United hiring by Fall 2012

ATN_Pilot said:
Actually, the same thing doesn't happen. Those of us who lived through bargaining under the Bush NMB ("No airline strikes on my watch") know just how different things are today.
Click to expand...

If it happens with this administration I will agree with you till then we will have to agree to disagree or however that's said.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
It's already happened. Have you forgotten the Spirit strike in 2010? Not a chance in hell that would have happened under President Bush.
Click to expand...

A small LCC that mostly carries tourists to the caribean from Florida is one thing, American or Delta is another.

They will probably let the regionals walk off the job, but when the NMB releases United to strike I'll eat my left boot.
 
USMCmech said:
A small LCC that mostly carries tourists to the caribean from Florida is one thing, American or Delta is another.

They will probably let the regionals walk off the job, but when the NMB releases United to strike I'll eat my left boot.
Click to expand...


Two R's in carribean ,

Still concur with your statements.
 
USMCmech said:
A small LCC that mostly carries tourists to the caribean from Florida is one thing, American or Delta is another.

They will probably let the regionals walk off the job, but when the NMB releases United to strike I'll eat my left boot.
Click to expand...

The problem is that the average pilot thinks of a release as a path to a strike. That's incorrect. That's not the way the NMB views a release, and it's certainly not what the drafters of the Act intended. A release is not intended to lead to a disruption of service, it is intended to prevent a disruption of service by leading to a deal. The NMB issues a release when they believe that the pressure of an impending release will cause management to move towards a deal. Conversely, the NMB "parks" negotiations when they believe that the pressure of recessing negotiations will cause labor to move towards a deal. Therefore, the size of the carrier is irrelevant, because their goal is to avoid a disruption. Or at least, avoid a significant disruption. If negotiations in the UAL/CAL negotiation reach a point where the Board believes that a deal is imminent and would be triggered by the pressure of a release, then they'll provide it.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
If negotiations in the UAL/CAL negotiation reach a point where the Board believes that a deal is imminent and would be triggered by the pressure of a release, then they'll provide it.
Click to expand...
I'll believe it when I see it.

The RLA exists because the railroads were such a critical component of the american economy, that the unions could not be allowed to strike unless there was no other option. The airlines have replace the railroads in this regard.

I do agree that Bush's stance on this regard was dead wrong. however, I don't think even Obama could allow a major airline to go on strike and survive politically.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
And last time I checked, the President is not a dictator in this country. The House is controlled by the Republicans, and the Senate is deadlocked all the time because the Democrats don't have a filibuster-proof majority.
Click to expand...

But for 2 years, the Democrats did have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate while they also controlled the House and the Presidency. And let's not forget that Pinnacle was parked during that time after 5 years of negotiations. Democrats are no better than Republicans when it comes to a carrier that will actually disrupt the system.
 
Interjecting logic into a Democrats mind.

How long does it take before a democrat stops blaming Pres Bush for all things wrong in the world?
Trick question.

When Pres Bush was at the helm, it was his responsiblity.
Since Pres Obama took the helm, it's the crews fault, not Obama's that we're heading for an iceberg.
 
You know I've ridden in the back on United a few times in the last few years. You'd have to pay me a significantly greater sum than they seem to be pulling down to deal with that particular one-car funeral.
 
USMCmech said:
I do agree that Bush's stance on this regard was dead wrong. however, I don't think even Obama could allow a major airline to go on strike and survive politically.
Click to expand...

You're still making the same mistake! Again, a release is not a tool used to lead to a strike. A release is a tool used to reach a deal.
 
SrFnFly227 said:
But for 2 years, the Democrats did have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate while they also controlled the House and the Presidency.
Click to expand...

No, they didn't. Not really, anyway. Several of those Democrats were conservative Democrats who were "Ds" in name only. They consistently voted with the Republicans because of their conservative states and wanting to get re-elected. We haven't had a truly progressive filibuster-proof majority in the Senate in decades.

And let's not forget that Pinnacle was parked during that time after 5 years of negotiations.
Click to expand...

Of course they were! Even I would have parked Pinnacle. The MEC was disjointed and untenable demands were being made at the table. The only way the Board could get them to wake up was to park negotiations. They did exactly as they should have done.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
You're still making the same mistake! Again, a release is not a tool used to lead to a strike. A release is a tool used to reach a deal.
Click to expand...

Whatever you want to call it, no administration Democrat or Republican will ever allow a major airline to shut down the whole country.

I have no idea about the finer points of the RLA,nor do I care. I assume that you are correct about the exact semantics of labor negotiations.
 
USMCmech said:
Whatever you want to call it, no administration Democrat or Republican will ever allow a major airline to shut down the whole country.
Click to expand...

They don't need to. A release can lead to a PEB just as easily as it can lead to a strike. The PEB in the AMR case in 1997 resulted in a significantly improved contract. The Act performs incredibly well when a President and NMB are in place that allow it to work as designed.
 
USMCmech said:
Whatever you want to call it, no administration Democrat or Republican will ever allow a major airline to shut down the whole country.

I have no idea about the finer points of the RLA,nor do I care. I assume that you are correct about the exact semantics of labor negotiations.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure that my FNWA brothers would agree with that.


Sent from my TRS-80
 
Derg said:
I'm not sure that my FNWA brothers would agree with that.
Click to expand...

Maybe 10 years ago, sure it could have happened.

Now that we will soon have 4 major airlines (UNICAL, DeltaNW, USairAA, and Southwestran) I just can't see it happening. The levels of pressure that would be brought to bear on both management and the union would simply be unimaginable. It has been well established that the public has no sympathy for "already overpaid" pilots, and management would not fair any better.

FedEX and UPS are in the same boat. If a strike shut down Memphis for more than a week, I could see the postal service taking over and the USAF doing the flying.
 
USMCmech said:
Maybe 10 years ago, sure it could have happened.

Now that we will soon have 4 major airlines (UNICAL, DeltaNW, USairAA, and Southwestran) I just can't see it happening. The levels of pressure that would be brought to bear on both management and the union would simply be unimaginable. It has been well established that the public has no sympathy for "already overpaid" pilots, and management would not fair any better.

FedEX and UPS are in the same boat. If a strike shut down Memphis for more than a week, I could see the postal service taking over and the USAF doing the flying.
Click to expand...
I guess it a good thing that Fed Ex still provides an acceptable pay rate and QOL for their work force.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top