Congress Or Chaos May Await Us Airways

You won't have to worry about crossing a picket line, even management has admitted that the place will shut down if any of the unions go on strike.
 
NeedForSpeedNFS said:
Well, 700, wait for the NMB's permission to strike, then, GO ON STRIKE!!! YOU will be on the street, my friend!!! But, I'm sure that as the Sr VP of the "bad boys" club, you can stand in front of all your union brothers' and sisters', and declare......."VICTORY"!!!!!!!.....We showed them!! When CAL struck, it was a completely different ballgame. If it has not been brought to your attention recently, the rules are ...well lets just say the rules have changed since that strike!!!!! This Company is on the verge of COLLAPSE if things do not change! I do NOT like what is happenning to the labor groups, but your constant diatribes and chest pounding are really quite boring.......When there are 28,000 other employees on the unemployment line, get back to me, and pound your chest then, and brag about how much you "SHOWED 'EM"!!!! GOOD DAY!!!!!!!
[post="205034"][/post]​
As per my previous post...........700, does this mean I ACTUALLY added to the topic, and you agree with me?? Not the whole post, of course, just the portion that mentions what you just posted. GOOD DAY!!!!
 
usfliboi said:
I say those who want to legally strike , do it! I will not support it. Theres a time when you know theres a reason and a positive outcome, this isnt one of them . I hope those who take the position , that there is no longer a contrat, ie 700, that they are replaced in a timely manner. Youre doing nothing but hurting yourselves...... there is nor positive outcome, you cant fight reality, you can only hope that the industry changes, and that there will be another day to stand and fight...
[post="205205"][/post]​


WHOSE "WE"???????????

Did you take a poll of your own? Is it scientific?

Dec. 13 is the date of the ballot calculation.
 
BoeingBoy said:
Well, you've summed up the management argument....



Jim
[post="204975"][/post]​

Interesting Jim but one question hasn't the status quo been upsetted with the temporary changes already in place, therefore allowing a strike to take place?
 
ClueByFour said:
So let's think this out:

[post="205015"][/post]​

In any argument about anything it would best to leave out any quote by USA320pilot as I don't think there are many if any that believe what he says.
 
usairways_vote_NO said:
Interesting Jim but one question hasn't the status quo been upsetted with the temporary changes already in place, therefore allowing a strike to take place?
[post="205318"][/post]​

I guess one could make that argument, though my 2 cents worth is that since it's only temporary the status quo still exists. But that's only my opinion....

Jim
 
Pitbull, nor have you. I highly doubt there will be a vote to strike however the proof will be in the lack of action..... its amazing you think differently... you need to understand sweets, theres life outside of pit
 
usfliboi said:
Pitbull, nor have you. I highly doubt there will be a vote to strike however the proof will be in the lack of action..... its amazing you think differently... you need to understand sweets, theres life outside of pit
[post="205325"][/post]​

The real reality you need to understand sweets, is theres gonna be life without USAirways very soon.
 
BoeingBoy said:
With all due respect, he did. It was in the context of BK1. I once posted the quote from him and a link to the source.

Jim
[post="204989"][/post]​

Thanks Jim, and you can dispence with the"all due respect." 320 deserves none. This simple fact remains, and the "law be d....md," if an employee is being told he is going to lose everything he has NOTHING to lose. Look at the IAM. Their very existance is threatened. I don't really think the F/As are losing as much, even with the cuts (after all, they will still have jobs with some benefits..unlike the mechanics.) But I think their PERCEPTION is the same. My theory is there will not be enough time at U for even a presidental act to save the company, much less a court ruling...there just is not enough time. If one major group goes out..all the creditors lose...food for thought. Greeter.
 
I think the issue of whether it will be legal or not to strike, whether the judge can order US Airways workers to not strike, is irrelevant. Clearly, many people want to strike if their contract is thrown out. The CWA has voted, the AFA is voting, and the IAM's members have always been very likely to tell the company what to do with their jobs.

All of these people seemingly know what the consequences of a strike will be, but that doesn't appear to be an issue. They're saying it's time to take a stand.

While I could be wrong, it's clear to me that if the judge throws out the contracts, there will be a serious disruption to the airline.

If a strike is deemed legal, one or more unions will strike, and others will honor the strike. No one seems to dispute that will result in liquidation.

If a strike is ruled illegal, one or more unions still could call a strike as a way of challenging such a ruling. In the best case, thousands will stop showing up to work, and most of them will probably picket, and the unions' leadership will publicly say there is no organized job action.

Is the judge going to have law enforcement arrest thousands of people for contempt of court? That still doesn't help the airline continue to operate, and the resulting publicity would certainly be enough to drive passengers away, a 1-2 punch that also will result in liquidation.

I understand what USA320Pilot and other optimists think will happen, but I just don't see any possibly good outcome if the judge throws out the contracts. If there's somewhere that my logic breaks down, I'd like someone to tell me. Because USA320Pilot continues to pass up opportunities to comment on it.
 
US Airways to ask judge for more relief

"The most significant hearings in US Airways' bankruptcy begin today when the airline seeks approval to void labor contracts covering more than 20,000 workers and the pensions of 53,000 current and former workers and to cut the medical benefits of nearly 11,000 retirees."

Washington Times

Jim
 

Latest posts

Back
Top