Pass Travel Survey
#61
New Hire
Joined APC: Aug 2007
Posts: 8
". . but the case was so clear that his attorney did not even require an upfront contingency fee. . . "
That is not a thing.
"
. . . "too bad, I was lucky in life and you were not." . . "
Hmmmmmm, that sounds quite similar to the "you will have time to make it up" argument that the gummers in favor of B-scale and age 65 used.
"Retiree pass travel is a really a dead issue, few retirees use it, but the emotional attachement is still there. Us old duffers don't have anything better to do then picket Wacker Drive (warm weather only) and we like to write letter. How's this for a sign:
United Steals Benefits from Retirees"....but only after it steals from active employees...
One can always twist things.
Cheers,
T.S.
That is not a thing.
"
. . . "too bad, I was lucky in life and you were not." . . "
Hmmmmmm, that sounds quite similar to the "you will have time to make it up" argument that the gummers in favor of B-scale and age 65 used.
"Retiree pass travel is a really a dead issue, few retirees use it, but the emotional attachement is still there. Us old duffers don't have anything better to do then picket Wacker Drive (warm weather only) and we like to write letter. How's this for a sign:
United Steals Benefits from Retirees"....but only after it steals from active employees...
One can always twist things.
Cheers,
T.S.
#62
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2010
Position: A320/A319/B737 Sys Acft Maint Controller
Posts: 303
Oh, so true. With all the questions about supervisors getting an enhanced priority, I think they were probably surprised that the results were so firmly NO in that category. There was no ambiguity in that answer, unlike the split in some of the others. Now we shall see if we really do have a say in the NEW policy.
I read that survey as well and unless Jeff makes Supervisors a class unto themselves then it won't be going down the way they tried to frame it.
If a supervisor is pn a Business trip then his department can issue an SA1 or BP3 ticket to go where they need to go. But for Pleasure Travel??
NO!! Straight Seniority! Your time in the saddle has GOT to count for something. And this survey has shown that it Does. I don't think many Non Pilots other than myself agreed with me on Pilots having a boarding Priority while in Uniform. I thought it was OK but then again many of YOU didn't even agree with me so you win some? you Lose some? and some get Rained out. I still thought it was a good idea. I doubt that the final policy will look like any of us want it to. But that Check in Time vs seniority boarding proposal sure went down the drain. (that was an Idea Frought with scandalous overtones.)
#63
". . but the case was so clear that his attorney did not even require an upfront contingency fee. . . "
That is not a thing.
"
. . . "too bad, I was lucky in life and you were not." . . "
Hmmmmmm, that sounds quite similar to the "you will have time to make it up" argument that the gummers in favor of B-scale and age 65 used.
That is not a thing.
"
. . . "too bad, I was lucky in life and you were not." . . "
Hmmmmmm, that sounds quite similar to the "you will have time to make it up" argument that the gummers in favor of B-scale and age 65 used.
Nevertheless, to a point I agree with you, I doubt you will ever "make it up." We got those pay scales through sacrifice and unity, you don't have that. Will you put your job on the line for someone else? If not, don't complain about the excrement that management gives you in your new contract. This pass travel debate is really a distraction, to divide the different factions, you have bigger things to worry about.
So long, off to the home to play bingo, now where did I put my teeth.
The Geezer
#64
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,610
The simplest and easiest resolution that is most fair is straight years of service.
No windfall for one group.
If you have 15 years of service, you go ahead of someone with 10 years of service.
Retiree with 30 years of service goes ahead of active employee with 20 years of service.
Retiree with 25 years of service goes BEHIND an active employee with 30 years of service.
The more time you give to the company, the higher your priority. Period. Who would disagree?
No windfall for one group.
If you have 15 years of service, you go ahead of someone with 10 years of service.
Retiree with 30 years of service goes ahead of active employee with 20 years of service.
Retiree with 25 years of service goes BEHIND an active employee with 30 years of service.
The more time you give to the company, the higher your priority. Period. Who would disagree?
#65
#67
From what you say about how the questions were written it is obvious they were written that way because they know FULL WELL that the policy is complete BS and that there are more UAL folks on the property than CAL. They want to keep that policy for obvious reasons. CAL folks have a opportunity right now...not after... to have their union representatives make a stand to management..together... along with the the UAL union reps to INSIST that this policy stops. Just because you accepted it before doesn't mean that you should keep accepting it.
#68
Originally Posted by strfyr51
If a supervisor is pn a Business trip then his department can issue an SA1 or BP3 ticket to go where they need to go. But for Pleasure Travel??
#69
But in the case of the ALPA AGE 65 survey I take it you approved of the result? Those were not "slanted" questions that ALPA created to get the result they wanted?
Better get Glawe, Whiteford and Gallud Band back together to attempt to circumvent this AGAIN.....
#70
I disagree, active employees followed by retiree's. There is a reason why all the other airlines do not have retiree's first, just plain unfair. No SA1, no SA2. Simple, active years of service determines boarding priority.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post