ppragman
No pasa nada.
And why can't a union have the right organize a strike at any time?
Virgin America Pilot Pay Increase
- Thread starter Cherokee_Cruiser
- Start date
And why can't a union have the right organize a strike at any time?
Provisions of the railway labor act.
You can't engage in "self help" without following the process.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
Meh, it's the truth. At least I can keep it professional and avoid the namecalling (which you have a huge problem doing). There's no denying your past history and how quickly you shot up the ranks and became one of the youngest EVPs ever. When given facts about those representing 9E, you defend them despite evidence by the line pilots that indicate otherwise. I understand you had a buddy-buddy relationship with them and would defend them. But don't write off the regular 9E line pilot as being wrong because we didn't know how CS or SE were. You had ulterior motives which were quite obvious. Now you'd rather quit altogether than be SWAPA? Something doesn't sound right with that one. AAI is a good job but with SWA your pay goes up tremendously more. The downside being you're no longer ALPA. Time will tell I suppose. Although I don't think the chapter is closed with your union career.
ppragman
No pasa nada.
And that is the problem - at brand x regional the longevity of a given pilot may be less than the cooling off period. Even at the "majors" lacking the ability to tell management to "f-off, you are going to cooperate or we will burn this place down" means that management has more power than the union. They can elect to furlough as they want, they can close bases, they can abuse as desired and the union is at a disadvantage. There's no mutually assured destruction which keeps both the employer and union from acting badly - the company can declare BK and get their conessions. I would love to work at a union carrier for the protections that are afforded, but I don't think for a minute that the MBA types in the offices are bargaining from an equal point as the crews.
ppragman
No pasa nada.
Could you explain what you mean a bit?
About to hop on the treadmill and it's more than a 30 second explanation so I'll give you a raincheck on my answer.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
@Derg covered airlines and railroads. But even employees covered by the NLRA don't have the right to "wildcat strike." Only after an impasse has been reached in good faith bargaining.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
You mean the best package in the regional industry that is worth $15 million LESS per year than the TA the XJT pilots just turned down?
Skywest pilots are the highest paid regional pilots just like Virgin pilot pay rates are up to par with the rest of the industry.
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
He means any pilot that votes for conservative lawmakers is shooting himself in the foot. And while he probably wouldn't say it, I will: if you vote that way, you really have no place to be bitching, because it's your own damned fault that management has the upper hand.
Now now; it certainly seems like there are more and more unions who aren't exactly too happy with what President Obama has been cooking up in the past few years with regards to their interests, especially seeing as to how much support they put into getting him elected.
But maybe that's democracy in action?
SlumTodd_Millionaire
Most Hated Member
Anger among unions towards the President is greatly exaggerated by Faux. Don't believe what you hear. AFL-CIO President Rich Trumka was recently on CNBC, and the hosts said something similar to what you did. He thoroughly dismissed it and reinforced labor's support for the President and the President's support for us.
I'm not going by Fox, I'm going by generally left-leaning publications such as the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/busin...da6afc-8789-11e3-833c-33098f9e5267_story.html
"Many labor leaders hope to make headway in talks with the administration and have opted to withhold sharp criticisms of the White House. AFL-CIO officials declined to comment, referring reporters to a resolution passed at the organization’s last convention that echoed the policy concerns expressed in the Reid-Pelosi letter.
The rejections by the White House follow previous disappointments for the labor movement, which poured money into pro-Obama campaigns in 2008 and 2012 and deployed millions of grass-roots volunteers motivated largely by their support for Obama’s push to bring about near-universal health insurance. Another major goal of the labor movement — card-check legislation to make it easier for workers to form unions — failed to win support after what many labor officials thought was a lackluster effort by the White House.
Union officials expect the health-care controversy to intensify a raging debate within the labor movement over how deeply labor should invest in Democratic Party candidates.
Already, the Laborers’ International Union has established warm relations with one potential GOP presidential candidate, Chris Christie, endorsing his 2013 reelection as New Jersey’s governor. The union gave $300,000 to the Republican Governors Association, now headed by Christie. And there have been preliminary discussions between labor officials and aides to the governor over a possible appearance by Christie at a union convention.
The Treasury Department has determined that Taft-Hartley plans cannot receive the tax break given to such health plans and the subsidies for insurance companies in the exchanges set up for those who can’t get affordable insurance through their jobs.
“The unions here are asking to double dip,” said Robert Laszewski, a health policy consultant in Washington. “It is an unfair request. The Obama plan is very simple: If your employer pays for your health plan, you are not eligible for a government subsidy. What the unions are asking for is government and employers to fund their benefits.”
Union officials acknowledge that their plans are unique but say the health-care law didn’t take that into account. As a result, they say, commercial insurers can cover anyone through the individual or group markets, while their funds cannot. They add that the law provides incentives for employers to drop coverage and shift their employees to the exchanges.
The legislation also imposes a $63-a-person annual tax on nonprofit, self-funded plans, including unions’ plans, and uses that money to subsidize insurance companies that take on costly patients. The union plans do not get any of that subsidy money, a source of union outrage."
ppragman
No pasa nada.
I'm certainly not voting conservatively.
Cherokee_Cruiser
Bronteroc
XJT FO and SkyWest FO pay is comparable for comparable equipment (ERJs vs CR2s). The CA side seems comparable as well. But SkyWest gains well ahead of XJT in two areas. One, the XJT scale stops at 12 yrs and the SkyWest goes to 19 yrs. The topped out guys at SkyWest (or anyone above year 12) are in a better financial position than XJT. Two, XJT's lack of greater than 50 seaters. SkyWest has CRJ-7/9s and those pay higher for both FO and CA seats. Personally I don't think it bodes well for legacy XJT to be only 50 seaters and when the axe drops on United Express like it did at Delta Connection, a lot of XJT will be screaming for a 3-way seniority integration with SkyWest/ASA.
Just think "What's the Fox Say" whenever you read anything "industry" written by @Cherokee_Cruiser and you'll be ok.
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster
jtrain609
Antisocial Monster