Didn't take long for all the disputed pairings to disappear
03-02-2007, 08:34 AM
#201
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
This pilot group has shown that it is unable to "read between the lines".
And frankly, I'm getting tired of our leadership beating around the bush with everything they "really" expect us to do. I say, let's press to test. We pay a lot of money in dues, for ALPA's resources, including legal.
Instead of our leaders putting out these subliminal messages, to preclude any lawsuits...I say, make the maggot independent operators, get a court order that forces our leaders to tell us not to be bad. Would anyone not understand that?
I think it would be good practice for our next round of negotiations. We, not our union leaders, waste an enormous amount of time and energy, just trying to convince people around here of what they "really" should be doing.
I'm tired of it.
And frankly, I'm getting tired of our leadership beating around the bush with everything they "really" expect us to do. I say, let's press to test. We pay a lot of money in dues, for ALPA's resources, including legal.
Instead of our leaders putting out these subliminal messages, to preclude any lawsuits...I say, make the maggot independent operators, get a court order that forces our leaders to tell us not to be bad. Would anyone not understand that?
I think it would be good practice for our next round of negotiations. We, not our union leaders, waste an enormous amount of time and energy, just trying to convince people around here of what they "really" should be doing.
I'm tired of it.
03-02-2007, 08:46 AM
#202
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,838
This pilot group has shown that it is unable to "read between the lines".
And frankly, I'm getting tired of our leadership beating around the bush with everything they "really" expect us to do. I say, let's press to test. We pay a lot of money in dues, for ALPA's resources, including legal.
Instead of our leaders putting out these subliminal messages, to preclude any lawsuits...I say, make the maggot independent operators, get a court order that forces our leaders to tell us not to be bad. Would anyone not understand that?
I think it would be good practice for our next round of negotiations. We, not our union leaders, waste an enormous amount of time and energy, just trying to convince people around here of what they "really" should be doing.
I'm tired of it.
And frankly, I'm getting tired of our leadership beating around the bush with everything they "really" expect us to do. I say, let's press to test. We pay a lot of money in dues, for ALPA's resources, including legal.
Instead of our leaders putting out these subliminal messages, to preclude any lawsuits...I say, make the maggot independent operators, get a court order that forces our leaders to tell us not to be bad. Would anyone not understand that?
I think it would be good practice for our next round of negotiations. We, not our union leaders, waste an enormous amount of time and energy, just trying to convince people around here of what they "really" should be doing.
I'm tired of it.
ALPA isn't worried about lawsuits from "independent operators". they are concerned with Lawsuits from the Company and the Dept of Labor. The current Administration has proven that it never sides with Labor and has granted very liberal union busting policies to the Bankruptcy courts as we have all recently witnessed.
Your dues money goes to hire the Best Labor Attornies in the business. I suppose if ALPA got hit with a multi million lawsuit for doing what you imply, you wouldn't have any problem or complain about coughing up a couple thousand in legal assesments? Nor would the rest of your fellow pilots?
Believe me, I am as frustrated as you, but we are in a environment of Anti-Labor. That may change in 2008 and it may not. The fact is we have to deal with it.
03-02-2007, 08:57 AM
#203
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Oh yah. I get it.
I don't care who files the lawsuit. What are they going to do? Decertify the union because they didn't voluntarily put out that letter? I don't think so.
What I'm saying is...Let them file a suit. And, if and when the judge issues the order, then put out the letter telling us to stop. And until then, just don't say anything, one way or the other.
I don't care who files the lawsuit. What are they going to do? Decertify the union because they didn't voluntarily put out that letter? I don't think so.
What I'm saying is...Let them file a suit. And, if and when the judge issues the order, then put out the letter telling us to stop. And until then, just don't say anything, one way or the other.
03-02-2007, 09:05 AM
#204
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
Multi million dollar lawsuits?
YTGTSM!! ALPA would get fined for not obeying the court order. Not for doing what I implied.
Do you really think a multi-million dollar judgement would be awarded because our leaders didn't put out that message, yesterday?
YTGTSM!! ALPA would get fined for not obeying the court order. Not for doing what I implied.
Do you really think a multi-million dollar judgement would be awarded because our leaders didn't put out that message, yesterday?
03-02-2007, 09:22 AM
#205
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 2,838
setting precidence with case law.
03-02-2007, 09:30 AM
#206
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: leaning to the left
Posts: 4,184
In other words, the judge ruled that APA did not do enough to stop the alledged "sick out", after he had issued the order.
03-02-2007, 01:21 PM
#207
Organizational Learning
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Position: Directly behind the combiner
Posts: 4,948
"It has been brought to the attention of the MEC that an unidentified individual or individuals are placing notes inside certain crewmembers' flight folder highlighting a disputed pairing that is being flown. These actions are counter to the way we have and will continue to do business. This practice is unacceptable and is not condoned by your MEC. Notwithstanding the fact that the voluntary flying of disputed pairings undermines the efforts of the PSIT to protect the members, that choice remains yours. Your MEC has gone to great lengths to promote unity in the face of disagreement and individuals encountering difficulties regarding this matter should contact Captain XXXX in Professional Standards."
The above from the latest ALPA message line. It appears that the MEC doesn't think that Tony is always right.
Not sure I agree with them on this one though, there has to be some way to inform these dudes of the damage they are doing.
The only things I've suggested are already published on the ALPA website. Granted, there are a few non-members who haven't seen that stuff yet, but that's not our fault, is it?
.
03-02-2007, 01:47 PM
#208
gets every day off
Joined APC: Mar 2006
Position: Retired MD11 Capt
Posts: 705
They CAN'T be referring to Tony....
The note specifically says "unidentified"
The note specifically says "unidentified"
03-02-2007, 02:24 PM
#209
Proponent of Hysteria
Joined APC: Mar 2005
Position: 3B
Posts: 1,052
Hey I'm not saying I disagree with you Tony. On the contrary. I am kind of amazed how quickly the MEC put that word out in their effort to squash the resistance movement.
WE definitely need to educate the folks picking up disputed pairings to the evils of their ways.
WE definitely need to educate the folks picking up disputed pairings to the evils of their ways.
03-02-2007, 02:57 PM
#210
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 426
MD11 Freight Dog
How much time to you have to compile the list? I was curious because I know at least one of the individuals who flew a disputed pairing was on reserve - absolutely no choice in the matter. If you have extra time, is there a column/notation to denote that it was a reserve pilot?
As for the Boeing employee #'s, did everyone notice HOW JUNIOR the pairings went?? Specifically, F/O's + S/O's?
As for the new message line, perhaps the union is worried about harrassment/hostile work environment issues -- a full blown confrontation at the counter -- something of that nature is my guess for their quick quash of, er, individual efforts to educate.
As for the Boeing employee #'s, did everyone notice HOW JUNIOR the pairings went?? Specifically, F/O's + S/O's?
As for the new message line, perhaps the union is worried about harrassment/hostile work environment issues -- a full blown confrontation at the counter -- something of that nature is my guess for their quick quash of, er, individual efforts to educate.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
