RAH Upgrade Vacancies???
02-11-2009, 10:09 AM
#21
Che Guevara
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
When you come into my domicile, put my company's name on your aircraft, and do my job for 50-60% less than me, you don't think we have a right to be p****d 
Sure you can't refuse to do the flying without being disiplined but you
but you CAN stand up for a contract that doesn't encourage management a**holes to pull this crap in the first place. How could you people sign a contract with a 3-20 year scale of $37/hr and no rigs on equipment that replaces 737/DC-9s ???? Did you honestly think that 9 month upgrades were going to continue?
Sure you can't refuse to do the flying without being disiplined but you
but you CAN stand up for a contract that doesn't encourage management a**holes to pull this crap in the first place. How could you people sign a contract with a 3-20 year scale of $37/hr and no rigs on equipment that replaces 737/DC-9s ???? Did you honestly think that 9 month upgrades were going to continue?
02-11-2009, 10:38 AM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: retired
Posts: 992
Yep, they're just as bad, Duke, er.....Duck. They're already separateing themselves into wide and narrowbody camps. Some of them even look at the 75 as an RJ. But you're part of the problem, too, when you don't stand up for professional compensation which none of you seem to be willing to address.
02-11-2009, 11:14 AM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2005
Position: Retired
Posts: 2,934
We're in contract negotiations right now and not a happy pilot group. Our contract isn't bad but there's always room for improvement. The company is making money, they can pay us more.
Trust me, I'd much rather be flying a plane that doesn't say "express" or "connection" on the side but about 15 years ago mainline decided they were too good to fly the "little" jets and the senior guys kept selling the junior guys down the river to protect their pay by giving up scope.
We're not stealing flying, you're giving it away.
Trust me, I'd much rather be flying a plane that doesn't say "express" or "connection" on the side but about 15 years ago mainline decided they were too good to fly the "little" jets and the senior guys kept selling the junior guys down the river to protect their pay by giving up scope.
We're not stealing flying, you're giving it away.
02-11-2009, 11:16 AM
#24
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Posts: 324
That's a pretty ignorant comment as we are in contract negotiations as we speak. You guys have a right to be angry, but direct your anger somewhere else.
02-11-2009, 12:05 PM
#25
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: E145 Gear Swinger
Posts: 102
02-11-2009, 12:26 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 744 CA
Posts: 4,772
Yep, they're just as bad, Duke, er.....Duck. They're already separateing themselves into wide and narrowbody camps. Some of them even look at the 75 as an RJ. But you're part of the problem, too, when you don't stand up for professional compensation which none of you seem to be willing to address.
02-11-2009, 01:03 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: retired
Posts: 992
At least get educated...as others have said the guys and gals at RAH are IN contract negotiations ...have been for some 17 months. Further, I dont have an old seniority list in front of me from my short time there, but I would venture to say that probably 80% maybe a number as high as 85% of the pilots currently at RAH were NOT even there when the last CBA was signed. If my friends at RAH sign a BS agreement somewhere down the road....bash them THEN. However, to say they are not willing to address the compensation issue when nothing has been signed is just flamebait. Note: RAH current contract was signed in 2003... SIX years ago.
02-11-2009, 01:22 PM
#28
Che Guevara
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
The posters here that don't think it's so bad think that because they look at others around them. They also look at the time that it was being negoatiated and the circumstances around that. They successfully dodged a whipsaw attempt by merging multiple seniority lists as well as got rid of junior manning and setup some pretty strong language about mergers and acquisitions of other companies. Considering it was post 9/11 I'd say these guys did a damn good job.
02-11-2009, 01:48 PM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: retired
Posts: 992
The posters here that don't think it's so bad think that because they look at others around them. They also look at the time that it was being negoatiated and the circumstances around that. They successfully dodged a whipsaw attempt by merging multiple seniority lists as well as got rid of junior manning and setup some pretty strong language about mergers and acquisitions of other companies. Considering it was post 9/11 I'd say these guys did a damn good job.
02-11-2009, 01:54 PM
#30
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2007
Position: 744 CA
Posts: 4,772
SA? who is that.. do you mean S5? I do know there is a group of "original shuttle" pilots who did get screwed during the integration.Some of those guys lost effectively 2 years seniority. With the way the list is now... thats probably less than 100 numbers. Cant speak to that, Wasnt around then. RAH's 2003 contract is certainly no barn burner but it is also not bottom of the barrel. As for you E120 FO's making making more than that in 1984.... I would love to see those pay scales. On a personal note I made 13.50 an hour if I remember correctly in 1992 to Fly ATR-42's for Flagship Airlines ( Nashville American Eagle )... and topped out at about 16 dollars an hour in my third year there.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
