US Pilots Labor Discussion

[nycbusdriver]

No, because Management has rebuffed every attempt USAPA has made to advance a DOH list.

I don't agree that your premise is true, but even if it were...management has rebuffed every attempt USAPA has made to secure an industry standard contract. Should we just accept what management says and give up? Maybe USAPA should just put LOA 93 out there for a joint contract. I'll bet management would grab it with DOH attached.

It's called negotiating. Section by section...including Section 22.

 

[cleardirect]

I don't know about the TSA but I'm sure the company is looking into it.

Why? Because usapa said so? The company is neutral. Any proof that it came from the company?

Where did usapa get the west addresses before the election? The company or TSA going to look into that?

 

[Metroyet]

Why? Because usapa said so? The company is neutral. Any proof that it came from the company?

Where did usapa get the west addresses before the election? The company or TSA going to look into that?

A Hallmark of pathological narcissism is the tendency to get enraged and over react to even the slightest perceived challenge to ones authority. Like say a pamphlet in the mail box.

USAPA= True Narcissism in action.

 

[CallawayGolf]

I don't agree that your premise is true, but even if it were...management has rebuffed every attempt USAPA has made to secure an industry standard contract. Should we just accept what management says and give up? Maybe USAPA should just put LOA 93 out there for a joint contract. I'll bet management would grab it with DOH attached.

It's called negotiating. Section by section...including Section 22.

Yes, it's just like a crew meal, or so I have heard. 😱

I forget, were crew meals mentioned in the Transition Agreement?

 

[767jetz]

On the other side there's your opinion and nothing else.

What else do they need? That's been fueling their fire for years now. 🙄

 

[luvn737s]

And yes management does have an obligation by law to negotiate a new agreement with USAPA.

Who's been filling your mind with such nonsense? The NMB will park negotiations if they feel one side or both is unwilling to negotiate. The company always retains the right to lock out employees at the end of 30 day cooling off (refer back to the "parking comment - i.e. you'll never get out of benig parked to get to the 30 day cooling off) and labor retains the right to strike. However, the union needs to have a strike vote and the brain trust in CLT won't get enough Yes votes to a) influencing the company to resume good-faith negotiations and B) actually pull off a successful strike if one would actually be called.

The pace of negotiations would increase if either USAPA was replaced with an organization that had the respect and solidarity of its members or if the courts decide that the Nic list is the only list to be used for integration (USAPA could try re-ordering the list at the next contract, right?) thus defusing the vindictive nature of USAPA and their anti-west bias.

Either way it's unity first, contract second.

 

[Missfit]

Well there is a difference between healthy and unhealthy narcissism.

It's healthy to feel like you should be treated fairly and to stand up for yourself.

Unhealthy narcissism or what I'd look at as narcissistic entitlement is when one seeks to be seen as superior to others...an example may be feeling that they deserve to have much more seniority than someone with more time served at a company. Not willing to serve their time so to speak.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Maybe USAPA should just put LOA 93 out there for a joint contract. I'll bet management would grab it with DOH attached.

It's called negotiating. Section by section...including Section 22.

I'd gladly take that bet. Do you really think Management would pull back on their DJ request and just sign off on that LOA93 rate proposal? Let's see they offered Kirby rates but are then going to conspire with the unscrupulous group of USAPA malcontents in the hopes that the west pilots who got the shaft with DOH wouldn’t mind also taking a significant reduction in pay rates too; if they get to keep their seats that is. I’m certain Management would not go over that cliff with USAPA. By all means though, please instruct USAPA to make that offer and let’s see where it gets you. It certainly will make the Kirby proposal seem much more reasonable to the masses once word gets out how far down USAPA was willing to go to get DOH.

 

[Bear96]

AT this moment in time... whether or not the company and USAPA are free to bargain on all sections of a CBA... do you not understand what is going on????

Maybe not. I guess I am a little slow. Can you help me out:

Which pending action filed by USAPA has posed this question to a court?

(And ETA: What would the answer to that have to do with a seniority list agreed to by the two pilot groups?)

 

[Pi brat]

Who's been filling your mind with such nonsense? The NMB will park negotiations if they feel one side or both is unwilling to negotiate. The company always retains the right to lock out employees at the end of 30 day cooling off (refer back to the "parking comment - i.e. you'll never get out of benig parked to get to the 30 day cooling off) and labor retains the right to strike. However, the union needs to have a strike vote and the brain trust in CLT won't get enough Yes votes to a) influencing the company to resume good-faith negotiations and B) actually pull off a successful strike if one would actually be called.

The pace of negotiations would increase if either USAPA was replaced with an organization that had the respect and solidarity of its members or if the courts decide that the Nic list is the only list to be used for integration (USAPA could try re-ordering the list at the next contract, right?) thus defusing the vindictive nature of USAPA and their anti-west bias.

Either way it's unity first, contract second.

That statement is kind of like "Give me my way and I will join you, otherwise I will hurts us both, but dang it, by you not getting your way you are killing us!" :huh:

I know one truly narcissistic person and that is exactly the kind of argument he would use,

 

[CallawayGolf]

Well there is a difference between healthy and unhealthy narcissism.

It's healthy to feel like you should be treated fairly and to stand up for yourself.

Unhealthy narcissism or what I'd look at as narcissistic entitlement is when one seeks to be seen as superior to others...an example may be feeling that they deserve to have much more seniority than someone with more time served at a company. Not willing to serve their time so to speak.

Did the number one HP pilot have the same "seniority" as the number 1 US pilot on September 26, 2005? If you say yes then you understand what the term seniority means. If you say no, then you are trying to use a different term altogether and trying to make it fit to serve your biased position.

So based on your definition and a true interpretation of the term seniority, the west pilots are being “healthy narcissists” (odd phrasing, but that is in line with your premise) for seeking to be treated fairly and standing up for themselves. The unhealthy narcissism would be for a furloughed pilot on September 27, 2005 to expect and demand (and hold everyone hostage) because he wants to be placed ahead of hundreds of west pilots who have more seniority.

 

[Pi brat]

Here's a question for you guys that know it all, and Jim I'm interested in your take since you know some of the guys I'm talking about. About the top 1/4 to 1/3 of the east seniority list is not really affected by the Nic award. Why are they not joining forces with the west and beating on the USAPA door everyday in CLT to force them into giving in on the Nic award? We've heard from several east posters on here that are in thouse positions and that have said why they feel that way, but I'm interested in the other side telling me why they think nobody rises up.

 

[Pi brat]

Maybe not. I guess I am a little slow. Can you help me out:

Which pending action filed by USAPA has posed this question to a court?

(And ETA: What would the answer to that have to do with a seniority list agreed to by the two pilot groups?)

I might not understand your question, but why would USAPA pose this question to a court? It has been their position from the beginning that they had the right to do it and have been proceeding in that direction. The opposition has disagreed fromthe beginning and took the steps with the court to stop them, and USAPA has answered and been delayed by them.

 

[No Land Green]

Either way it's unity first, contract second.

Gee what are the odds of "unity first" ever happening here now?

 

[Bear96]

I might not understand your question, but why would USAPA pose this question to a court?

I don't know. (But then, USAPA has done a lot of things that are beyond the capability of my meager brain to understand.) From what I can see, USAPA has been the one refusing to bargain over a CBA and has been consistently trying to evade their legal obligations, so this seems no different.

Maybe the real question is why would anyone pose that question to a court? The seniority list agreed to by the two pilot groups should not have any bearing on CBA negotiations between USAPA and LCC. The question therefore does not seem relevant.