Strike/chaos Ballots

[Dea Certe]

It seems the flight attendant group has little to lose. Should the judge abrogate the contract, or US Management toss in a few pennies in an attempt to get a signed contract, the result will be the same. We still have the same inept, incompetent management at the helm.

Unless there is a drastic improvement in what the company offers, I will have to vote FOR CHAOS. I don't want it come to that, I'm hoping management will recognize they need to change the way they do business.

I'm sure AFA will give our valued customers advance notice of our intentions, as so not to interupt their business or vacation plans. Let's hope manangement knows we don't want our customers to book away from US and the ball is in their court. Literally.

Management has played their cards, we will play ours. Management may just decide to shut it down. Wolf had threatened to do so last time. But then, the CWA and IAM weren't quite as angry as they are now. AFA International wasn't calling for nation-wide strike. The court did not have a request to void our contract before them. It's going to get real interesting.

I should think it's in management's best interest to negotiate in good faith.

Dea

 

[Dog Wonder]

Bargain in good faith?

Management has to argue they have bargained in good faith, but they have a wide and loose definition.

Good faith is whatever management thinks it is.

 

[Trip Confirmed]

I used to be a big supporter of US Airways.

But after seeing the posts of employees on the "Cables cut" thread, I simply do not give a rat's behind what happens to this airline. You employees see this as a joke?

I also read employees laughing about those mysterious holes in the planes in other threads.


You want to gripe? Do it to those employees.

Shut the whole airline down. It will not be missed. This USAIR behavior is beyond nauseating.

America can find better and more moral airlines.

Go for CHAOS now. Don't stop .

 

[USA320Pilot]

Today the New York Times reported under the Railway Labor Act, airline workers are prohibited from striking while their contracts remain in force. But the law is less clear about whether workers can strike if a judge sets aside their contract and imposes wage and benefit terms.

Union officials maintain those terms do not constitute a ratified labor agreement, giving workers the ability to walk out. Labor specialists, however, say airlines would immediately seek restraining orders, requiring workers to return to the job. Moreover, the ensuing battle could drive away consumers, daunted by the prospect of picket lines and unhappy workers.

For its part, US Airways maintains such an action would violate the law. "Any work action, we believe, would be illegal," Mr. Castelveter said yesterday.

See Story

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[mrfish3726]

First, I never looked closely at the pictures thus I can't tell you if she was legal or not so relax! I think it was a link to some japanese place beacuse it wanted to download japanese language decoder (or something like that). Those japanese people like some freaky stufff sometimes.

Anyways, I was just poking a little fun at Jim and I know stuff like that can happen on the interent because of hackers. Not his fault, stuff happens.

Peace!

Skeezer

[post="204076"][/post]​

Kinda like the japanese twins on Gold Member F#K ME and F&K U?

 

[AC/CF]

Any work action on my part would be illegal, but you can cancel my contract and that is just okey dokey.......................yea seems fair to me!!!!!!!!!!

 

[TransatlanticFlyGuy]

Desperate times require desperate measures.

The agreement with GECAS was a desperate response to CHAOS.

[post="204330"][/post]​

LMAO....you people make me laugh! Get a grip.....the GECAS agreement has nothing to do with CHAOS. You are all so brainwashed its pathetic!

 

[TransatlanticFlyGuy]

Hey "funny man",

You need to wake up and know that all who are "in the know" understand this management's idealogy of "Corporatism"...thier educated school of Hard Knox Economic Fascism we all know about. They are shoving these prinicples down your throat and your mouth is WIDE OPEN!!!

Its you who needs an education. You are being dooped and cattled into the same car as the leaders of the 30's Mussolini and Hitler where the "state" was more important than the "idividual".
I WON'T SUBSCRIBE, FRIEND.

[post="204323"][/post]​

You know...all i do is shake my damm head at your posts! You are so ignorant to the obvious changes going on in our industry. You are so "yada yada yada" I wanna cringe! Get to the basics baby....read the damm newspapers, watch the TV. US is going to become the first legacy carrier to become a full service LCC weather you like it or not. There is no getting away from that. Your endless "union" diatribes are falling on deaf ears!

 

[700UW]

When a contract is abrogated it is no longer in effect, you are not working under a contract, but that has been explained to you numerous times.

What you are describing is Section 6 negotiations which niether party are engaged in.

Your own ALPA lawyer Seltzer wrote a book that describes union's right to seek self-help after a contract abrogation.

When Continental Airlines employees had their contracts abrogated they STRUCK and no judge issued a TRO nor an injuction to order them back to work.

US Airways Vote No has provided you numerous links to provide you with the information that unions are allowed to strike, everything you post is in regard to Section 6.

When a contract is abrogated that is a major violation of the Status Quo.

We urge all pilots to contact their reps or the Comm Center for accurate updates on restructuring negotiations and the activity of other unions. We also request that all pilots refrain from promoting any management anti-union propaganda or chastise other employees in the media. There is little to be gained from such activity other than embarrassment for yourself, your fellow pilots, US Airways, and ALPA.

 

[bobcat]

Abrogated Contract - invalid, void, non existent = NO contract

Does NOT mean amended!

STRIKE!

 

[jimntx]

This will last for a few weeks, and when the rank-and-file see their CHAOS number come up and realize that their mini-strike means that now THEY are on indefinite furlough (without, mind you, any unemployment compensation (it's not payable when you strike,)) they will soon start thinking twice about particpating.

[post="204326"][/post]​

Not true. Unemployment compensation is not denied when people are "terminated for striking" or "locked out" on an individual basis. It is denied only when the entire work group is, officially, on strike. However, if the employee swears that "I'm not on strike. It's those other guys. I'm just locked out because of them." then compensation is usually paid.

 

[Winglet]

Weeks that an unemployed worker can ill afford especially if the claim is initially denied and subsequently appealed prior to a favorable ruling

[post="204586"][/post]​

INCOMMMMINNNNGGGG!!! Another company fear grenade.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You guys that think the government would step into this pile of crap are just fooling yourselves. UAIR going out of business would solve alot of problems for this industry, and, quite frankly, UAIR won't be missed for more than a week. Other companies would be so happy to see it happen that they would honor as many tickets as they could. The holidays would be a problem, so I expect any decision by the court to be pushed off until after Jan 2nd or so. The scenario I envision is that the commuters and MAA will be spun off and sold to someone, Bronner will get something out of that and the ATSB will get the rest. Then the gates and slots get auctioned, with the ATSB and other stakeholders getting back a few cents on the dollar. Some congressman or other will come up with some kind of LPP protection like Braniff employees had, but employees will still have to start at the bottom at their new company. Then UAIR becomes another chapter in some book by Mary Sciavo about how mismanaged the airline industry is. That's what I envision. Hope it doesn't happen, but I won't really be surprised if it does.

 

[Doc]

Today the New York Times reported under the Railway Labor Act, airline workers are prohibited from striking while their contracts remain in force. But the law is less clear about whether workers can strike if a judge sets aside their contract and imposes wage and benefit terms.

Union officials maintain those terms do not constitute a ratified labor agreement, giving workers the ability to walk out. Labor specialists, however, say airlines would immediately seek restraining orders, requiring workers to return to the job. Moreover, the ensuing battle could drive away consumers, daunted by the prospect of picket lines and unhappy workers.

For its part, US Airways maintains such an action would violate the law. "Any work action, we believe, would be illegal," Mr. Castelveter said yesterday.

See Story

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="204341"][/post]​

This is what a bunch of us want.....I don't understand why you don't understand this. I want a fare wage... I want what we negotiated not what some judge thinks he should do because the company said so......and if I can't earn a fare wage to be here then I want it shut down.

Don't misunderstand me I have always loved my job but since these thieves have used 911 to just rape the employee's of this once professional airline....
(now it's a joke) I have no love for my job it's just a pay check now ..
and if you are running late or need some extra help sorry I can't help you just get in line somebody will be with you in about 20minutes.......I would have never done that in the past. It almost takes a crane to get me out of bed to come to this crap hole.

 

[markkus757]

It comes down to a pretty simple formula. With US Airways, they only have the ability to make "X" for revenue. We have seen them try to increase this but they just cannot. The cost side is harder to swallow. You have "Y" amount of employees making "A" or "Z" amount of emploees making "B". The equation has equal out or US is not going to be in business. The company either has to pay less wages to the same amount of people or the same amount to less employees. That would be your decision when you vote.