Should Spirit Maintenance, MLS and Ramp Workers Get 1 for 1 seniority integration with Jetblue Workers?

Status
Not open for further replies.

JimmyBop

Advanced
May 29, 2014
219
30
With Spirit worker numbers smaller, and with Jetblue being larger and the buyer, what is fair and equitable for both groups? 1 for 1, 2 for 1, 3 for 1, etc.? Or should Spirit workers get more?
 
DOH I can understand. But what about classification seniority for shift bidding, layoff and transfer rights?
 
This is in the Spirit Ramp contract. What it means now that JetBlue Ramp turned down representation is questionable. Without McCaskill/Bond all JetBlue should be placed underneath represented Spirit workers but that’s not going to happen anyway and it will likely end up 1 for 1. I’m also not sure if Spirit is IAM represented outside FLL so I’m going to have a front row seat to this.

E34D6A21-9079-492C-9AFD-628F7E282E32.jpeg
 
What’s the point of having a union negotiated employment agreement to secure my work and paying many thousands of dollars over my career for that if someone who doesn’t have it or wanted it can just waltz in and potentially knock me out of the box?
 
Yeah, that kind of undercuts the entire narrative about why people need a union in the first place.

Or maybe, just maybe, the people who sold you that "job security!" bill of goods were lying to begin with?
 
Yeah, that kind of undercuts the entire narrative about why people need a union in the first place.

Or maybe, just maybe, the people who sold you that "job security!" bill of goods were lying to begin with?

Anything to try and undermine the idea of being in a Union from you. Give it a rest Jack.

Seniority under a Union contract and the more you gain is job security. Of course if a Company goes belly up all bets on that are off.

Otherwise you know better than anyone about the value of a Union. Should I repost your comment from when you were with UAL and sweating about keeping your job during the layoffs and how happy you were to be one of the chosen ones?

Have fun with that “At will” employment.
 
As usual, you find it more convenient to attack me and my positions on other unrelated things versus the topic.

By your own admission, I'm not undercutting anything. I'm pointing out a promised value of representation that you just admitted isn't actually there when it is needed.

Heck, even your reference to the Covid layoffs is flawed. I kept my job based on my performance and skills, not a hire date. If those same layoffs had been based on seniority, I would have been unemployed. Fortunately merit won over longevity. People seniority to me but less capable were cut.

At-will employment has done pretty good for me over 36 years. I don't need to whip out my 401k or IRA balances, house value, or pension amounts to prove anything.
 
Last edited:
As usual, you find it more convenient to attack me and my positions on other unrelated things versus the topic.

When you try to claim that I was sold a bill of goods by purposely misinterpreting my comment I consider that an attack against my intelligence. So I return the favor naturally.

By your own admission, I'm not undercutting anything. I'm pointing out a promised value of representation that you just admitted isn't actually there when it is needed.

Of course it’s there. You just interpreted my opinion how you felt fit your narrative. Government just likes to stick their noses in a little too much for my tastes sometimes.

Heck, even your reference to the Covid layoffs is flawed. I kept my job based on my performance and skills, not a hire date. If those same layoffs had been based on seniority, I would have been unemployed. Fortunately merit won over longevity. People seniority to me but less capable were cut.

You really do think very highly of yourself. Are you sure it was your performance and skills that kept you on the payroll or “maybe” (your word) you don’t question those who have authority over you?

At-will employment has done pretty good for me over 36 years. I don't need to whip out my 401k or IRA balances, house value, or pension amounts to prove anything.

Good for you then. I think you moved around too much but that’s none of my business. With you I felt maybe I needed to since you can’t see what I fully support as a value proposition.

If we’re both happy or satisfied with our choices and fortunes in life maybe we should try congratulating each other once in an awhile. (Instead of looking for the angle to tear down)
 
This is in the Spirit Ramp contract. What it means now that JetBlue Ramp turned down representation is questionable. Without McCaskill/Bond all JetBlue should be placed underneath represented Spirit workers but that’s not going to happen anyway and it will likely end up 1 for 1. I’m also not sure if Spirit is IAM represented outside FLL so I’m going to have a front row seat to this.

View attachment 17264
There are something like 13 methods of integration that are considered “fair & equitable” under McCaskill-Bond.

As far as I know, FLL is it for NK ramp. They were in 4. As soon as the IAM was voted in, NK cut 3 of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: WeAAsles
DOH I can understand. But what about classification seniority for shift bidding, layoff and transfer rights?
Good question, and I suppose it’s up to them to decide.

Ideally, they ditch classification seniority and move to a DOH model. As you know I used to be a huge advocate for classification seniority, but have since changed my mind. DOH is the one thing that’s truly “fair and equitable” for every employee involved.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts