gotWXdagain
Polished Member
If a mass quitting occurred, would the people who came in and took the jobs afterword be ex Great Lakes pilots?
Poor Sun Country
- Thread starter CFIscare
- Start date
If a mass quitting occurred, would the people who came in and took the jobs afterword be ex Great Lakes pilots?
z987k
Well-Known Member
Who cares. They couldn't train them up fast enough anyways.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Okay, that's your choice. As for me (if I was still a pilot), I wouldn't be interested in losing my job because of some angry militants who don't know how to get things done legally.
A vote that isn't authorized by law is not a democratic vote. You can vote yourself a pay raise of 200%, too, but management isn't going to honor it.
Um, yes. As was mentioned before, they can and have thrown people in jail over illegal strikes. They also impose fines and damages and deduct them from your pay checks until paid off.
I think you're just posting without reading previous posts. I gave a pretty good summary of the problems with getting rid of the RLA.
Actually, what happens is that the government simply outlaws striking altogether. Reference Senator McCain's proposal for "baseball style" arbitration, eliminating the right to strike. Start striking more often over petty BS, and watch the government bring its boot down on your neck.
No, and the reason that they aren't is what I discussed previously in this thread about the weaknesses in law outside of the RLA that allow management the same access to easy self help. Getting rid of the RLA doesn't increase your leverage. It reduces it.
gotWXdagain
Polished Member
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Except that it's not a hypothetical when several prominent lawmakers have been pushing it for years, including a Republican presidential nominee. But bury your head in the sand, if you wish.
gotWXdagain
Polished Member
That would be because they are taking advantage of the slippery slope fallacy, and have been for years.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
gotWXdagain
Polished Member
I surmise that what I'm talking about is not what you are talking about.
hook_dupin
Well-Known Member
What's the tactic to counter a response of "We can't do that... It would bankrupt us" for a privately held firm? Not trying to pick a fight... I'm genuinely interested to know these tactics.
For a public company, it'd be easy to pull the financials and compare proposals with previous financial performance and actuarial data.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
hook_dupin said:
Typically you come to an agreement as part of the protocol agreement for the negotiations that certain financial information will be provided. But honestly, companies usually don't have to be pushed too hard to allow ALPA to see their books. ALPA E&FA is even hired by the airlines on occasion to do some of their costing in bargaining. The truth is that pilots just don't like to hear what they don't want to gear, so they'll usually say stupid things like "they're cooking the books" even after the information has been provided.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
I will respect someone like @Acrofox and @Maximillian_Jenius for asking questions to get informed.
But I can't take this.
Time for a quiz @gotWXdagain and @ppragman. If you are soooooo well informed (I don't think you are) and versed on the NMB and the RLA then you should have no problem answering these. I do ask you don't ask anyone or use Google the answers. Yes, I have no way of telling, but even the mighty Google will have problems with some of these questions. As stated, if you know what you are talking about, you won't need Google.
1) Why are airline pilots included in the RLA?
2) Name two of the three board members of the NMB?
4) Who is the chair of the NMB?
5) How are the NMB members appointed?
6) Before the current members on the NMB were there, what were they doing?
7) What is the main determination the NMB uses to release a group into self help?
8) What is the biggest thing the NMB uses to push parties to reach consensus to get a deal?
9) Who is the main law firm that airlines use in negotiations?
10) What is the connection between this law firm and the TV Show 'The Office?'
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
I never said I was informed, in fact, I even asked for explanation, which I received... I don't work for a union carrier, I don't know. You always assume that I'm attacking you, I'm not.
ppragman
FLIPY FLAPS!
I don't necessarily have to agree with your statement or the law to be better informed about the issue. I don't agree with how you framed your opinion for the necessity of the RLA, @ATN_Pilot did a more thorough job and provided me with more information that I think makes a better case. Reading his post I came to the conclusion that it was probably better than not having it because of the potential for baseball style- still, there's something that strikes me as wrong about it philosophically if you can be legally told that you must go to work or be held in contempt. I am entitled to my opinion, even if it doesn't mesh with yours. Something like this coming from you personally is pretty ironic.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
If you would take my quiz and answer question 1 it would show you that being legally told that you must work is a very good provision for a number of reasons.
gotWXdagain
Polished Member
What are you a five year old?
z987k
Well-Known Member
If I was legally told I must go to work after I told the company I quit, I'd write up every scratch on the airplane and then when the thing was factory new, I'd call in unfit due to the stress of being forced to do something after which I'd drink a beer every 4 hours or so ensuring that at no point could it be possible for me to legally report for duty. What are they going to do? Fire me? I'm trying to quit, lol.
Seggy
Well-Known Member
No, just someone who knows what I am talking about here.
F
Flying Saluki
Guest
The RLA is unethical, but not for the reason you suggest. It's unethical because it allows non-invested parties to have control over the direction of a company. If I don't like what ABC Airlines does with regard to its labor practices, I am free to work elsewhere. If ABC Airlines doesn't like what it's employees are doing, they're pretty much stuck with them.
That said, it seems to me the value of the RLA from an employee's perspective, is that to a certain extent it prevents companies from using their employees as competitive points. For better or worse the airline industry competes pretty much on price alone, but they tend to do so by taking money out of their employees' wallets (i.e. cost savings), rather than their customers' (i.e. revenue enhancements). I like working in aviation, but I'm not willing to subsidize passengers who aren't willing to pay what it costs to ride an airplane. I'm college educated with technical skills that are in demand, and I should be able to earn more than a retail or fast food worker, even at the regional level.
gotWXdagain
Polished Member
Me: "I don't like those winds. Can't go."
Them: "Wind says 00000KT"
Me: "I know, something's wrong. AWOS must be broken. VFR-only airport. Visibility looks low."
Here is what I know of the RLA. It was created in the '20s because of the fear that a railway strike could literally bring the economy in the U.S. to a grinding halt. That would never, not ever even once, happen in 2015. Between rail, bus, and airline capacity, there is plenty of lift to keep the flow going should one of the cars fall off the track, so to speak. You are trying to win a moral argument by proving that myself and @ppragman aren't well versed in the technical details, a disingenuous tactic because one doesn't need to know all the technical details to know that it is morally wrong to force someone to go to work, under threat of incarceration, in conditions they feel are inadequate enough to otherwise walk away from the job. The word we used to have for that was slavery.