Further Comments for AC Pilots

[Guest Bugsy G Darren]

Richard,

I have been following your posts and am shocked at how brazen you have become, you have implicated "someone" in a criminal act by releasing information that has been bound by a judiciary.

I suggest that you consult an attorney!!

If I am wrong, I guess I will be eating crow on AEForum!!

[Guest neo]

I guess that shoe didn't feel very comfortable.

I appreciate your warning, and I hope every reader will recall my repeated caveats about the nature of the information I've presented. Take it for what you will.

neo

[Guest windi]

Bat,

Does it matter which side you're on? Perhaps just a curiosty on my part.

I agree with point #2 of your post on CIRB decison #183 compliance. If Keller has chosen to use a date other than Oct 17, 2000 and if we don't move forward together from that date, Lordon will look at it and identify it as a fault. Then what?

I am for the record an original AC, and if you were to be an ex-CAIL pilot it would mark a point of agreement, which seems to be a rare thing these days.

Cheers,

W

[cp fa]

I didn't comment on that part of your post because the Canadian FA's have already been wearing that shoe for quite some time now.

But here is what you do know:

1. The Keller award is not out yet, possibly not even written yet, and anything you have heard from anyone but Keller is speculation.

2. Your assumption that if the TA is voted down, it may be forced upon the membership anyway, is just an assumption. It is also within the realm of possibility that they may just impose something even worse. The fact is that no one knows what will happen if this TA is voted down.

It's a really big gamble Richard, and I think everyone would be wise to just take a step back from all of this rampant speculation and wait for the ACPA roadshows.

[Guest neo]

I respectfully suggest that it's a bad idea to not know where your final stand should be taken. If you don't have that point in mind, you will be pushed back to nothing, eventually.

I am not asking you a hypothetical question: it's a question based solely on your own personal feelings and priorities. Would you accept any deal, no matter how onerous, to save AC for everyone else? (Safety issues aside, as that's not what we're talking about here.) As I said, if there's AC employees out there who can answer yes to that question, let them cast the first stones.

The answer to what might be gained by voting NO (other than those issues which are personal, such as maintaining one's self-respect at refusing to capitulate to some devastating fate) are hypothetical. We do not know the outcome of a rejection of the T.A. It could be annihalation, or it could be something else. Eventually, people are pushed to the point where they will actually roll the dice in situations like that.

We do not know the outcome of the rejection of the T.A. However, ASSUMING IT'S RELEASED IN A TIMELY FASHION, we will very well be able to see the consequences of the Keller Award prior to voting. At that time we'll each know for ourselves if rolling the dice on some unknown fate is preferable to the known outcome.

Thanks very kindly for your wise counsel, Greg.

Richard

[Guest GDR]

Hi rance

To be honest the whole Picher episode occured about seven years ago. Quite frankly we have more current and bigger fish to fry. It is now not so much what seniority we have but whather we will have any seniority at all, at either the mainline or JAZZ.

As far as Picher goes I believe that the majority of AC pilots at the time, myself included, felt that the Picher award was unfair to our junior pilots. It would have meant for example, that a Dash 8 Capt who had left the connectors to come to the mainline would now be junior to someone who had been an FO at the connector while he was there. I know that the connector pilots feel differently about the fairness of that, but that was our view.

At the same time I wasn't happy about reneging on the arbitration agreement. In the end it came down to two negative options and I do understand the frustration and disappointment felt by the connector pilots.

I'm sorry it happened the way it did. In the end the connector pilots that have remained with the connectors have been disadvantaged. Hopefully, some day we can put it behind us and start working together.

Greg

[Guest neo]

Presumably, if I've implicated someone in a criminal act then I would be a witness, not a charged individual. I guess as a witness I could get an attorney, but I have nothing to hide and would certainly do my duty as a citizen if called to court.

neo

[Guest rance]

Hi Greg;

Thanks for addressing my post.

In your post you say "As far as Picher goes I believe that the majority of AC pilots at the time, myself included, felt that the Picher award was unfair to our junior pilots".

This is the exact reason why other groups have a problem with Acpa. Whether you thought it was fair or not, it was binding arbitration that you agreed to participate in. You can't agree to something,decide it's not good enough and renege and not expect repercussions in the future. This past is what acpa is facing today, not because your an easy target because your big as you mentioned in another post.

" It would have meant for example, that a Dash 8 Capt who had left the connectors to come to the mainline would now be junior to someone who had been an FO at the connector while he was there".

By you not living up to binding arbitration it meant that a dash-8 driver with 15 years with the company would always be a dash-8 driver making 50% of the same mainline wage, while some joe blow off the street moved ahead of him. So becareful on what you call "fair".

I'm sure it wil never be solved but its important to know how we got here so same mistakes aren't made again.

The whole point is that this whole mess could have been avoided if you did the right thing, now it bites us all.

[Guest neo]

I recommend to others NOTHING more than this:

That they make sure they know what's in the Keller Award PRIOR to voting on the Tentative Agreement.

That is the ONLY recommendation I've made to anyone in all of this. If you or anyone else has a problem with the information that I've provided in support of that recommendation, then I respectfully suggest that were you or anyone else in my shoes, you would do the same thing. If you wouldn't, then shame on you all.

You, as a long-time member of the forum should know more than anyone else, I do not waste my time or anyone else's in idle rumor-mongering.

Far from identifying what I know, your first point simply tells me what YOU know. And I can assure you based on that, you do not have the full story.

I repeat: my sole recommendation to anyone is that they know what's in the Keller Award before voting on the T.A. I base that recommendation on information I've received that suggests that a very large seniority swing will take place under the Keller Award. Regardless of how speculative anyone thinks my information is, who in their right mind would vote without having all the facts of their employment at their disposal?

How others choose to vote once they have the Keller Award in front of them is entirely their own business. But get the award before you vote.

[cp fa]

Okay, but what if the Keller award is not released until after the vote on the TA?

And what if the consequences of voting down the TA are worse than the present TA and the Keller award combined?

Just some food for thought Richard.

[Guest Bat]

Windi:

See if you can glean anything from the "Homerun-Productivity Numbers" thread.

B

[Guest neo]

If the Keller Award is not released until after the vote on the T.A., it will be a blatant political move to deny the original AC pilots crucial information that they deserve to have before making any decision on the T.A.

That's why I've stated, if the Keller Award is delayed until after the vote on the T.A., I will automatically vote "NO".

Think about it, Jennifer. People's votes on the T.A. will be based on their expectations of lost wages, and or lost employment. If the Keller Award subsequently has an enormous impact on those beyond what occurs due to the T.A., then people will be blindsided.

And you can trust me on this, food for thought is not in short supply at the moment.

Richard

[Guest G3]

Neo

Call me thick, but I don't understand your logic in terms of the Keller award and its impact on how you would vote on the TA. To my way of thinking, save the company first and your job. If the Keller agreement is not to your liking, you can always leave. I have left jobs because of worsening working conditions. I think if you believe a no vote for the TA will cause the TA to be revisited, I think you are gravely mistaken, I don't think the creditors will allow it. So if you do find out the Keller award details and still vote no because it is not to your liking; the company goes into liquidation, 30000+ people are out work because one employee group has it's "nose out of joint", well that is selfish. If this does happen for real, I hope you like places like Angola or Congo because no reputable, profitable airline will hire a member of a group that willingly put their own company out of business because of greed (thats what it really boils down to). I have been in positions where I have hired and fired people, I have always been very cautious when entertaining the thought of hiring someone with a long union history but if you as a group were to put the last nail in AC's coffin, you or any of your wing'ed colleagues wouldn't get a second look. Good luck, I hope it works out for you and everyone you work with.

G3

[Guest neo]

Thanks for the warning and thanks for your positive wishes.

neo

[Guest Bugsy G Darren]

Witness / Patsy, whatever makes you feel good, afterall this only about YOU!!

[Guest neo]

Oh, phew! For a moment there I almost thought you actually were concerned for my well being.

My Dad used to say that if you talk to someone long enough, they'll always show their true face.

Paper bag, Bugsy?

neo

[Guest V1V2Vgo]

Hi Richard,

Maybe you should have stayed at Air BC?

I would wager a guess the intonation of your diatribe would be a tad different.

Cheers!

[Guest V1V2Vgo]

Hi Greg,

"ACPA is the largest and most affluent group and as a result we are the easiest target" To date I have read and appreciated your postings. Unfortunately, I must disagree with your view in this case. In recent history, ACPA has disagreed with, trounced,and walked away from every settlement opportunity. In your very words, from a past post, if the regionals had the RJ's from the outset, we would not be in this mess. Why do you have the RJ's? Well, because you wanted them and you had the power. Period. That balance of power may be shifting.