NeedForSpeedNFS
Veteran
- Mar 12, 2004
- 517
- 0
Your kidding, RIGHT????? Once again, I must revert to my trusty attatched picClueByFour said:
Airbus Arbitration Scheduled
- Thread starter 700UW
- Start date
colorado_cowboy
Advanced
- Dec 20, 2003
- 151
- 0
If the IAM does lose in arbitration and the remaining rank and file are presented with a contract thats going to eliminate the majority of their jobs anyway what makes you think any proposal from the company is going to pass?
Not to mention the fact that the CWA also appears to be telling Management "The concession stand is closed".
A320 why havent you started telling the CWA membership what Dave's going to do if they dont agree to more concessions?
"no Sale, Mr. Baldanza"..., CWA
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
USA320pilot,USA320Pilot said:
Presently, the company is only negotiating with the Pilots.
The "whole head" blown off theory is applied to the entire company. Without the mechanics and the rest of Labor to participate in the "new business Low Cost plan",
then there is no plan, and everyone's heads (including yours and the Execs) gets blown off!
Reality sucks, doesn't it....
This is where you are wrong!USA320Pilot said:
We know exactly what their intentions are, which are to obliterate the unions and get rid of the mechanics completely. What you are on here doing is begging mechanics like myself to make it easy for them, become a living sacrifice to Dave's tyranny.
I will not, they can screw themselves; they can go straight to hell. I WILL NOT give them anything they request. Big Dave had his chance to rid this company of Dave Siegel but did nothing.
I will say it again Capt.. I don't care; let them burn the place to the ground. I will not be a willing participant. Call me selfish, call me whatever you want, trouble is your pointing your finger is the wrong direction because I did not place this company in it's present state, Dave Siegel did, point your finger in the right direction for once and stop making the IAM or other unions look like we created this sorry state of affairs.
Your posts are making you look desperate; they are enough to call for a suicide watch.
pitguy
Veteran
- Aug 21, 2002
- 1,509
- 0
1/5/2003 9:23:46 PM
PITguy, I apologize for the delay. I haven't been online and just saw your note.
We are not going to outsource heavy maintenance in PIT or elsewhere. We never even proposed it. (Unlike UA which has proposed the outsourcing of heavy maintenance.)
We will pay all furlough pay as provided for in the contract.
We have no further plans to lay off more mechanics beyond what is published. With the new commitment to operate 279 a/c, we will need just about all the mechanics on the property to perform the maintenance we have scheduled, since our fleet plan anticipated retiring some planes that we will now be flying.
Finally, we are not trying to vendor maintenance with either Boeing or Airbus.
Chris Chiames
PITguy, I apologize for the delay. I haven't been online and just saw your note.
We are not going to outsource heavy maintenance in PIT or elsewhere. We never even proposed it. (Unlike UA which has proposed the outsourcing of heavy maintenance.)
We will pay all furlough pay as provided for in the contract.
We have no further plans to lay off more mechanics beyond what is published. With the new commitment to operate 279 a/c, we will need just about all the mechanics on the property to perform the maintenance we have scheduled, since our fleet plan anticipated retiring some planes that we will now be flying.
Finally, we are not trying to vendor maintenance with either Boeing or Airbus.
Chris Chiames
Aside from your "trusty attached pic" doing nothing to further the discussion, you fail to recognize that Pittsburgh will most likely remain a part of this country for the next century. US Airways will most likely not. So, with that in mind, who needs whom more?NeedForSpeedNFS said:
High Iron
Senior
- Aug 20, 2002
- 495
- 0
"Nobody truly knows management's true motivation but them self. However, the facts are the company has the IAM and its members set up for a very painful fall.
Could the company and the IAM elect to negotiate a cost effective way to keep the overhaul in-house? Sure, but management also has a plan to eliminate most of the mechanics and make the IAM irrelevant, if necessary or they desire.
Again. Like a deep pool ( over the head ). Let's take two pieces of rhetoric and put them together:
1) They will continue run roughshod over any and all agreements ( or parts thereof )...commensurate with a plan of eventual phasing out and elimination of said work group's scope and numbers.
2) A new ( deeply concessionary ) agreement could theoretically be made with the ostensble hopes of said work group cutting their losses....IF the company wants to....and IF the company wants to abide by even that agreement or not....the making of the IAM irrelevant in high-handed whimsy.......commensurate with a plan of eventual phasing out and elimination of said work group's scope and numbers.
Now....not an especially good entreaty to get the IAM members to make a deal is it?
The only choice then, within the present mindset of management's plan is to:
--Go down swinging ( ride it out till the end )
--Go down willingly ( concede and hope for managerial mercy )
Both above will result in their demise, but the high-handedness will make the vast majority to choose the former.
To not see this is beyond comprehension.
Could the company and the IAM elect to negotiate a cost effective way to keep the overhaul in-house? Sure, but management also has a plan to eliminate most of the mechanics and make the IAM irrelevant, if necessary or they desire.
Again. Like a deep pool ( over the head ). Let's take two pieces of rhetoric and put them together:
1) They will continue run roughshod over any and all agreements ( or parts thereof )...commensurate with a plan of eventual phasing out and elimination of said work group's scope and numbers.
2) A new ( deeply concessionary ) agreement could theoretically be made with the ostensble hopes of said work group cutting their losses....IF the company wants to....and IF the company wants to abide by even that agreement or not....the making of the IAM irrelevant in high-handed whimsy.......commensurate with a plan of eventual phasing out and elimination of said work group's scope and numbers.
Now....not an especially good entreaty to get the IAM members to make a deal is it?
The only choice then, within the present mindset of management's plan is to:
--Go down swinging ( ride it out till the end )
--Go down willingly ( concede and hope for managerial mercy )
Both above will result in their demise, but the high-handedness will make the vast majority to choose the former.
To not see this is beyond comprehension.
They already got it in the last round of cuts and are doing it to us already. Anything else would be a freebie. Skycaps, kiosks and home computers can print boarding passes now (they actually want the agents to make announcements at boarding time this week telling people to check in at home next time they fly!!) Boarding card readers at the gates, CARS and Mainline Express, US.com. There isnt going to be a need for many mainline agents/ res agents in the near future anyway. We've already given away most of the mainline protection we had. The painful clause in our contract was voted in last time. :down:colorado_cowboy said:
Hmmm. I fail to see where this would not be a majorcavalier said:
improvement over the current situation. Let me see,
no unions equals flexibility for the company to adapt
their business plan to meet market conditions. That
might even allow the company to make a small profit.
Never mind, until the company closes the doors and
opens under an alter ego airline, the unions will
continue to be a thorn.
NeedForSpeedNFS
Veteran
- Mar 12, 2004
- 517
- 0
PITBul, there you go again!!!!!! Getting off the threadPITbull said:
Remember, those three words you put in bold type may be what other people on these boards believe in!!!!! These times we live in are different, and political affiliation may mean different things to different folks!!This is another example of BLAH....BLAH.....BLAH!!!!! Same tired,worn out mentality! sorry pitbul, thats how i feel 
NeedForSpeedNFS
Veteran
- Mar 12, 2004
- 517
- 0
agree totally with this statement!!! See, 700 we can agree700UW said:
I love you, man!!!!! :blink:
NeedForSpeedNFS
Veteran
- Mar 12, 2004
- 517
- 0
You, my friend, are a pest! Your very observant of the fact that PIT will be around for the next century! AND you state US will not! THAT was my point, exactly!!! If i must explain... The point of said attatched pic, was to remind people to remove their head from the noted location if they believe that US has any intention of remaining a viable carrier in PIT!!! GET IT??? Now for you, sir, personally for you........my trusty pic!!!!!!! Read it!!, and weep! GOOD DAY!!!...MORE LATER!!!mweiss said:
Similar threads
