JetBlue Pilots vote against union

[falconvalley]

Ok. Or they can furlough them just like they would an ALPA carrier so they can save money on retraining. Or if the pay is the issue they can pull a Midwest as well. Which by the way is an ALPA carrier. You didn't say much there chief. It's kind of insulting that people assume a pilot group doesn't know what's best for them.

We're talking about sociological issues here. If either of us said we knew the answers, we'd be full of it. I'm just saying- they're happy at this point. Representation isn't free and it certainly isn't bullet proof. But it doesn't hurt when you have a large group of people in a dynamic dept such as a pilot group. They just don't realize that as a group and unfortunately probably won't for the reasons that representation is actually good for. Do you think you can get 2000 people to all agree to pay for a "little" more job security at a place like JB? That'd be like me asking you to fork over 50 bucks a month so I can't be fired for failing a checkride. If you're confident you'll never have that problem, you'd probably tell me to take a long walk off a short pier. All I'm saying is a large group of people like that might be better off as a whole if someone speaks for them. Otherwise it's everybody for themselves. In a corporate flight department, that works. In a 2000 pilot group, you might have a few things swept under the rug by management just because it can be done. Are you trying to say that I'm full of it for stating that?

 

[BajtheJino]

Bus drivers spend their day in a (big) van; airline pilots spend their nights in one.

Now thats funny!
:yup:

 

[jtrain609]

As much as I hate to contribute to this #### slinging fest, which will probably degenerate into the mind numbing topics section.

Your 14 months as an express jet FO hardly make you the wise sage you some times purport to be, yet you bash anyone with a different opinion. You know I've got your back if you want to head north to get back into flying, and you know I think what your doing with Law and your aspirations are honorable, but man, sometimes you get more flies with honey.

I never claimed to be Jesus, bro, and if you can't take somebody disagreeing with you on the internets then you need to grow some thicker skin.

Bash people? Seriously? I disagree with somebody and now I'm trying to curb stomp them? Did I tell anybody to bite the curb?

You're out of your element.

 

[Polar742]

As always with any thread involving unions, very interesting to read inspite of the usual BS to wade through.

What have I learned? That the fact that we can settle these discussions via a lawful voting process is great.

Of course there are many different ways this can play out. The most obvious admission though, is the 25% stake LH has in JB.

What future plans does LH have with that stake? Obviously they didn't buy it just to say they own a piece of something. Is it a wait-and-see if United fails, to help JB attract investments to buy the remnants to have a strong Star Alliance partner in the US? Is it a wait-and-see if the government allows all-out foreign ownership of US airlines, allowing them to funnel their extensive international network through the US on an already known brand?

As to the future at JetBlue, who knows what will occur for the pilots. I don't know the inner-workings of the airline, but like someone pointed out, if everyone is making money, then everyone is generally happy. I didn't talk to anyone I know over there who got the 12/share stock options now that the stock is hovering around 4-6/share, with all the splits, I wonder if they're still ahead. I sure won't ask my buddy who got his option price locked in at 48.

In othernews, it is a fact that SWA has crept up, but the legacies have tumbled in pay. It is merely conjecture that SWA caused that.

More importantly, is SWA going to be the main determination of testing pilot salaries? If so, are they going to be the ceiling or the floor?

Stay tuned to "As The Turbine Turns..."

 

[BobDDuck]

That'd be a good thing, but people would still call them scabs for not being a union shop, even though its a good place to work. The argument for ALPA/UNION X/Etc. will be undermined in a lot of ways, but probably not too much.

Look at Lynden Air Cargo, they're not union, and they have some of the best pay and duty in the industry (APC gives you hourly rates, not the rates plus the profit sharing and bonuses, so the APC rates are wildly underinflated), they're cargo only, but its still a big bird they're driving along. The next step is NAC, where guys are making a bit less than the AK Airlines 737 capts. to drive them, but its a job they enjoy, has them home in bed everynight (every night) and they have a long and excellent history.

And with this post right there you completely demonstrate that you don't understand what the argument is about. It has VERY little to do with pay. It has to do with benefits. And not typical HR related benefits but industry benefits. What annoys Union people (and specifically ALPA people) is the number of things ALPA has done for the pilots of the industry that other (non Union carriers) get to enjoy. Just recently ALPA spent time and money to get CrewPass up and running. And now everybody in the CASS system (another ALPA project) get's to enjoy the benefits of it. MY dues dollars subsidized a bunch of JetBlue and Skywest pilots getting to use CrewPass.

And the list goes on. GPWZ, TCAS, accident investigation protocals... these are all things that, in the past ALPA has spent a huge amount of time and money developing so that they BENEFIT pilots. And then, along comes another airline who's pilots have contributed absolutly no money or time to help with these things and they get to use the benefit provided. Hardly fair is it?

Velo's argument about jumpseats is another example of this. ALPA spend a huge amount of bargaining capital to get companies (and the FAA) to allow commuting pilots to use the jumpseat. That benefit is now industry standard and hence many people have no clue that ALPA fought long and hard to make it that way. So in some senses it makes complete sense that because it was ALPA (and a few other Unions too) fighting for that, it should be just those Unions who have the benefit of using it.

This begs the question, did SWA have low payrates that others had to come down to? Or, did the legacies have unrealistic payscales that "rightsized" and came down to a more realistic level with SWA?

It appears to me the SWA pilots make a lot of money.

I'd agree that they make a lot of money. But my point was more about which way the pay rates went and the history shows that theirs stayed about the same and everybody else came down to be "competitive".

 

[SmoothLanderJ]

As always with any thread involving unions, very interesting to read inspite of the usual BS to wade through.

What have I learned? That the fact that we can settle these discussions via a lawful voting process is great.

Of course there are many different ways this can play out. The most obvious admission though, is the 25% stake LH has in JB.

What future plans does LH have with that stake? Obviously they didn't buy it just to say they own a piece of something. Is it a wait-and-see if United fails, to help JB attract investments to buy the remnants to have a strong Star Alliance partner in the US? Is it a wait-and-see if the government allows all-out foreign ownership of US airlines, allowing them to funnel their extensive international network through the US on an already known brand?

As to the future at JetBlue, who knows what will occur for the pilots. I don't know the inner-workings of the airline, but like someone pointed out, if everyone is making money, then everyone is generally happy. I didn't talk to anyone I know over there who got the 12/share stock options now that the stock is hovering around 4-6/share, with all the splits, I wonder if they're still ahead. I sure won't ask my buddy who got his option price locked in at 48.

In othernews, it is a fact that SWA has crept up, but the legacies have tumbled in pay. It is merely conjecture that SWA caused that.

More importantly, is SWA going to be the main determination of testing pilot salaries? If so, are they going to be the ceiling or the floor?

Stay tuned to "As The Turbine Turns..."

Now THAT would be a good show........

 

[Velocipede]

Only because everybody else dropped their rates down to SWA, NOT because Southwest raised their rates above the rest of the industry.

You see the problem? Now you've got industry newbies thinking that SWA's pay rates are something to aspire to. 10 years from now, when the rest of the industry has been forced to drop their rates to match JetBlue and Virgin some new guy is going to comment about how they have the best Airbus pay in the world.

:yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat::yeahthat:

For the most part, if management is making money, they are happy. If pilots are making money they are happy, and are willing to go the extra mile for management. SWA realizes this.

Absolutely correct. Herb Kelleher was adamant that the employees were his #1 asset. And that's the essential difference between SWA and the rest of the industry. SWA treats its employees as assets to be maximized. Virtually everyone else treats employees as a liability to be minimized.

That's the difference.

 

[kellwolf]

Absolutely correct. Herb Kelleher was adamant that the employees were his #1 asset. And that's the essential difference between SWA and the rest of the industry. SWA treats its employees as assets to be maximized. Virtually everyone else treats employees as a liability to be minimized.

That's the difference.

When the boss comes to you and says "Look, I want you to take a pay freeze, and to be fair, I'm gonna take one, too....and pass over my bonuses, too" you tend to respect him more. When bosses say "Well, the company's in trouble, so we need you to take concessions," then they give themselves a bonus for cutting costs, you tend to feel like you've got a knife sticking out of your back. Herb did the first scenario when SWA was in trouble back in the day. Other airline CEOs are guilty of the latter.

 

[WacoFan]

When the boss comes to you and says "Look, I want you to take a pay freeze, and to be fair, I'm gonna take one, too....and pass over my bonuses, too" you tend to respect him more. When bosses say "Well, the company's in trouble, so we need you to take concessions," then they give themselves a bonus for cutting costs, you tend to feel like you've got a knife sticking out of your back. Herb did the first scenario when SWA was in trouble back in the day. Other airline CEOs are guilty of the latter.

Of all the "new" airlines, I really admire Allegiant the most. They seem to have a true sense of responsibility in terms of their growth and their commitment to their plan. They do not get blinded by their stock price to the point of over-expansion. They also have been profitable in these rough times. Of any of the "new" airline management, they impress me the most - and many of them are SWA refugees. I know for a fact that management is concerned with the pilots, and I believe the pilots have an organized group that deals with management. I do not think they are an in-house union, but I would not be shocked to see that, or something else in the future. Allegiant (management and business wise) seems to be hitting the right notes.

 

[jhugz]

Your 14 months as an express jet FO hardly make you the wise sage you some times purport to be, yet you bash anyone with a different opinion.

Didn't ya know that as soon as ya step foot into the right seat of an RJ you magically understand unions. Come on Pat.

 

[jtrain609]

Didn't ya know that as soon as ya step foot into the right seat of an RJ you magically understand unions. Come on Pat.

HA! You're cute, kid.

 

[jhugz]

HA! You're cute, kid.

 

[Cruise]

Yes....and a CSA and an Ops Agent. So it yeah it makes me a ignorant ground pounder but I still know what airline mgmt. is capable of doing.

jtrain...u know I respest your opinion, but my whole problem with "part" of this thread is that it got made out that the JB guys made the wrong choice. Last time I checked we did'nt have any JB guys on here, so we really don't know the backstory on why the union got shot down.

I just didn't like the implication of "no union, no jumpseat".

They did make the wrong choice. Yes, it really is that simple. But, perhaps they'll realize that over the course of the next year and the results will be different next time. Rest assured, there will be a 'next time;' however, it just might not be next year.

 

[JungleJet]

Good for them, seriously. I'm happy an airline really takes care of their pilots to the point they shoot down a union. Don't let the unions spend their money on people who want to eliminate capitalism/our jobs!

From: an ALPA member.

 

[Boris Badenov]

Here I was about to post about how at least this will take the heat off the SWA guys for being the Elemental Portal of Aviation Evil! Silly me, they just got a sidekick.

 

[mrivc211]

I worked in the industry for 6 years at 3 different airlines as a ground pounder. I know what management can throw at you. I've had non union jobs and union ones....Hell I was one of the first ones to scream "Burn this ***** down" during my company's contract talks w/my union because I thought the offers were insulting. And BTW even with a union if they want you gone they'll get you gone...it just takes more work....i seen it happen a couple times.

My whole problem is this....so the JB guys don't want a union, not even an in house one. Okay...if that is what works with that group than good. I will agree with a earlier poster....if mgmt screws them (or even a percived screwing)then you'll see a union at JB.

But honestly what is the big deal. Union or no union they are out there doing the job safely and hopefully making money for not only themselves but for the company also. For alot of those guys that's it....there is no moving on if JB tanks, so I don't blame those ex TWA,USAir,United guys more than likely voted no for a union....considering what they all went though, I'd be a little gunshy too.

As far as they whole JS thing...we've had that arguement. I respect the captain authority on that...my problem is when even there is a issue somebody has to pull the whole "not on my JS" deal. IMHO its petty and embarassing to pilots as a whole because it make you guys sound like whiny 4 year olds with a playing keep-a-way with toy.

So let me get this straight? You work the ramp, and you think you're qualified to give an opinion on Pilot matters? Please. Save it. Maybe you should come spend 5 years as a 121 pilot then come talk to us.

 

[seagull]

So let me get this straight? You work the ramp, and you think you're qualified to give an opinion on Pilot matters? Please. Save it. Maybe you should come spend 5 years as a 121 pilot then come talk to us.

That is condescending and uncalled for. 5 whole years as a "121 pilot" makes someone qualified to give an opinion? Sorry, don't buy it. Do those reading this thread really think that many (probably most) of the Jetblue pilots did work for union carriers before? It's been my experience that those that were with union carriers in a previous life, that went out of biz or similar, are usually the most rabid anti-union folks on the property. The ex-military are usually fairly indifferent absent a major event one way or the other. Also, equating the experience at a regional hardly gives a lot of perspective at to what life is like a a true (not just DOT definition) major or legacy carrier.

The fact that they only had 33% voting for any representation says a lot. It really wasn't even close. They need to decide their own future. The last thing you want is for there to have been 24% for their independent, another 26% for ALPA, so you get ALPA representation with only 26% of the pilots wanting it, and a lame duck union. That's worse than no representation at all. BTDT. The Jetblue pilots made their own decision.

 

[skydog]

The thing that amuses me is the general belief that the presence of a union will make things "better." They're're gonna get better pay, better schedules, better crew meals, better whatever. It's gonna get better. Why? Nothing else has changed. The company's business model hasn't changed. The economics of the industry haven't changed. Customers aren't suddenly paying more for tickets. The regionals' mainline partners aren't suddenly paying more to have flights operated. Nothing else has changed. in fact, with unionization, the airline just got more expensive to operate, yet it is assumed that all of a sudden there is money to pay for all these improvements.

 

[jtrain609]

The thing that amuses me is the general belief that the presence of a union will make things "better." They're're gonna get better pay, better schedules, better crew meals, better whatever. It's gonna get better. Why? Nothing else has changed. The company's business model hasn't changed. The economics of the industry haven't changed. Customers aren't suddenly paying more for tickets. The regionals' mainline partners aren't suddenly paying more to have flights operated. Nothing else has changed. in fact, with unionization, the airline just got more expensive to operate, yet it is assumed that all of a sudden there is money to pay for all these improvements.

I think it's called reducing profits to pay for an additional contract that you've entered into.

 

[meritflyer]

You know I'm not even sure about that, I just think he lacks the visceral experience of having to deal with the things airline management can throw at you.

You worked at XJT for < 1 year. How much have you really experienced?