Spirit Airlines Strike Update

Is this you posting this on another forum? If so, what do you mean? What is your agenda? What are you trying to stir up? Are you suggesting the pilots have to go back on strike illegally to support the FA's who are not on strike? What are you saying?

If it wasn't you, please know someone has the same moniker and same profile. They do say everyone has a twin somewhere...

"So the management team thought they'd be cute and use the FA's as negotiations fodder by furloughing all of the FA's and now they're gonna eat a poop-sandwhich for doing so. I hope each and every one of the pilots now support the FA's, as the FA's supported the pilots. Not a single FA should return to work without following their contract."
 
lostplanetairman said:
Is this you posting this on another forum? If so, what do you mean? What is your agenda? What are you trying to stir up? Are you suggesting the pilots have to go back on strike illegally to support the FA's who are not on strike? What are you saying?

If it wasn't you, please know someone has the same moniker and same profile. They do say everyone has a twin somewhere...

"So the management team thought they'd be cute and use the FA's as negotiations fodder by furloughing all of the FA's and now they're gonna eat a poop-sandwhich for doing so. I hope each and every one of the pilots now support the FA's, as the FA's supported the pilots. Not a single FA should return to work without following their contract."
Click to expand...

I think whats being said is that since the contract language specifies certain prerequisites for the FAs prior to returning to work following a furlough, that the FAs follow that contract language to a T. I don't read that anyone here is saying for the pilots to go back on strike, but only that the FAs should follow their contract, especially as seeing how the management tried to use their furlough as a tool to try and whipsaw them against the striking pilots (ie- management saying "you FAs wouldn't be out on the street now, were it not for those greedy pilots). Why do management any favors by helping them out any such as returning to work early, when they tossed you out like yesterdays garbage by furloughing you.

At least thats how I see it being written here. Really has nothing to do with the pilots, as their portion of the situation seems to have been completed.
 
lostplanetairman said:
Is this you posting this on another forum? If so, what do you mean? What is your agenda? What are you trying to stir up? Are you suggesting the pilots have to go back on strike illegally to support the FA's who are not on strike? What are you saying?

If it wasn't you, please know someone has the same moniker and same profile. They do say everyone has a twin somewhere...

"So the management team thought they'd be cute and use the FA's as negotiations fodder by furloughing all of the FA's and now they're gonna eat a poop-sandwhich for doing so. I hope each and every one of the pilots now support the FA's, as the FA's supported the pilots. Not a single FA should return to work without following their contract."
Click to expand...


No it's me. I have no agenda other than to point out what was simply another poor decision (furloughing FA's), in a line of poor decisions, by your apparently inept management. No, you pilots absolutely shouldn't go back on strike. Don't be ridiculous. Please stop reading more into this than is there.

If the FA's contract or their MEC endorses it.....the FA's should return as soon as they feel necessary. If it's tomorrow....then voilá, everything is back to business as usual. Everyone is free to fly and make all the money they can.

I realize you and your group have been under a tremendous amount of stress in the recent weeks. Perhaps you are seeing more in my posts than is there. I wish nothing but the best for your group and your FA's. What a great bunch of people; I was honored to walk with you. Safe flight tomorrow! :beer:
 
MikeD said:
I think whats being said is that since the contract language specifies certain prerequisites for the FAs prior to returning to work following a furlough, that the FAs follow that contract language to a T. I don't read that anyone here is saying for the pilots to go back on strike, but only that the FAs should follow their contract, especially as seeing how the management tried to use their furlough as a tool to try and whipsaw them against the striking pilots (ie- management saying "you FAs wouldn't be out on the street now, were it not for those greedy pilots). Why do management any favors by helping them out any such as returning to work early, when they tossed you out like yesterdays garbage by furloughing you.

At least thats how I see it being written here. Really has nothing to do with the pilots, as their portion of the situation seems to have been completed.
Click to expand...

Thanks Mike!!! That's exactly right. :)
 
It is normal to lay people off if business is shut down. It was all anticipated. They furloughed the FA's and gave them 3 months health insurance. That's more generous than the real world. There was no whipsaw. I don't understand the references to them being used as a pawn.

Quite frankly, if the FA's followed their contract to the letter of the law, this would further infuriate the customers against unions. They were furloughed for one day and now you say they should shut down the company for two weeks because why? We know management is stupid. But should we shoot ourselves in the foot?

We've already seen a rebound as passengers saw other airlines adding flights but charging huge fares because they could. It's not your decision. Stop giving your opinion as to what the FA's should do--it's their decision. So far, they are back to work.
 
lostplanetairman said:
It is normal to lay people off if business is shut down. It was all anticipated. They furloughed the FA's and gave them 3 months health insurance. That's more generous than the real world. There was no whipsaw. I don't understand the references to them being used as a pawn.

Quite frankly, if the FA's followed their contract to the letter of the law, this would further infuriate the customers against unions. They were furloughed for one day and now you say they should shut down the company for two weeks because why? We know management is stupid. But should we shoot ourselves in the foot?

We've already seen a rebound as passengers saw other airlines adding flights but charging huge fares because they could. It's not your decision. Stop giving your opinion as to what the FA's should do--it's their decision. So far, they are back to work.
Click to expand...

Happy flying!
 
New to the conversation, and not at all involved, so please take the following as a genuine question, not a veiled attack. It's not.

But is what's being advocated here that the F/As NOT "fly the contract"?

Quite frankly, if the FA's followed their contract to the letter of the law, this would further infuriate the customers against unions.
Click to expand...

It's the Internet, so there's no shortage of ways in which to misunderstand one another, but as I understand it now, "sauce for the goose" applies here. "The Public" will never be on our side. It's a fantasy. Worse, it's a fantasy that destroys Solidarity.
 
lostplanetairman said:
It is normal to lay people off if business is shut down. It was all anticipated. They furloughed the FA's and gave them 3 months health insurance. That's more generous than the real world. There was no whipsaw. I don't understand the references to them being used as a pawn.

Quite frankly, if the FA's followed their contract to the letter of the law, this would further infuriate the customers against unions. They were furloughed for one day and now you say they should shut down the company for two weeks because why? We know management is stupid. But should we shoot ourselves in the foot?

We've already seen a rebound as passengers saw other airlines adding flights but charging huge fares because they could. It's not your decision. Stop giving your opinion as to what the FA's should do--it's their decision. So far, they are back to work.
Click to expand...

Precisely. As their contract says, the FAs have up to 15 days or sooner if they wish, after receiving the formal recall notice and the response time therein to respond to that. Their call.

But if I'm reading you right, it sounds as if you're saying "well, the pilot portion is complete, so everyone should giddy up and follow us." When the ball is now in the FA court. Seems had the FAs not been formally furloughed, then everything could go hunky-dory now that the pilot portion is complete. Now that the FAs were formally furloughed, there is protocol to be followed per their own contract for returning from a furlough, and its up to them how they do it.
 
They are free to fly if they choose. They also have the right to stick to the 7 day notice and 7 day show. They have two choices in their contract. If they chose the latter, they are pay protected for June.

But if they chose the former, they can earn their overtime for June.
 
lostplanetairman said:
Quite frankly, if the FA's followed their contract to the letter of the law, this would further infuriate the customers against unions. They were furloughed for one day and now you say they should shut down the company for two weeks because why? We know management is stupid. But should we shoot ourselves in the foot?
Click to expand...

This statement is an absolute cop out, an absolute DOUBLE STANDARD. You got yours but the FA's can't have theirs? Management used the FA as a bargaining tool and basically gave them the shaft. They should absolutely burn the company in spite. Eye for an eye.

You shut this company down to prove a point, they should be able to do the same public opinion be damned. You not supporting them in this effort is very disappoint to me.
 
lostplanetairman said:
OMG--good night boys. You don't get it.
Click to expand...

Apparently I don't either. I don't really see why you're getting upset.

Management clearly tried to use the FAs as leverage against the pilots. The furlough was an attempt to scare you into believing that management was settling into a long-term strike, which they hoped would scare pilots into caving and possibly crossing the lines. It's an old trick. That's all anyone is saying when they use the term "pawn." It's not a slight against the FAs or the pilots. It's a comment on hostile management.
 
You didn't ask, but here is my take on it....

1. The company screwed up by letting the strike happen in the first place. The contract should have been offered prior to the strike. So the pilots rightfully went on strike. After 10 million dollars in lost revenue the company gives the pilots the contract they should have had 5 days earlier. Today I see the Spirit pilots back at work a day earlier than actually required.

2. The company screwed up and furloughed the flight attendants. That should not have happened. The flight attendants have the right to take 15 days to report back to work. They can exercise that right. But what good does it do anyone? Everyone loses and no one gains anything at all.

Should the company get away "scott free" with the flight attendant screw up? No way. But a better way to handle this is to get the flight attendants some extra money in their July paychecks, with a sincere thank you, and let this airline get back up and running. That way everyone gains.

Remember the Spirit employees have a vested interest in the health and profitability of the company. The last thing anyone needs is for Spirit to start losing money.

Joe
 
JOEFRIDAY2 said:
You didn't ask, but here is my take on it....

1. The company screwed up by letting the strike happen in the first place. The contract should have been offered prior to the strike. So the pilots rightfully went on strike. After 10 million dollars in lost revenue the company gives the pilots the contract they should have had 5 days earlier. Today I see the Spirit pilots back at work a day earlier than actually required.

2. The company screwed up and furloughed the flight attendants. That should not have happened. The flight attendants have the right to take 15 days to report back to work. They can exercise that right. But what good does it do anyone? Everyone loses and no one gains anything at all.

Should the company get away "scott free" with the flight attendant screw up? No way. But a better way to handle this is to get the flight attendants some extra money in their July paychecks, with a sincere thank you, and let this airline get back up and running. That way everyone gains.

Remember the Spirit employees have a vested interest in the health and profitability of the company. The last thing anyone needs is for Spirit to start losing money.

Joe
Click to expand...

But the biggest cry you hear here is "fly the contract". Granted, the contract allows for early or later return to work, but that should be the decisions of the FAs and FAs alone now, shouldn't it?.
 
MikeD said:
But the biggest cry you hear here is "fly the contract". Granted, the contract allows for early or later return to work, but that should be the decisions of the FAs and FAs alone now, shouldn't it?.
Click to expand...

Mike the decision is the Flight Attendant's. I've found them to be pretty smart about these things. I'm sure they will figure out the best solution for their circumstance.

Joe
 
JOEFRIDAY2 said:
Mike the decision is the Flight Attendant's. I've found them to be pretty smart about these things. I'm sure they will figure out the best solution for their circumstance.

Joe
Click to expand...

I do hope the FAs do whatever is indeed best for them and their interests, as its now their time. Congrats to the pilots too for their victory.
 
These shenanigans stop right here if the Spirit FA's grow a pair and shut this airline down for another two weeks. No more will non-striking workers be used as a pawn by management for fear of retaliation. Lead by example ladies and gentleman. DON'T let the ploy go unpunished.
 
I am so confused. A few days ago, it seemed the pilots would have preferred to shut down the airline than cave and work for peanuts. But now, the FAs should return to work earlier than required after basically being fired? Because "they have bills to pay" and "all employees have incentive to see the financial well-being of the company?" If the financial well-being of the company was so important, then why strike and cost the company millions of dollars? Why ask for contractual gains that increase the financial burden on the company?

This all just makes little sense to me.
 
JOEFRIDAY2 said:
You didn't ask, but here is my take on it....

1. The company screwed up by letting the strike happen in the first place. The contract should have been offered prior to the strike. So the pilots rightfully went on strike. After 10 million dollars in lost revenue the company gives the pilots the contract they should have had 5 days earlier. Today I see the Spirit pilots back at work a day earlier than actually required.

2. The company screwed up and furloughed the flight attendants. That should not have happened. The flight attendants have the right to take 15 days to report back to work. They can exercise that right. But what good does it do anyone? Everyone loses and no one gains anything at all.

Should the company get away "scott free" with the flight attendant screw up? No way. But a better way to handle this is to get the flight attendants some extra money in their July paychecks, with a sincere thank you, and let this airline get back up and running. That way everyone gains.

Remember the Spirit employees have a vested interest in the health and profitability of the company. The last thing anyone needs is for Spirit to start losing money.

Joe
Click to expand...

I dunno, I know it would be a tough decision for them, but I hope the flight attendants demand the full 15 days. That was really dirty and underhanded what the company did to them and demanding the 15 days would be another amazing show of solidarity to the company.

That's what this industry needs right now, proof that workers have the cahones to stand up and not put up with this crap anymore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top