SheriffWydell

Why is the EXCO waiting for a solution from ABX? The EXCO should be telling ABX what the solution is going to be. It's clear in the CBA.

NeedAJob

There's too much here to address line for line; so I'll hit the highlights. I appreciate your perspective ABXflyer, though I disagree to some of the finer details.

Detail 1 - The original 5 new hires:

I'll concede that the contract is "gray" in this area regarding the timing of the proffer etc. The major problem I have is that the contract says that any New Hire shall be hired "after" eligible pilots have been recalled. We'll all concede that we weren't eligible on January 18, but the rub came when the new hires weren't hired until over a month later on February 23rd. On the 23rd there were 24 eligible pilots on furlough of which 8 had been furloughed for a month. According to the contract, 21 days notice is all that's required for a recall unless waived by the Crewmember. There was ample time to recall furloughed pilots with 21 days notice rather than hiring the New Hires. The Company chose to do the ethically irresponsible thing which is no surprise. The surprise was that the Union bought off on it rather than fighting for the rights of those furloughs.

There are many other sections in the CBA that support recalls over new hires. All involved directly have dissected the CBA very thoroughly. I don't think this is the place to argue those semantics though. Bottom line, the Company is trying to save a buck and the Union screwed up. I think they know that, and are trying to cover their a$$.

Detail 2 - The fired ATI/ABX crewmember:

Who cares? That situation is completely different, and I believe it is understandable that the Company didn't welcome this man back. The logic is sound to prevent people from voluntarily getting fired from ATI to return to ABX. Why reward bad behavior. An involuntary furlough is a whole different ball of wax as conceded by the Company and the Union.

Detail 3 - The 2 Crewmembers hired that were a "mistake"

Oh brother. Mistake my rear end. Since those two new hires effectively cut in line in front of 24 other senior people, knowingly or unknowingly (though I suspect the former) there is only 2 acceptable resolutions.

Resolution 1 - Those guys need to be furloughed and put in line behind the rest of us in accordance with their seniority. Then the 2 senior Crewmembers on that list should be recalled.

Resolution 2 - If the Company chooses to retain the 2 New Hires who are in excess of the original 5, then all 24 Crewmembers senior to them that were cut in front of must be recalled or paid retroactively among other things to rectify the situation.

We'll see what the Union negotiates on our behalf, but I'll just say I'm not too confident.

Detail 4 - Did the New Hires know what they were doing?

Some probably yes and some probably no. Either way there's no excuse. As I said in my original post, it really won't matter. Some guys will welcome them aboard, and some will be sour toward them. They'll just have to live with that, but be forewarned...they are all replacement workers no matter how anyone wants to spin the contract.

Detail 5 - The February 14th proffered class and when the Company has to fill those vacancies:

The CBA clearly says that an award has to be made before a class date can be postponed. This prevents confusion and fighting within the ranks over who will be in the class. The Company is still wrongly postponing the class without any awards to maintain the leverage to negotiate an Asian Side Letter.

Again, we can continue beating up articles in the contract on this one up and down trying to make points and counter points, but the fact is simple. What they're doing is just bad business and flat wrong. I believe the contract says that what they are doing is a violation. I think that a lawyer would agree with us. I can tell you that if those 2 new hires aren't furloughed in exchange for the senior pilots, or if all 24 aren't recalled to keep them, we'll sure find out what a lawyer has to say.

To be continued....

airbus300

[QUOTE=…which in fact could mean that many who are furloughed from ATI will be too junior to hold a slot at ABX.[/QUOTE]

What are the chances of a quick recall at ATI? Or do furloughed Capital guys with more senority get recalled first to ATI. The rumor going around is that ATI and Capital have merged operations... (from a FAA guy).

SheriffWydell

I agree with all. The only thing I would add is that, if the disputed new hires are furloughed, the 7 year recall clock should reset for all furloughed pilots to the same date the new hires are furloughed.

SheriffWydell

Today is the 12th day that replacement workers are enjoying work at ABX while 2 dozen pilots remain furloughed and ready to return.

It's Sunday and the replacement workers might be enjoying a day of rest before returning to ground school.

I said a prayer for justice for the furloughed pilots and their families.

abxflyr

Just a few rebuttal points and we’ll let it go at that…

Regarding recalling folks for the Jan opening that were not filled with recalls (no one was eligible). Yes, your ATI furlough occurred after that date but there is no provision resetting the clocks even though the subsequent class start date occurred after you (and others) are on furlough. It’s not a ‘gray’ area of the contract at all…in fact, a long supported practice how vacancies have been filled by our CBA. Hate the CBA if you want, but it is legal.

No doubt that hiring 2 additional persons is a company mistake. The Exco is (IMO) rightfully “overseeing” how the company is going to fix the wrong. They (Exco) did not create the problem…they should not be creating the solution. Saving you the words here….they should and are involved in making sure the company does just that…fix it. I too remain very skeptical and hope whatever ABX does is satisfactory; remember I’m in the same boat. Although my experience tells me that whatever solution is forthcoming, some will not be happy (just hoping it’s not from my perspective). Again…a little patience.

Again, you can hate the game, but not the player. ATI’ers didn’t (and some still don’t) love the idea that ABX’ers can come to their property with all the enhancements that are with that program. It does not mean you dislike the individual(s) who are employed, how they got there, etc. We’ve all heard it before, they are just pilots like you and I who are trying to survive in this world. You can not hold a person individually responsible when, as an individual, they have done nothing wrong. Hate your CBA, Management team, Obama, deregulation, FAA or whomever floats your boat, but taking these concepts to a one v one level is undoubtedly wrong.

To answer on Capital, they are presently operating under ATI as a merged management resource carrier. Separate certificate(s), operational control, C/P’s, pilot groups, etc. So there is no Capital recall or merge into ATI at this point in time. ATI is at a difficult point in life right now. If business picks up, then a recall is possible….without, more than likely additional furloughs to reduce payrolls (as training occurs). Of course, should ABX recall and some leave ATI to go there it would help with the balance of no furloughs or perhaps speed up recalls depending on business requirements.

At least most can tell the common thread is that ABX management has made it very difficult (for no reason) on not only their employees, active and furloughed, but even providing unnecessary stress on the few legal new-hires. I’d like to think that things change over time regarding a person’s philosophy, especially as people become older and more mature in their thinking….obviously that is not the case here.

SheriffWydell

I doubt that hiring new hires was a MISTAKE. I don't believe they accidentally interviewed, ran backgrounds checks, fingerprinted, made employment offers, scheduled class dates and printed ID cards.

Your statement that the EXCO should "oversee" the fix is a passive statement. The EXCO should know what the proper solution is and demand it. Why would they want to back peddle from this? You are wrong when you say that the EXCO should NOT be creating the solution. The EXCO absolutely should be creating the solution!

You mention that you hope the solution is satisfactory from your perspective. What is a satisfactory solution from your perspective? I have stated three possible solutions listed below. do you agree or disagree with the solutions I have proposed?

1. Fire the replacement workers and recall pilots according to the CBA.
2. Furlough the new hires. Pay all the furloughed pilots for the same amount of days that the replacement workers were paid. Also start the 7 year recall rights clock over for each furloughed pilot to the same date that the replacement workers are furloughed.
3. Keep their replacement workers but provide pay protection for every furloughed pilot who has a hire date earlier than 03/14/2012

ATCsaidDoWhat

There's an awful lot of "I's" in #57. Like it or not, abxflyr is correct...the problem must first be dumped in management's lap to fix in order to properly set the process in place. If the union takes control first, it sets the precedent and allows the company to take this and other issues that they should be compelled to address and dump them off on the union. Then if the union pushes back, or proposes a solution the company doesn't want to accept, they can delay forever.

Sometimes is is wide to remember that there is a lot more to the situation than meets the eye and that one persons interpretation of a CBA may not be the correct one.

And that there is no "I" in "team."

NeedAJob

Well there you have it folks. Case and point. Some people will just take the offensive behavior and welcome the New hires with open arms, and others will be ****ed about it. All will say the contract supports them bla bla bla.

I have never subscribed to the pilot vs. pilot attitude either. Again, the first 5 guys may have not known what they were getting into fully. None of us guys on furlough even knew they started until a couple days after they were hired. They may have thought the situation was resolved. The last 3 guys absolutely knew what they were doing though. I won't say scab, but use whatever malicious word suits our politically correct society. There's no way they didn't know that there were 24 guys awaiting recall when they accepted the job in front of us. I'm sure management told them that things were just fine, relax, its legal. Then they gave them the by the way...be sure to look over your shoulder in the crew lot speech. Now why would they need to say that...hmmm....

Everyone else can sit "employed" at ABX and ATI and express their viewpoint on a situation that has no immediate impact on them, though it may in the future. We'll see what song they sing about fair and contractual then as they sit at home eating bread and apples watching "their" Union and Management team treat their replacement workers....AKA New Hires...to steak and boos.

Lastly, I would love to continue the timing argument, and the historical recall precedence argument, but it won't matter. Between the collaborative experience of the 24 people on furlough (almost everyone with 12+ years), no history lesson about recall procedure is required as we've all been through it. I could copy and paste all of the contract quoted in our grievances, but this isn't the place for that.

Again, we'll see what the Union decides is fair, but I would be willing to bet that their idea of fair in this situation will be just as lopsided as 7 new hires over a month after 24 senior pilots became available.

SheriffWydell

When you say the union sets precedence when it takes control first, you don't make any sense. What does that statement even mean?

There is an "I" in grievance and in lawsuit.