Mgt JCBA Proposal - Oct 28,2010
10-30-2010, 11:43 AM
#41
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
No, we're not talking about anything illegal. We are talking about the ability of UAL pilots to strike. It just won't happen. I couldn't disagree more about having control over the company. UAL Pilots have "NO" control over the company WRT the SOC. They have some leverage, but that's about it. If they squander that it'll be very sad, indeed. I honestly believe that UAL management wants to mend fences and get the company headed down the path to dominance in the airline world. They stand to gain nothing from a long protracted fight with ALPA. Besides, they already have the upper hand that ALPA has given them via the legal suit and subsequent injunction. The fight is over and ALPA LOST, therefore the UAL Pilots lost. Sad.
They (UAL management) really DO see the CA$H opportunities from the merger and they are ENORMOUS. However, I'm not so naive as to think they will just give away the store and let the MEC roll over them. They are going to demand some movement on scope AND improvement in productivity from the SENIOR bubbas, many of whom drop way down in their monthly skeds at the expense of the lowly junior pukes who are left holding the bag.
"Tide turning for labor?" You're stilling looking at this as an "us vs. them" situation. That's unfortunate.
Best -
JD
p.s. The injunction does matter in the discussion of whether the UAL pilots will be able to strike. And, the NMB make-up is largely irrelevant. A pilot workforce of nearly 13,000 pilots at the world's largest airline will NEVER be allowed to strike.
They (UAL management) really DO see the CA$H opportunities from the merger and they are ENORMOUS. However, I'm not so naive as to think they will just give away the store and let the MEC roll over them. They are going to demand some movement on scope AND improvement in productivity from the SENIOR bubbas, many of whom drop way down in their monthly skeds at the expense of the lowly junior pukes who are left holding the bag.
"Tide turning for labor?" You're stilling looking at this as an "us vs. them" situation. That's unfortunate.
Best -
JD
p.s. The injunction does matter in the discussion of whether the UAL pilots will be able to strike. And, the NMB make-up is largely irrelevant. A pilot workforce of nearly 13,000 pilots at the world's largest airline will NEVER be allowed to strike.
First of all, don't patronize me with "you still see it as us vs. them, which is sad". You claim to be so knowledgeable about all things UAL, though you haven't found the courage to explain to all of us why your opinion is so much more enlightened than those of us who actually work there, so you should know perfectly well that the CEO's of United ALWAYS run the same play. They come in and give the standard "we must look forward and forget the past by working together to achieve our goals". Then they immediately shrink the airline and come up with uplifting lines like "pilot morale is not my problem". Sound familiar? This while giving themselves industry leading fat contracts.
Explain to me how UAL gets a single operating certificate without a combined seniority list. Explain to me how UAL gets a combined seniority list without a contract. Sounds like control of the process to me!
A few things. Scope relaxation? Like... 90 seaters? Ha!! Good luck!!
Second. You are still on the productivity of the senior pilots vs the junior pilots? That is almost a non issue to UAL. They don't care WHO has to do the heavy lifting as long as the line average ends up where they want it to be. The PILOTS are the ones who have to deal with the senior vs junior question. It's a piece of the puzzle, but not a terribly large one right now around the line since the last TA passed that tightened the PBS line values.
Your PS makes no sense. You are combining apples and oranges. The injunction prohibits ALPA from doing anything illegal. It does not change the RLA. If the NMB, with it's labor friendly new makeup, determines that an impasse has been reached, they can start the cooling off period. That has NOTHING to do with the injunction. When the cooling off period is finished, a PEB will decide whether a strike is allowed or not. That has nothing to do with the NMB OR the injunction. The injunction is simply not part of that process provided legal channels are followed. Whether the PEB would allow a strike is a much fuzzier question, but I haven't disputed that.
You think management wants to grow and dominate. I hope you are correct, but experience tells me you won't be. Outgoing UAL management, some of whom (McDonald) are still there, obviously didn't have that goal. Continental management was pretty much unwilling to negotiate with their pilots in any meaningful way prior to the merger. Now the are at the table fully engaged. Why? Because we now have something they want....
Your dislike of pilots and ALPA tells me that you couldn't possibly be one; unless I suppose you were hired in 1985. Then your attitude would make sense. As your tagline is "Sitting in the back facing front", I'm assuming you aren't a pilot.... Or at least any more. From someone who is sitting up FRONT keeping you safe in the back, your constant arrogant and snide remarks about the union that protects my family and livelihood are offensive. I certainly don't come to YOUR house and make cracks about your family. That's how it feels when you trash my brothers and sisters.
10-30-2010, 12:34 PM
#42
Line Holder
Joined APC: Aug 2010
Posts: 55
posted by dumpcheck: They better honor picket lines...especially if they are ALPA!! How could they be considered anything other than scabs?
Did Delta/ASA/Skywest et al. pilots honor picket lines when Comair was on strike, or sympathy walk? This may answer your question. It's only struck work when they go beyond the "scope" of their normal operations. So tell me how many regional pilots do you think are going to continue flying during a strike? My guess will be all of them. I don't like it, but I'm sure it will happen. Especially seeing as how the largest of UAL feeders is non-union to begin with, and opposes any tightening of scope.
If the other carriers do walk, that's great, but we can't expect it, nor should the NMB base their decision on releasing us to self help, on whether or not other carriers may or may not honor the strike.
Management created the paradigm where half of the domestic feed is done by other carriers, this is the exact reason we might walk, but they can't have it both ways. If mainline controlled all flights at the biggest carrier domestically, then there can be an argument of essential commerce being interrupted during a strike. As we stand with the way scope is today, we have international alliances, and domestic code share and capacity purchase agreement carriers, flying half or more of our passengers. Our striking hurts the pocket book and egos of those at UALs headquarters more than it affects the passengers, and commerce. Again, they created the situation, not labor.
Managements successful efforts to end run the UAL pilots and abrogate scope through alliances and code shares, will be the exact reason for the NMB to release us, when time comes. That being said the economic impact to UAL would be significant. We are truly in a once in a lifetime situation today, where WE CAN get things accomplished
Did Delta/ASA/Skywest et al. pilots honor picket lines when Comair was on strike, or sympathy walk? This may answer your question. It's only struck work when they go beyond the "scope" of their normal operations. So tell me how many regional pilots do you think are going to continue flying during a strike? My guess will be all of them. I don't like it, but I'm sure it will happen. Especially seeing as how the largest of UAL feeders is non-union to begin with, and opposes any tightening of scope.
If the other carriers do walk, that's great, but we can't expect it, nor should the NMB base their decision on releasing us to self help, on whether or not other carriers may or may not honor the strike.
Management created the paradigm where half of the domestic feed is done by other carriers, this is the exact reason we might walk, but they can't have it both ways. If mainline controlled all flights at the biggest carrier domestically, then there can be an argument of essential commerce being interrupted during a strike. As we stand with the way scope is today, we have international alliances, and domestic code share and capacity purchase agreement carriers, flying half or more of our passengers. Our striking hurts the pocket book and egos of those at UALs headquarters more than it affects the passengers, and commerce. Again, they created the situation, not labor.
Managements successful efforts to end run the UAL pilots and abrogate scope through alliances and code shares, will be the exact reason for the NMB to release us, when time comes. That being said the economic impact to UAL would be significant. We are truly in a once in a lifetime situation today, where WE CAN get things accomplished
10-30-2010, 12:49 PM
#43
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2010
Position: 737 CA
Posts: 110
IF (and its a big if) they don't let us shut 'er down at the end of the cooling off period, perhaps they would allow us to run a "chaos" type job action?
Theoretically not shutting down all of the world's largest airline but instead 10-20% of it, randomly and different parts of it each day.
Theoretically not shutting down all of the world's largest airline but instead 10-20% of it, randomly and different parts of it each day.
10-30-2010, 01:31 PM
#44
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2007
Posts: 520
Which is exactly why ual wont be allowed to strike-- we cant have over half our domestic feed support our strike!
Democrats changing the labor playing field? People who believe that are fools-
Just watch how they erodethe faa duty limitations- and to boot alpas position is against its own member majority-
Alpa should support new rules/legiation that affects its members without their vote/ sayso- the higherups responsible for change its members dont want= pathetic
10-30-2010, 02:39 PM
#45
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 126
That's a good question, ual4low...I really don't know stats about previous strikes. I guess Skywest might cross (not being ALPA), but I would certainly expect ALPA regionals not to...and for ALPA to provide that specific direction if and when the time comes.
If an ALPA regional has ALPA pilots picking up struck ALPA flying, then none of this union stuff makes much sense to me. Too much creative loophole BS for me. Let's keep it simple: Honor the picketline or get branded a scab.
If an ALPA regional has ALPA pilots picking up struck ALPA flying, then none of this union stuff makes much sense to me. Too much creative loophole BS for me. Let's keep it simple: Honor the picketline or get branded a scab.
10-30-2010, 03:33 PM
#46
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: Sitting down and facing front in a plane
Posts: 136
First of all, don't patronize me with "you still see it as us vs. them, which is sad". You claim to be so knowledgeable about all things UAL, though you haven't found the courage to explain to all of us why your opinion is so much more enlightened than those of us who actually work there, so you should know perfectly well that the CEO's of United ALWAYS run the same play. They come in and give the standard "we must look forward and forget the past by working together to achieve our goals". Then they immediately shrink the airline and come up with uplifting lines like "pilot morale is not my problem". Sound familiar? This while giving themselves industry leading fat contracts.
Explain to me how UAL gets a single operating certificate without a combined seniority list. Explain to me how UAL gets a combined seniority list without a contract. Sounds like control of the process to me!
A few things. Scope relaxation? Like... 90 seaters? Ha!! Good luck!!
Second. You are still on the productivity of the senior pilots vs the junior pilots? That is almost a non issue to UAL. They don't care WHO has to do the heavy lifting as long as the line average ends up where they want it to be. The PILOTS are the ones who have to deal with the senior vs junior question. It's a piece of the puzzle, but not a terribly large one right now around the line since the last TA passed that tightened the PBS line values.
Your PS makes no sense. You are combining apples and oranges. The injunction prohibits ALPA from doing anything illegal. It does not change the RLA. If the NMB, with it's labor friendly new makeup, determines that an impasse has been reached, they can start the cooling off period. That has NOTHING to do with the injunction. When the cooling off period is finished, a PEB will decide whether a strike is allowed or not. That has nothing to do with the NMB OR the injunction. The injunction is simply not part of that process provided legal channels are followed. Whether the PEB would allow a strike is a much fuzzier question, but I haven't disputed that.
You think management wants to grow and dominate. I hope you are correct, but experience tells me you won't be. Outgoing UAL management, some of whom (McDonald) are still there, obviously didn't have that goal. Continental management was pretty much unwilling to negotiate with their pilots in any meaningful way prior to the merger. Now the are at the table fully engaged. Why? Because we now have something they want....
Your dislike of pilots and ALPA tells me that you couldn't possibly be one; unless I suppose you were hired in 1985. Then your attitude would make sense. As your tagline is "Sitting in the back facing front", I'm assuming you aren't a pilot.... Or at least any more. From someone who is sitting up FRONT keeping you safe in the back, your constant arrogant and snide remarks about the union that protects my family and livelihood are offensive. I certainly don't come to YOUR house and make cracks about your family. That's how it feels when you trash my brothers and sisters.
Explain to me how UAL gets a single operating certificate without a combined seniority list. Explain to me how UAL gets a combined seniority list without a contract. Sounds like control of the process to me!
A few things. Scope relaxation? Like... 90 seaters? Ha!! Good luck!!
Second. You are still on the productivity of the senior pilots vs the junior pilots? That is almost a non issue to UAL. They don't care WHO has to do the heavy lifting as long as the line average ends up where they want it to be. The PILOTS are the ones who have to deal with the senior vs junior question. It's a piece of the puzzle, but not a terribly large one right now around the line since the last TA passed that tightened the PBS line values.
Your PS makes no sense. You are combining apples and oranges. The injunction prohibits ALPA from doing anything illegal. It does not change the RLA. If the NMB, with it's labor friendly new makeup, determines that an impasse has been reached, they can start the cooling off period. That has NOTHING to do with the injunction. When the cooling off period is finished, a PEB will decide whether a strike is allowed or not. That has nothing to do with the NMB OR the injunction. The injunction is simply not part of that process provided legal channels are followed. Whether the PEB would allow a strike is a much fuzzier question, but I haven't disputed that.
You think management wants to grow and dominate. I hope you are correct, but experience tells me you won't be. Outgoing UAL management, some of whom (McDonald) are still there, obviously didn't have that goal. Continental management was pretty much unwilling to negotiate with their pilots in any meaningful way prior to the merger. Now the are at the table fully engaged. Why? Because we now have something they want....
Your dislike of pilots and ALPA tells me that you couldn't possibly be one; unless I suppose you were hired in 1985. Then your attitude would make sense. As your tagline is "Sitting in the back facing front", I'm assuming you aren't a pilot.... Or at least any more. From someone who is sitting up FRONT keeping you safe in the back, your constant arrogant and snide remarks about the union that protects my family and livelihood are offensive. I certainly don't come to YOUR house and make cracks about your family. That's how it feels when you trash my brothers and sisters.
First, the "us vs. them" comment is NOT a patronizing remark. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.
You obviously cannot read, because I NEVER said I dislike pilots. Cite the remark where I say I dislike pilots and I will hand deliver an engraved apology.
Next, the tag line/position is "sitting down facing front in a plane." Nothing about being in the back.
More room on scope means a combo of 50 and 70 seaters across the new UAL system. Again, I said NOTHING about anything bigger than 70 seaters. As you SHOULD know, CAL only allows for 50 seaters with a small exception for more seats in turbo-props. You simply cannot put the 70-seater genie back in the bottle....UNLESS the UAL pilots give a huge concession to the company...I don't believe. I could be wrong about that, I hope I am.
The union protects your family? I am rolling on the floor laughing RIGHT NOW ! ! ! Trash your brothers and sisters? Spare me the righteous indignation. I said NOTHING about your "brothers and sisters." You're looking for an argument where there is none.
When you have learned how to read and can comprehend what I am saying, please return for more debate. Until then, you can camp out on your front porch.
r/
JD
Last edited by JetDaily; 10-30-2010 at 03:52 PM.
10-30-2010, 03:40 PM
#47
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: Sitting down and facing front in a plane
Posts: 136
That's a good question, ual4low...I really don't know stats about previous strikes. I guess Skywest might cross (not being ALPA), but I would certainly expect ALPA regionals not to...and for ALPA to provide that specific direction if and when the time comes.
If an ALPA regional has ALPA pilots picking up struck ALPA flying, then none of this union stuff makes much sense to me. Too much creative loophole BS for me. Let's keep it simple: Honor the picketline or get branded a scab.
If an ALPA regional has ALPA pilots picking up struck ALPA flying, then none of this union stuff makes much sense to me. Too much creative loophole BS for me. Let's keep it simple: Honor the picketline or get branded a scab.
JD
10-30-2010, 03:50 PM
#48
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Position: Sitting down and facing front in a plane
Posts: 136
JD you really are a troll. Having said that I do agree with you that it is unlikely a strike would be allowed by any administration. But there doesn't have to be a strike to achieve the objectives sought after. The greatest leverage of all is to do nothing. I don't know how many times I have just told the FO to sit on his hands and stay off the radio. The system will easily cave when the pilots decide to stop shoring up all of management's ineptness.
You're calling me a troll? I just looked that word up in the dictionary. You really think I am a supernatural creature of Scandinavian folklore? I am not sure how you come up with that description based on any of my posts here. You must have an interesting thought process.
JD
10-30-2010, 03:57 PM
#49
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: 747 Captain, retired
Posts: 928
10-30-2010, 04:21 PM
#50
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
First, the "us vs. them" comment is NOT a patronizing remark. I'm not sure how you came to that conclusion.
You obviously cannot read, because I NEVER said I dislike pilots. Cite the remark where I say I dislike pilots and I will hand deliver an engraved apology.
Next, the tag line/position is "sitting down facing front in a plane." Nothing about being in the back.
More room on scope means a combo of 50 and 70 seaters across the new UAL system. Again, I said NOTHING about anything bigger than 70 seaters. As you SHOULD know, CAL only allows for 50 seaters with a small exception for more seats in turbo-props. You simply cannot put the 70-seater genie back in the bottle....UNLESS the UAL pilots give a huge concession to the company...I don't believe. I could be wrong about that, I hope I am.
The union protects your family? I am rolling on the floor laughing RIGHT NOW ! ! ! Trash your brothers and sisters? Spare me the righteous indignation. I said NOTHING about your "brothers and sisters." You're looking for an argument where there is none.
When you have learned how to read and can comprehend what I am saying, please return for more debate. Until then, you can camp out on your front porch.
r/
JD
You obviously cannot read, because I NEVER said I dislike pilots. Cite the remark where I say I dislike pilots and I will hand deliver an engraved apology.
Next, the tag line/position is "sitting down facing front in a plane." Nothing about being in the back.
More room on scope means a combo of 50 and 70 seaters across the new UAL system. Again, I said NOTHING about anything bigger than 70 seaters. As you SHOULD know, CAL only allows for 50 seaters with a small exception for more seats in turbo-props. You simply cannot put the 70-seater genie back in the bottle....UNLESS the UAL pilots give a huge concession to the company...I don't believe. I could be wrong about that, I hope I am.
The union protects your family? I am rolling on the floor laughing RIGHT NOW ! ! ! Trash your brothers and sisters? Spare me the righteous indignation. I said NOTHING about your "brothers and sisters." You're looking for an argument where there is none.
When you have learned how to read and can comprehend what I am saying, please return for more debate. Until then, you can camp out on your front porch.
r/
JD
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
