Imminent Strike at G4
- Thread starter HVYMETALDRVR
- Start date
ZapBrannigan
If it ain’t a Boeing, I’m not going. No choice.
What I learned from this thread, @ATN is extremely knowledgeable and was once again accurate(Strike postponed). Todd you should seriously launch a labor relations consulting business. IBT could use your help
Oh for crying out loud. We don't TYPE things like that where he can READ THEM!! If his head gets bigger they'll need to disassemble the front door of his house for him to go outside!
If you agree with him you can either admit it begrudgingly and move on, or keep it to yourself. Are you new?! If this keeps up he will be unstoppable!
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Oh for crying out loud. We don't TYPE things like that where he can READ THEM!! If his head gets bigger they'll need to disassemble the front door of his house for him to go outside!
If you agree with him you can either admit it begrudgingly and move on, or keep it to yourself. Are you new?! If this keeps up he will be unstoppable!
scooter2525
Very well Member
SHOTS!
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Three major points:
1. Disruption to air/rail commerce was not an issue as it would be here. The entire purpose of the Act is to resolve disputes without disruptions to commerce.
2. The carrier was taking actions specifically to avoid the duty to bargain, which isn't the case here.
3. There was never actually a decision issued in that case granting the right to strike. The court contemplated in dictum (discussion, not binding ruling) that the union would probably have the right to strike if it had exhausted all possible remedies to the carrier's refusal to follow the act. All possible remedies have not been exhausted here. The union is attempting to strike prior to allowing the judge to impose penalty upon the carrier for not adhering to his ruling.
Prediction: the judge upholds the injunction against the union but holds the company in contempt if they don't restore the status quo. There will be no strike outside of an NMB release, which will now be a very long time away.
Avalon781ML
Well-Known Member
Well I disagree with the first two points as does our lawyer. As for the third... If this gets drawn out because a court is unable to see what this management team is doing then it's a sad ass day to live in the United States.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Avalon781ML said:
They're points of fact, not opinion, so I'm not sure how you can disagree with them. Of course, this is the country where people believe it's debatable that Jesus rode a dinosaur, so....
I'd say it would be a great day for the United States, because the rule of law would have prevailed over emotion. I understand that you're frustrated with the company, but many pilot groups have been frustrated, and they managed to resolve their problems without breaking the law.
Avalon781ML
Well-Known Member
These are your opinions as you do not have all of the pertinent information. I'm finished with this topic.
Get-home-itis
Well-Known Member
The NMB wasn't going to release them "for a long time" regardless of this 'strike tactic'. This isn't about a strike, it's about defending Status Quo with a company that's clearly violating it and currently thumbing their nose at a judge who has decreed that they are violating it. By drastically changing Status Quo, the negotiations were permanently harmed by readjusting the baseline. By fomenting strike talk, the IBT has forced the issue back into the courts where they should reasonably be allowed to argue that withdrawal of services is the ultimate antithesis of Status Quo and what's good for the goose is good for the gander.
By the way, the judge who ruled in favor of the temporary restraining order has transferred the case for injunction to Judge Gordon of the same district court......the same Judge Gordon who issued the Status Quo ruling against Allegiant 9 months ago. How happy do you think he will be to have a plaintiff who has been ignoring his orders. How can he punish one side's 'plans' to breach Status Quo while ignoring the other side actively engaging in a breach.
I actually think it's an out of the box solution to a problem of a status quo breach that's been going on for 2 and a half years without resolve. An added benefit is a solid show of unity by the pilots with a overwhelming strike vote, and some practice for the strike commitee.
mrivc211
Well-Known Member
Contrarian
A contrarian is a person who takes up a contrary position, a person who seems to be "contrary for the sake of being contrary," especially a position that is opposed to that of the majority, regardless of how unpopular it may be.[1] It is similar to iconoclasm; attacking or openly rejecting cherished beliefs and institutions or established values and practices, but unlike the contrarian, the motive is not simply to be contrary or a tool to incite discussion. Contrarian styles of argument and disagreement have historically been associated with radicalism and dissent.[citation needed]
Have you ever known this type of person? I have
- Edit
- Watch this page
A contrarian is a person who takes up a contrary position, a person who seems to be "contrary for the sake of being contrary," especially a position that is opposed to that of the majority, regardless of how unpopular it may be.[1] It is similar to iconoclasm; attacking or openly rejecting cherished beliefs and institutions or established values and practices, but unlike the contrarian, the motive is not simply to be contrary or a tool to incite discussion. Contrarian styles of argument and disagreement have historically been associated with radicalism and dissent.[citation needed]
Have you ever known this type of person? I have
As a sidebar, this calm and friendly back and forth in this thread makes me miss young, new-regional-pilot @jtrain609 who was angry and would demand that they burn the damn place to the ground! STFD!!
Eagle421flyer
Well-Known Member
Coincidental timing in this, though allegiant does have a lot if emergency landings.
http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local/2015/04/02/allegiant-flight-emergency-landing/70819640/
http://www.wtsp.com/story/news/local/2015/04/02/allegiant-flight-emergency-landing/70819640/
B767
Well-Known Member
No one has answered my question. Someone, please, as I'm curious. Has there been collective bargaining between the two entities, in which agreements have been reached and signed on? From my research, there is no "status quo" per the RLA for the Allegiant pilots to fall back on. You must have had a prior CBA for status quo to take effect. Until then, management CAN unilaterally alter any agreements.
Glad this is going back to the judge that ordered the return to status quo. Pulling for you guys and hope it works out in your favor.
Glad this is going back to the judge that ordered the return to status quo. Pulling for you guys and hope it works out in your favor.
mrivc211
Well-Known Member
Lol I remember those days. @jtrain609 is too damn old these days to put up a fightAs a sidebar, this calm and friendly back and forth in this thread makes me miss young, new-regional-pilot @jtrain609 who was angry and would demand that they burn the damn place to the ground! STFD!!
B767
Well-Known Member
Lol I remember those days. @jtrain609 is too damn old these days to put up a fight
Nah. Not too old to put up a fight. He left the joint that pissed him off, and he will be a captain in just a few short weeks (months?). Happier now, perhaps. He's still too old, in general, though.
Lol I remember those days. @jtrain609 is too damn old these days to put up a fight
Burn it to the damn ground! He would say. Complete with Slayer death metal playing in the background. He let the hate flow freely through him!
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
True. The IBT is notoriously awful at working with the NMB, and this stunt is a perfect example of why the IBT finds it so difficult to get anything done with the Board.
Oh, I very much agree that it needs to be defended. It's just being defended in the wrong way. The way to handle this is to let the judge do what judges do. Not by going rogue.
That's patently false. The Board is not composed of three morons. These are very intelligent people, and they know what the baseline for bargaining is. Management isn't "tricking" them by unilaterally changing the status quo.
The IBT could have gotten back into court without fomenting strike talk. The company is violating the judge's orders. That's enough to get back into court.
Oh, I'm sure he's not happy with them, which is why I suspect that he'll find them in contempt. He may require them to pay damages to the IBT, in fact. But I've got a round of drinks at NJC that says he won't allow you to strike.
As I said previously, the problem here is short-sighted focus instead of focusing on the overall objectives. Showing unity and giving the strike committee practice are not your ultimate goals. Doing anything that doesn't serve your ultimate goals is a mistake. The ultimate goals, ostensibly, are to reach a fair CBA and to have it enforced. This action is contrary to achieving those goals. Here's why:
Your best case scenario is that the judge has a lot to drink the night before the hearing and actually grants you the right to strike. If he does that, he's giving you the right to strike until the status quo is restored. That bolded part is very important to remember. If the judge issues a ruling giving you the right to strike, the company's attorney can walk across the room, hand your attorneys a letter saying that the status quo is immediately restored, and your strike never happens. Victory, right? Nope. Because now the NMB is pissed. They put you on ice, or at the very least give you only very sporadic bargaining sessions. Now the company has what they ultimately want: no new CBA with increased costs.
You see, the company is doing the smart thing. They've planned this ahead 10 steps, while you're only looking at the step right in front of you. They've created a situation where they can't lose. If the judge rules in their favor, then you can't strike and the NMB is still pissed off. If the judge rules in your favor, all they have to do is go back to doing things the way they used to be done and they short-circuit your strike, but the NMB is still pissed off at you. No matter what happens in court, the company wins. This is the difference between strategy and reaction. The IBT is reacting. The company is engaging in careful strategy.
Avalon781ML
Well-Known Member
To answer your question ... yes...