jynxyjoe
Queso King
Hehe... ouch.
RAH 100 seat airplanes
- Thread starter Kingairer
- Start date
falconvalley
Absentee Dad of the OOTSK, Runner, Cat Frustrator
The company spent a ton of ammunition on this. I have a feeling it will only result in a short-lived win for them. Look at what they have to spend on every 100+ passenger when they are oversold ($400). In many cases, that exceeds what a captain would make with a reasonable raise from 99 seat a/c. By making this move the company is basically admitting one of two things:
1) They don't care about profits and losses
or
2) They believe that they won't be able to sell 100+ seats anyway, in which case I must ask- should we be making 100 seat pay, relatively speaking?
However you slice it, they claim it's not a seat and they aren't "selling" it as a seat. I realize there are a lot of examples of how that contradicts some industry standard, but the arbitrator simply believes that it's not a seat and we should not be paid for something that is not filled. All they practically have to do is sneeze wrong at this point and they would have to start negotiating. I mean seriously, we're talking about teetering.
The FO payscale is not based on seats at all. It is universal.
Technically he's right. He's saying if they were operating with 100 seats and then made it 99, they would lose. But that's not the case. They operated with 99 seats from the start therefore not violating the contract. I would be more worried over the fact that you top out at 37 bucks as an FO.
Hootie
Old Skool
Technically he's right. He's saying if they were operating with 100 seats and then made it 99, they would lose. But that's not the case. They operated with 99 seats from the start therefore not violating the contract. I would be more worried over the fact that you top out at 37 bucks as an FO.
Yeah, but its a jet! And the engines are under the wings so I can tell the ladies I fly a Boeing!
falconvalley
Absentee Dad of the OOTSK, Runner, Cat Frustrator
Either way, though this is quite a downer, they get exactly what they want and deserve. I got the same feeling about this grievance result that I get when I have to sigh and let my 1yo throw a fit over changing her clothes.
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
Technically he's right. He's saying if they were operating with 100 seats and then made it 99, they would lose. But that's not the case. They operated with 99 seats from the start therefore not violating the contract. I would be more worried over the fact that you top out at 37 bucks as an FO.
Be more worried about? How do you suggest we change that overnite? Ask for a LOA for more pay? We did that, denied of course. We are working on protecting the contract that we have in place. We could send a 5 year old down the aisle to count 100 seats. Obviously the one that 'counts' in this case, the arbitrator, does not agree with myself and the union. Theyve always operated with 100 seats not 99.
RPM
Well-Known Member
I will never understand why they would not make more money selling the 1 extra seat multiple times per day over the course of a month to cover the measly costs of a new payrate.. It's simple 1st grader math.
Its no wonder the airlines lose billions every year. Airline management is by far the dumbest group of people in the business world by a landslide. They are far more interested in screwing labor groups over than making profits.
Airline management math: 2+2= (-394,047,508.625768)
Its no wonder the airlines lose billions every year. Airline management is by far the dumbest group of people in the business world by a landslide. They are far more interested in screwing labor groups over than making profits.
Airline management math: 2+2= (-394,047,508.625768)
Kingairer
'Tiger Team' Member
I will never understand why they would not make more money selling the 1 extra seat multiple times per day over the course of a month to cover the measly costs of a new payrate.. It's simple 1st grader math.
Its no wonder the airlines lose billions every year. Airline management is by far the dumbest group of people in the business world by a landslide. They are far more interested in screwing labor groups over than making profits.
Airline management math: 2+2= (-394,047,508.625768)
THey know they are getting a hell of deal on the flight crews, and that if they negotiated a new rate, it would be much higher then the BS rate that it is now. Im sure they did the math and thought it wouldnt be worth it for the % of time that 100th seat would be filled.
falconvalley
Absentee Dad of the OOTSK, Runner, Cat Frustrator
AAAAAANNNNDDD, that makes us a 99 seat airline. Are we really gonna be cliché and ask for something for nothing? I've noticed a bunch of people getting drawn into the "Hey, but you were supposed to...HEY!!" argument. They acted like they were going to put 100 seaters out and they didn't. Then they got an arbitrator that agreed with their point. They win. This battle's over. Deal with it and laugh at their absolute stupidity for creating a big mess for themselves and spending all that money just to make a useless point.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor? NO! There are two more chances to appeal this.
BobDDuck
Island Bus Driver
Hmmm... If the Germans were bombing Pearl Harbor I'd figure it was pretty much over already.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
[yt]V8lT1o0sDwI[/yt]
surreal1221
Well-Known Member
We need to do some recruiting Train.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
Nine, HONDOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!
falconvalley
Absentee Dad of the OOTSK, Runner, Cat Frustrator
Sure, and could we win? Sure! I don't see the point, though. We don't run the airline. Let them posture themselves all they want. "Big picture"! This is one thing they can't hide from forever. Either we remain a 99 seat airline or we eventually become a 100+ seat airline. Let them do what they want. They went well out of their way to pretend they didn't just have a linebacker face plant on the way out to be the kicker during a fake field goal. The idiot ref just didn't get it. They fooled the ref, but they didn't fool us and they didn't really score, either! So, now we have the ball on their 15. Do we call them out on the fake or do we press on with the offense?
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
If you want to keep with the football analogies, then what's just happened is your quarterback was sacked, and it resulted in a turnover.
You have nothing if you don't chose to stand and fight.
falconvalley
Absentee Dad of the OOTSK, Runner, Cat Frustrator
LOL, too many football references...well I don't know how else to put it, you either have the ball or you don't and you either accept or decline a penalty and play on. IMO, we should decline and take the ball. My dues should be spent on grievances that have an actual meaning. This grievance can actually by won without appealing. Just give the company time to "change their mind". Like they say "pick your battles". I think this grievance was a waste of time and money on both sides.
jynxyjoe
Queso King
It's the bottom of the eighth, it's 15-love, we just lost our point guard, and you know what? I'm not scared. Their putting has been terrible and their out fielding was laughable all last half. I say we can win this thing! This will be the game of the century, for the next 90 years they'll say, "boy that Jet's versus Mets game was a once in a lifetime comeback".
Polar742
All the responsibility none of the authority
You coming to LAS, or are you held up picking out the proper shade of white for the unity candle?