XJ to get 17 CRJ200's from 9E

[ImbracableCrunk]

My MEC Speaks for Me! (Just not to me!)

No one on the inside other than the MEC (and they're not talking much lately) knows anything at XJ.

Yeah, didn't we have some issues with some MAIR letter or something? Gosh, I swear there was some big to-do. . . . Lawyers and judges or something. Musta been my imagination.

 

[GRAAB HIRBOUBI]

Xj

I am just under 500 seniority. At 5 crews per planes its simple math
36+17+49=102 planes = about 500 captains.

It will take about 2 years to get all the 705's so you tell me when to realistically expect upgrade. Attrition and more aircraft are the only variables that MAY accellerate the process. Then I expect a pretty bad reserve schedule in MEM. NOPE!

Yes the MAIR letter was supposed to be in court in the week of April 20th or 25th. Nobody in the MEC will answer email or phone or ALPA board posting or calls on the subject.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Can you post any link to your information on "single carrier" with the NMB?

Yup.

I can also let the RJDC toads continue to feed $$ to Haber while he "researches" the issue...and advises them that he can't find a conclusive definition.

I choose Option B.

Everything I have seen from ALPA and the NMB states that "single carrier" only deals with the "who represents" part of the equation.

Wow! (And by "Wow!" I mean "who cares?") Merger "expert" N2264J tells us it simply means ALPA is considering petitioning the NMB to have ALPA represent a carrier it's represented for decades. If you can't tell, I think this is about the coolest thing I've ever seen on FI.

He and his cabal of victims are angry! They're militant! They're in italics! And not just any italics...but extra slanty italics to indicate they are really angry.

The Single-Carrier status petition issue simply illustrates that they,

A. Don't know what they're talking about.
B. Have hired incompetent counsel.
C. Probably have extra-small weiners.

Can you site any examples of single carrier petitions between groups who were represented by the same union?

I appreciate your thirst for knowledge (I recommend you drink at the Fountain of Knowledge instead of just gargling), but if you think I'm gonna provide any information to the know-it-all RJDC bumblers...you're wrong.

 

[ImbracableCrunk]

Occam, you might've spoken to this topic on other threads, but in this thread, you've mostly been dookie-slinging and name calling.

I don't know much about the RJDC and ALPA, but you, sir, seem mighty belligerent.

I appreciate your thirst for knowledge (I recommend you drink at the Fountain of Knowledge instead of just gargling), but if you think I'm gonna provide any information to the know-it-all RJDC bumblers...you're wrong.

And that's why we call it Flight Info, folks.

 

[N2264J]

If your Labor-savvy lawyer (snicker) knew what he was talking about, he wouldn't need to ask the question, would he?

I guess you realize that lawyers sometimes ask questions during depositions for purposes other than their own professional education, don't you?

Comments made by the former President of ALPA...doesn't change the fact that the NWA MEC doesn't need to file anything to have Mesaba represented by ALPA. That's your assertion...and it's wrong. You know it, and I know it.

You know, all the messages between us are still here if someone wanted to take the time to go back and read them. You are aware of that, aren't you?​

My asserton is that the NWA MEC needs a mechanism to bring Compass into ALPA. The NMB isn't bound to the NWA contract so a single carrier petition is filed which would include Mesaba since they're a wholly owned subsidary. It has nothing to do with a single list according to the former president of the ALPA and his legal staff.​

It is amusing, however, at the amount of time it took you to throw your buddy Duane under the bus in a effort to cling to what's left of your credibility with the Mesaba pilots.​

It must be situational Semper Fi.​

 

[PCL_128]

My asserton is that the NWA MEC needs a mechanism to bring Compass into ALPA.

Guess again. Shouldn't you be writing another check to that arrogant twit Haber?

 

[JoeMerchant]

Yup.

I can also let the RJDC toads continue to feed $$ to Haber while he "researches" the issue...and advises them that he can't find a conclusive definition.

I choose Option B.



Wow! (And by "Wow!" I mean "who cares?") Merger "expert" N2264J tells us it simply means ALPA is considering petitioning the NMB to have ALPA represent a carrier it's represented for decades. If you can't tell, I think this is about the coolest thing I've ever seen on FI.

He and his cabal of victims are angry! They're militant! They're in italics! And not just any italics...but extra slanty italics to indicate they are really angry.

The Single-Carrier status petition issue simply illustrates that they,

A. Don't know what they're talking about.
B. Have hired incompetent counsel.
C. Probably have extra-small weiners.



I appreciate your thirst for knowledge (I recommend you drink at the Fountain of Knowledge instead of just gargling), but if you think I'm gonna provide any information to the know-it-all RJDC bumblers...you're wrong.

You can't win this argument now.... either ALPA has knowingly mislead the ASA and CMR MECs by advising that single carrier petitions are only for representation, or you are wrong and ALPA advised ASA and CMR correctly..... either way you look bad....

 

[JoeMerchant]

Guess again. Shouldn't you be writing another check to that arrogant twit Haber?

OK PCL, what say you? ALPA has advised the ASA and CMR MECs that a single carrier petition is only for the purpose of determining a bargaining agent. If both carriers are already ALPA, then it does no good. Occam disagrees and believes it is the first step to merging.

Would you care to enlighten us with your understanding? Is PCL going to file a single carrier petition for Colgan? What is ALPA telling PCL?

 

[PCL_128]

OK PCL, what say you? ALPA has advised the ASA and CMR MECs that a single carrier petition is only for the purpose of determining a bargaining agent. If both carriers are already ALPA, then it does no good. Occam disagrees and believes it is the first step to merging.

Your buddy N2264J stated that Compass isn't ALPA until a single carrier petition is filed. ALPA is already recognized as the official bargaining agent of NWA. I know the NWA ALPA rep that led the negotiations for the Compass CBA. My understanding is that the NWA MEC is considering the possibility of running Compass as part of the NWA MEC rather than have it as a separate unit.

Is PCL going to file a single carrier petition for Colgan? What is ALPA telling PCL?

Sorry, but PCL ALPA's bargaining strategy is not something that we broadcast publicly. Neither is our confidential legal counsel from ALPA.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Your buddy N2264J stated that Compass isn't ALPA until a single carrier petition is filed. ALPA is already recognized as the official bargaining agent of NWA. I know the NWA ALPA rep that led the negotiations for the Compass CBA. My understanding is that the NWA MEC is considering the possibility of running Compass as part of the NWA MEC rather than have it as a separate unit.

Your buddy Occam said that a single carrier petition is the first step in merging carriers and that the NWA MEC was persuing it with NWA/Compass/Mesaba. Others, including ALPA national, have pointed out that a single carrier petition is only for determining the bargaining agent, and that if all carriers are already represented by the same agent, a single carrier petition does no good.

Enlighten us.... what is a single carrier petition for? Does it do any good for the NWA MEC to file one if NWA, Compass, and Mesaba are already represented by ALPA?