Airline, Attendants Ready For Concession Talks
- Thread starter USA320Pilot
- Start date
I can only base it on what I read here, now, can't I? Want me to post links to all of the messages to show you where that impression comes from?PITbull said:
And, PITbull, you certainly made clear to me what you think, how you feel, what you intend, and why.
Fly, I do not work in the industry. Without going into too much detail, I have had numerous connections to the industry over the years, but have never worked for an airline.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
mweiss,
With all due respect, I am just tired of hearing the majority of the "don't throw everyone under the bus" posters all of a sudden turn into socialistic, guilt-pushers tell the employees what they ought to be doing and thinking about.
We have to live whatever ensues, whether we accept subsidizing a new business plan for a business model that doesn't work in the 21st century, or not. We gave $1.2 billion plus a ride in BK with all of our stock down the tubes and they come again and demand more, as if the last two years never happened, along with all the threatening bells and whisles all over again.
Will we quit.....NO. We will see what the proposals are, ratify them or not, and if they go through, many WILL quit. If it fails through a democratic vote, than the decision will be made for us by management.
With all due respect, I am just tired of hearing the majority of the "don't throw everyone under the bus" posters all of a sudden turn into socialistic, guilt-pushers tell the employees what they ought to be doing and thinking about.
We have to live whatever ensues, whether we accept subsidizing a new business plan for a business model that doesn't work in the 21st century, or not. We gave $1.2 billion plus a ride in BK with all of our stock down the tubes and they come again and demand more, as if the last two years never happened, along with all the threatening bells and whisles all over again.
Will we quit.....NO. We will see what the proposals are, ratify them or not, and if they go through, many WILL quit. If it fails through a democratic vote, than the decision will be made for us by management.
So if I understand you correctly, you think they're just saber-rattling, and they'll find a way to make it work regardless of what happens with the contracts. Is that correct?
And, just so we're entirely clear on the topic, I am anything but socialistic on this or any issue.
And, just so we're entirely clear on the topic, I am anything but socialistic on this or any issue.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
In this context, you play on those naysayer-employees by attempting to convey some socialistic mind-game maneuvering imposed on those employees you question, in the hope that you can convince those folks who maybe voting 'no' to be concerned with those who want this job, at any expense, and who lower the bar by accepting this for all others in the industry...as if that is a good and noble way to behave.mweiss said:
To me, it is the same as management finding the weaknesses of the employees, stripping them of confidence and self worth, and then striving to instill apathy and hopelessness, worthlessness, in order to control the worker's behavior.
Pitbull, do you really think even one person in management is striving for those goals. Educated or motivated people working lifelong to acheive a career path do so to ultimately instill "hopelessness" and "worthlessness" into the company they worked for and the people under them? That's jaded beyond reasonable reality. Do you work for the union?
To everyone that keeps telling the unhappy employees to vote yes and save the jobs for the people that are willing to take these drastic pay and benefit cuts, and then quit....
There is also another point of view...a lot of employees here put up with much crap from passengers and management but are willing to deal with the crap at current wages and benefits. Some that are unhappy do want to stay but feel it is not just, to expect the same level of service for anything less. Whose to say that another round of concessions will breath eternal life into this airline and save us all. What if this is another repeat of the last two rounds and we do die a slower death and suffer with lower wages in the mean time and less UE benefits in the end. As many keep preaching...no airline has been saved by employee concessions.
Most of the employees need their current paycheck just to survive day to day, not to buy high end cars, boats, summer homes etc. If this management team is being truthful and really want this airline to survive, whose to say that if the majority votes "no" for concessions that they might finally get their golden butts into high gear and be forced to implement all of the cost saving ideas that each work group has suggested and put some of their ideas into high gear. That could be a plan! No one knows for sure that concessions will do the trick so, no one can say that any other cost saving plan wouldn't do the trick. Again, who knows.
My point is...the other side could say...vote "no" to save pay and benefits that are desperately needed by most. Don't take hard earned money and benefits away and force them to work for substantially less. You say that it's not right to take jobs away by voting "no" so, what makes it right to take someone elses pay and benefits away by voting "yes" and it could be all in vain.
If the groups give in to concessions and ultimately we don't make it, there will be a lot of angry bitter people regretting their decision. I've heard from many US employees that they will tell no one if they vote "yes" because they are afraid of the flack from other employees if we do cease operations or when inadequate paychecks arrive every other week.
Either way it is a crap shoot. The decision to vote yes or no is up to each individual for what ever reason. A "no" vote may not save the company and a "yes" vote may not save the company. So, don't tell people what is right or wrong. Taking jobs away from someone is no more wrong than taking away needed money from paychecks and benefits from employees that do want to stay.
There may alternatives.
There is also another point of view...a lot of employees here put up with much crap from passengers and management but are willing to deal with the crap at current wages and benefits. Some that are unhappy do want to stay but feel it is not just, to expect the same level of service for anything less. Whose to say that another round of concessions will breath eternal life into this airline and save us all. What if this is another repeat of the last two rounds and we do die a slower death and suffer with lower wages in the mean time and less UE benefits in the end. As many keep preaching...no airline has been saved by employee concessions.
Most of the employees need their current paycheck just to survive day to day, not to buy high end cars, boats, summer homes etc. If this management team is being truthful and really want this airline to survive, whose to say that if the majority votes "no" for concessions that they might finally get their golden butts into high gear and be forced to implement all of the cost saving ideas that each work group has suggested and put some of their ideas into high gear. That could be a plan! No one knows for sure that concessions will do the trick so, no one can say that any other cost saving plan wouldn't do the trick. Again, who knows.
My point is...the other side could say...vote "no" to save pay and benefits that are desperately needed by most. Don't take hard earned money and benefits away and force them to work for substantially less. You say that it's not right to take jobs away by voting "no" so, what makes it right to take someone elses pay and benefits away by voting "yes" and it could be all in vain.
If the groups give in to concessions and ultimately we don't make it, there will be a lot of angry bitter people regretting their decision. I've heard from many US employees that they will tell no one if they vote "yes" because they are afraid of the flack from other employees if we do cease operations or when inadequate paychecks arrive every other week.
Either way it is a crap shoot. The decision to vote yes or no is up to each individual for what ever reason. A "no" vote may not save the company and a "yes" vote may not save the company. So, don't tell people what is right or wrong. Taking jobs away from someone is no more wrong than taking away needed money from paychecks and benefits from employees that do want to stay.
There may alternatives.
crazyincanton
Advanced
- Jan 10, 2003
- 151
- 1
Save the airline for who? You and all the stock option whores? No thanks. This horse is down. Someone just need to shoot it.Hawk said:
