UA Flight Cancelled ...

[BottomFeeder]

Hey Einstein, wearing one's hat is not part of the collective bargaining agreement, hence no job action. But thanks for you concern. Once again... fast and loose with the facts.


Pilots are instructed to carry their hats at all times, and if approached by management in public view and asked to wear the hat, to comply.

Well Mr Spin Master would this be a little more ALPA definition of "IS". The uniform dress code would that be in your FOM? Does your CBA address complying with your FOM? If so then it is a job action which is a violation of the RLA.

Cheers

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Hey Einstein, wearing one's hat is not part of the collective bargaining agreement, hence no job action. But thanks for you concern. Once again... fast and loose with the facts.

Of course I understand your confusion, since the USAir East pilots would probably fight for weeks and give up pay and work rules just to put some ridiculous uniform requirements into their contract, just in case they merge with someone, to protect their right to wear their original uniform and no other.

No numbers yet, btw. ALPA is still negotiating with the company this week. But don't you worry. As soon as the information comes out you'll know. And we will be heading to the sweet land of vindication. Better warm up your excuses and justifications, since I'm sure you will be unable to simply come out and admit being wrong. (Again.)

PS. I see you are already backpedaling on your statement of June 16th where you say that your original estimate of 1200-1500 is on the low side and should be more like 1760.

You know why ALPA is negotiating? they don't want to lose 1200-1500 dues paying members. After all, it is ALL ABOUT THE CASH.

As for the numbers, I take no pleasure in seeing the industry inundated with furloughees, but it's happening. The CAL-UAL STAR deal may mean EVEN MORE. When corporations talk about "synergies" you can bet they're talking about "redundancies" as well.

I can wait for the numbers. It's not gonna be pretty. If I were you, I'd let this quietly die. You're gonna look a lot more mentally challenged when the numbers come out. And remember, we're talking numbers for the entire 100 airlplanes, not just the 10 or 20 they will park initially. I know you'll try to spin it. Wouldn't expect anything else from you.

By the way, you're STILL WRONG about whether the hat issue is a job action. And a pretty stupid one at that.

Here's the definition from WORD.NET:

WordNet: job action
The noun has one meaning:

Meaning #1: a temporary action by workers to protest management decision or to make demands


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

[767jetz]

Does your CBA address complying with your FOM? If so then it is a job action which is a violation of the RLA.

Cheers

Actually, no. It addresses scope, definitions, compensation, lodging & transport, hour of service, seniority, reduction of personnel, filling vacancies, training, moving expenses, vacation, leave of absence, sick leave, physicals, workers comp, missing benefits, grievances, system board of adjustment, crew compliment, scheduling, international, duration, and letters of agreement.

The FOM addresses uniforms, and as such is dealt with by the company, not the union. Since uniforms are not part of the CBA, ALPA can not be held responsible for any CBA violations or accused of a job action. It is most certainly an employee message to management, and they are free to handle is as they see fit. But not a contract violation as opined by those who play fast and loose with the facts.

 

[767jetz]

You know why ALPA is negotiating? they don't want to lose 1200-1500 dues paying members. After all, it is ALL ABOUT THE CASH.

Well golly gee whiz! Whadayaknow! ALPA's agenda and the pilot's agenda line up! Niether want to see jobs lost unnecessarily. Go figure. How shocking! Do you think anyone cares what the reason is, if they are able to mitigate furloughs? Oh, and today the COMPANY announced that they are still negotiating with ALPA for ways to mitigate involuntary furloughs and more information would be forthcoming when an agreement is reached. Aren't you the one who said that would never happen?

BTW, you still keep skirting the fact that you were wrong when you claimed that ALPA would give concessions in a futile attempt to save jobs, when in reality they just secured a raise for the pilots. Any comment on that?

I can wait for the numbers. It's not gonna be pretty. If I were you, I'd let this quietly die. You're gonna look a lot more mentally challenged when the numbers come out. And remember, we're talking numbers for the entire 100 airlplanes, not just the 10 or 20 they will park initially. I know you'll try to spin it. Wouldn't expect anything else from you.

I'm so comforted by the fact that you are waiting with baited breath in anticipation of ALPA announcing furlough numbers at UAL. You really are entertaining me here. (Yes I do mean, as Joe Pesci would say, funny, ha, ha, like a clown. You amuse me!)

I'm sure you would LOVE for this to die quietly so you won't have to eat crow. Sorry, you won't get off that easy. I've already said that if I'm wrong I'll be the first to admit it. (Yes, the final numbers that include all 100 airplanes, Skippy.) You an the other hand can't even admit you were wrong about the "concession" comment. So you better keep practicing your denials and justifications.

You wouldn't understand unity if if bit you in the -ss, coming from such a fractured group as yours.
Here are some more definitions of "Job Action" to add to your collection:
"A temporary action, such as a strike or slowdown, by workers to make demands or protest a company or managerial decision."

"a form of protest by workers in which they deliberately slow down in order to cause problem from their employers"

"a job action in which workers cause a slowdown by doing only the minimum amount required by the rules of the workplace"

"a group's refusal to work in protest against low pay or bad work conditions"

"a joint refusal by a group of employees to perform all or part of their duties in an attempt to force the granting of certain demands; esp., such an action by a group forbidden by law to strike"

All are job actions. But your original inference is that pilots not wearing their hat in unison is an ILLEGAL job action that ALPA can be sanctioned for, which is categorically false. Are you going to deny saying this:

Seems to me that if the "no hat" thing was a "job action" by ALPA that the company could recover the cost of lost revenue from ALPA. This could be an illegal job action.

By your definition, picketing would also be considered an illegal job action, when in reality it is a legal protest to demonstrate solidarity. Of course you've probably never walked a picket line in your life so you wouldn't understand that either. We've been picketing, along with Continental and American Airlines for many months now. You probably consider that childish as well, even though it has lead to several contract improvements for us over the last year such as industry leading full line guarantee, duty rigs for the narrow body fleet to match the wide body fleet, higher minimum days off for reserve pilots, a 1% raise, just to name a few. How many contract improvements have you gotten lately??? Oh yeah, exactly ZERO, and still working under LOA 93. How sad.

If there is no violation of the CBA, there is no ILLEGAL job action, hence you are wrong again. Care to admit to it? Didn't think so.

 

[flydude]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/travel/chica...,0,554576.story

 

[767jetz]

So right now the number stands at 950. A far cry from oldiebutgoody's 1760 number.

United says it will lay off 950 pilots

United Airline's parent UAL to cut 950 pilots

One article references 1450, but it is unclear if that was their original number that was "mitigated" down to 950. or if that number includes pilots already on long term and military leave, or if there will be more furloughs beyond the 950. Media reporters are notoriously inaccurate when news like this first hits the press.

Regardless, ALPA has nor the company has not yet released any official announcements, so I will reserve a final ruling on this "internet slug fest" until we get final detailed news from official sources. Interestingly enough, 950 would be exactly half way in between my high estimate of 700 and his low original estimate of 1200. (Not including his amended claim of 1760.)

To be continued...

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Well then. By one article, the 950 number, we tied (950-700 = 250, 1200-950 = 250). By the other, I hit the nail on the head (my estimate was 1200-1500). Wow, I read elsewhere that the number of pilots UAUA has is 8000 active. The article says only 6500+. Where did all the others go? That sure reduces the percentages.

Go ahead, spin away. Then, update your down bid to include RJs.

My sincere prayers go with the folks that will be leaving. This is a screwed up industry. I urge you all to find something you may enjoy more than this YoYo career. If I was younger, I sure would. For those that choose to wait, I hope your wait for return will be short.

 

[767jetz]

The article says only 6500+. Where did all the others go? That sure reduces the percentages.

Go ahead, spin away. Then, update your down bid to include RJs.

Yeah. As I said, these reporters are notoriously inaccurate. 6500 is WAY off. The junior man on the list is somewhere around 8100. Don't know how many management, long term leave, etc pilots there are, but the "active list" is over 7500.

As I said, when we have the official word from the company and ALPA then we will know where we stand.

But you still haven't explained your estimate of up to 1760 furloughs. Have you retracted that statement and I just missed it?

You also haven't explained your comments about ALPA giving concessions in a "futile attempt to save jobs", when in reality they just negotiated a raise, on top of multiple other contract improvements over the last year or so. Have you retracted those statements as well?

Still waiting for more of YOUR spin. Your track record on UAL matters so far is pretty poor. So is your ability to admit you are wrong. Why so quiet on those 2 details? You seem to have a big mouth when you are spouting off your predictions, and playing fast and loose with the facts, but are at a loss for words when you are proven wrong. (Let me help you out. It goes something like this... "Sorry, I was wrong.") Based on your silence on those issues, I'm certain you'll have some excuse ready.

No spin on my side. Just the facts. So far my estimate was a little low. We will see when all the details come out as to how successful ALPA was at mitigating furloughs.

And thanks for your concern, but I'll have no RJ's in my future. Was never furloughed, and won't be even at twice the numbers we are talking about here. And since the 737 fleet is being parked, the worst I'll see is the A320. (Even that is not likely.)

 

[Borescope]

Since then the pin is something every member wears as part of his uniform. Only "non members" aka "scabs" do not wear it.

Incredible you would call all pilots at WN and AA "scabs". I have never run across one of these pilots with an alpa pin on the tie or lapel.

 

[Borescope]

Yeah. As I said, these reporters are notoriously inaccurate. 6500 is WAY off. The junior man on the list is somewhere around 8100. Don't know how many management, long term leave, etc pilots there are, but the "active list" is over 7500.

As you said earlier, Just the Facts. The reporter probably got the 6500 figure right off your ALPA web site. Actually if you look up the airlines, they list United's pilot group as 6400 not 8100 or even 7500. Someone can't count here and it isn't the reporter. Who has the facts wrong you or ALPA?

 

[nostradamus]

Incredible you would call all pilots at WN and AA "scabs". I have never run across one of these pilots with an alpa pin on the tie or lapel.

767jetz recent quote below;

"Additionally it is a strong statement of unity. (Another concept you may not be familiar with.) Just like wearing an ALPA pin became a signal of unity before and after ALPA's successful strike against UAL in 1985. Since then the pin is something every member wears as part of his uniform. Only "non members" aka "scabs" do not wear it. At United, a slick tie (one without an ALPA pin) is a like a Scarlet Letter indicating a pilot who crossed the picket line in 1985."




Hypocrites are not able to smell themselves.


"It's a dirty little secret within UAL, and to some extent ALPA National, that this most militant of pilot unions had a significant number of their most senior pilots hauling domestic passengers within Australia in the face of mass resignations by the pilots at Ansett and Australian Airlines."

"denials will swiftly melt into rationalizations after they are confronted by the facts, article click here"

 

[767jetz]

Incredible you would call all pilots at WN and AA "scabs". I have never run across one of these pilots with an alpa pin on the tie or lapel.

I was referring to UAL pilots only. Sorry for the confusion.

 

[767jetz]

Someone can't count here and it isn't the reporter. Who has the facts wrong you or ALPA?

Well, I have the seniority list right here in front of me, and the junior pilot as of 6/5/08 is seniority # 8201.

You figure it out.

 

[767jetz]

Well then. By one article, the 950 number, we tied (950-700 = 250, 1200-950 = 250). By the other, I hit the nail on the head (my estimate was 1200-1500).

Go ahead, spin away.

Well, well, well. We now have something official. And you're not going to like it "oldie."

From UAL's employee communications:
Planned Reduction in Fleet by 100 Aircraft to Result in 950 Pilot Furloughs by Year-End 2009
Posted June 23, 2008

Today we announced initial details concerning the first wave of pilot furloughs resulting from our plans to take 100 aircraft from our mainline fleet due to record high oil prices and a softening U.S. economy. The first notices to furlough approximately 100 pilots for the flying month of September will be issued in mid-July.

By the end of 2009, when we expect to complete the full reduction of our 94 B737 aircraft and six B747s (see June 4 NewsReal), we anticipate the need to furlough approximately 950 active pilots. This process is one of the difficult but necessary steps we need to take to size our business appropriately to reflect the current market reality.

Due to the number of United pilots on military and personal leave, approximately 1450 furlough notices will be distributed over time in order to reduce our active pilot ranks by 950.

We currently are discussing with ALPA ways to reduce the number of involuntary furloughs, and we will communicate any agreements that result.

-----------------------------------------------------

So it looks like you were wrong. Again. 950 is the starting point BEFORE furlough mitigation like voluntary leaves, surplus reduction lines, etc. The number will only get smaller from there, breaking the "tie" you claimed above, and clearly bringing the final numbers closer to MY original estimate. (Admittedly higher than I anticipated, but within a reasonable margin of error for an educated guess.) We could easily see over 100 voluntary leaves based on past experience after 9/11.

Your claim above of "hitting the nail on the head" was a bit premature and actually quite comical. You now have an opportunity to show some humility and integrity, or continue the spin. Your choice.

 

[BugWash]

As you said earlier, Just the Facts. The reporter probably got the 6500 figure right off your ALPA web site. Actually if you look up the airlines, they list United's pilot group as 6400 not 8100 or even 7500. Someone can't count here and it isn't the reporter. Who has the facts wrong you or ALPA?

I think the listing of 6400 pilots would be the active pilots. There are over 8,000 when you include the pilots that are inactive due to military leave, medical leave, personal leave etc.

Signed,
Long time lurker, newbie poster, oldie to this business.