Unions are stupid... Mesaba screwed

[pilot602]

Enough SPECIFICS for you or should I go on ...

 

[Minnesota_Flyer]

So where did their money go? It went to the basics. The real increases in family spending are for the items that make a family middle class and keep them safe (housing, health insurance), that educate their children (pre-school and college), and that let them earn a living (transportation, childcare, and taxes).

Lies, damn lies and statistics. Perhaps the middle class is getting squeezed by home prices because the middle class insists on buying far more housing than it really needs.

From the NAHB -- June 26, 2006 - The average size of a new home climbed to a record high last year, according to annual data on new-home characteristics released by the U.S. Census Bureau last month, and in terms of amenities the distance between homes built today and homes built 30 years ago continued to widen.

"Between 1975 and 2005, the portion of new homes built with central air conditioning has risen 43%, while the portion of homes built with fewer than two bathrooms has fallen from 41% to just 4%. Meanwhile, the share of newly built homes with four or more bedrooms has risen steadily from 21% three decades ago to just shy of 40% last year."

The average floor area in a newly built home last year reached an all-time high of 2,434 square feet - up from an average 2,349 square feet in 2004 and just 1,645 square feet in 1975.

 

[Minnesota_Flyer]

Back on topic -- if Mesaba didn't have a union, Mesaba would have imposed new pay terms October 13, 2005 (or earlier). So Mesaba's "stupid" unions, at a minimum, held off the pay cuts for more than a year.

 

[pilot602]

Back on topic -- if Mesaba didn't have a union, Mesaba would have imposed new pay terms October 13, 2005 (or earlier). So Mesaba's "stupid" unions, at a minimum, held off the pay cuts for more than a year.

Exactly ... if nothing else that "stupid" union made it harder for management to screw their employees and those "dues" were well worth it.

 

[pilot602]

Lies, damn lies and statistics. Perhaps the middle class is getting squeezed by home prices because the middle class insists on buying far more housing than it really needs.

From the NAHB -- June 26, 2006 - The average size of a new home climbed to a record high last year, according to annual data on new-home characteristics released by the U.S. Census Bureau last month, and in terms of amenities the distance between homes built today and homes built 30 years ago continued to widen.

"Between 1975 and 2005, the portion of new homes built with central air conditioning has risen 43%, while the portion of homes built with fewer than two bathrooms has fallen from 41% to just 4%. Meanwhile, the share of newly built homes with four or more bedrooms has risen steadily from 21% three decades ago to just shy of 40% last year."

The average floor area in a newly built home last year reached an all-time high of 2,434 square feet - up from an average 2,349 square feet in 2004 and just 1,645 square feet in 1975.

Well chicken or egg argument: smaller houses with fewer amenties hold less resale value.

 

[pilot602]

The Average American: 1967 and Today
Forbes.com
By Tom Van Riper

As the U.S. population crossed the 300 million mark sometime around 7:46 a.m. Tuesday (according to the U.S. Census Bureau), the typical family is doing a whole lot better than their grandparents were in 1967, the year the population first surpassed 200 million.

Mr. and Mrs. Median's $46,326 in annual income is 32% more than their mid-'60s counterparts, even when adjusted for inflation, and 13% more than those at the median in the economic boom year of 1985. And thanks to ballooning real estate values, average household net worth has increased even faster. The typical American household has a net worth of $465,970, up 83% from 1965, 60% from 1985 and 35% from 1995.

Throw in the low inflation of the past 20 years, a deregulated airline industry that's made travel much cheaper, plus technological progress that's provided the middle class with not only better cars and televisions, but every gadget from DVD players to iPods, all at lower and lower prices, and it's obvious that Mr. and Mrs. Median are living the life of Riley compared to their parents and grandparents.

How many two income familes were there in the '60s? How many are there today? The comparison is invalid unless adjusted for that small, little detail.

 

[Minnesota_Flyer]

Well chicken or egg argument: smaller houses with fewer amenties hold less resale value.

Yeah, well, just a personal pet peeve of mine. I've lost track of the number of stories in the local paper about how "John and Sally had to sell their home because they couldn't afford payments on their 5,000+ sq. ft./5+ acre house after John lost his job making rubber dog vomit." Who the $@#% needs a 5,000 sq. ft. house?!? :insane:

 

[pilot602]

Yeah, well, just a personal pet peeve of mine. I've lost track of the number of stories in the local paper about how "John and Sally had to sell their home because they couldn't afford payments on their 5,000+ sq. ft./5+ acre house after John lost his job making rubber dog vomit." Who the $@#% needs a 5,000 sq. ft. house?!? :insane:

Well, when John was making rubber dog vomit they could afford their 5,000+ sq. ft./5+ acre house. The fact that he lost his job is my point.

I mean sh*t, whith that logic unless you're a multi-millionaire we should all live in HUD housing because if some day our job is lost ...

 

[juskl]

Just curious, how many pro-union republican politicians are there????? If you own a company, you want to make money.... That is your stance... If you are in upper management, your job is to make your owner (shareholders) the most money possible (otherwise you are out of a job).... So naturally, you are going to fight any possible decline in profits, no matter the moralistic nature.... It is your job.....

The problem is that even though most understand this concept, when top management is making several times the amount as labor (insert any nonmanagement position here), and you are asking for a cut in benefits and salary while upper management is getting raises and stock options (to keep and attract new tallent), well labor get's a bit upset.

Doesn't matter if it is a private biz, publicly held complany or government, the workers always suffer when things go down in terms of dollars.... UNIONS help defend the workers..... period.

Yes things are great when you don't have a union and management is happy, economy good, workers getting great salary and benies....... Then one day management changes (new people, new ideas, what have you.....) and all of a sudden, they want to change all the rules no matter what..... Look at the current governor of California trying to raid the state pension of the firefighters, cops, and teachers.... Thank God, they have great unions.... His life became a living hell.... Because without the unions, they just may have been raided.... imagine trying to fight that one on your own, instead of an association of many and a prepaid legal team, with a contract to boot.... Makes things a bit harder and management a bit reluctant to just act, without thinking of the ramifications to them......

You never need unions......,until you need them.......then it's too late......

just my 2 cents....

 

[Minnesota_Flyer]

Well, when John was making rubber dog vomit they could afford their 5,000+ sq. ft./5+ acre house. The fact that he lost his job is my point.

I mean sh*t, whith that logic unless you're a multi-millionaire we should all live in HUD housing because if some day our job is lost ...

Well, if John had bought a reasonable house and saved some money, he might have had a decent cash cushion with which to ride out his job loss.

 

[pilot602]

Well, if John had bought a reasonable house and saved some money, he might have had a decent cash cushion with which to ride out his job loss.

You have a cash cushion?

Not, arguing irresponsible personal finances, there's way too much of that going on, but there are also a lot predatory lending practicies going on under the guise of "honest" financial institutions. And, when/if a job is lost a lot of people are in BIG trouble. Hence, declining middle class.

 

[seagull]

Here's the deal: no union, these guys and gals would already be working for peanuts LONG ago while management got fat off the profits. Their options would be take it or quit, sorta like what they have now.

I don't blame either Reps or Dems for this, I blame the judges responsible for interpreting a law that has been on the books since the 1930s. According to the RLA, self-help (imposing the contract or striking) is available to BOTH sides after a cooling off period. Well, bankruptcy seems to give an edge to teh company and effectively skips several steps in the CBA process. The problem is, there's nothing in the bankruptcy code that protects the workers. You've got the Norris-LaGuardia act, but it's outdated and full of holes as well.

Jtrain, this wasn't the case that set the precedent. You'll have to look at NWA and the FAs for that one. Their strike was blocked a little over a month ago. I'm pretty sure Kishel probably viewed that one as precedent. So, I'd say the precedent is already set, and you can't blame the regional guys for it this time.

If I were a Mesaba pilot, I'd be gone as soon as they impose terms. I couldn't subject my family to the kind of wage cuts that are potentially going to be imposed. 17.5%? I can make more as a CFI, set my own schedule and sleep in my own bed every night. I'm officially flying an airliner for as little as I'm willing right now. Mesaba would be significantly lower than what I'm making at Pinnacle. Doesn't matter that it's a turboprop, it's still an airliner carrying passengers, punching through weather and trying to make it from point A to point B on time.

The thing I'm afraid of is Pinnacle following suit, cooking the books (we're making money right now, so bankruptcy is sorta out unless they do something weird in accounting), filing Ch 11, forcing terms or getting another cert going to whipsaw us Go Jets-style. If that happened, I think I'd rather be flying at Mesa.....

A post I agree with completely. Not sure where it will end, but judges have overstepped their bounds in many ways for many years, and THAT precedent is really the problem here. Somehow the judges have decided that the company has the right to impose without allowing both the "self help" option. I don't understand the logic, but it seems like it is a lot like the union is a male in the family court system!

 

[seagull]

You have a cash cushion?

Not, arguing irresponsible personal finances, there's way too much of that going on, but there are also a lot predatory lending practicies going on under the guise of "honest" financial institutions. And, when/if a job is lost a lot of people are in BIG trouble. Hence, declining middle class.

First, the sources of your quoted articles alone pretty much says it all in terms of serious editorial bias. However, that issue aside, you must be very young and completely unaware of what things were like the last time the Democrats really controlled everything. Maybe you should take a look at the late 70s, when the Democratic party held both houses of Congress and the President. The Prime Rate interest rates got near 20%, and you think they're high now?

With all the complaining, do you really think we were better off then? By the way, guess what party sponsored and signed into law most of the Deregulation Acts that we now live with?

 

[pilot602]

First, the sources of your quoted articles alone pretty much says it all in terms of serious editorial bias.

Can't argue the facts so you argue the source.

However, that issue aside, you must be very young and completely unaware of what things were like the last time the Democrats really controlled everything. Maybe you should take a look at the late 70s, when the Democratic party held both houses of Congress and the President. The Prime Rate interest rates got near 20%, and you think they're high now?

With all the complaining, do you really think we were better off then? By the way, guess what party sponsored and signed into law most of the Deregulation Acts that we now live with?

Still haven't shown me any specifics.

 

[skydog]

The thing to remember about unions is that they cannot "get you" anything. They can ask for it, negotitate for it, and even strike for it. But at the end of the day, every good thing that shows up in a union contract is there because someone in management decided to give it to them. Likewise, every bad think you see in a contract is there because someone in the union decided to accept it.

What I find amusing is that not too long ago pilot unions were using their muscle (slow-downs, strikes, etc) to get management to give them what they wanted. And the pilots were just fine with that. Now that the tables are turned, and management is using their muscle (i.e. bankruptcy) to get what they want, the pilots are all indignant about it.

If you're going to play hard-ball, don't be surprised when the other side plays by the same rules.

 

[Minnesota_Flyer]

You have a cash cushion?

Yes. We can last indefinitely without the wife's salary, 1 year without my salary, and 3-4 months without either salary. But I'm probably a bad example because, based on your Washington Post article, we're not middle class.

Not, arguing irresponsible personal finances, there's way too much of that going on, but there are also a lot predatory lending practicies going on under the guise of "honest" financial institutions. And, when/if a job is lost a lot of people are in BIG trouble. Hence, declining middle class.

I'm not sayin' that the lenders are angels (in fact, some of them are pretty bad). I'm just not going to feel sorry for someone who made no plans for a bump in the road (and I'm going to put anyone who lives in a 5,000 sq. ft. home down as having missed at least one very large opportunity to protect themselves from lifes unexpected surprises).


Anyway, this is getting way off point --- UNIONS ARE ALL THAT STANDS BETWEEN YOU AND YOUR PROFITEERING CORPORATE OVERLORDS!!!!


That is all.

 

[kellwolf]

What I find amusing is that not too long ago pilot unions were using their muscle (slow-downs, strikes, etc) to get management to give them what they wanted. And the pilots were just fine with that. Now that the tables are turned, and management is using their muscle (i.e. bankruptcy) to get what they want, the pilots are all indignant about it.

If you're going to play hard-ball, don't be surprised when the other side plays by the same rules.

But they aren't playing by the same rules. All of the labor side "strong arming" was done within the law of the RLA, which has set steps laid out. Bankruptcy is NOT one of those steps. Management is using bankruptcy to side step the law and throw it into the laps of the courts. Let's look at MAIR holdings, the company that owns Mesaba. Now, Mesaba contributes most of the money MAIR makes, yet MAIR is still solvent while Mesaba is in bankruptcy. Now, I know they have Big Sky, but I don't see how Big Sky can offset the money Mesaba is "losing" for MAIR. So, in order to break the union contracts, management turns to the court system. They've got a long, drawn out fight on their hands under the RLA (ie the LEGAL way), but they need to cut costs quickly. So, they side step the law. So, the other side is NOT playing by the same rules. If both sides were allowed self help as they should be under the RLA, it would be the same rules. As it is, the courts have taken ALL of the power out of the unions hands, not just some of it.

There's a reason no new talks are scheduled with Mesaba management and pilots: management doesn't have anything to gain from talks since they've already got what they want in their back pockets. If there wasn't a time frame set for those imposed terms, they would have been imposed the second the ruling came down and there's nothing labor could have done about it.

 

[seagull]

Can't argue the facts so you argue the source.

Still haven't shown me any specifics.

Your "source" is putting out flawed data, so I do argue with it.

Specifics? I listed the prime rate above, is that not specific enough for you? President and BOTH houses were democrats at that time.

Airline Deregulation Act, sponsored by Sen. Kennedy, signed into law by President Carter. Do I need to explain what party they are members of?

NAFTA. Signed into law by Clinton.

There are more, but this is an airline forum and so I will start with the ones that impact our biz.

 

[pilot602]

Your "source" is putting out flawed data, so I do argue with it.

Prove it.

NAFTA. Signed into law by Clinton.

but you said this earlier:

and I am against ANY politician that believes protectionism works or is actually good for the average American.

Which is it? Protectionism is bad or NAFTA (definately NOT protectionism) is bad?

There are more, but this is an airline forum and so I will start with the ones that impact our biz.

Didn't stop ya from listing NAFTA and the obligatory Clinton reference ...

 

[Cherokee_Cruiser]

But they aren't playing by the same rules. All of the labor side "strong arming" was done within the law of the RLA, which has set steps laid out. Bankruptcy is NOT one of those steps. Management is using bankruptcy to side step the law and throw it into the laps of the courts. Let's look at MAIR holdings, the company that owns Mesaba. Now, Mesaba contributes most of the money MAIR makes, yet MAIR is still solvent while Mesaba is in bankruptcy. Now, I know they have Big Sky, but I don't see how Big Sky can offset the money Mesaba is "losing" for MAIR. So, in order to break the union contracts, management turns to the court system. They've got a long, drawn out fight on their hands under the RLA (ie the LEGAL way), but they need to cut costs quickly. So, they side step the law. So, the other side is NOT playing by the same rules. If both sides were allowed self help as they should be under the RLA, it would be the same rules. As it is, the courts have taken ALL of the power out of the unions hands, not just some of it.

There's a reason no new talks are scheduled with Mesaba management and pilots: management doesn't have anything to gain from talks since they've already got what they want in their back pockets. If there wasn't a time frame set for those imposed terms, they would have been imposed the second the ruling came down and there's nothing labor could have done about it.

Here's the deal: no union, these guys and gals would already be working for peanuts LONG ago while management got fat off the profits. Their options would be take it or quit, sorta like what they have now.

I don't blame either Reps or Dems for this, I blame the judges responsible for interpreting a law that has been on the books since the 1930s. According to the RLA, self-help (imposing the contract or striking) is available to BOTH sides after a cooling off period. Well, bankruptcy seems to give an edge to teh company and effectively skips several steps in the CBA process. The problem is, there's nothing in the bankruptcy code that protects the workers. You've got the Norris-LaGuardia act, but it's outdated and full of holes as well.

Jtrain, this wasn't the case that set the precedent. You'll have to look at NWA and the FAs for that one. Their strike was blocked a little over a month ago. I'm pretty sure Kishel probably viewed that one as precedent. So, I'd say the precedent is already set, and you can't blame the regional guys for it this time.

If I were a Mesaba pilot, I'd be gone as soon as they impose terms. I couldn't subject my family to the kind of wage cuts that are potentially going to be imposed. 17.5%? I can make more as a CFI, set my own schedule and sleep in my own bed every night. I'm officially flying an airliner for as little as I'm willing right now. Mesaba would be significantly lower than what I'm making at Pinnacle. Doesn't matter that it's a turboprop, it's still an airliner carrying passengers, punching through weather and trying to make it from point A to point B on time.

The thing I'm afraid of is Pinnacle following suit, cooking the books (we're making money right now, so bankruptcy is sorta out unless they do something weird in accounting), filing Ch 11, forcing terms or getting another cert going to whipsaw us Go Jets-style. If that happened, I think I'd rather be flying at Mesa.....

Kellwolf, your posts in this thread are some of the MOST well thought out, well explained, and dead-spot-on-correct posts I have ever read on an aviation forum!

Even though you've only been at PNCL since March, your knowledge of unions and airline management's tricks is considerable! You're a good role model that I hope others look up to.

If we ever meet, lunch is on me.