Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
What to do about Contract Violation >

What to do about Contract Violation

Search

Notices

What to do about Contract Violation

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 11-04-2010, 04:15 AM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Captain Bligh's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 786
Default

Originally Posted by Dash8Pilot
Almost nobody at SkyWest wants to do this flying...
So don't do it. Or are you saying "Almost nobody, but there are just a few that are eager at the opportunity"?
Captain Bligh is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 04:21 AM
  #12  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Captain Bligh's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2009
Posts: 786
Default

Originally Posted by dosbo
Perhaps restricting the jumpseat from regional crewmembers would create enough of a cluster that management would have to do something.
Chartered Non-Rev only flights to bring in pilots? The economy is tight, kids want to fly bad enough, if they told them move there or no job, they would all move. What a shame the MECs have recently demonstrated such dysfunction and non-unity. This would be a great time to shine with some real leadership... hint.
Captain Bligh is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 04:29 AM
  #13  
Keep Calm Chive ON
 
SoCalGuy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Default

Originally Posted by Dash8Pilot
Almost nobody at SkyWest wants to do this flying......
Originally Posted by Captain Bligh
So don't do it. Or are you saying "Almost nobody, but there are just a few that are eager at the opportunity"?
+1 to Bligh.

Last time I checked Dash, no one from Pol Pot's Khmer Rouge is holding a gun to your head for the Death March.....and the "Were not Unionized" at SkyWest, doesn't hold water in my book either.

Believe me, the UAL pilot group already knows the outcome of this style of tactic, and the alternative is grim. Banded vs Unbanded?? That's child's play....SCOPE is ONE thing we ALL see eye to eye on.....Let the games begin.

Good luck on that.
SoCalGuy is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 04:30 AM
  #14  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Position: Furlough/Gun Driver
Posts: 437
Default

Originally Posted by Captain Bligh
Chartered Non-Rev only flights to bring in pilots? The economy is tight, kids want to fly bad enough, if they told them move there or no job, they would all move. What a shame the MECs have recently demonstrated such dysfunction and non-unity. This would be a great time to shine with some real leadership... hint.
That would mean they would have to move for thier job. Maybe they would have to evaluate if the job paid enough to justify that disruption to thier life and family if they can even afford to have one. If they are subsidising the crappi wages with the spouses good income then they won't move. What a shame, every other profession that is worth moving for pays enough to justify the move and the disruption to thier life. Why continue to make it easy to have our jobs outsourced.

Bring that flying in-house and the problem will be solved. Furloughs returned and more pilots hired at a major for a career that has actual growth opportunities for a lifetime, maybe.

You are right this profession is in serious need of leadership from both the union and management.
dosbo is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 08:53 AM
  #15  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 Cap
Posts: 2,282
Default

I'm glad you posted this 757Driver. To me it brings to light the fact that we should STOP the bickering about banding, and return our focus to getting the JCBA done STAT with Scope nailed down. I keep hearing that the CAL guys are on their forums saying "take your time.. no rush" to getting this deal done, so hopefully THIS arrogant move by management will change that philosophy.

By the way, Skywest is shrinking its ORD presence by about half to move the airplanes down to IAH. Clearly its the CAL pilots who are going to lose in this latest Scope nightmare. The only way I see to stem this tide is refocus on the SCOPE in our JCBA and move past this ridiculous banding vs. unbanding issue. KILL the 70's.
gettinbumped is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 09:16 AM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
 
luv757's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Aug 2005
Position: 18%er but I’ll enforce UPA23 to the last period.
Posts: 471
Default

Originally Posted by SoCalGuy
Banded vs Unbanded?? That's child's play....SCOPE is ONE thing we ALL see eye to eye on.....Let the games begin.

Good luck on that.
+1. I won't launch into my feeling on it here but this is the REAL threat here boys. Not a couple of bucks an hour on an airplane but getting ZERO bucks an hour because the job got outsourced, or taking a huge hit in pay as you move to the right seat from the left seat.
luv757 is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 09:28 AM
  #17  
Keep Calm Chive ON
 
SoCalGuy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2008
Position: Boeing's Plastic Jet Button Pusher - 787
Posts: 2,086
Default

Originally Posted by luv757
+1. I won't launch into my feeling on it here but this is the REAL threat here boys. Not a couple of bucks an hour on an airplane but getting ZERO bucks an hour because the job got outsourced, or taking a huge hit in pay as you move to the right seat from the left seat.
Yep....first to raise my hand on that.

I don't fly the 'short bus', nor am I a Mensa Scholar......but I know one thing......you have to be/remain on property first in order to collect in the riches/rates/benefits of any future JCBA (regardless of pay structure).

No qualms about it, we are seriously on 'hells brink' concerning SCOPE as it relates to this new company and the entire industry from this point forward.
SoCalGuy is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 09:29 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Position: Skeptical
Posts: 378
Default

Originally Posted by 757Driver
Just wondering what we CAL folks can do in response to Skywest and Shuttle America violating our scope agreement in our CBA. I know I for one won't be allowing any of them on my jumpseat to get work to violate my contract.
Be sure to deny the entire pre-merger UAL pilot-group who negotiated and voted for a contract that allowed such UEX flying in the first place. You know, the only ones in this whole drama who could have prevented this flying.

That'll show 'em.
Golden Bear is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 10:48 AM
  #19  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: A320/A319/B737 Sys Acft Maint Controller
Posts: 303
Default

Originally Posted by boxer6
Man, Sorry to see this bunch of crap. Looks like Smisek has been hanging around Glenn too much...although, deep down, I don't think he needs Glenn's tutledge one iota.
I bet this is one topic where you and the UAL guys will be in lock step with one another.
************************************************** **********
Contrary to popular belief, SMISEK is the CEO, BUT NOT the Chairman and Won't be for the next 2 years. Let him NOT stay with the "Corporate LINE" as far as the scope stands as it is today? And you'll see HIM leaving as for "other opportunities" as "mysteriously" as your Former CEO left. Tilton doesn't CARE what Smisek's ideas are, And? For the next 2 years Smisek will be "Grinning and Bearing it". Unlesss you guys NEGOTIATE the scope restrictions away? They won't be going Anywhere!! So what you guys might need to do is quit "haggling" about Nothing and Start worrying about SOMETHING because Scope is going to bite you in the Butt a damn sight Harder than whether Banding the 747/777 is viable.. Maybe you didn't live through the 1113 hearings but let me make this PERFECTLY clear. Tilton is EVERY BIT as sharp as ANYBODY in ALPA and TWICE as Treacherous. You'd better be getting up Earlier and staying up LATER if you plan to best him. "Just a word to the wise".
strfyr51 is offline  
Old 11-04-2010, 11:18 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Position: 737 capt
Posts: 335
Default

Originally Posted by strfyr51
************************************************** **********
Contrary to popular belief, SMISEK is the CEO, BUT NOT the Chairman and Won't be for the next 2 years. Let him NOT stay with the "Corporate LINE" as far as the scope stands as it is today? And you'll see HIM leaving as for "other opportunities" as "mysteriously" as your Former CEO left. Tilton doesn't CARE what Smisek's ideas are, And? For the next 2 years Smisek will be "Grinning and Bearing it". Unlesss you guys NEGOTIATE the scope restrictions away? They won't be going Anywhere!! So what you guys might need to do is quit "haggling" about Nothing and Start worrying about SOMETHING because Scope is going to bite you in the Butt a damn sight Harder than whether Banding the 747/777 is viable.. Maybe you didn't live through the 1113 hearings but let me make this PERFECTLY clear. Tilton is EVERY BIT as sharp as ANYBODY in ALPA and TWICE as Treacherous. You'd better be getting up Earlier and staying up LATER if you plan to best him. "Just a word to the wise".
I think glenn is the "non-executive" chairman so who knows what the real power structure behind the mgt curtain is. You are spot on about scope because no matter who is calling the shots, they are going to do whatever they want untill we have a JCBA. We can slam the barn door as hard as we want but it will not do us any good 6 months from now..... the horses are going to be long gone.
ron kent is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
vagabond
Aviation Law
4
09-04-2008 01:09 PM
VictorFoxCharli
Foreign
13
07-18-2008 09:43 AM
BoredwLife
Major
1
07-16-2008 02:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices