When one sits back and looks at it with a calm mind and not through a raging psyche taking nothing personal but looks at reality, then it's very clear this company is in one big heap of manure. So after that realization is made the next logical realization is the fact that things will change drastically or this company will perish. It's not rocket science, it only requires a calm rational mind, a mind that is not filled with mistrust, vengeance, and hatred and every kind of negative emotion . We have posters calling for a new management team, ok great and like this poster here asked, then who will they be and can we be sure they will be any better, smarter and more labor friendly. Then we have posters on here pounding the drum to no more concessions without any answer given to alternatives. The very few posters that do hint at more concessions point the finger away from their little work group, away from where they themselves live at in the U system. We have posters explaining how the entire system should be run, routes, schedules, pricing etc. They believe they have the answers and if only this management team would listen to their wisdom U would be ok. I was a poster calling for a new management team, screaming no more concessions, pointing to other groups. Then with some time away from work and time to think without the daily rumors, jobs that must get done yesterday because we have an AOG, just the everyday stress of being an airline employee trying to keep the planes flying which requires a ton of people all working together 24/7. When you get out of that environment for a time it clears your head. No, I don't have the answers, I am just a mechanic and know nothing of the business world other that what I read. I know what airlines are doing poorly and what ones are doing well, but I don't have the education or experience to know the reasons for these facts. I just know them as general knowledge like anyone else does. I, like everyone else on these boards, would love to see U not only survive but become one of the top airlines and be proud I am part of it. How do we do that, is it even possible, what are the answers, frankly I am clueless. To all the posters screaming at this management team, or their union or the union leaders must be replaced: I challenge them to take over and run the show and make it work. We had posters on here screaming remove the IAM, believing that would take care of problems. That phase is history and now the mantra is remove this management team we have in place. All the infighting, finger pointing, demands for this and that, all the pent up emotions and frustration and even rage in some cases, will in my opinion, equal the demise of this company. It only creates apathy to the point where people stop believing and therefore even trying. I know I have been going on here but to get on these boards yelling, screaming and pointing fingers, demanding new teams, no more cuts, they can shut it down on and on is just a big waste of energy. It does nothing but fuel the negative emotions already in place. If you feed on this stuff the results are frustration, fury, rage, and pure apathy. It's not healthy, not indicative of a successful company for it's employees to be in such states. Nope I sure don't have the answers, but do know I will no longer participate in something that only fills me with negative emotions and solves absolutely nothing. I am thankful I have other hobbies not needing this sort of thing to kill time with. If I want to fill myself with negative emotions all I need to do is show up at work.UseYourHead said:
Dave's Friday Message
- Thread starter A319FA
- Start date
- Status
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
Those who have a new found epiphany, for whatever reasons, are the same folks who have created and fostered much of the concepts on these boards that they now cite as "fury and rage". Those same folks that have called for new mangement to boot. Most of the posters here are those who care enough and give ideas to management in hope to spur "change". Those who are irrational thinkers who manifest rage/fury as one may describe in their own perception of reality, are now sitting in judgement of others, as if they have the "insight" on how, where, and when things will happen. But, offer no solutions but to sit and judge those who attempt to elicit positive change by citing those that are either responsible or need removed. What you see on these boards is "protest" and that is defined as liberty and freedom, and that is what drives "change". Silence...is to maintain "staus quo" and allow those to control your destiny.
Citing "cause and effect" will not solve U's problems or the employees' morale. And wishing morale would somehow or should some how just improve, is really, irrational thinking. There are many who have critisized management and given good, sound rational ideas in hope to create positive "change" however "colorful that expression may be for some. Most have been "adament" and "steadfast" in their positions. I would hardly call that rage and fury. Most ideas from the posters have been extremely constructive, fixing route structure, pax International lines in PHL, rolling Hubs...ideas from employees and PAX alike. Those who can't see that, can hardly say that is apathy. Quite the contrary.
It is those folks who are on the front line who have no opportunity to express, or vent, that have apathy.
What you see here, is good, healthy debate. If it is offensive to some, because of some new found and crystal clear epiphany, than stay off the boards and maintain peace with yourself.
Nothing personal; just an observation from past to present postings.
Citing "cause and effect" will not solve U's problems or the employees' morale. And wishing morale would somehow or should some how just improve, is really, irrational thinking. There are many who have critisized management and given good, sound rational ideas in hope to create positive "change" however "colorful that expression may be for some. Most have been "adament" and "steadfast" in their positions. I would hardly call that rage and fury. Most ideas from the posters have been extremely constructive, fixing route structure, pax International lines in PHL, rolling Hubs...ideas from employees and PAX alike. Those who can't see that, can hardly say that is apathy. Quite the contrary.
It is those folks who are on the front line who have no opportunity to express, or vent, that have apathy.
What you see here, is good, healthy debate. If it is offensive to some, because of some new found and crystal clear epiphany, than stay off the boards and maintain peace with yourself.
Nothing personal; just an observation from past to present postings.
(tadjr...I wish I could really understand your previous post.)
What part dont you understand and I'll try to make it more clear for you.
(Overtime is a voluntary thing , so working 12 hr days that included OT is your choice..work as many as you like, it's up to you)
If I could get the overtime I would. There is very little to go around and if its a Full Time shift, the full timers are getting it. On the part time side we only have 5 different start times and with the overlap on some of them, if you're working an afternoon shift, you're disqualified from working 2 of the other shifts. How is this supposed to work again? My point on this was that if the company says its ok for you to work all day when they need you to do it for THEIR need to cover overtime, it ought to be allowed to happen for a shift swap more than 1 day in a row, but its not.
(The swap thing is a BIG deal to some , but I swap maybe 10 times a year and never use my quota. Allowing more swaps won't save money and there are some who will use this job just for the benefits and not work many days.. )
I'm glad you never make quota. I very rarely do either, even if that means I have to turn down hours because I cant change my start time to another shift start or its counted as one of my 20 swaps when I'm still working that day. If you read my post again, I mentioned those who use it only for benefits. If you require agents to work X% of the hours they are scheduled in a quarter, you would be doing away with the swap control and still making it where people have to come to work to get the benefits. If you are scheduled to work 325 hours in a quarter (5hr shift at 65 days with no vacation) then you would have to work 60% of your hours so you would have to work 195 hours in the quarter. It wouldnt have to be YOUR assigned shifts, but 195 hours from somewhere. The % could be whatever is agreed upon, but would give those who like to take time off to go away or have family matters to attend to who dont want to use sick days to do it the option. It would also allow those who want the hours to have them available to pick up since people wouldnt be limited in what they can give away.
Also if you think people DONT call in sick when they are out of swaps, I think you'd be wrong. I'm sure some people would love to limit the swaps so they can be assured the overtime when this happens, but this isnt saving the company money by paying sick time plus overtime. It does happen.
(Additional swaps would also decrease the number of employees who are eligible for overtime and on bad days this would cause a serious shortage.)
Bingo. Exactly why this is worded this way. Its ok for them to plan for an irregular ops this way, but not any other time? We dont have that many irregular ops days remember so why should this be considered? The agents shouldnt be held hostage to the possible need for overtime coverage when they are trying to do the best they can with the hours they've been given. If you are getting plenty of hours, good for you. Its not that way in the entire system. I would hope that you could see how this change would make things better for so many of your coworkers who are getting by on 4 or 5 hour shifts or having to take time off to commute back home to take care of their families. Where, other than the overtime coverage in case of irregular ops, would any of these changes hurt the companies bottom line without the possibility of helping it?
If you still dont understand something I posted, please feel free to pm me and I'll try to explain.
What part dont you understand and I'll try to make it more clear for you.
(Overtime is a voluntary thing , so working 12 hr days that included OT is your choice..work as many as you like, it's up to you)
If I could get the overtime I would. There is very little to go around and if its a Full Time shift, the full timers are getting it. On the part time side we only have 5 different start times and with the overlap on some of them, if you're working an afternoon shift, you're disqualified from working 2 of the other shifts. How is this supposed to work again? My point on this was that if the company says its ok for you to work all day when they need you to do it for THEIR need to cover overtime, it ought to be allowed to happen for a shift swap more than 1 day in a row, but its not.
(The swap thing is a BIG deal to some , but I swap maybe 10 times a year and never use my quota. Allowing more swaps won't save money and there are some who will use this job just for the benefits and not work many days.. )
I'm glad you never make quota. I very rarely do either, even if that means I have to turn down hours because I cant change my start time to another shift start or its counted as one of my 20 swaps when I'm still working that day. If you read my post again, I mentioned those who use it only for benefits. If you require agents to work X% of the hours they are scheduled in a quarter, you would be doing away with the swap control and still making it where people have to come to work to get the benefits. If you are scheduled to work 325 hours in a quarter (5hr shift at 65 days with no vacation) then you would have to work 60% of your hours so you would have to work 195 hours in the quarter. It wouldnt have to be YOUR assigned shifts, but 195 hours from somewhere. The % could be whatever is agreed upon, but would give those who like to take time off to go away or have family matters to attend to who dont want to use sick days to do it the option. It would also allow those who want the hours to have them available to pick up since people wouldnt be limited in what they can give away.
Also if you think people DONT call in sick when they are out of swaps, I think you'd be wrong. I'm sure some people would love to limit the swaps so they can be assured the overtime when this happens, but this isnt saving the company money by paying sick time plus overtime. It does happen.
(Additional swaps would also decrease the number of employees who are eligible for overtime and on bad days this would cause a serious shortage.)
Bingo. Exactly why this is worded this way. Its ok for them to plan for an irregular ops this way, but not any other time? We dont have that many irregular ops days remember so why should this be considered? The agents shouldnt be held hostage to the possible need for overtime coverage when they are trying to do the best they can with the hours they've been given. If you are getting plenty of hours, good for you. Its not that way in the entire system. I would hope that you could see how this change would make things better for so many of your coworkers who are getting by on 4 or 5 hour shifts or having to take time off to commute back home to take care of their families. Where, other than the overtime coverage in case of irregular ops, would any of these changes hurt the companies bottom line without the possibility of helping it?
If you still dont understand something I posted, please feel free to pm me and I'll try to explain.
Smoke and Mirrors
Member
- Apr 29, 2003
- 29
- 0
PITbull said:
hey smoke....you should have looked up glass' law firm that u hired...read their bio,dude..............................................................
...................................... ...................................................................loo
here
...................................... ...................................................................loo
here
Piney,
No where did I say I agree or disagree with the compensation for IAM people (again, its not my union so I dont care), but an internal IAM matter should have no bearing for those of us here other than IAM members and should be handled by them as they see fit to do so (and several options have been mentioned before). I still say that should have no bearing on US management and their compensation being discussed here in regards to their performance of US Airways, unless USAirways is paying the salaries of these IAM people.
IMO this would be no different than saying we are concerned about the salaries being paid to management at Globe Security, ASI, OgdenAllied, etc unless its something directly payable by US and the service is not being delivered then its irrelevant in this particular discussion. You're trying to throw something else into the mix to cloud the waters and it doesnt belong here.
No where did I say I agree or disagree with the compensation for IAM people (again, its not my union so I dont care), but an internal IAM matter should have no bearing for those of us here other than IAM members and should be handled by them as they see fit to do so (and several options have been mentioned before). I still say that should have no bearing on US management and their compensation being discussed here in regards to their performance of US Airways, unless USAirways is paying the salaries of these IAM people.
IMO this would be no different than saying we are concerned about the salaries being paid to management at Globe Security, ASI, OgdenAllied, etc unless its something directly payable by US and the service is not being delivered then its irrelevant in this particular discussion. You're trying to throw something else into the mix to cloud the waters and it doesnt belong here.
PITbull
Veteran
- Dec 29, 2002
- 7,784
- 456
S&M,
I can only cite the "affialiation" with Ford and Harrison, with Glass's firm positively included in that affiliation. Ford and Harrison law practice is Labor relations whose focus and strategies for managements is to thwart "anti union" organizing.
I guess its just coincidental that Jerry happened to get hired in 2002 and has this firm affiliation with Ford and Harrison, and just fell into Labor Relations as a VP and an Officer to boot, and just happened to be the "center" of our negotiations.
You are right; no proof. Hey, let him know my sincere apologies, really.
I can only cite the "affialiation" with Ford and Harrison, with Glass's firm positively included in that affiliation. Ford and Harrison law practice is Labor relations whose focus and strategies for managements is to thwart "anti union" organizing.
I guess its just coincidental that Jerry happened to get hired in 2002 and has this firm affiliation with Ford and Harrison, and just fell into Labor Relations as a VP and an Officer to boot, and just happened to be the "center" of our negotiations.
You are right; no proof. Hey, let him know my sincere apologies, really.
Justaramper
Advanced
- Dec 15, 2002
- 218
- 0
delldumb...Excuse me, what are you refering to...? it seems once again your "confused" with the issues...delldude said:of course as you've indicated before...if it doesn't float your way...you would exercise the "zero tolerance option"....and take down any and all who oppose you.Justaramper said:
People like you keep me AWAY from Union Meetings, as you like to insult others who don't share your views
- Status
