Spirit of NKS
04-19-2009, 02:39 PM
#361
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: A320
Posts: 61
If the current MEC were true leaders, they would have come out and gotten behind their MEC two years ago instead of running recalls. After all, that NC had agreements on 29 sections, with only pay and prefbid to go.
You're reps threw away those sections which included the significant gains that you now seek. That work product, the result of over a year of bargaining, was thrownout for purely political reasons and you now have the balls to act as if the old MEC is somehow working against the group.
.
You're reps threw away those sections which included the significant gains that you now seek. That work product, the result of over a year of bargaining, was thrownout for purely political reasons and you now have the balls to act as if the old MEC is somehow working against the group.
.
Vote Yes to have a future.
04-19-2009, 03:37 PM
#362
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 758
Simply put, this is revisionist history. The Company reneged on this offer. In fact, Jeff Carlson had promised pay in exchange for all the improvements ALPA made in that document, the biggest being pref-bidding. He was unable to make good on that promise and the agreement fell apart. That was roughly Feb 14th. 14 days later most of the former MEC, NC, and other positions voluntarily left, simultaneously, in advance of the new MEC Chairman without any urging of the new MEC. Political or not, them's the facts.
Vote Yes to have a future.
Vote Yes to have a future.
I was in the room, were you?
04-19-2009, 05:57 PM
#363
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Posts: 314
why does everyone think pref bidding is the end of the world? I've talked to friends of mine who are quite happy with it.
04-19-2009, 06:07 PM
#364
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 758
Because a poor pref bid system is worse than line bidding and a lot of airlines had poor pref bid systems forced on them thru bankruptcy. The perception that it must be bad because the company wants it might also have something to do with it.
The ALPA pref bid specialists contend that bidding satisfaction goes further down the seniority list with pref bid than with line bidding.
If you know the FO (PH) who was the pref bid specialist negotiator in 2007, you could go ask him about more pref bid details.
04-19-2009, 06:44 PM
#365
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2005
Position: A320 Captain
Posts: 1,114
What I really don't understand is why the company is fighting PBS other than just to try and get under our skin. PBS is more efficient for the pilots and the company, so why fight it. I guess I should be used to it with airline management, whatever makes sense and saves money is the last thing they want to do. Go figure.
04-19-2009, 07:17 PM
#366
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: 319/320/321...whatever it takes.
Posts: 492
Agreed... Allow me to make a comment... You said “the company wants to basically make this an at will job"... That is what they want... but they can’t... We have a contract that protects us from that. They tried to get us with the 5 day off, however we won and got it back.
I think a lot of you guys are getting me wrong. I like my job, union, and although I see a lot of things going on I do not agree with, I have the right to speak my opinion, and I do...In the crew room, cockpit, and union meetings. Yes, I have been to almost all of them.
I have never said anything about voting no. And do I intend to??? That is my business and my vote. I will say however that I intend on supporting my fellow pilots, as I have in the past volunteering for union positions and letting the MEC do their job as they see fit. They have a right to do that...After all they were voted in by us.
Here is what I did say, and I know it’s too late, but again, it is my opinion. Left handed stated what the company wanted to do with work rules, pay, etc... I stated that we should defend our current contract. I also stated that we become equippted with resources for better educating our group, as "Prepare" was not enough in my opinion. If we cannot defend this contract what makes you think we can defend a new one? I would have rather seen us protect our current CBA, rather than settle for a subpar raise, traded for work rules and quality of life. I also think that this vote is premature by way of a horrible economy, reduced flying and loads industry wide. I think patience will benefit us in the long run. But that is not the case...Tomorrow I will vote.. To my union brothers and sisters, and all others in this industry,... I will cast my ballot in favor of our pilot group and ALPA's agenda.
Again, in my opinion... If acheiving a yes vote that is over 60/40 was important, how come the union did not start making calls to answer questions and rally support? The Strike vote letter was emailed a day ago, and now we vote tomorrow. Now tell me that is not rushing it...
I think a lot of you guys are getting me wrong. I like my job, union, and although I see a lot of things going on I do not agree with, I have the right to speak my opinion, and I do...In the crew room, cockpit, and union meetings. Yes, I have been to almost all of them.
I have never said anything about voting no. And do I intend to??? That is my business and my vote. I will say however that I intend on supporting my fellow pilots, as I have in the past volunteering for union positions and letting the MEC do their job as they see fit. They have a right to do that...After all they were voted in by us.
Here is what I did say, and I know it’s too late, but again, it is my opinion. Left handed stated what the company wanted to do with work rules, pay, etc... I stated that we should defend our current contract. I also stated that we become equippted with resources for better educating our group, as "Prepare" was not enough in my opinion. If we cannot defend this contract what makes you think we can defend a new one? I would have rather seen us protect our current CBA, rather than settle for a subpar raise, traded for work rules and quality of life. I also think that this vote is premature by way of a horrible economy, reduced flying and loads industry wide. I think patience will benefit us in the long run. But that is not the case...Tomorrow I will vote.. To my union brothers and sisters, and all others in this industry,... I will cast my ballot in favor of our pilot group and ALPA's agenda.
Again, in my opinion... If acheiving a yes vote that is over 60/40 was important, how come the union did not start making calls to answer questions and rally support? The Strike vote letter was emailed a day ago, and now we vote tomorrow. Now tell me that is not rushing it...
Well said Taylorjets. you are correct in that we need to enforce our current contract now to be able to enforce any future one. The reason I said the "at will" comment was on the mgmt firing of pilots with no recourse for the pilot written into C9. I would also have liked to see a little more time for the strike vote, not because of the economy, but just to have everyones questions answered. There seems to be a critical mass of pilots that when reached, would start to counter the naysayers in the cockpits and the lounges, and we need more people to know the info before they vote on heresay. Anyway, glad you're back, can't wait to get back myself.
04-19-2009, 09:19 PM
#367
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: A320
Posts: 61
I guess the question is which room. In the June meeting between Alpa, Spirit and the mediator (after you left) the negotiators made it clear that they would be working with the Russo language with some changes.
In September the Company submitted C9, superceding all previous negotiations much to the chagrin of ALPA and the Mediator. That was the day the Russo language died, and voting 'no' won't change that. Your beef is with Spirit management, not your fellow Spirit pilots.
Join us, vote "yes" and work toward the future.
In September the Company submitted C9, superceding all previous negotiations much to the chagrin of ALPA and the Mediator. That was the day the Russo language died, and voting 'no' won't change that. Your beef is with Spirit management, not your fellow Spirit pilots.
Join us, vote "yes" and work toward the future.
04-20-2009, 12:46 PM
#368
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2005
Posts: 758
I guess the question is which room. In the June meeting between Alpa, Spirit and the mediator (after you left) the negotiators made it clear that they would be working with the Russo language with some changes.
In September the Company submitted C9, superceding all previous negotiations much to the chagrin of ALPA and the Mediator. That was the day the Russo language died, and voting 'no' won't change that. Your beef is with Spirit management, not your fellow Spirit pilots.
Join us, vote "yes" and work toward the future.
In September the Company submitted C9, superceding all previous negotiations much to the chagrin of ALPA and the Mediator. That was the day the Russo language died, and voting 'no' won't change that. Your beef is with Spirit management, not your fellow Spirit pilots.
Join us, vote "yes" and work toward the future.
I don't expect management to act in my best interest, I do expect my union to do so.
I have no problem with using the vote as leverage, but I firmly believe that the company will be looking at what we are doing, not what you/I/strikevote is saying.
04-20-2009, 03:09 PM
#369
Line Holder
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: A320
Posts: 61
You've given many reasons not to vote yes. Here's what happens when you vote no:
The Company will assume we are fractured and weak. They will not attempt any further negotiations, and may seek release on their own so that they may implement 9000.
If you are serious about your future, and your fellow pilots, you will vote yes. I stand by my assertion that a no vote signifies:
1. Fear
2. Misunderstanding
3. A political axe to grind.
04-20-2009, 04:09 PM
#370
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2008
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 163
Good Grief ladies, grow a set and vote Yes.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
