

Personally I never thought the suit had a chance, but I'm glad the MEC did their job and attempted to enforce ATA's contract. Even if they had won in court, I seriously doubt that it would have resulted in anything other than a payment by GAL to the ATA crewmembers.

You are showing your true colors. What would have happened if you won? Explain to us how you would have structured the seniority list, with fences, with the loss of ATA business? Pay attention to his answer WOA and NAA pilots.

(in fact, most I spoke with thought North American would be the first whipping boy). Are you listening to this NAA pilots?

So instead of saying, "Hey sorry about getting the shaft ATA pilots," you say "Time to shut the door." I along with most WOA pilots were saying that right up until we found out about your lawsuit.

Oh damn, there goes Bel's theory about HIS God given seat

Not God given seat, Bel given seat. Bel applied to WOA, succesfully interviewed and then moved up the seniority list to where he is today. Bel did not need a lawsuit or fast track interview.

Addendum: As I re-read this post, I realized I probably need to put you in the category of my first paragraph. You must be a member of the 5-10% club to come off with as ignorant and arrogant an attitude as you do. Note to self - disregard any other blathering by Bel.

Do what you want it does not matter to me.

Bel