Airbus Arbitration Scheduled

ktflyhome said:
Well, frankly, he has not scared or intimidated me, I just find his posts confusing and disjointed. I can see that he aims at the IAM most of the time. I don't see him calling on the other Unions much. Even if he did take aim at AFA and try to use scare tactics like someone else who posts on here, it would not make one bit of difference in my stance. I have bled all I am going to bleed with this Company. We are becoming an Embarassment. :angry:
now now kitty pitbull is just doing her job!
 
In the fall PIT will become a focus city and go down to 10 mainline and 10 express gates.

Without a cost effective solution to conduct heavy maintenance in-house, the PIT maintenance facility will be closed at some point after January 2004 and before January 2006.

Moreover, if the company wins the heavy maintenance outsourcing grievance, then the CLT B767/B757 and the PIT B737 heavy maintnenace tracks will be closed, unless there is a cost effective agreement to conduct overhaul in-house.

Why? The company's stand-alone fleet will consist of A330s, A320 family, and EMB170/175/190/195 aircraft.

Regards,

USA320Pilot
 
USA320Pilot said:
In the fall PIT will become a focus city and go down to 10 mainline and 10 express gates.

Without a cost effective solution to conduct heavy maintenance in-house, the PIT maintenance facility will be closed at some point after January 2004 and before January 2006.

Moreover, if the company wins the heavy maintenance outsourcing grievance, then the CLT B767/B757 and the PIT B737 heavy maintnenace tracks will be closed, unless there is a cost effective agreement to conduct overhaul in-house.

Why? The company's stand-alone fleet will consist of A330s, A320 family, and EMB170/175/190/195 aircraft.

Regards,

USA320Pilot
again, I think 320 is on to something
 
yea, well, duh. If the company wins, its all over for the mechs.

Why keep stating the obviouse?
 
SpinDoc said:
Hmmm. I fail to see where this would not be a major
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.
Spin Doc,

I figure you a "union buster"....? :angry: :angry:
 
sentrido said:
yea, well, duh. If the company wins, its all over for the mechs.

Why keep stating the obviouse?
DUH, You actually think this company can operate without mechanics even [IF] they win the arbitration ??? Then please explain to me why Jet Blue, Southwest, America West , Airtran or any other so called low fare airline still have mechanics on the payroll..your statement "all over for the mechanics" suggest to me that you have no ideal what mechanics do in the airline industry.. Besides Heavy Maint. mechanics, airlines have Line Mechanics, "Lighter " check mechanics, {"A", "B", "C" checks} So it's NOT as obviouse as you think..Excuse me, it's spelled obvious.
 
usfliboi said:
now now kitty pitbull is just doing her job!
now now kitty pitbull is just doing her job!

Boi!!! I was not referrring to Pitbull and my name is not Kitty. Geez, I wouldn't even bother, but your posts are so out of context and need some clarification. READ!!!!!! :shock:
 
NeedForSpeedNFS said:
PITBul, there you go again!!!!!! Getting off the thread :rolleyes: 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 :up:
NFS,

Call it what you will so you can sleep at night.... During 8 years of Democratic Administration, we had an economic BOOM!

Call it coincidence, but it just so happens unemplyment is higher now than it has been since the Republican Administration in 1990. Job losses, and "outsourcing" jobs over seas, is now common place with Corporations and sanctioned by our government. This Administration can not stimulate job growth, hell they're not even talking about it, and no remedy is in sight. Bush is still looking for weapons of mass destruction....

Sorry Charlie...I calls'em, like I see'em. LIke it or lump it. :p
 
I am not getting into politics here but please remember this....

The democratic administration was just in the right place at the right time. The economic boom actually started before Slick Willie took office and the bubble burst and was headed downward before he left office. In both cases the incoming administrations got the credit/blame for what started before them.

However I digress. I have a simple question, which may have been asked and answered but it is pertinent to this thread.

The company and the IAM have a SIGNED CONTRACT which states that the work stays in house and belongs to the IAM. So my question is simple: On what basis did the company move to outsource the Airbus work??? Regardless of whether or not they were happy with the terms they had a signed contract. Do they really expect an arbitrator to just say OK you can ignore a contract just because you don't like it?

Again I apologize if this is a repeat question but I just don't understand how this whole thing started (the farmout).....

My best to you all....
 
Art at ISP said:
I am not getting into politics here but please remember this....

The democratic administration was just in the right place at the right time. The economic boom actually started before Slick Willie took office and the bubble burst and was headed downward before he left office. In both cases the incoming administrations got the credit/blame for what started before them.

However I digress. I have a simple question, which may have been asked and answered but it is pertinent to this thread.

The company and the IAM have a SIGNED CONTRACT which states that the work stays in house and belongs to the IAM. So my question is simple: On what basis did the company move to outsource the Airbus work??? Regardless of whether or not they were happy with the terms they had a signed contract. Do they really expect an arbitrator to just say OK you can ignore a contract just because you don't like it?

Again I apologize if this is a repeat question but I just don't understand how this whole thing started (the farmout).....

My best to you all....
You nailed it Art, every word. I couldn't agree more.

It really is that simple.
 
PITbull said:
NFS,

Call it what you will so you can sleep at night.... During 8 years of Democratic Administration, we had an economic BOOM!


This Administration can not stimulate job growth, hell they're not even talking about it, and no remedy is in sight. Bush is still looking for weapons of mass destruction....

Sorry Charlie...I calls'em, like I see'em. LIke it or lump it. :p
Call it what you will so you can sleep at night.... During 8 years of Democratic Administration, we had an economic BOOM!
YEAH...LIKE IT ALL STARTED ON JAN 20TH...GIMME A BREAK.
left overs from the previous administration and you know it.
tell me then how your 8 years of dem booga booga caused enron,world com ,and the like to cucka the bed on "w's" watch??? started on jan 20th...ah ha ha ha.... :lol: get with it sister....... :up: **************************************
Call it coincidence, but it just so happens unemplyment is higher now than it has been since the Republican Administration in 1990.(hey .... i don't know if you realize,we're 14 years down the road,times have changed and so has technology) Job losses, and "outsourcing" jobs over seas, is now common place with Corporations and santioned by our government.***************************
funny ... the work force is adjusting to the introduction of time saving technonolgy...from as far back as being implemented during clinton's reign....you remember gores "information highway"...well the highway cost you and me jobs.....blame it on george. :lol:
 

Latest posts

Back
Top