Striking pilots, airline for Amazon, DHL head to court

Hmmm.

While I am not what you would call a huge fan of labor unions, I do not universally reject them either, and the airline pilot is an example of someone for whom, as the industry is structured, union representation is pretty darned important. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out.
 
SCCutler said:
Hmmm.

While I am not what you would call a huge fan of labor unions, I do not universally reject them either, and the airline pilot is an example of someone for whom, as the industry is structured, union representation is pretty darned important. It'll be interesting to see how this one plays out.
Click to expand...

I lean a bit farther toward unions on the continuum: I support private-sector unions in general, but I don't think that they're always right. I also think union membership should always be voluntary, but that employees who choose not to join should also forfeit any benefits, representational or otherwise, of union membership. (Under present law, workers who refuse to join the union in states where that's allowed still receive almost all union benefits.)

I do agree that the nature of professional aviation is such that union representation is important. That applies not only to pilots, but also to ramp service and so forth at big airlines and airports. Most ramp service companies in particular would work employees until they dropped if they could; and non-pilot aviation professionals like mechanics, fuelers, loaders, and others who work on the ground have very few legal safeguards regarding working hours and rest periods.

As for this strike, I suppose it could be devastating to DHL, who would be forced to send their packages via their direct competitors. Amazon, not so much. They're wizards of logistics. If they don't have an instant fallback in place, Jeff Bezos will make sure that some heads roll.

Rich
 
RJM62 said:
I lean a bit farther toward unions on the continuum: I support private-sector unions in general, but I don't think that they're always right. I also think union membership should always be voluntary, but that employees who choose not to join should also forfeit any benefits, representational or otherwise, of union membership. (Under present law, workers who refuse to join the union in states where that's allowed still receive almost all union benefits.)
Click to expand...

It is not really possible to split out what, of the overall "package" of union representation, constitutes a "benefit," and what is not; and you have to remember that union "benefits" are not free, but rather, are paid for by contributions from the paystream of the workers.

My biggest disappointment about unions (I deal with them predominantly in the construction trades) is that, as to most of them, the union leadership has long since abandoned the best interests of their rank and file members or the industry in which they work (and upon which they depend for their livelihood), focusing instead upon ensuring continued discord and resultant benefits for the small cadre of union leaders at the top. Kinda like congress, if you think about it.

With a few exceptions, the construction trade unions have abandoned their role as leaders in training and workforce development.

Thirty years ago, virtually all commercial construction in Texas (a right to work state) was performed by union labor, who in turn were employed by trade contractors owned by union-trained owners. The almost complete shift from union-shop to merit-shop did not come about because of "greedy business owners," but rather, because of greedy elected union leaders. The change did not come about so workers could be exploited; the change came about so that business could continue, to the great regret of the business' owners, who lamented the end of a good and productive system.

There are exceptions. I have clients who are still union signatories, and very successful ones; these are crafts in which the union recognizes that a successful business is not, by definition, cheating is workers; but rather, that mutual success is the best success of all. Good unions have no difficulty maintaining union shops in right to work states; they do not need mandatory membership laws, because the management welcomes the union and the benefits of its presence.
 
Unions are earned.

But not like an award or a promotion, they are earned like a restraining order.
 
I was a member of ALPA for 24 years and flew at a regional airline (ASA), and believe me, we needed it. But as SCCultler points out, the ones at headquarters seem to only be concerned with their selves. I mean the ALPA president makes like 400-500K, has retirement, expense account, free car etc. Meanwhile the airlines gutted contracts by taking advantage of bankruptcy filing. In the case of Delta those pilots took something like 40% paycuts and lost pensions. Then the CEO and about 25 other top people left Delta, the CEO with $25 million and other parachute bennies. But the top officials didn't lose a cent of their pay and bennies.
 
This is fairly open and shut case in favor of the pilots. Clearly ABX management has not staffed the company properly. Now due to lack of planning on managements part they expect the line pilot to make up for it. If an additional assignment is asked of any pilot and that pilot does not feel fit for duty then he or she is absolutely within their rights to declare themselves fatigued or otherwise unfit for such additional assignment. The pilots don't even really need to strike in this case but rather just start refusing additional segments/assignments.

Looks like ABX needs to beat the bushes and hire some pilots or else they're gonna have a lot of egg on their face.
 
Art VanDelay said:
This is fairly open and shut case in favor of the pilots. Clearly ABX management has not staffed the company properly. Now due to lack of planning on managements part they expect the line pilot to make up for it. If an additional assignment is asked of any pilot and that pilot does not feel fit for duty then he or she is absolutely within their rights to declare themselves fatigued or otherwise unfit for such additional assignment. The pilots don't even really need to strike in this case but rather just start refusing additional segments/assignments.

Looks like ABX needs to beat the bushes and hire some pilots or else they're gonna have a lot of egg on their face.
Click to expand...

Not in the middle of it, but sure looks that way.

I think the union is making a point - and they're being heard!
 
Art VanDelay said:
This is fairly open and shut case in favor of the pilots. Clearly ABX management has not staffed the company properly. Now due to lack of planning on managements part they expect the line pilot to make up for it. If an additional assignment is asked of any pilot and that pilot does not feel fit for duty then he or she is absolutely within their rights to declare themselves fatigued or otherwise unfit for such additional assignment. The pilots don't even really need to strike in this case but rather just start refusing additional segments/assignments.

Looks like ABX needs to beat the bushes and hire some pilots or else they're gonna have a lot of egg on their face.
Click to expand...
The Pilot Shortage coming home to roost. FedEx and UPS are hiring at much higher pay, and better Bennies.

Looks like Atlas is filling some of the flying, with at least one plane today.
 
Sluggo63 said:
I'm hoping the Atlas pilots are smarter than that...
Click to expand...

Supposedly Kalitta had a 747 fly, but it was flown by some management pilots brought in via Learjet. Hopefully it was a similar situation with Atlas. As I understand it they're holding strong.
 
kayoh190 said:
Supposedly Kalitta had a 747 fly, but it was flown by some management pilots brought in via Learjet. Hopefully it was a similar situation with Atlas. As I understand it they're holding strong.
Click to expand...
I hope so. I have an email into our MEC about this and haven't heard back yet.
 
Unions exist only to engage in extortion. They extort their members, they extort management, and they foster discord, because that's what keeps the union bosses from having to get real jobs.
 
Lindberg said:
Unions exist only to engage in extortion. They extort their members, they extort management, and they foster discord, because that's what keeps the union bosses from having to get real jobs.
Click to expand...

Well, I can only speak for ALPA as that's the only union I have had a part in. Like I've said on here before - there have been plenty of times when I would rather have a sister in a whorehouse than a brother in ALPA. But.....they are a necessary evil by virtue of the way airlines are set up and run.

Largely in the case of pilots what the union really does is negotiate an employment agreement. Just like CEO's and high level management have employment agreements. I will GAURANTEE you that I can find more egregious BS in a CEO contract then you could EVER show me in ANY pilot contract. Hint - think TYCO.
 
Art VanDelay said:
Well, I can only speak for ALPA as that's the only union I have had a part in. Like I've said on here before - there have been plenty of times when I would rather have a sister in a whorehouse than a brother in ALPA. But.....they are a necessary evil by virtue of the way airlines are set up and run.

Largely in the case of pilots what the union really does is negotiate an employment agreement. Just like CEO's and high level management have employment agreements. I will GAURANTEE you that I can find more egregious BS in a CEO contract then you could EVER show me in ANY pilot contract. Hint - think TYCO.
Click to expand...
There's a symbiotic relationship between airlines and unions. The airlines didn't become the way they are in a vacuum.
 
Lindberg said:
Unions exist only to engage in extortion. They extort their members, they extort management, and they foster discord, because that's what keeps the union bosses from having to get real jobs.
Click to expand...

Unions are a necessary evil. Some are more evil than others.
 
Lindberg said:
Unions exist only to engage in extortion. They extort their members, they extort management, and they foster discord, because that's what keeps the union bosses from having to get real jobs.
Click to expand...

Sometimes true, sometimes false - it all depends!

It has been said (and is often true) that management gets the union it deserves. I can say that, in every union election I have tended, the employees have rejected representation because they trusted the management/ownership more. But, true fact: that trust has to be earned.

In the airline industry, I'd be reticent to call it a career without a union's help. The seniority system makes representation critical.

My $0.02.
 
The unions I don't think should exist are government employee unions.

Airline unions would be much better if seniority was universal instead of existing within the confines of each company.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
The unions I don't think should exist are government employee unions.

Airline unions would be much better if seniority was universal instead of existing within the confines of each company.
Click to expand...

I agree with you first statement 100% ! Governments don't have the ability to make a profit. I would be very much ok to see Mr. Trump and congress finding a way to do away with government employee unions.

The second part while sounding quite nice is just not possible. Let's say a 15 year 737 pilot makes a gauranteed hourly rate of X and a 5 year 737 pilot makes Y, with Y being a lessor amount. If you had to hire a bunch of 737 pilots which would you be more biased to hire ?
 
Art VanDelay said:
That's fine. If they do not feel fit to fly any additional segments they're duty bound to call in fatigued.
Click to expand...
I agree. It sounds like what the company is pulling would be very fatiguing. Using "emergency" scheduling to invalidate their required days off and vacations. Sounds very fatiguing. But, don't forget, cargo is cut-out of 117...
 
Art VanDelay said:
The second part while sounding quite nice is just not possible. Let's say a 15 year 737 pilot makes a gauranteed hourly rate of X and a 5 year 737 pilot makes Y, with Y being a lessor amount. If you had to hire a bunch of 737 pilots which would you be more biased to hire ?
Click to expand...

Ideally ALPA represented airlines would all have the same exact contract and benefits. Ideally. But as we all know each airline negotiates their contract individually with their airline's management.
 
Lindberg said:
Yessir, but it's an informed opinion. And this story is a great example. The dispute has been ongoing for two years. Why would the union choose now to strike?
Click to expand...

Because this is the time they can exert the greatest pressure?

Companies charge as much as they can to profit.
Companies pay as little as they can to profit.
Unions bargain as best they can to get their members better salaries.

I don't see any of those being particularly evil. There have been plenty of times that I've been under paid and had little recourse because it was just little-old-me negotiating with a company that wouldn't care of one person left.
 
172andyou said:
Because this is the time they can exert the greatest pressure?.
Click to expand...

All those Christmas gifts ordered from Amazon , and the like, so I concur, not that you need my concurrence. ;)

Plus having the RLA (Railroad Labor Act) favoring management makes it difficult for pilot unions (ALPA etc) to make gains in their contract.
 
Art VanDelay said:
I agree with you first statement 100% ! Governments don't have the ability to make a profit. I would be very much ok to see Mr. Trump and congress finding a way to do away with government employee unions.

The second part while sounding quite nice is just not possible. Let's say a 15 year 737 pilot makes a gauranteed hourly rate of X and a 5 year 737 pilot makes Y, with Y being a lessor amount. If you had to hire a bunch of 737 pilots which would you be more biased to hire ?
Click to expand...

If everyone was in the same union with universal seniority the company would have to hire in seniority order.
 
Tarheelpilot said:
If everyone was in the same union with universal seniority the company would have to hire in seniority order.
Click to expand...
How do you propose to force airlines--even those that don't yet exist--to give up their right to choose who they hire?
 
Tarheelpilot said:
If everyone was in the same union with universal seniority the company would have to hire in seniority order.
Click to expand...

True. They could also make it a more merit based system and not simply seniority, if they'd operate across airlines.

Larry in TN said:
How do you propose to force airlines--even those that don't yet exist--to give up their right to choose who they hire?
Click to expand...

But there is the rub.

Many trade unions DO manage to operate across business boundaries, though, with varying degrees of success. It's always surprised me that never took off in the airline biz. Especially with the whole "bankruptcy car wash" business model of change the name and start over being fairly prevalent in American business and only slightly less so in the airline biz.*

There's another piece to this, however. I first noticed it in a thread here this year and never thought about it much before then. In most trade union shops, the entire concept of "apprenticeship" is very strong and heavily cultural. Think "apprentice electrician" vs "journeyman" vs "master". In the airline biz, that's down to seniority and which seat someone is sitting in, but both pilots have to meet the same standard.

Some line pilots you talk to are more than happy to teach in the cockpit and sim sessions as senior captains. Not the baselines, but the nuanced stuff. Things you learned over long years doing it.

Others flat out complain if the company parks someone new to the stuff in their other seat.

Aviation unions, at least to an outsider's perspective, don't seem to have anywhere near the "apprenticeship culture" that trade unions have, nor any clout to say things like "you need a master rated person flying that flight"... and commensurate pay, etc. The two go hand in hand even in licensure in the trades.

Yes, there's IOE and check airmen and that. Not saying there isn't. Just saying that feel isn't nearly as strong from aviation organizations as it is in say, an electrician's union. Or telecom. Or pipefitting. Etc.

It's odd. But understandable. Your logbook fills in for some of that in aviation. But when you hire a Union Master Electrician, you know an awful lot about what you're going to get and how long they've been doing it under the watchful eye of a previous Master Electrician.

You hire an ATP, that's not quite the same feeling. If you catch my drift. And the airline still has to mold one of those to their system. Hiring an ATP with previous airline experience? Better. You know they know the airline training and evaluation systems and need re-training to meet the ops of the current employer.

Just thoughts. No dog in the fight on this one here. If I don't screw up my re-ride I'm going to be a tiny cog on that very big wheel of training and teaching folks -- and have probably a bigger effect than even I realize yet on the pilots I teach -- but they won't be anywhere near ready for an airline without the massive training systems the airlines stack up behind those ratings.

How the unions got so shut out from that overall process, is kinda where the thoughts above lead. They could have been an integral part of the required mentorship inside the airlines, like they are in the trades.

Still could be, but that's a long uphill battle and maybe not worth the losses involved to get there at this point.

*Airline in this case should really be air transport and include cargo and self-loading cargo alike, I just used "airline" generically.
 
Acrodustertoo said:
Maybe things would be better off if they did?
Click to expand...
Who is "they"?

Even if the unions were to pursue such a plan, they have no power to force all airlines to agree to it. Under our laws (RLA), all airlines would have to agree to participate and there's little, if anything, in it for them. In fact, it would increase their costs and decrease their control over whom they hire.
 
denverpilot said:
True. They could also make it a more merit based system and not simply seniority, if they'd operate across airlines.



But there is the rub.

Many trade unions DO manage to operate across business boundaries, though, with varying degrees of success. It's always surprised me that never took off in the airline biz. Especially with the whole "bankruptcy car wash" business model of change the name and start over being fairly prevalent in American business and only slightly less so in the airline biz.*

There's another piece to this, however. I first noticed it in a thread here this year and never thought about it much before then. In most trade union shops, the entire concept of "apprenticeship" is very strong and heavily cultural. Think "apprentice electrician" vs "journeyman" vs "master". In the airline biz, that's down to seniority and which seat someone is sitting in, but both pilots have to meet the same standard.

Some line pilots you talk to are more than happy to teach in the cockpit and sim sessions as senior captains. Not the baselines, but the nuanced stuff. Things you learned over long years doing it.

Others flat out complain if the company parks someone new to the stuff in their other seat.

Aviation unions, at least to an outsider's perspective, don't seem to have anywhere near the "apprenticeship culture" that trade unions have, nor any clout to say things like "you need a master rated person flying that flight"... and commensurate pay, etc. The two go hand in hand even in licensure in the trades.

Yes, there's IOE and check airmen and that. Not saying there isn't. Just saying that feel isn't nearly as strong from aviation organizations as it is in say, an electrician's union. Or telecom. Or pipefitting. Etc.

It's odd. But understandable. Your logbook fills in for some of that in aviation. But when you hire a Union Master Electrician, you know an awful lot about what you're going to get and how long they've been doing it under the watchful eye of a previous Master Electrician.

You hire an ATP, that's not quite the same feeling. If you catch my drift. And the airline still has to mold one of those to their system. Hiring an ATP with previous airline experience? Better. You know they know the airline training and evaluation systems and need re-training to meet the ops of the current employer.

Just thoughts. No dog in the fight on this one here. If I don't screw up my re-ride I'm going to be a tiny cog on that very big wheel of training and teaching folks -- and have probably a bigger effect than even I realize yet on the pilots I teach -- but they won't be anywhere near ready for an airline without the massive training systems the airlines stack up behind those ratings.

How the unions got so shut out from that overall process, is kinda where the thoughts above lead. They could have been an integral part of the required mentorship inside the airlines, like they are in the trades.

Still could be, but that's a long uphill battle and maybe not worth the losses involved to get there at this point.

*Airline in this case should really be air transport and include cargo and self-loading cargo alike, I just used "airline" generically.
Click to expand...

Piloting doesn't lend itself to apprenticeship in the same way as other trades do.

The Carpenters', Electricians', and other craft unions in New York City have excellent apprenticeship programs that go far beyond OJT. They also run their own schools whose programs are of high enough caliber that they qualify successful graduates for college credit (32 credits in the case of the Carpenters Union program). The ready availability of highly-trained workers is one of the reasons why many union construction trades companies in New York were organized top-down: The companies, not their members, were the ones who initiated the union contact.

But those trade unions don't need to own and operate transport aircraft to run their schools, their members are legally allowed to work while they're learning, and the consequences of apprentices' mistakes are correctable. It's an ideal situation for an apprenticeship-oriented training system.

Training pilots, on the other hand, requires a massive investment in aircraft and associated wherewithal, pilots must be certificated before they sit in the right seat, and the consequences of mistakes can be deadly.

Rich
 
Larry in TN said:
Who is "they"?

Even if the unions were to pursue such a plan, they have no power to force all airlines to agree to it. Under our laws (RLA), all airlines would have to agree to participate and there's little, if anything, in it for them. In fact, it would increase their costs and decrease their control over whom they hire.
Click to expand...
Yeah so about the rla.... my opinion is either rla is repealed to force companies and labor to properly interact or if the gov will not repeal they should not allow unions for airlines
 
Tarheelpilot said:
Yeah so about the rla.... my opinion is either rla is repealed to force companies and labor to properly interact or if the gov will not repeal they should not allow unions for airlines
Click to expand...

I thought deregulation was all about not telling businesses how to run their business ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top