Contract Negotiations / Agreement
- Thread starter GT_BMW
- Start date
PrincessintheTower
Well-Known Member
TheGirlinPurple
Well-Known Member
TheGirlinPurple
Well-Known Member
Beehive
Well-Known Member
Re: Contract Negotiations...
I dig your stance, Polarbear, for Pat but you can not give Pat President Obama's credit.
Ruth will fight for what is fair regardless of party in office. And the fight gets uglier when a dip-sh...wad Republican is in office. <--I think Pat forgot that.
It's like any other day at the office, only Polarbear is on the scope next to me.
I dig your stance, Polarbear, for Pat but you can not give Pat President Obama's credit.
Ruth will fight for what is fair regardless of party in office. And the fight gets uglier when a dip-sh...wad Republican is in office. <--I think Pat forgot that.
Beehive
Well-Known Member
TheGirlinPurple
Well-Known Member
Re: Contract Negotiations...
Obama's credit? With all the stuff going on in the country I seriously doubt NATCA is on his mind everyday. Granted he has helped us, but a small union is not his priority.
Pat has led the fight in congress, limited damage control, and done what was necessary in an adminstration that was the worst since PATCO vs Regan. You cannot deny that John Carr and Ruth Marlin were in charge when IWR was decided on. They made the mess, Pat had to clean up. Has he cleaned it up as fast as everyone wants? No. Has he cleaned it up as fast as anyone else could? I'd say so. What else could he have done? I personally asked Ruth that question durring my one on one with her and got a round the block answer in which it comes right back to he has done what he can. There is not much anyone else could have done. The damage was already there.
Pat has stayed in negotiation meetings with the FAA when every other member of the NEB(including Paul Rinaldi) got up and walked out. Why? We can't win our fight taking an adversarial approach. If we walk out, whine and scream, give an "our way or no way" approach, or anything like that we lose. You have to stay at the table and continuely negotiate. The people helping us answer to the general public. The general public has no idea what we do. If we get out in the news in the wrong light, we lose everything. Those guys helping us can't afford to look bad in the news. Pat will not let that happen. Paul and Ruth both advocate for adversarial approaches. Bad news for us.
My vote was in the first day eligible. Pat Forrey President, Rich Santa VP.
Now all this said, if the vote was between Ruth Marlin and Paul Rinaldi. Ruth would be my choice hands down. I do not neccessarily think she would do that bad of a job, but Pat would/has done it better. Paul on the other hand is a rogue who would have us isolated in a heartbeat. I fear the day having him elected pres.
Any bets on how soon this thread is going to be locked? lol
Obama's credit? With all the stuff going on in the country I seriously doubt NATCA is on his mind everyday. Granted he has helped us, but a small union is not his priority.
Pat has led the fight in congress, limited damage control, and done what was necessary in an adminstration that was the worst since PATCO vs Regan. You cannot deny that John Carr and Ruth Marlin were in charge when IWR was decided on. They made the mess, Pat had to clean up. Has he cleaned it up as fast as everyone wants? No. Has he cleaned it up as fast as anyone else could? I'd say so. What else could he have done? I personally asked Ruth that question durring my one on one with her and got a round the block answer in which it comes right back to he has done what he can. There is not much anyone else could have done. The damage was already there.
Pat has stayed in negotiation meetings with the FAA when every other member of the NEB(including Paul Rinaldi) got up and walked out. Why? We can't win our fight taking an adversarial approach. If we walk out, whine and scream, give an "our way or no way" approach, or anything like that we lose. You have to stay at the table and continuely negotiate. The people helping us answer to the general public. The general public has no idea what we do. If we get out in the news in the wrong light, we lose everything. Those guys helping us can't afford to look bad in the news. Pat will not let that happen. Paul and Ruth both advocate for adversarial approaches. Bad news for us.
My vote was in the first day eligible. Pat Forrey President, Rich Santa VP.
Now all this said, if the vote was between Ruth Marlin and Paul Rinaldi. Ruth would be my choice hands down. I do not neccessarily think she would do that bad of a job, but Pat would/has done it better. Paul on the other hand is a rogue who would have us isolated in a heartbeat. I fear the day having him elected pres.
Any bets on how soon this thread is going to be locked? lol
Re: Contract Negotiations...
They were in charge, but made the mess? What are you smoking? The Bush Administration made the mess, under guidance from Reason and God knows who else. It didn't matter whatsoever who was in charge at the union, the IWRs were coming.
They were in charge, but made the mess? What are you smoking? The Bush Administration made the mess, under guidance from Reason and God knows who else. It didn't matter whatsoever who was in charge at the union, the IWRs were coming.
TheGirlinPurple
Well-Known Member
Re: Contract Negotiations...
Really? Could they not have been spearheaded? Maybe, maybe not. No matter what I hold responsible those that were in charge when something is implemented(our leadership and Bush). What can you be smoking to not hold your leadership responsible?
Really? Could they not have been spearheaded? Maybe, maybe not. No matter what I hold responsible those that were in charge when something is implemented(our leadership and Bush). What can you be smoking to not hold your leadership responsible?
GolfChuck
Trustworthy Source
Re: Contract Negotiations...
I don't know the whole situation, I was completely disinterested back in 2006, but I have done some reading on what happened.
If history (PATCO) tells us anything, it is that a Republican administration is going to do whatever it wants in regards to Federal employment contracts. The powers that be back then should have known this going into negotiations, and when they realized that they weren't going to get the pay raises they wanted, they should have conceded and got a contract done so that at the very least they could have got SOME of the things they wanted. I know that it was not the FAAs intentions going into negotiations to have employees working under the current IWR. When negotiations fell through, the Republican bureaucrats saw an opportunity to save a buck at the common man's expense, and that is what they did.
I have to agree with Polarbear. Blame the people who were there, on both sides.
I don't know the whole situation, I was completely disinterested back in 2006, but I have done some reading on what happened.
If history (PATCO) tells us anything, it is that a Republican administration is going to do whatever it wants in regards to Federal employment contracts. The powers that be back then should have known this going into negotiations, and when they realized that they weren't going to get the pay raises they wanted, they should have conceded and got a contract done so that at the very least they could have got SOME of the things they wanted. I know that it was not the FAAs intentions going into negotiations to have employees working under the current IWR. When negotiations fell through, the Republican bureaucrats saw an opportunity to save a buck at the common man's expense, and that is what they did.
I have to agree with Polarbear. Blame the people who were there, on both sides.
Re: Contract Negotiations...
They did. The FAA made it's offer (the white book) on day 1 and never negotiated whatsoever. It never moved from that offer.
Natca offered to take pay cuts.
They did. The FAA made it's offer (the white book) on day 1 and never negotiated whatsoever. It never moved from that offer.
Natca offered to take pay cuts.
aperfectool
New Member
Re: Contract Negotiations...
great thread.
great thread.
Chris Barnes
Well-Known Member
Re: Contract Negotiations...
Yeah Zach, quit posting useless crap.
Yeah Zach, quit posting useless crap.
genot
Well-Known Member
Re: Contract Negotiations...
This is some seriously flawed logic. There was and still is a clause that if the FAA and NATCA can't come to terms the FAA's "best" offer becomes effective by default. The FAA said here is our offer. NATCA said here is our counter offer. The FAA said here is our offer, NATCA said, this is the same as the last offer, the FAA said tough. NATCA counters with another offer, the FAA offers the same one. This goes on with the FAA knowing full well that all they have to do is pass the same tired old sheet across the table for a few months and bingo, its effective. Unless you think NATCA should have hired super secret ninjas to sneak around and rewrite said clause governing impasse on every single copy of legislation with some super secret technology that leaves no trace of forgery behind, then I'm really interested to know what you believe they should have done.
Oh and I'm not willing to accept any answer having to do with dubious ties to the mafia either..that or aliens...because aliens are definately anti labor.
Before anyone rips me a new one, my version of the previous contract negotiations is at best the clift notes version heavily edited for PG viewing, it is not intended to be a historically accurate rendition of past events. Oh and I definately do not advocate forgery of any government document.
This is some seriously flawed logic. There was and still is a clause that if the FAA and NATCA can't come to terms the FAA's "best" offer becomes effective by default. The FAA said here is our offer. NATCA said here is our counter offer. The FAA said here is our offer, NATCA said, this is the same as the last offer, the FAA said tough. NATCA counters with another offer, the FAA offers the same one. This goes on with the FAA knowing full well that all they have to do is pass the same tired old sheet across the table for a few months and bingo, its effective. Unless you think NATCA should have hired super secret ninjas to sneak around and rewrite said clause governing impasse on every single copy of legislation with some super secret technology that leaves no trace of forgery behind, then I'm really interested to know what you believe they should have done.
Oh and I'm not willing to accept any answer having to do with dubious ties to the mafia either..that or aliens...because aliens are definately anti labor.
Before anyone rips me a new one, my version of the previous contract negotiations is at best the clift notes version heavily edited for PG viewing, it is not intended to be a historically accurate rendition of past events. Oh and I definately do not advocate forgery of any government document.
GolfChuck
Trustworthy Source
Re: Contract Negotiations...
lol, from what i read the IWR were significantly worse than what was being haggled over when negotiations came to an impasse. Apparently I was wrong.
Either way, it still stinks, but I have been keeping track of what Pat has been doing and reading up on Ruth's blog and her stances. Both obviously have the best interests of the union in mind, but I believe that even with a friendly congress and administration, that Ruth may be a little overzealous. Yeah we have a congress and president who might be willing to give us everything we want, but just because they will, doesnt mean we should take it, otherwise we end up with IWR the next time a republican is elected president of the united states.
Article 42 or whatever definitely needs to be changed to prevent bad faith "negotiations," but you can't blame Pat on that one. The house has already passed the change, and the senate should follow suit soon.
lol, from what i read the IWR were significantly worse than what was being haggled over when negotiations came to an impasse. Apparently I was wrong.
Either way, it still stinks, but I have been keeping track of what Pat has been doing and reading up on Ruth's blog and her stances. Both obviously have the best interests of the union in mind, but I believe that even with a friendly congress and administration, that Ruth may be a little overzealous. Yeah we have a congress and president who might be willing to give us everything we want, but just because they will, doesnt mean we should take it, otherwise we end up with IWR the next time a republican is elected president of the united states.
Article 42 or whatever definitely needs to be changed to prevent bad faith "negotiations," but you can't blame Pat on that one. The house has already passed the change, and the senate should follow suit soon.
WoH
New Member
Re: Contract Negotiations...
I for one and enjoying the banter
Look at me everybody I am posting pointless banter secretly boosting my junior status on jetcareers thus wasting everybody else's time.
I for one and enjoying the banter