B19 Flyer
....
- Joined
- May 8, 2006
- Posts
- 1,595
You guys are all making me look like a genius.
ALL OF YOU STATED THERE WOULD BE NO JOB CUTS AT NETJETS BECAUSE THE CLEINTELE WAS SO RICH THEY COULD WITHSTAND ANY DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY.
Guess I was right again, and you union mongers were wrong again.
The union has done nothing but concede that the contract was too expensive and they were forced to find a way to reduce staffing to pay for the “industry leading contract”.
I’m not looking foolish here, this is exactly what I stated would happen. Is it a different method? Yep, but there will still be jobs lost, union and non-union, families will be hurt.
While the idea normally only happens in a non-union arena, the concept of buyouts isn’t new. Before all of you have a group hug with each other, you really should let it play out to see of the results match in reality what they do on paper. If they don’t get the numbers they need, it will get fugly.
Over the many years (and recent months) I have stated:
Unions will sacrifice pilot and non-pilot jobs before they will concede pay.
Usually, it’s the bottom third, and while this is creative, this is nothing more than a very expensive buyout that in a best case scenario will avoid ugly labor action if it works. The union hasn’t conceded a nickel of pay, thus as I have previously stated, a larger amount of jobs will be lost than could have happened if the union had done something like this AND did a good faith bargaining agreement to reduce compensation. This is all once sided. The last time I saw this, the first round worked, the remaining round created a horrible environment because future packages are not as lucrative. The method is different, but I stated the union would not concede pay to save jobs and I was right.
The success of a contract can only be judged at the conclusion of the contract.
So far, I see that the industry leading contract has failed because the union needed to come up with a way to work something out with the company to prevent the traditional furloughs from happening. The plan is now just being executed. If the contract was everything you guys said it would be, not a single pilot would be facing any time off via a voluntary or involuntary layoff. The contact failed as jobs are being lost.
None of you care about the financial health of the company or support worker’s families that support you.
Not one of you has said a word about your non-pilot coworkers and what is happening with them. Why? Union greed and selfishness. Not a one of you cares about the financial health of Netjets, all you care about is what you are going to get out of it. This process will not be deemed a success unless the next quarterly statement shows that NJ has contributed profitably to the bottom line of B-H. If not, the contract has failed.
I stated in early January that I has heard as many as 50 airplanes were going to be parked.
ALL OF YOU told me I was wrong. I guess my source was correct, and while the final count isn’t in yet, once again.. I had advanced info you didn’t have. I was right, and well.. once again, you were wrong.
ALL OF YOU STATED THERE WOULD BE NO JOB CUTS AT NETJETS BECAUSE THE CLEINTELE WAS SO RICH THEY COULD WITHSTAND ANY DOWNTURN IN THE ECONOMY.
Guess I was right again, and you union mongers were wrong again.
The union has done nothing but concede that the contract was too expensive and they were forced to find a way to reduce staffing to pay for the “industry leading contract”.
I’m not looking foolish here, this is exactly what I stated would happen. Is it a different method? Yep, but there will still be jobs lost, union and non-union, families will be hurt.
While the idea normally only happens in a non-union arena, the concept of buyouts isn’t new. Before all of you have a group hug with each other, you really should let it play out to see of the results match in reality what they do on paper. If they don’t get the numbers they need, it will get fugly.
Over the many years (and recent months) I have stated:
Unions will sacrifice pilot and non-pilot jobs before they will concede pay.
Usually, it’s the bottom third, and while this is creative, this is nothing more than a very expensive buyout that in a best case scenario will avoid ugly labor action if it works. The union hasn’t conceded a nickel of pay, thus as I have previously stated, a larger amount of jobs will be lost than could have happened if the union had done something like this AND did a good faith bargaining agreement to reduce compensation. This is all once sided. The last time I saw this, the first round worked, the remaining round created a horrible environment because future packages are not as lucrative. The method is different, but I stated the union would not concede pay to save jobs and I was right.
The success of a contract can only be judged at the conclusion of the contract.
So far, I see that the industry leading contract has failed because the union needed to come up with a way to work something out with the company to prevent the traditional furloughs from happening. The plan is now just being executed. If the contract was everything you guys said it would be, not a single pilot would be facing any time off via a voluntary or involuntary layoff. The contact failed as jobs are being lost.
None of you care about the financial health of the company or support worker’s families that support you.
Not one of you has said a word about your non-pilot coworkers and what is happening with them. Why? Union greed and selfishness. Not a one of you cares about the financial health of Netjets, all you care about is what you are going to get out of it. This process will not be deemed a success unless the next quarterly statement shows that NJ has contributed profitably to the bottom line of B-H. If not, the contract has failed.
I stated in early January that I has heard as many as 50 airplanes were going to be parked.
ALL OF YOU told me I was wrong. I guess my source was correct, and while the final count isn’t in yet, once again.. I had advanced info you didn’t have. I was right, and well.. once again, you were wrong.
Last edited:
