AA hiring rate and Envoy flow rant

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

ATL Concourse C Pre Lee Moak:
View attachment 29352

ATL Concourse C Post Lee Moak:
View attachment 29353

Dude, this is one of those "correlation does not equal causation" moments. The RJs are gone because they aren't economical. It has absolutely zero to do with Moak. Moak just happened to be standing around when it happened.

 

[jynxyjoe]

Trust me, I've seen people get fired for being jerks. It just takes a paper trail.

Am I wrong? I wasn't a big time union volunteer or rep (I did a little). Can a union insist they fire someone? I would think the company would just stare blankly at the union rep and say, "I'll pretend you didn't say that."

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I'm blaming the company for not working to remove guys like that, and the union for not insisting that they do.

If you think a union should insist that someone be fired, then you don't even understand what a union is. It's management's job to manage. If they don't, that's on them, not the union.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Am I wrong? I wasn't a big time union volunteer or rep (I did a little). Can a union insist they fire someone?

Not unless they want to be sued into oblivion and have management laugh at them.

 

[amorris311]

Am I wrong? I wasn't a big time union volunteer or rep (I did a little). Can a union insist they fire someone? I would think the company would just stare blankly at the union rep and say, "I'll pretend you didn't say that."

If you don't pay your dues the union can push to have someone terminated. That's part of having agency shop. I know at CJC We got close with a few and just before they were terminated they came up with the cash.

I know this is going to get the union thug vocalist out but those people in my mind are stealing.

 

[jynxyjoe]

Not unless they want to be sued into oblivion and have management laugh at them.

I didn't realize the law suit thing, but it doesn't matter if they meet at your conference room or you meet at there's, you have to be respectful. Telling them how to do their job is a good way for them to get angry and walk out, or say something dick'ish like, "sure sure sure... where is that in the contract??!". At the VERY least, whoever does the "insisting" is going to be a punch line at every meeting and she/he'll never be able to show their face again.

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

I've met you, you just don't remember it. I haven't flown with you though. I think it's funny how you remember this because I still have the PM that YOU started. Re read april 13th 2013. I simply replied telling you to stop trying to sleuth people, outing people, and stop the madness you create around you.

Well, hopefully it wasn't a bad impression in person. I don't have PMs, I delete that stuff.

Not unless they want to be sued into oblivion and have management laugh at them.

True, but don't forget the dues sign off/shop stuff which is a contractual section. You can be fired for not ponying up the money to ALPA. At least, that's how it was explained to me. So how's that right? Why should the company terminate you because you haven't paid a pilot group association something? If I was the company, I'd say that's between the pilot and his union head honchos.

 

[jynxyjoe]

If you don't pay your dues the union can push to have someone terminated. That's part of having agency shop. I know at CJC We got close with a few and just before they were terminated they came up with the cash.

I know this is going to get the union thug vocalist out but those people in my mind are stealing.

Right, but that's a CBA issue, that has nothing to do with the price of tea in China. Cool story and everything but if the pilot is a "dick" a union rep can't sit across from a management rep and "insist" they'll be fired.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Right, but that's a CBA issue, that has nothing to do with the price of tea in China. Cool story and everything but if the pilot is a "dick" a union rep can't sit across from a management rep and "insist" they'll be fired.

Hell, I would love for SWAPA to insist to SWA management that they fire me for being a dick. I know they'd love to. But they won't, because I'd walk away with their $20 million war chest in my pocket.

 

[jynxyjoe]

Well, hopefully it wasn't a bad impression in person. I don't have PMs, I delete that stuff.

Would you like me to forward it to you?

 

[jynxyjoe]

Hell, I would love for SWAPA to insist to SWA management that they fire me for being a dick. I know they'd love to. But they won't, because I'd walk away with their $20 million war chest in my pocket.

And then you'd buy me a Hylas right?

 

[BobDDuck]

Am I wrong? I wasn't a big time union volunteer or rep (I did a little). Can a union insist they fire someone? I would think the company would just stare blankly at the union rep and say, "I'll pretend you didn't say that."

Yes. A union can insist the company fire someone, if the reasons for termination are listed in the contract, as they are with agency shop places.

Why should the company terminate you because you haven't paid a pilot group association something? If I was the company, I'd say that's between the pilot and his union head honchos.

Because oftentimes the language is in the CBA, forcing the company to fire a pilot in bad standing. Same reason a company does DCO.

 

[PhilosopherPilot]

You agree with the above though right? I don't know what you think the union insisting on anything is going to do.

I do agree. But I think the union has a responsibility for the integrity of the pilot group, and if there's a bad apple they have responsibility to try to remedy that. Firing may not be the best option. Maybe it's just a very frank conversation that's needed.

That's why Professional Standards exists right? The union and the company both have the means to deal with bad apples, and share that responsibility. I would think that at some point the union would look at the company and say, "So what are YOU going to do about Bob? We've done all that we can."

If you think a union should insist that someone be fired, then you don't even understand what a union is. It's management's job to manage. If they don't, that's on them, not the union.

My point was that if Pro Standards is getting constant complaints about someone and the company is doing nothing to remedy it, then yeah the union has a responsibility to insist that the company does something to fix it. Right?

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

Would you like me to forward it to you?

No thanks

Yes. A union can insist the company fire someone, if the reasons for termination are listed in the contract, as they are with agency shop places.




Because oftentimes the language is in the CBA, forcing the company to fire a pilot in bad standing. Same reason a company does DCO.

So a union does protect itself by writing language a pilot can be fired by the company if they aren't ponying up the cash. Isn't that the same as insisting the company look at getting someone fired as someone mentioned above? Granted, it's a different issue in dues payment vs discipline issues but the concept is the same.

 

[jynxyjoe]

Yes. A union can insist the company fire someone, if the reasons for termination are listed in the contract, as they are with agency shop places.

Is being a "jerk" in this instance something in your contract? I understand a CBA would have it worded better by lawyers, i'm just a layman.

I do agree. But I think the union has a responsibility for the integrity of the pilot group, and if there's a bad apple they have responsibility to try to remedy that. Firing may not be the best option. Maybe it's just a very frank conversation that's needed.

That's why Professional Standards exists right? The union and the company both have the means to deal with bad apples, and share that responsibility. I would think that at some point the union would look at the company and say, "So what are YOU going to do about Bob? We've done all that we can."



My point was that if Pro Standards is getting constant complaints about someone and the company is doing nothing to remedy it, then yeah the union has a responsibility to insist that the company does something to fix it. Right?

I haven't had those types of experiences. I've seen the pro stands, through grievance, do exactly the "We've done everything we can, he's refusing all help. We're done" and the company kept him anyway.

Bob is better at this than me. I'm not even union anymore.

 

[BobDDuck]

So a union does protect itself by writing language a pilot can be fired by the company if they aren't ponying up the cash. Isn't that the same as insisting the company look at getting someone fired as someone mentioned above? Granted, it's a different issue in dues payment vs discipline issues but the concept is the same.

No. Because in the case of financial bad standing it directly effects the operation of the union (via finances), something the company wouldn't care about at all. In the case of a pilot acting a fo' and making life difficult for everybody, it doesn't directly effect the union's operation (although it does effect the union's pilots day to day lives) but more importantly, it DOES effect the company's day to day operation due to potential poor CRM and safety issues.

Also, keep in mind that back in the day, there were a whole lot of ways you could end up in bad standing that didn't have to do with not paying your dues. It wasn't unusual for unions to publish a list of "bad" pilots who were asses to work with or did things like picking up open time while guys were on furlough. That would land you in the black book and if you stayed there long enough, somebody would start an Article VIII process against you which could eventually get you booted from the union and then, due to agency shop clause in a CBA, booted from the company. The problem now is that in this touchy/feely, litigious we live in, the "subjective" black books are problematic so pretty much the only way you can end up in bad standing in through dues issues.

 

[jynxyjoe]

The problem now is that in this touchy/feely, litigious we live in, the "subjective" black books are problematic so pretty much the only way you can end up in bad standing in through dues issues.

Hehe. Easy old man.

 

[PhilosopherPilot]

No. Because in the case of financial bad standing it directly effects the operation of the union (via finances), something the company wouldn't care about at all. In the case of a pilot acting a fo' and making life difficult for everybody, it doesn't directly effect the union's operation (although it does effect the union's pilots day to day lives) but more importantly, it DOES effect the company's day to day operation due to potential poor CRM and safety issues.

Also, keep in mind that back in the day, there were a whole lot of ways you could end up in bad standing that didn't have to do with not paying your dues. It wasn't unusual for unions to publish a list of "bad" pilots who were asses to work with or did things like picking up open time while guys were on furlough. That would land you in the black book and if you stayed there long enough, somebody would start an Article VIII process against you which could eventually get you booted from the union and then, due to agency shop clause in a CBA, booted from the company. The problem now is that in this touchy/feely, litigious we live in, the "subjective" black books are problematic so pretty much the only way you can end up in bad standing in through dues issues.

You don't have to be in the union though. You just have to pay the agency fees. So how would being booted from the union get you fired?

 

[HVYMETALDRVR]

Keep an unruly and restless work force at bay? ?

What is this, a kindergarten teacher trying to manage a romper room after their class of kids missed their nap time?



Since you asked, I will elaborate a bit on just why else on God's green earth a flow arrangement would exist.

In 2005 when Northwest Airlines declared bankruptcy, one of the things that ended up coming out of it was a change in the scope clause and this resulted in two groups of 36 76-seat airplanes being outsourced. 36 CRJ-900s went to Mesaba, and 36 E-175s were to be to be sent to what was then referred to as NewCo, an airline planned to be started from scratch using the operating certificate from defunct Atlantic Coast Air/Independence Air.

NewCo went on to be named Compass Airlines and although others such as Richman might be able to fill you in on the details, the NWA MEC wanted to at least offer something to the several hundred furloughed pilots if they were going to take a scope concession. The idea was, they could get off the street and take a job at Compass while they waited for their recall to NWA. This flow-up and flow-down agreement was created with this in mind, and aimed to get the furloughs back at mainline at a metered rate and of course they would keep their original seniority number. If times got worse and more furloughs occurred, it would give a furloughee an opportunity to still fly someplace, in seniority order for those who chose to use take the opportunity.

Perhaps surprisingly, only three furloughees took the offer. What perhaps was expected to be a pilot group mostly comprised of furloughed pilots ended up being almost entirely off-the-street pilots from all different carriers.

The flow language is what it is, and after the sale of the wholly owned carrier, an ending DOH was established for the flow-up and a preferential interview agreement was later setup, although has not been used as the flow-up program is still in effect with remaining pilots.

Other flow programs may very well be for keeping unruly workforces at bay, although I doubt it because there are other reasons posted by people in this thread, but that's the more accurate scoop on one of them that your notion does not apply to.

Yes, that's exactly what I mean, apparently my former regional employer had quite a few unhappy people. So much so (and yet we couldn't recruit) we chose to hire pedaphiles and had guy write death threat poetry towards the CEO and his kids.

Things may be bright and rosy at Compass with said flow, I don't know much about what goes on there, used as compensation its a little bit better. Although generally against flows, I was mostly referring to AE. I have a friend there who's an early '07 hire and is having some big regrets right now. He said he's not 100% sure if he'll even flow prior to his 10 yr anniversary at AE. I hope things are better than at Compass. I also have some friends from college at PNCL who are waiting on the "elusive" DL interview (yes not the same as a flow but done in the same spirit), we'll see how many PSA guys actually get to bite they're carrot and how long it will take . All these situations to me sound like a bad excuse to do the same job for years on end with half the pay, benefits, and QOL perks. The only way a flow is a good idea IMO if there's a guarantee you'll be on property with a seniority number at mainline by XXXX date.

Oh, and honestly after re-reading my post I realize I came at you with a tone that's not normally my style. I've never met you before and I apologize for coming off as a jerk.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

My point was that if Pro Standards is getting constant complaints about someone and the company is doing nothing to remedy it, then yeah the union has a responsibility to insist that the company does something to fix it. Right?

No, absolutely not. Again, management is solely responsible for managing the airline. The union is not. Decisions to hire or fire are solely the purview of management (except when the CBA says something otherwise, as with agency shop provisions). If Pro Stands has dealt with someone so many times that they don't feel that they can do anything else, then they simply back away and no longer get involved. But never, under any circumstances, does the union tell the company to fire someone for Pro Stands related issues. Period. The entire integrity of the program would be eliminated if that were to be possible.