No Pay Raise for RAH FOs
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2009
Posts: 313
Bolo. I am very much informed. The letters that the company released were entirely to make us look bad to the other work groups and apparently you are naive enough to believe them. Just wait and see what happens the first time you guys actually stand up to Bedford
#52
Vuvla...a user on APC was noted saying something similar to "see that the 357 think of the website by the end of the week." That means there are F9 pilots that were aware on the suit over www.rahcontractnow.org before the local knew and before it was made public.
That is strong evidence that there are F9 pilots are are dealing with RAH management directly to work against their own representation.
That is strong evidence that there are F9 pilots are are dealing with RAH management directly to work against their own representation.
It's actually spelled Vulva bro!
As far as F9 pilots being aware of a lawsuit before it was made public, I'm not sure I see your point (again). I know you would like to suggest that FAPA is in bed with management which is a stretch. Personally, I found out about this lawsuit yesterday when it was referenced in an email from a friend. A quick Google search took me to the Indianapolis Business Journal where I read the article myself.
Furthermore, yesterday at precisely 11:28am (MST), the first reference to this lawsuit was posted on our internal FAPA message boards. I'm sure that someone here at APC has backdoor access to that site so can check confirm for yourself.
I can't speak for any other F9 pilots as there are nearly 700 of them and the company is a relatively small organization. Many have various connections to management types (friends, golfing buddies, family members, etc.).
RAHContractNow.org did not go over particularly well with many of us here at Frontier. IBT357 can do whatever they feel they need to in order to achieve their objectives. Bringing the reputation of those who feed you (United and USAirways), and those who suckle from your teat (Frontier), by using unauthorized images on a website in direct violation of the RAH and Frontier company policy manual tends to ruffle feathers. Especially, when the message of the site is obviously intended to damage the Company.
For reference:
Republic handbook:
7.2.14
G. Use of Company Logo or Trademark
The Company and its Associates must adhere to very strict copyright licenses. Therefore, under no circumstance can Associates use the livery (tails), logos, photos, images etc. on any type of personal website, blog, social networking site, etc., without approval from the office of Marketing and Branding. Any and all existing unapproved postings must be taken
down.
7.2.14
G. Use of Company Logo or Trademark
The Company and its Associates must adhere to very strict copyright licenses. Therefore, under no circumstance can Associates use the livery (tails), logos, photos, images etc. on any type of personal website, blog, social networking site, etc., without approval from the office of Marketing and Branding. Any and all existing unapproved postings must be taken
down.
I sent an email to the Company about RAHContractNow because I don't like when non-Frontier issues damage the reputation of the company I work for. First we have a drunk CHQ pilot whom 99% of the media portrays a drunk Frontier pilot showing up to work to fly a Frontier flight. Then a militant website arises incorporating images of IBT followers, aircraft in United, USAirways and Frontier livery. I wouldn't be surprised if United and USAirways also come after the IBT on this one.
This might get expensive for the 357. Good thing they've got a steady source of "core fees" payers to fill the coffers.
Rather than fire off something testy at me, why don't you start by calling (not posting on your internal message board!) you eBoard and asking them what the EXACT circumstances are around the "hostage taking" of the FO who put together RAHContractNow.org. I guarantee you there are 2 entirely different sides to the story. One will appear very benign and the other militant. But, of course, no matter what the various parties say, most RAHbros will continue to drink from the IBT fountain.
I used to laugh at this stuff, but now I am starting to think it is pretty sad. Baaahhhh Baaahhhh Baaaahhhhh!!!!!!
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 339
RAHContractNow.org did not go over particularly well with many of us here at Frontier. IBT357 can do whatever they feel they need to in order to achieve their objectives. Bringing the reputation of those who feed you (United and USAirways), and those who suckle from your teat (Frontier), by using unauthorized images on a website in direct violation of the RAH and Frontier company policy manual tends to ruffle feathers. Especially, when the message of the site is obviously intended to damage the Company.
For reference:
Frontier pilots are not behind this lawsuit. The Company is full of grown up people who are smart enough to know when they can legitimately call BS on an effort the uses livery images without permission and in direct violation of the policy manual. I'm sure that some Frontier pilots voiced their opinions to management via email, phone calls or in person. IBT representation does not restrain individual pilots from walking in to the GO and voicing an opinion.
I sent an email to the Company about RAHContractNow because I don't like when non-Frontier issues damage the reputation of the company I work for. First we have a drunk CHQ pilot whom 99% of the media portrays a drunk Frontier pilot showing up to work to fly a Frontier flight. Then a militant website arises incorporating images of IBT followers, aircraft in United, USAirways and Frontier livery. I wouldn't be surprised if United and USAirways also come after the IBT on this one.
For reference:
Frontier pilots are not behind this lawsuit. The Company is full of grown up people who are smart enough to know when they can legitimately call BS on an effort the uses livery images without permission and in direct violation of the policy manual. I'm sure that some Frontier pilots voiced their opinions to management via email, phone calls or in person. IBT representation does not restrain individual pilots from walking in to the GO and voicing an opinion.
I sent an email to the Company about RAHContractNow because I don't like when non-Frontier issues damage the reputation of the company I work for. First we have a drunk CHQ pilot whom 99% of the media portrays a drunk Frontier pilot showing up to work to fly a Frontier flight. Then a militant website arises incorporating images of IBT followers, aircraft in United, USAirways and Frontier livery. I wouldn't be surprised if United and USAirways also come after the IBT on this one.
#55
Unlike the IBT, Frontier pilots don't wake up in the morning devising a new way to screw you or the company. Most of us would be more than happy to see you all score a new and improved CBA. In the best of cases it really won't affect us so why not see the RAHbros do well for themselves? In the worst of cases, it would bode well for me when I get bumped out of the Airbus in 6 years to fly something different.
Unfortunately, today more than ever, I think you guys are heading in the wrong direction. You are taking absolutely ZERO responsibility for any of the contentious issues currently festering around you. Everything is the fault of the company, right? They are a bunch of pathological liars, right?
You have all chosen the absolute best (and I sincerely mean that) representatives if winning PR and misinformation campaigns is the goal. Heller and BB could have had an epiphany and realized that they need to change their ways and give you everything you want and you'd still find fault with them. IBT appears disinterested in taking prisoners in this war.
You guys better damn right start calling out your eBoard when something smells fishy. Only problem is they are the best at covering up the stink. Don't say you don't want to distract them from their duties of fighting management. It is OK to challenge your reps. Especially, face to face. It's a lot easier to tell whether they are lying or not when you look them in the eye.
#56
Now, 2 weeks ago when I visited the infamous RAHContractNow.org site, I immediately took an interest in the sites deliberate use of similar images, especially since I felt the message being presented by the site was damaging to the brands being depicted. Again, I like my job and I like Frontier and I want to see it succeed. I am being absolutely forthright with you on this when I admit that I did contact the company to voice my objection to the use of Frontier images on the site, not because I am some pilot in bed with management, but because I freaking care! That's it.
#60
I am not management. I do own my own business and I have plenty of experience at a Fortune 500 company in a prior life, but right now I am nothing more than a pilot with an opinion as, I believe, you are too.
Why bring scope into the equation? How does it apply in a discussion about a website set up to harm the company which includes images in violation of company policy that all employees are required to abide by? Maybe you are saying that by allowing 190 size aircraft to fly under contract with F9 livery, we somehow hurt the reputation of the company?
I would argue that you are correct since those airplanes are being flown by an entirely separate company whose pilots are blindly following their union and appear ready to burn the house down to get what they want. Those efforts include bringing the Frontier name into potential bad light with the public, especially when IBT is advertizing the RAHContractNow site on other independent websites such as APC.
Every day that passes that we are still associated with RAH hurts the reputation of Frontier. Especially, when the general public (and media) is incapable of discerning the difference between Frontier Airlines and a company who contracts to fly for Frontier.
So Embraerjetpilot, go back in your hole and search for something useful to bring to the conversation.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post