Polar/Atlas The Saga Continues [Archive]

WhaleFR8

28th May 2008, 04:12

BillyBob521 says:
Should they, let those Atlas people vote how they will, because then they can't blame the Polar folks for their bad decisions like they have for the past 7 years. Grow your own balls, except your own desicions, don't let another union or pilot group tant your decision, but except what you get and there is no one else to blame.hmmmm.... Should we "except our own desicions" or should we accept our own decisions. And if so should we let another group tant our desicions.

I just dunno.... I would hate to make a tanted desicion. or have one of my desicions tanted by another union or pilot group.

I guess when I grow some balls then my desicions won't be tanted - is that what you are trying to say?

BELOW - any and all Polar cards have been accepted so far - feel free to send yours in. Furloughed counts. If you are still on the seniority list somewhere your card is acceptable to the NMB.

BELOWMINS

28th May 2008, 12:18

Whale
Trying not to be redundant, but the question remains:
Will authorization cards from Polar crewmembers be counted toward the decertification of ALPA at Atlas?
How about cards from Northwest pilots or United?

layinlow

28th May 2008, 12:29

Whale

I'm sure you aren't getting much if anything from Polar. And what you may get will not be what you want. Personally I have no desire to waste my time and a stamp. And why isn't anyone answering BELOMINS question?

WhaleFR8

28th May 2008, 14:11

It seems to me that I answered this once already but let me check - -

BELOW - any and all Polar cards have been accepted so far - feel free to send yours in. Furloughed counts. If you are still on the seniority list somewhere your card is acceptable to the NMB.Yup sure did.

Suggest you take a look at the company rumor board. Then go here (http://www.atlasforteamsters.com/docs/authorizationcard1.pdf) and print out your card and send it in. Even the NMB thinks Atlas and Polar are merging. There is a merged list - and it should have arrived at the company yesterday, although why ALPA couldn't transmit it electronically is beyond me. So since there is a merged list, agreed to by both councils, then anyone on that list can send in a card. Last time I checked there were no NWA or UAL pilots on that list so why would the NMB accept cards from them?

Layin - Nice to see that the ground staff at FedEx is so sure of things these days. How's the view from the cheap seats?

Intruder

28th May 2008, 14:12

Will authorization cards from Polar crewmembers be counted toward the decertification of ALPA at Atlas?
And why isn't anyone answering BELOMINS question?
Probably because nobody has the answer. That won't be known until the petition is made to the NMB and they determine who is included in the group who can participate in the election.

BELOWMINS

28th May 2008, 17:55

Whale
From the NMB Representation Manual Section 9.207, Eligibility to Vote.

"Emoloyees working for another carrier, other than the carrier involved in the dispute, are ineligible."

Last time I checked Polar and Atlas are still separate carriers.

WhaleFR8

28th May 2008, 18:46

Last time I checked there was a merged seniority list, agreed on by both MECs; as well as a merged company, operating two certificates. The entire planet with the exception of Robbobin knows Atlas and Polar are merging. Even ALPA (finally) wants the single CBA finished. The seniority list is what the NMB will look at to determine if the cards were furnished by eligible pilots. Send in your cards and join your Polar brothers who can actually read the writing on the wall.

EJetCA

28th May 2008, 18:52

BELOWMINS

28th May 2008, 19:01

Whale
Is that the same merged seniority list your VARS message states can't be used until a merged CBA is completed?

layinlow

28th May 2008, 19:35

At this point I don't think it really matters. With Fuel at $3.81/gal. in the U.S., heaven knows wht it is overseas, and many fuel suppliers demanding cash up front prior to fueling; DHL reducing their presence in the U.S. by 34% and outsourcing the flying to UPS: the economies continuing to shrink: and the continuing assault on older aircraft by the FAA, there may not even be a merger.

WhaleFR8

28th May 2008, 19:36

Yup same one - can't be used by the company ... yet.

iahtexan747400

28th May 2008, 21:18

EJET, all the arbitration cases are now null and void! It is time to move on.

BillyBob521

29th May 2008, 00:53

Hey Whale, reach down to your knees, if Mr. Cato doesn't plug you while your reaching then raise your hand upwards and see if you can find some balls. I hope it all works out for the regular Atlas crewmembers and the regular Polar folks. Looking at the way ya'll are going, I'm not very convident!

Fr8Dog

29th May 2008, 01:40

Hey BillyBob someone a nun in your family?

You guys that don't proof read or spell check amaze me! :D

nitty-gritty

29th May 2008, 05:23

Belowmins

It looks like they will be filing single carrier status. The company did get the delivered seniority list that Polar mostly won launching a number of triggers for the merger on the ALPA NATIONAL SIDE.

That fits more decisively than the USAir/AWA requirements to do that as per the pre-posted link to that document by me. Guess you better call your MEC on what to think about that since you can't believe anyone else or draw conclusions of your own.

Not that I want to be a total jerk, the Atlas for Teamsters side has petitioned the Polar group in their last VARS message for cards. It appears they will be taking advantage of this to move everyone to a more productive union.

http://www.atlasforteamsters.com/thefacts/vars05282008.html

http://atlasforteamsters.com

WhaleFR8

29th May 2008, 06:00

Curious how just six weeks ago the Polar MEC was throwing their ALPA pins at John Prater and thumbing their noses at ALPA. Now, when Polar starts to toe the ALPA line, ALPA decides to go forward with the merger. I urge you all to read this:

All Crewmembers, this is Dave Allen with a Teamsters message for May 28, 2008.

Polar and Atlas crewmembers have a choice to make this week. Authorization Cards are due.

The merged seniority list was delivered to Atlas Headquarters today.

Polar crewmembers, you may be just a little bit shell shocked by now. ALPA implied that you would never merge, and now ALPA has crumbled, reversed course and succumbed to the pressure of the decertification. I was going to point out the inconsistencies of your MEC who now publicly support the ALPA decision to merge Polar and Atlas, but in the end I decided that would not be fair. Why? I suspect that ALPA National informed your MEC, that to continue to blast them would result in your MEC being placed in receivership, with a trustee appointed by ALPA. Your MEC, therefore really has no choice but to publicly support the merger.

Is this the union you really want to belong in, a union who changes course so easily and a union who can so easily control your MEC? What will happen when you need to stand up to the Company, will ALPA be there for you??? Or will they switch sides just as quickly.

I think that ALPA's will is broken forever. When the merged seniority list was given to the Company, it triggered the 270-day merger clock and a merger from this point is a certainty, it is not reversible. This is a legal watershed event. ALPA National’s fight against the merger has led you into a position that has lost jobs. ALPA National is supporting grievance actions against Atlas Air as an excuse to destroy your fellow union members, and ultimately is concerned with one thing, keeping our dues money.

ALPA National fought the merger with your jobs, these jobs are now lost by one very quick policy reversal. ALPA National caved so easily! I urge you to consider a life under ALPA, and I do mean under. You are a "B" carrier and will be treated as a non-legacy carrier, a "cargo hauler" as long as you remain at ALPA. We are all 2nd class members under ALPA. This is not how a Trade Union should treat its members.

The Atlas and Polar crews have a lot to gripe about... the Company, each other, past sins, the merged seniority list, etc. It is well past time that we put our two groups together and start the healing process. There is a link at the beginning of the text version of this message which leads to a paper on Trade Unionism.

I urge you to read and think about the impact it has on our situations. I fault ALPA National for allowing us to snipe at each other. Allowing our situation is not in keeping with true trade unionism. A trade unionist puts aside strong emotional issues when it will hurt his group or that of a fellow union crewmember. If you were told in the past that we would never merge, that was an opinion subject to debate. The debate is over. We are definitely merging now. We need to mend fences. Polar brothers and sisters, determine which union will serve you better, ALPA National or the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. Ask yourself this question, will I be better off at ALPA in five years (if they survive) as a lonely cargo "B" carrier in a legacy airline paying much higher dues? Or better off in a cargo focused Teamsters organization where trade unionism is not just words on paper? A Teamsters union where there are no "B" carriers.

Polar crews; bring your strong scope clause and some of your work rules, enjoy our pay scale and the better contract we will achieve with our Teamster Local professional negotiator that does not have an IBT or ALPA legacy agenda, just our interests at heart. Join us. Fly any pattern your seniority will hold including all the DHL flying, rest easy knowing that Atlas Worldwide Holdings will be responsible to get you to work with gateway travel. Both MECs will be dissolved and new joint elections will be held. Join us today. Mail in an authorization card.

Goodbye until next time.

iahtexan747400

29th May 2008, 10:55

This is the time for us to put the past behind us and unite! :D:ok:

layinlow

29th May 2008, 12:43

Nah, I'll stick with ALPA.

rob rilly

29th May 2008, 12:54

Kev, (FR8), George W. needs your help with Spin. One Hell of a job you do ! You tell almost believable LIES..............

BELOWMINS

29th May 2008, 13:08

Nitty
Exactly who are the "they" that are filing for single carrier status?

jetpilot007

29th May 2008, 15:31

rob rilly,

Please tell us this...

Did ALPA send the merged seniority list to AAWWH or not ?

What will Polar MEC do if ALPA actually sent the merged list ?
Will Polar MEC go along with ALPA decision ?

If WhaleFR8 post is true then looks like Polar and Atlas will merge in 270 days from now.

Wow..... Looks like what Atlas guys saying was true and what Polar guys saying was false if this is the case..

Looking forward to hear from Polar guys answer.

layinlow

29th May 2008, 17:27

I don't think the merged means a darned thing. What will company get? Two different CBA's, two different certificates, and two different unions. Atlas may make Cato happy and go to the Teamsters, but Polar won't. I don't see mixed crews for a long time, and if you ever do, the Polar no fly list will be very long.
Besides, with the economies of the world the way they are, and the price of fuel neither company may be around that much longer anyway. The first hint of more losses and the bean counters will close up shop, then open the doors again under a different name and non-union. Happened before, will happen again. Remember who runs these outfits, the lowest of life forms.

rob rilly

29th May 2008, 20:57

Low, well said....... Lets hope Agent 007 gets it

nitty-gritty

29th May 2008, 22:34

I think that at least two of you are confused. Probably more considering the incorrect info being spread on one side of the equation. The merger will result in one pilot group, one union (probably Teamsters) and two airline certificates. Just like Air Micronesia and Continental.

Belowmins,

The petitioning of single carrier status could be done by any of the parties - the company, Atlas Union or Polar's union. A moot point now with ALPA National's delivery of the merged seniority list. Thus no need to do it now.

Polar guys can send in their cards along with the Atlas guys now.

Get one at :

Atlas for Teamsters (http://atlasforteamsters.com)

jetpilot007

30th May 2008, 00:36

Well, my final words to Polar and Atlas crews is.."I hope you guys get along without no-fly list."

Good luck guys...

rob rilly

30th May 2008, 02:08

Crews (Pilot Groups) will never get along......NEVER !

Best Angle

30th May 2008, 10:43

What makes you think Cato will start honoring scope clauses after we are merged?

BELOWMINS

30th May 2008, 14:19

Nitty
Better re-read the NMB Regs. Companies (carriers) cannot petition for single carrier status. It is a representational issue between labor groups.

WhaleFR8

30th May 2008, 15:12

Better re-read the NMB Regs. Companies (carriers) cannot petition for single carrier status. It is a representational issue between labor groups.NOT!

NMB Regulations

19.1 Merger

Merger is a consolidation, merger, purchase, lease, operating contract, acquisition of control, or similar transaction of two or more business entities.

19.3 Notice to NMB

A Carrier should notify the NMB, in writing when any of the transactions described in Section 19.1 occur, or of:
1) an intent to merge, at the same time it files with the Surface Transportation Board (STB) or the Department of Transportation
(DOT); and
2) a completed merger including the date of the merger and the Carriers (or business entities) involved. Notices must comply with the service requirements of Section 1.2.

19.4 Initiation of Procedure for Determination of a Single Transportation System

Any organization or individual may file an application, supported by evidence of representation or a showing of interest (See Section 19.601-2), seeking a NMB determination that a single transportation system exists.

19.5 Merger Investigations

After an application is filed, the NMB will conduct a pre-docket investigation to determine whether a single transportation system exists. The investigation may take any form appropriate to the determination.

19.501 Factors Indicating a Single Transportation System

The following are some indicia of a single transportation system:
(1) published combined schedules or combined routes;
(2) standardized uniforms;
(3) common marketing, markings or insignia;
(4) integrated essential operations such as scheduling or dispatching;
(5) centralized labor and personnel operations;
(6) combined or common management, corporate officers, and board of directors;
(7) combined workforce; and,
(8) common or overlapping ownership.

From "The Railway Labor Act"
By Douglas L. Leslie

Chapter 2
B. Carrier Petitions for Investigation
Unlike in all other representations disputes, which must be initiated by a labor organization, a carrier facing a relevant change in corporate structure may, according to the NMB Merger Procedures, petition for investigation of a merger representations dispute. A carrier files with the Board at the time it applies to the Department of Transportations (DOT) or the ICC for approval of a transaction. The carrier must state when it intends to operate as a single transportations system or as separate systems. If the carrier does not intend to effect an operational merger immediately after obtaining DOT or ICC approval, but determines to do so at some later time, the carrier must again invoke the NMB's services at that later time, prior to the operations merger.

rob rilly

30th May 2008, 18:32

McCabe knows all the answers ! But does he know or get the Question !

BELOWMINS

30th May 2008, 19:53

Whale
The organizations the NMB is referring to are labor organizations.
Polar Air, Atlas Air and AAWH have been accused of a lot of things, but never of being labor organizations.

Read sentence one of your Chapter Two, carefully.

nitty-gritty

30th May 2008, 20:31

Guess you didn't read the part in the post "Polar Union - Atlas Union". Nor did you read about the USAPA filing and determination for single carrier status between USAir and AWA in the prior post in PDF format from the NMB. So obfuscating the facts with little non issues is wasting everyone's time. If one of a list of several entities can file, what is the deal over one "maybe" that wouldn't do it to be begin with.

So if you want to hear what you want to hear, call the Polar VARS line or Bobb Henderson himself as he states in the May 30th VARS. He doesn't want facts or the truth clouding your minds. He wants you to believe what he says vs reality.

WhaleFR8

30th May 2008, 22:10

Unlike in all other representations disputes, which must be initiated by a labor organization, a carrier facing a relevant.....

So lets read carefully -
Unlike in all other representation disputes - this of course means that the single carrier status dispute is what they are discussing as this is the chapter in question

Which must be initiated by a labor organization - What they are saying here is that "all other representation disputes" mentioned above must be initiated by a labor organization.

a CARRIER - meaning the airline or railroad entity itself which has created the merger.

so to rephrase,
All other representation disputes, with the exception of the single carrier status, must be filed by a labor organization. In the case of a single carrier status dispute a carrier (airline or railroad) may initiate.......

And lets not forget the NMB regs themselves which are helpfully copied above for your viewing pleasure.

19.4 Initiation of Procedure for Determination of a Single Transportation System

Any organization or individual may file an application, supported by evidence of representation or a showing of interest (See Section 19.601-2), seeking a NMB determination that a single transportation system exists.
sheeese do you guys need lessons in English interpretation as well as spelling and grammar?

BillyBob521

31st May 2008, 00:35

Since when are airlines surface carriers?

BillyBob521

31st May 2008, 00:42

Oh, by the way your spelling is great, its' the rest of what you say that leads me to believe you stupid or a pawn.

cptvac

31st May 2008, 03:07

Originally posted 28 April:

This is about a favorable outcome for Bourne and his inner circle, as engineered by Cato to end Polar. Period.

Honorable representation of his crewmembers is not on Bournes list of To Do items. Look for the following:

1...HARD press for Teamster representation (w/ Cato support).

2...Move for Single Carrier (w/ Cato support).

3...Subsequent vote to pull Polar from ALPA (w/Cato support).

4...Bourne installed at Teamster National.

5...Caputo/Alves/Allen Atlas Teamster positions.

6...Continuous blame of ALPA and Polar for concessionary contract from all of the above (and WhaleFr8) rings suddenly hollow with Atlas membership-

AND THE REGRET AND DISAPPOINTMENT WILL CONTINUE...

At least Dave will still be eating in the same expensive DC restaurants on the membership dime.
************************************************** *****

Add Fr8Dog and NITTY-GRITTY to WhaleFr8...
The list? It will be attacked and a staple job will be attempted.
**************************************************

Nitty

You are right about two things...

1)I am scared of the Teamster move, because it is not about improving the lot of the Crewmemberss (see above) AND it has some very real downsides for all involved.

2) I, for one, was happy (giddy would be an overstatement) to merge under the Polar Certificate. And not because of the name on it. You see, the Polar Certificate has certain elements that are valuable for crewmembers to be attached to.

As one who has tried every which way to bring the protections we Polar pilots have to the Atlas pilots (because we all benefit by doing so), I find it interesting that you are (to use your own word) "giddy" at the prospect of the better Polar Certificate elements being lost as some sort of sick revenge. Guess you never considered trying to gain the same protection for your Crewmembers.

We seem to be moving right down the list...

Don't see any mention of the DHL announcement regarding UPS...
Does anyone really wonder why the Polar Crewmembers do not want to be seperated from their Operating Certificate?

nitty-gritty

31st May 2008, 03:48

Billybobb,

The RLA and NMB oversees labor issues for other modes of transportation. Not just airlines alone. A common mistake of the uninformed.

How did you put it -
its' the rest of what you say that leads me to believe you stupid or a pawn.
-seems to fit as a proper response to yourself and not others.

cptvac,

You make a very good parrot. Probably why you are on the negotiating committee at Polar. You can repeat a message without understanding any of it, which is preferred among your leadership.

I agree, bringing the protections that are contained in the Polar contract would be beneficial to the whole of both groups as would the Atlas pay scales. It's just that your group wanted to take that a step further and be "more protected" of the combined group with a add on "follow the flying" exposing the Atlas crew contingent. It was really just another attempt to get more of the seniortiy arbitrated award Polar mostly won. Lets not get started on the scope portion also. The company stated that Polar's scope could remain in the combined contract, but the Polar union chose to stop the negotiation process instead. I'm certain that can now be revisited with the recent reinitiation of the merger, but not because of anything Polar's leadership has done.

WhaleFR8

31st May 2008, 07:14

We seem to be moving right down the list...

As long as we are discussing lists, lets visit the things the NMB apparently considers as indications of a merged carrier (carrier means AIRLINE Billybob)

(1) published combined schedules or combined routes; - Yup got 'em
(2) standardized uniforms; - getting those
(3) common marketing, markings or insignia; - yup got that (btw. anyone seen the insignia with the Atlas guy holding up the circle "P")
(4) integrated essential operations such as scheduling or dispatching; - really got that
(5) centralized labor and personnel operations; - yup got that too!
(6) combined or common management, corporate officers, and board of directors; - I'm curious, does Polar have their own board of directors - NOPE!
(7) combined workforce; and, - got this one too!
(8) common or overlapping ownership. - and this one!

Sounds like a merged single carrier to me.

Fr8Dog

31st May 2008, 11:00

"Oh, by the way your spelling is great, its' the rest of what you say that leads me to believe you stupid or a pawn"

And Billy Bob does it once again! :ok:

I was curious, how many dead cars are in your backyard?

They actually let you fly a jet?

L-38

31st May 2008, 15:31

"This is about a favorable outcome for Bourne and his inner circle, as engineered by Cato to end Polar. Period."

That would be "Plan B", cptvac . . . . That damn Cato, he sure seems to earn his money.

nitty-gritty

31st May 2008, 17:10

This is about a favorable outcome for Bourne and his inner circle, as engineered by Cato to end Polar. Period

This repeated implication with Cato makes for a good sound bite to the Polar crews, but it would mean so much more if it came from the mouths of those that do not have the blood of past Atlas crew jobs dripping from their hands. When the tide turns, how quickly one forgets what happened.

The same implications can easily be made of Polar when those Atlas jobs and A/C moved to Polar and the later requests by the Polar MEC for relief from the Atlas struck work agreement. Polar reeks of complicity with Mr. Cato themselves, but we realize that it is more greed (Polars-we have scope so we get to keep the ill gotten gains forever) than complicity of the Polar group with Cato. Mr. Cato just knows how to throw the food out in front of two hungry dogs to watch the fight begin. There is no intended complicity on either part. Just greed for the individual group at best. Not in standing with Trade Unionism at all.

EJetCA

31st May 2008, 17:23

The company stated that Polar's scope could remain in the combined contract, but the Polar union chose to stop the negotiation process instead.

So you believe what the company tells you? I mean, that's how I read it, what with your underlining for emphasis and all.

I'm just checking. These are the same people that brought you AACS, a "gateway basing" agreement that has you travel on days off and pay tax, and brags about how much they can involuntarily stretch their "crew resources" to the investors.

I personally would have a hard time believing anything they said if the above points were true.

Intruder

31st May 2008, 19:54

As long as we are discussing lists, lets visit the things the NMB apparently considers as indications of a merged carrier (carrier means AIRLINE Billybob)

(1) published combined schedules or combined routes; - Yup got 'em
(2) standardized uniforms; - getting those
(3) common marketing, markings or insignia; - yup got that (btw. anyone seen the insignia with the Atlas guy holding up the circle "P")
(4) integrated essential operations such as scheduling or dispatching; - really got that
(5) centralized labor and personnel operations; - yup got that too!
(6) combined or common management, corporate officers, and board of directors; - I'm curious, does Polar have their own board of directors - NOPE!
(7) combined workforce; and, - got this one too!
(8) common or overlapping ownership. - and this one!

Sounds like a merged single carrier to me.

Not to me... Note first your own definition of "carrier" -- it does NOT mean the holding company!

Virtually every one of those factors is open to interpretation. I suspect a pair of lawyers could make a long and convoluted argument on each side of the issue in front of the NMB or an arbitrator:

(1) Don't see them "published" on the public web site. Only Polar schedules are shown at all!

(2) Don't have 'em yet.

(3) Not quite... Depending on the context, Polar and/or Atlas logo may be found in marketing materials. Note that they have separate web sites within the AAWW site, and the marketing is directed to significantly different customer bases. Once off the AAWW page or the Atlas or Polar main page, the distinct airline-specific logos predominate.

(4) They may be in the same room, but there are distinct, separate groups of people who handle each airline.

(5) They may have that to a larger degree, but they still advertise separate Atlas and Polar job opportunities.

(6) Only AAWH had a board of directors -- neither Atlas nor Polar has one! Other than a common VP of Flight Ops, there are VERY distinct upper-level officers at Polar and Atlas. The 2 DHL guys at the top of Polar have NO Atlas duties, AFAIK.

(7) Again, it depends where you look... Some of the work force (e.g., HR) serves all of AAWH. OTOH, with the EXCEPTION of a few upper-level managers, there are distinct, separate work forces in most of the flight ops departments: Crews, Scheduling, Dispatchers, Training...

(8) This is one place where they have actually DIVERGED in recent history! Both Atlas and Polar used to be wholly owned by AAWH. Now Atlas is owned by AAWH; but Polar is owned by PAWH, which is owned by DHL and AAWH, and directed on a day-to-day basis by 2 DHL transplants. It is clear that in the future DHL will, for all practical purposes (despite the legal fiction of 49% ownership and 25% control), control Polar's schedule, but Atlas and their various ACMI customers will control Atlas' schedule. I think this is one place where a convincing argument can be made that they are NOT "common" any more...

layinlow

31st May 2008, 20:38

Ditto intruder. There's an old saying "Figures don't lie, but liars figure", and that is exactly what AAWWH puts out and the Atlas guys lick it up. If they would just look back at all the crap the company has dumped on them......
But no, they go in and fight and after a year the company gives them a little (the operative word here is little) of what they want and they think they have won. Think Stanstead. One post bragged about how it is shrinking. Hell, it never should have come into being in the first place. Not to mention Gateway basing. They thought they won , but the company figured out a way to punish them for using it. Same with travel. Polar fights, maybe loses a battle or two, but the fight goes on and on. If the Atlas CBA had the same scope clause we have, would they put up the fight we are? I doubt it.
I wish the Atlas crews would:
1. Remember all the shenanigans the company has dumped on them
2. Took at good look at their council and see if they really did any good other than to salve over any wounds and finally
3. Realize that management is not their friend and could care less about the crews, only how to line their pockets.
Believe this, if AAWWH could get along without pilots they would and not think twice about it.
There is only so much one can take. I guess Atlas hasn't reached that point yet, we have.

nitty-gritty

1st Jun 2008, 00:18

So you believe what the company tells you? I mean, that's how I read it, what with your underlining for emphasis and all.

It was said by the company, Bill Flynn in particular, in front of the Polar Neg. Chair and MEC with the Atlas MEC and Neg. Committee Chair in attendance. Polar, after that meeting continued the "we are not mergering" stance.

If it is still on the table or not, I do not know.

EJetCA

1st Jun 2008, 01:08

nitty-gritty

You do realize that the Polar scope, as it is written, does not bind AAWH nor what you desire to be the "Atlas" pilot group to all or any flying commited by PACWW.

Without a parent/subsidary binder scope, a CBA will be worthless. I have seen a parent/subsidary scope binder for an "ACMI-like" operation. It would prevent another AACS fiasco from happening when the dollar gains strength again or any amendable period of a RLA CBA.

The very fact that the Polar CBA is being undermined should cause serious questions of AAWH's intentions of any future direction that the crewing scenario should unfold. A CBA without a parent/subsidary binder should not even be considered.

Best of luck to all of us, cause we all need it.

cptvac

1st Jun 2008, 02:27

Actually...Bill Flynn did not say any such thing. What was said was that Polar was "uncomfortable" and unwilling to continue without assurances that would protect the Crewmembers and bind them to the flying--since the Company changed the business plan after Polar and ALPA committed to a merger. Jim Cato responded that the Company was not seeking to "undermine Polars scope either purposefully nor accidentally" and that Polar, Atlas and ALPA should develop some joint "language" that the Company could look at to make everyone more comfortable. Atlas indicated that it did not matter to them...Bill Flynn then chimed in that the issue was scope. Everyone agreed and off they went to waste alot of time and money developing a Scope Proposal that was rejected.

Subsequently, Paul Alves referred to the situation as a "conglomeration, anything but a merger" with Dave Bourne present and nodding his head in agreement. Jim Cato since has testified, under oath, that he was in daily contact with the Atlas MEC and Negotiators and that they did not support the Scope--so he saw no reason to.

I'm sure further joint negotiations will go much better.

nitty-gritty

1st Jun 2008, 04:45

More - he said she said - again. At best, I believe what you refer to was tied to the "follow the flying" rhetoric exposing Atlas crews to first dismissal that was the center of the issue. More of the "more equal than others" scenario.

I doubt that we will get the at hand parties posting here, except for you Mark. While your MEC does view this site regularly and directs many posts by others, your reputation is at minimal suspect here.

In the end, both groups Atlas and Polar continue to stand empty handed.

:rolleyes::hmm:
:rolleyes::zzz:
:rolleyes::yuk:

Thanks go out to XXXXpc9 for his forwarded logs and other info.

cptvac

1st Jun 2008, 05:53

My thanks to Mercpc9 as well...

What happens will happen, the truth won't change.

EJetCA

2nd Jun 2008, 00:52

Since I dislike having PM's relevant to a discussion that can show other possiblities, I post the follwing:

You are very correct. Unfortunately, ALPA attorney's (2 separate ones) have advised that we can't tie the holding company to the Atlas or Polar certificates and associated labor contracts.

Subsidiary language would have to be totally voluntary on the holding company. Not likely to happen. It would be a first. I could see that as workable, but not likely when all they have to do is dance an advantage out in front of the other crew force to secure leverage against the other.

Good idea, but unworkable unless you have been given different advice/orders from National.

The same response I sent: It has been done. I worked under such a scope clause and it prevented a whipsaw startup endorsed by the other union, and prevented them from taking a 49% ownership in another carrier to circumvent the CBA.

To you, I submit: https://www.republicpilots.org/CBA.pdf Section 1 Para. D is a good read.

To the lawyers that say it's impossible, I say no. It's impossible to vote "Yes" on any contract that doesn't have a binder scope.

nitty-gritty

2nd Jun 2008, 15:48

After reading through some of that, I can see how it got done. Didn't have ALPA National and Legal directing it.

It is an IBT (Teamsters) driven contract. Good thing Atlas and Polar are going Teamsters if Atlas for Teamsters (http://atlasforteamsters.com) have anything to do with it. Keep the cards coming. They are needed now! Priority mail if possible due to the filing date. Numbers count in how National will fight back. Polar crews, yours will count also when we file despite previous comments of others here. The Card in PDF (http://atlasforteamsters.com/docs/authorizationcard1.pdf)

But back at ALPA National now, they are now saying that there really isn't a 270 day clock ticking on the current merger. Despite what they said before and policy. Kind of figured that ALPA National would try to find a way to back out of it just to subvert the decertification of ALPA vote. I think the ALPA National attitude is "Oh yeah, well sue us if you don't like it!" Of course that fits with the attitude of the Polar MEC whom said in the past that it will be a cold day in Hell before we merged.

Rules are rules until they get in the way at ALPA National.

I want to take a moment to say good-by to the ALPA staff I've worked with at National that are now being dismissed June 15th because of the budget cuts. Thanks for all of you past support and help. Good luck and blue skies.

EJetCA

2nd Jun 2008, 17:09

That one scope clause was all we got out of IBT.

And that was due to an MEC that fought the IBT and the company both.

You can be sick of ALPA's business tactics and scoff the contracts they are producing. How ALPA let the scope genie out of the bottle in the 70's is laughable.

However, the Teamsters have no Aeromedical staff. They have no aviation lawyers, well one, but he's also president of the 747 local. There is no aviation safety staff. Who knows. Maybe they have these postions. If they do, I never heard about them in 9 years.

Any World pilots care to comment?

Intruder

2nd Jun 2008, 17:11

But back at ALPA National now, they are now saying that there really isn't a 270 day clock ticking on the current merger. Despite what they said before and policy.
Now that's an interesting one... How can Prater or Helling just say "Never mind!" when the policy is written and referenced in CBAs? Seems an arbitrator would make quick work of a cato grievance on that one...

bpp

2nd Jun 2008, 17:41

I understand effective June 1 Polar's new crew base will be Anchorage. Does your CBA allow base changes with no company paid travel to and from? How will this impact your company if, unlike Atlas, there is NO GATEWAY travel. I traveled on Alaska Air last week and the entire aircraft was full including the jumpseats (Alaska Air Flight Crew).

Good Luck to all.

bpp

Fr8Dog

2nd Jun 2008, 17:42

"However, the Teamsters have no Aeromedical staff. They have no aviation lawyers"

EJetCa, Neither does ALPA any longer, the medical staff has always been through a contract service. This same service will still be available. The legal staff has all but deserted the sinking ship (funny how people like to be paid for their services). This service will also be available to IBT on a contractual basis.

layinlow

2nd Jun 2008, 19:09

bpp

If the company wants to base crews in ANC they have to pay to move to ANC. There are no originating flights out of ANC so the company will have to buy the crews tickets to there flights. The crew cost will go through the roof. With the Polar contract, the have to move crews on their day of the extended duty pay kicks in and it is quite generous. On top of that, the company cannot even call a crew member and request that they travel on their day off (in the CBA). They certainly cannot force them to. So if the company wants to make the crews work the full 16 days, they would have to lose the crews to a minimum of two days travel leaving only 14 days of productive work, and that is assuming they can get tickets. Travel is considered a day of duty.
This is just a ploy trying to force the Polar MEC's hand in this supposedly merger process and the numerous grievances that are coming due. Add up the cost factor, the cost of paying the move to ANC, the unavailablility of quick access tickets, and the extended duty, the cost to the company will go way up. And besides, it isn't June but October when this is to happen. A very good portion of the crews are looking forward to moving, they want to see Cato and the boys blow a wad of cash, which is exactly why it won't happen.

nitty-gritty

2nd Jun 2008, 20:42

I don't know the Polar schedule, but almost every Atlas flight going west and east across the Pacific carrying anything stops at ANC for fuel. Probably why Atlas has a base there.

Can't they just logistically realign the origination point for crews out of the ANC Polar crew base (Only a few keystrokes in AIMS, pattern building wise)? You know, originate and end crews in ANC since most flying would go through ANC, let alone the Atlas flights you currently DH on now. You start in your crew base ANC then fly that ANC-ORD-JFK leg or ANC - ICN - PVG as an example back and fourth? Then just airline the Polar guys form ANC to the other none ANC hub oriented places (LAX - ICN trips for example)? They could even build patterns to DH you on Atlas to LAX or PVG out of ANC to avoid tickets. All within your 16 day clock leaving you on your own afterwards to go back and forth home for commuting guys. Heaven help you if you have a broken up 16 day work month. Multiple commutes and burned days off then.

EJetCA

2nd Jun 2008, 21:54

EJetCa, Neither does ALPA any longer, the medical staff has always been through a contract service. This same service will still be available. The legal staff has all but deserted the sinking ship (funny how people like to be paid for their services). This service will also be available to IBT on a contractual basis.

Well, I had a buddy that had a medical issue, serious deal, not a bump in the EKG. The teamsters provided no help. That's the difference between a marketing promise, and historical performance.

nitty-gritty

2nd Jun 2008, 23:46

I've noted that Atlas for Teamsters have a lot of questions and answers posted already on a number of subjects. This one already done HERE (http://atlasforteamsters.com/qanda/qandalist.html#legalmedical).

Maybe the local has a lot to do with how things are done since a majority of the funds are kept at the local vs the National like ALPA. I've noted they already have a commitment for loss of license coverage and disability insurance.

WhaleFR8

3rd Jun 2008, 04:33

However, the Teamsters have no Aeromedical staff. They have no aviation lawyers, well one, but he's also president of the 747 local. There is no aviation safety staff. Who knows. Maybe they have these postions. If they do, I never heard about them in 9 years.

Any World pilots care to comment?ALPA has no Aeromedical staff either - it is contracted out and available to Atlas as IBT members. Discussions are already in the works. My guess is after the cutbacks at ALPA there will be a number of Aviation attorneys at the Aviation Division of the IBT. ALPA also charges a premuim on their insurance programs that IBT does not have. don't forget that MANY of the past experiences with IBT are with the local 747. That is not an option for the Altas/Polar group.

We have been assured by no less than J. Hoffa Jr. that we will have our own local - it means more work for the Atlas/Polar volunteers but the programs will be designed for cargo carriers - ie. custom tailored for Atlas/Polar - not some castoff program from the legacy carriers. The "one level of safety" that ALPA has been paying lip service to, as far as flight and duty time and other cargo safety issues could now become a reality.

The IBT will be as good or as bad as we make it - our own local - our own destiny - our own programs. And we WILL have the support of the Director of the Aviation division for IBT in ALL of our efforts.

The real comments you should solicit are those from ABX - they have their own local.

layinlow

3rd Jun 2008, 12:14

Let me ask you this nittly. What is the Atlas schedule out of ANC? How about delays, cancellations, etc? Getting last minute tickets out of ANC wuold be a bear. And as ticketing to another Atlas base, ame problem, last minute tickets. Crew cost would go through the roof. The crew foot print would be affected to. Travel is considered a day of duty. Then you have to pay for the move to ANC and that won't be cheap. Finally there is still the grievance on dead heading on an Atlas aircraft atill out there and not resolved.
I still don't think Cato will do it.

nitty-gritty

3rd Jun 2008, 17:31

Don't know what to tell you slick. We've been doing it a number of years on the Atlas side. Of course, it has been with more profitable flights than our common carriage division of the equation. Currently the DHL side of the equation is manned by the ANC based guys. As for covering the delays, sick leave, and others, I think reserve is for that. So I imagine the current reserves held at your past bases will be done in the new base ANC. Travel would not be to different. We airmail a number of crews regularly from ANC to places they need to cover trips.

As to the travel. They can build 16 day patterns (or less to make 16 days total) taking into account travel within that duty time. I imagine those patterns beginning with a DH will be fewer. For only the most senior to bid so they won't have to get themsleves to ANC commuting wise for the beginning of an awarded trip. They could probably work out an equal cost deadhead from where they live hopefully.

Paying for moves has never bothered them in the past with us. Most of our guys usually choose to use gateway travel when they get bumped out of a base. One of the nice things we do have. Not having to move with the A/C contracts when they change and the reason why it was a big issue during negotiations.

So while your enjoying your job in MEM with FDX keep thinking of your old Polar brothers. You might be seeing more of them jumpseat commuting to ANC on FDX now. On their own time, to show up for that next beginning of pattern out of their new base.

Having had to deal with Mr. Cato over the years on our side, spending money to make a point with labor is a behavior he has done over and over again. We still live with a lot of that to this day. I would like to count the ways we at Atlas have been through it.

Considering the logistics, subjective cost of it implementation, and past behavior by management, this could be a permanent thing to make a point to Polar crews. For the guys that like living in ANC it is great. For all the other Polar guys, it's going to suck and your quality of life will be coming down. Good luck on those jumpseats getting there.

After asking around, I heard it was September on the base move for Polar.

cptvac

3rd Jun 2008, 19:44

Gateway is a "good" thing...:rolleyes:.

EJetCA

3rd Jun 2008, 20:50

IMHO, snide remarks and snips at each other do absolutely nothing to add to a productive discussion.

BillyBob521

4th Jun 2008, 00:29

Thankyou Nitty for making managements case unfortunately they have a better spell check then this forum. Time will tell, we will see, but I'm betting the Atlas folks will make the right Decision. I think I told you a long time ago I have no dog in this fight; except the long term effect these decisions will have on the industry. About my spelling I only can stomach ya'll's BS when I have been drinking.

nitty-gritty

4th Jun 2008, 01:21

I'm not taking managements side. I just know what they can do and pointing it out. Sorry you can't take that.

Having had to go into battle a number of times for the labor front and the true bloody side of war - I just don't jump into the fray swinging, full of ego and blind faith only to be nailed and put down by a flanking attack. Something one side here has been doing for some time.

As to you not having a dog in the fight, I and probably most of us find that disingenuous.

layinlow

4th Jun 2008, 12:13

It certainly sounds like you're taking mangaments side

rob rilly

4th Jun 2008, 12:29

Low, seems like they always do....... you know who, is the their Master....

atlast

4th Jun 2008, 14:28

Back from 2 weeks off... gotta hate this quality of life at Atlas!

layinlow It certainly sounds like you're taking mangaments side

Mr Low: Is Mangament like a cross between Anger & Management? May I use that?

rob rilly Low, seems like they always do....... Cato is the their Master....

Mr Rilly : You've come out with some doozies, but actually there finally is some semblance of truth. James R. Cato is the Vice President, Flight Operations and Labor Relations at AAWH, so if you would like to refer to him as our Master then he is your Master too. Such strange subservience you practice!

EJetCA IMHO, snide remarks and snips at each other do absolutely nothing to add to a productive discussion.

Mr Ejecta : TRUE DAT! Are the above Snips, snides or neither? ;)

rob rilly

4th Jun 2008, 16:09

Not my Master, never has been, never will be............ I've never worked at either place. Seems you know nothing you're talking about.

atlast

4th Jun 2008, 16:23

Mr Rilly : You've come out with some doozies, but actually there finally is some semblance of truth. James R. Cato is the Vice President, Flight Operations and Labor Relations at AAWH, so if you would like to refer to him as our Master then he is your Master too. Such strange subservience you practice!

I tried to prove you've finally come out with some semblance of truth and....
i'm proved wrong! :ok: Thank you. May I ask where you do work?

nitty-gritty

4th Jun 2008, 17:11

Not my Master, never has been, never will be............ I've never worked at either place. Seems you know nothing you're talking about.
I tried to prove you've finally come out with some semblance of truth and....
i'm proved wrong! :ok: Thank you. May I ask where you do work?

Atlast,

He is just here for the intellectual retort with his vast knowledge and for the general improvement of the union situation in the industry in general. I'm certain he has no agenda here despite most of what he says can be tied directly back to the Polar MEC ;).

http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/rob/logs.pl

On the other front with Teamsters. Time is real short now. Whether you are Atlas or Polar Crews, you need to get your Authorization Cards in pronto. Numbers do count. Having a substantial number of cards reduces the resistance that the current bargaining agent puts up. Click HERE FOR PDF CARD (http://www.atlasforteamsters.com/docs/authorizationcard1.pdf). It has revised mailing instructions due to the upcoming filing with the NMB. You can also visit the web site at http://atlasforteamsters.com (http://www.atlasforteamsters.com).

layinlow

4th Jun 2008, 19:22

Just got mine, tore it up

trashhauler

4th Jun 2008, 19:52

I'll give it 12 months or less, the everyone will be on the street. Take a look around you.
Companies going bankrupt, fuel sky high, Atlas not being on the IOSA registry, economies slowing down world wide. What makes everyone think there outfit is special? AAWWH management would shut down in a minute if the profits keep going south. Then they will open up under a different name, non-union, pay peanuts and shut down again the first time anyone squawks. Why anyone wants to play footsie with those yahoos is beyond me. They are NOT your friend, and don't ever think they are.

cptvac

4th Jun 2008, 20:21

trashhauler

5th Jun 2008, 13:35

I doubt it, the teamsters have a way of kneecapping people they don't agree with. Ask Hoffa

Fr8Dog

5th Jun 2008, 14:03

Quote from Trashhauler:

"I'll give it 12 months or less, then everyone will be on the street. Take a look around you."

As the majors trim down, the cargo carriers pick up. Take a look at past history. Time sensitive freight must always move, fish, fruit, and vegetables must still be flown across the ponds. Without the bellies of United and the like available, someone will have to take up the slack. So I disagree with your prediction and say just the opposite, things are looking up. :ok:

trashhauler

5th Jun 2008, 15:15

You are probably right to a point. My point is with the cost of fuel rising and rising, a lot of shippers may ask, is it worth the cost. With less disposable income, people buy less, less flowers, more local products, etc. I am fortunate to remember the bad old days of the Carter administration when all this happened. I personally see deja vu here. Don't get me wrong, I don't want to see anyone on the streets but given the mindset of a lot of the outfits running cargo, and the state of the world economies, not to mention the price of fuel, a lot of carriers are on the back side of the power curve already and would shut the doors at the same time they say they are hiring. History, I am afraid is on my side on this one.

Intruder

5th Jun 2008, 15:29

While airlines that haul people are loathe to increase fares, even when that is the ONLY way to remain solvent, "fuel surcharges" have been alive and well in the freight business for quite a while.

With UAL pulling 6 747s (and their belly freight capacity) off the line, there will be a lot of freight looking for another way to get across the Pacific and Atlantic. It may be enough to help the bottom line of dedicated freight haulers...

CO just announced major layoffs, too, so there may be more airplanes parked...

v1andgo

5th Jun 2008, 16:03

However, with a suffering economy, due to high fuel cost, demand for goods is decrease across the board. Also shippers will have to take a hard look at the cost over time of air freight v. ocean shipping to stay competetive.
ATW reported that Emirates expects this year will be difficult for them because of the slowing economy.
In really these aren't really good times for any aviators. But I rather sit it out here than any other place.

Fr8Dog

5th Jun 2008, 17:02

V1andgo

Another Rhodes scholar on the board. Head on over to BillyBob's place, the shine is just about done. Don't forget to bring your banjo. :ugh:

trashhauler

5th Jun 2008, 17:31

V1 and goes English may be a little fractured but the point is spot on. No need to lower yourself to adhominum attacks FR8dog. Either acknowledge the point or reject it

v1andgo

5th Jun 2008, 17:37

FR8Dog
I have nothing to do with Polar or the BoBBs.
As a Gaint guy, I prefer to stay with the facts. I certainly do not like what's happening in our industry or our economy, and I am glad to be here. But we all need to face reality.
Please, read the below News update from ATW on this subject.
Two items:
1. If things get really bad in the ecomomy and Emirates has to make cuts, the contract will be the first to go.
2. If DHL is able to team up with UPS for their domestic lift they might also consider to codeshare internationally especially when the economy slows any further.
Neither one of these senarios would help Atlas or Polar.

Emirates SkyCargo carried 1.3 million tonnes of cargo in the fiscal year ended March 31, up 10.9% year-over-year, and boosted revenue 20% to AED6.4 billion ($1.7 billion), comprising 19% of Emirates' total revenue. But Divisional Senior VP-Cargo Ram Menen warned that the current fiscal year "will not be easy" and that cargo operators are entering into a "correction period" that will weed out inefficient players. "All carriers will have to refine their operating practices and airlines operating fuel inefficient aircraft will not survive," he warned at a gathering of SkyCargo employees. EK will take delivery of the first of eight 777Fs it has on order later this year.

Fr8Dog

5th Jun 2008, 19:31

"As a Gaint guy"

Need I say more?

HELLO!

And CptVac, guess cut and paste is your form of new fun and games? How about something new!

PHbiggles

5th Jun 2008, 22:46

Regarding this issue, the Polar/Atlas merger, what it really sad for me is that this could have been a really great company. If the management had wanted it to be.

In my experience, pilots are pilots, all trying to do the same thing. Have a stable job, have a decent retirement, get paid correctly and on time, have the company consider the employees and NOT treat them like a number, maximize profit without having the profit motive overshadow the fact that companies are about people and families, having qualified people run their airline instead of some bean counter who was running a railroad company last week, an airline this week and who
watches the stock price and wants to bale to some other shaky airline, file Chapter 11 bankruptcy at the first sign of trouble only to screw the employees and leave with some outrageous settlement. Isn’t that what has happened at Delta, American, United and others? It seems so typical of corporate America these days, screw the employees! A change in government maybe?

I have flown for a few non-scheds. Some of the crews are a problem, always looking to screw the company, most however are excellent and only want all that I described above. Sadly, in America particularly, there is a corporate sentiment to screw the employee. In this computer era I have been chasing my paycheck for 20 years and watch it get smaller and less stable each year! Most pilots in the US have been screwed out of their retirements and accepted pay concessions only to see the management leave their companies with HUGE bonuses and settlement packages. If any of the employees who accepted the pay cuts, to help the company, would have refused, it would have been perceived buy the management that they “were not a team player”! I say let the CEO’s leave and don’t let the door hit them in the ass!

Has ALPA managed to defend this degradation in pilot benefits? NO! Like all unions they are essentially useless! They are like insurance companies, more interested in collecting premiums that they are in paying out settlements. You could also equate them to churches who want to screw you out of your money while promising a salvation that they can't deliver! Trust in me, trust in me…………………! All tax exempt of course!

The Polar/Atlas arrangement could have been resolved ages ago had the "management" have had some vision! I truly don't even know what the "management" wants for this company. You never hear from Flynn. One has to ask, is he a visionary or is he just seeing things? Is he actually in charge or is someone else pulling his strings! Instead of honing this company into a cohesive team the management chose to play one side against the other resulting in animosity only rivaled by the Muslims and Jews. So much is predicated on rumor and hearsay. Did the Polar/Atlas management do anything to stop it? NO! they poured fuel on the fire! Now they want a merger! What we need is a new management. Clean house! Totally!
Not that the pilots are not without fault. In any merger everyone wants a windfall…………right! But what is right? What is fair?

Service in the US has really gone downhill. I flew on a US airline the other day and it smelled like a urinal! The flight attendants didn’t care. “They are not getting anything more from me!” was their response. I am not sure what the answer is. Work for overseas carriers and leave America’s aluminum urinals to the bean counters, the lawyers and $20,000/year illegal pilots! Reregulate the US airlines maybe?

At Polar/Atlas, the scheduling department will commercial me to my base because I am on reserve only to commercial me back again because they could not foresee that things would change. It all too often appears that the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing. Sadly this has been the case at every US airline I ever flew for! Penny wise and dollar foolish it seems.

I hear that Richard Branson operates differently. I also see that BA CEO Willie Walsh, said he felt it would be "inappropriate" to take a bonus this year ($1.37 Million) considering the difficulties the airline encountered when it moved its operations into the new Terminal 5 at London's Heathrow airport. He said the rest of the staff would be paid a bonus as the group reached its operating margin target of 10% for the year. Ever hear of a US CEO doing that? A bonus of only $1.37M. Wow those BA chaps come cheap eh?

What a concept! Responsibility! The buck stopped with him! Let’s hope its catching…………..

nitty-gritty

6th Jun 2008, 02:22

Nitty

Your implication is that I would in some way feel threatened (fortitude?) to express my opinion of the Director of the Airline Division of the IBT. AND, you and someone else are offering to get me a whole stage to take this gaint risk. Wow. Are opinions not allowed at the Teamsters? Very intimidating...

Fortitude For"ti*tude, n. [L. fortitudo, fr. fortis strong.
See Fort.]
1. Power to resist attack; strength; firmness. [Obs.]
[1913 Webster]

I have seen a few in my past express much less opinion/slander about a general group than you have and found themselves waking up wondering why they have to suck their meals through a straw. We at Atlas are used to your Polar BS. Our soon to be Teamster brothers that you decided to lump together in this are more likely to be less tolerant and rightfully so.

Opinions are great and accepted at Teamsters and ALPA Council 072.

Unfounded accusations and slander as yours is different. The Polar leadership prefers accusations and slander when they cannot figure out how to deal with things, which is all the time. It detracts the Polar membership from the Polar MEC mistakes. They also like to use their membership to do it so it cannot be tied to themselves. This is their mode of operation and you are the continuation of it by proxy whether voluntarily or by Polar MEC request. This is the Polar legacy.

One documented third party finding of this is HERE by ALPA (https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=41172). Even President Prater had to back away from Polar publicly on this one. There are other ones documented and undocumented. One thing that can be counted on by all is that the Polar MEC and Neg. Committee, which you are a part of, will lie and slander for their own end means.

Instead of proving yourselves union brothers, we Atlas crews have found you nothing but a second front of a continuous war we fight with the company management.

Heilhaavir

6th Jun 2008, 09:19

Best post I've seen so far on any Polar/Atlas thread :ok:

Thks Mr Biggles!

<< Atlas/Polar could have merged.
Regarding this issue, the Polar/Atlas merger, what it really sad for me is that this could have been a really great company. If the management had wanted it to be.

In my experience, pilots are pilots, all trying to do the same thing. Have a stable job, have a decent retirement, get paid correctly and on time, have the company consider the employees and NOT treat them like a number, maximize profit without having the profit motive overshadow the fact that companies are about people and families, having qualified people run their airline instead of some bean counter who was running a railroad company last week, an airline this week and who
watches the stock price and wants to bale to some other shaky airline, file Chapter 11 bankruptcy at the first sign of trouble only to screw the employees and leave with some outrageous settlement. Isn’t that what has happened at Delta, American, United and others? It seems so typical of corporate America these days, screw the employees! A change in government maybe?

I have flown for a few non-scheds. Some of the crews are a problem, always looking to screw the company, most however are excellent and only want all that I described above. Sadly, in America particularly, there is a corporate sentiment to screw the employee. In this computer era I have been chasing my paycheck for 20 years and watch it get smaller and less stable each year! Most pilots in the US have been screwed out of their retirements and accepted pay concessions only to see the management leave their companies with HUGE bonuses and settlement packages. If any of the employees who accepted the pay cuts, to help the company, would have refused, it would have been perceived buy the management that they “were not a team player”! I say let the CEO’s leave and don’t let the door hit them in the ass!

Has ALPA managed to defend this degradation in pilot benefits? NO! Like all unions they are essentially useless! They are like insurance companies, more interested in collecting premiums that they are in paying out settlements. You could also equate them to churches who want to screw you out of your money while promising a salvation that they can't deliver! Trust in me, trust in me…………………! All tax exempt of course!

The Polar/Atlas arrangement could have been resolved ages ago had the "management" have had some vision! I truly don't even know what the "management" wants for this company. You never hear from Flynn. One has to ask, is he a visionary or is he just seeing things? Is he actually in charge or is someone else pulling his strings! Instead of honing this company into a cohesive team the management chose to play one side against the other resulting in animosity only rivaled by the Muslims and Jews. So much is predicated on rumor and hearsay. Did the Polar/Atlas management do anything to stop it? NO! they poured fuel on the fire! Now they want a merger! What we need is a new management. Clean house! Totally!
Not that the pilots are not without fault. In any merger everyone wants a windfall…………right! But what is right? What is fair?

Service in the US has really gone downhill. I flew on a US airline the other day and it smelled like a urinal! The flight attendants didn’t care. “They are not getting anything more from me!” was their response. I am not sure what the answer is. Work for overseas carriers and leave America’s aluminum urinals to the bean counters, the lawyers and $20,000/year illegal pilots! Reregulate the US airlines maybe?

At Polar/Atlas, the scheduling department will commercial me to my base because I am on reserve only to commercial me back again because they could not foresee that things would change. It all too often appears that the right hand doesn’t know what the left hand is doing. Sadly this has been the case at every US airline I ever flew for! Penny wise and dollar foolish it seems.

I hear that Richard Branson operates differently. I also see that BA CEO Willie Walsh, said he felt it would be "inappropriate" to take a bonus this year ($1.37 Million) considering the difficulties the airline encountered when it moved its operations into the new Terminal 5 at London's Heathrow airport. He said the rest of the staff would be paid a bonus as the group reached its operating margin target of 10% for the year. Ever hear of a US CEO doing that? A bonus of only $1.37M. Wow those BA chaps come cheap eh?

What a concept! Responsibility! The buck stopped with him! Let’s hope its catching…………..>>

layinlow

6th Jun 2008, 12:06

PHbiggles

As always you have the ability to cut through all the BS and get right to the point. That is why I enjoyed flying and laughing with you so many years. Great post buddy!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fr8Dog

6th Jun 2008, 12:23

PHbiggles, How refreshing to have someone post something here worth reading. You sir have renewed my faith that there are some articulate pilots left with a head on their shoulders. :D

cptvac

6th Jun 2008, 23:27

Nitty

My opinion is that the Atlas MEC (including the former MEC Chair) and its Negotiating Committee have been in bed with Management, and remain snuggled up. I have seen/heard nothing to change that opinion.

I defy you to show one instance where I have "slandered" the Teamsters OR even commented on the Teamsters. If you choose to somehow stand behind the Teamsters hoping they will fight your "battles" for you or "threaten" those that speak out--Good Luck. They are smarter than you are.

While you are reviewing posts, take a good look at some of your own and apply your slander criteria. You have zero credibility.

BillyBob521

7th Jun 2008, 00:26

Great Post, Mr. Biggles fair unbias and accurate. As you can see it had little effect on the infighting. Hey if you get to SC give me a call.

nitty-gritty

7th Jun 2008, 01:47

I defy you to show one instance where I have "slandered" the Teamsters OR even commented on the Teamsters.
http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/rob/logs.pl

So you will know what we are talking about:

Slander \Slan"der\, v. t. [imp. & p. p. Slandered; p. pr. &
vb. n. Slandering.]
1. To defame; to injure by maliciously uttering a false
report; to tarnish or impair the reputation of by false
tales maliciously told or propagated; to calumniate.
[1913 Webster]

I guess you don't bother to read your own "cut and pasting". Then again, most of us don't either after the second time and give even less credence to it. I've passed your posts around to check if I was just imagining it. Since yesterday, five are in agreement with me out of the eleven Teamsters mailed. Still waiting on the other six to respond.

My postings normally have something to back them up. Usually with a link to a verifiable source or have been witnessed by a third party. Not just my say-so like you.

Yours, lets just say they carry less weight than the paper you can print them on, stating only innuendo and malice directed by the Polar leadership.

As to standing behind others, we don't. We stand in front, in unity, requiring court orders to tell us to stop (Federal Order 1 in PDF (http://pws.prserv.net/usinet.cpt747/TRO.pdf) Order 2 in PDF (http://pws.prserv.net/usinet.cpt747/TRO2.pdf)) and only then stand aside. BTW your MEC lied about the court orders to your membership, and took that VARS down at ALPA National order. Luckily there were copies and recordings of that.

What has your leadership done that can be remotely considered union to union oriented? Request relief from struck work agreements and only monitored A/C loads from an office in Purchase NY in the run up to the Atlas strike count down? At least Atlas guys crawled around on the freight and checked airbills for your freight, even after being ordered back to work for the sympathy strike we held for Polar.

Fragments of what you say are true. Dave Bourne is the Teamsters National Airline Director. Atlas and Polar will be under single carrier status. We will become Teamsters. The rest of what you say is slander.

While on the subject, we need your authorization cards sent in http://atlasforteamsters.com/docs/authorizationcard1.pdf. There is a limited time after the NMB filing that new cards will be accepted by them. So get them into the address on the new instruction sheet. The Polar turnout has been refreshingly great and we do appreciate it. We know it isn't everyone at Polar that are problems. We've identified a large number of those. Thanks again.

WhaleFR8

7th Jun 2008, 02:24

Actually if the truth be known, slander is the spoken word and the person who thinks he is being slandered actually has to prove damages.

Libel, however, is the written word; usually written in a public forum such as PPRUNE. In this case, damages are assumed to have been incurred by the plaintiff unless the defendant can prove what he wrote was the truth.

Here it is from a lawyer:

Libel is written defamation and slander is oral defamation. In an action for libel one does not have to prove damages. They are presumed. In other words, the law presumes that some damage will flow from the publication of a libel. The law also presumes in the plaintiff's favor that the statement in question is false, unless and until the defendant proves the contrary.

On the other hand, in slander, with the exception of four situations, one has to prove actual loss. The law does not presume that the publication caused the plaintiff any damage. The plaintiff has to prove special damage except in the following four situations:
1. The words charged that the plaintiff committed a criminal offense.
2. The words impute that the plaintiff has certain contagious diseases.
3. The words impute unchastity or adultery to any woman or girl.
4. The words are calculated disparage the plaintiff in any office profession, trade, calling or business held or carried on by him at the time of the publication.

So for instance, a public assertion that Bourne is "in bed" with Cato and a public declaration that Bourne is somehow colluding with the company "could" be taken to court as a libel. On the other hand it also seems to meet the parameters of item #4 above if it was spoken.

I guess that is one of the differences I see in this whole argument. The Polar guys tend to personalize it, name calling (you should see the PM's I get from Mr. Rilly) and accusing people of things that they THINK happened. Where the Atlas guys seem to focus on the issues and trying to get at the truth.

The fact that the rhetoric has heated up lately indicates the level of frustration on both sides - but some, in their infinite wisdom; and rob, in his childlike tantrums, decided to continue to post name calling, libelous statements, and innuendo instead of fairly discussing the issues.

Sorry but this is so typical. One of the staffers at a shared hotel in the Atlas system said it best - "You Atlas guys, you gentlemen - some of the Polar guys: not so much."

cptvac

7th Jun 2008, 04:19

Could be an interesting case to try...

layinlow

7th Jun 2008, 14:19

vac

You

WhaleDriver

7th Jun 2008, 14:33

We're hearing low level rumblings that the Harris decision is out. I could be wrong on which Arbitrator, there's so many. The one that's out is the transfer of aircraft to Polar and being made whole, moneywise.

We're hearing no transfer of aircraft, but no info on if there's a monetary award in it. This could be one where both sides declare victory(again). AAWH doesn't have to transfer planes, but Polaroids get cash. We'll see.

PPRuNe Pop

8th Jun 2008, 19:16

Heads up guys!

We have received a complaint from and individual who states that he has been subjected to slander in this thread. He probably has a point - although some have already been removed.

Some of you, some several times, are naming names and this is against PPRuNe rules. Absolutely and unequivocally.

You have two options.

1. Remove or change your own posts. If you do not then;

2. Be prepared to supply PPRuNe with your personal details, including name and address, if PPRuNe is held to account for libel and/or slander caused by an individual using his anonymity while openly disclosing names.

This has to be done ASAP.

Please do NOT do it.

PPP

FirstStep

10th Jun 2008, 05:40

You know, when us kids were fighting, my Dad would tell us to calm down. Then, if (inevitably) we didn't, he would s-l-o-w-l-y take his belt off.

nitty-gritty

11th Jun 2008, 06:22

http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/rob/logs.pl

Judging from the recent silence, I imagine some have already been put on the naughty chair where they can't post.

WhaleDriver

11th Jun 2008, 08:15

I stand corrected, it was the Holden arbitration that was decided. Basically, he decided in favor of the company, but will review his decision depending on the findings of another arbitration, in the works, one of many.

This was the one looking to get some Captains their seat back, not just the captains pay, which they were receiving, and was looking for $5.2 million in compensation.

cptvac

11th Jun 2008, 19:35

Dr.

Vac here...

layinlow

12th Jun 2008, 13:02

Hey vac. How's it going. I am wondering how Whale knows all about an arbitrators decision when our own MEC doesn't.
Is the high price of fuel hurting the company yet? The reason I asked is another carrier just bit the dust and many suppliers are demanding cash before fueling.

L-38

12th Jun 2008, 16:41

This is a rumor board . . . reveal sources? Respectable inputs considered, even Whale at times has proven credible.

Makes sense that small fleet Tradewinds and M&K had a foot on the banana peel. Operationally larger Polar /Atlas should be a wee bit higher on the Grimm Reaper's pecking order. . . . . What airline today is not hurt by fuel costs?

Intruder

12th Jun 2008, 17:05

How could it be that the Polar MEC does not know anything about the decision, when it has been published throughout Atlas?!?

layinlow

12th Jun 2008, 21:20

L-38

Of course you are right on the pecking order but it is going come to a point when customers are going to ask "Why ship by air". I was just wondering if that is happening yet.

layinlow

12th Jun 2008, 21:23

If you can find a picture of N421PO in India, you will see it on its rump.

Deltabravowhiskey

12th Jun 2008, 21:58

http://atlasforteamsters.com/atlaspressrelease.pdf

:D

jocko2000

13th Jun 2008, 04:45

Whaledriver,

I don't know if I am misreading your statement but the downgraded Captains are not currently getting paid as Captains. The company paid them for awhile and then decided to stop. I understand that this misery and hardship endured by some Polar guys might be enjoyed by some people, however, I think both groups need to be on the same page with this one. It seems to me that they should get paid for what they deserve. If this happened at Atlas I would feel the same way. I guess though at Polar we don't get profit sharing so we wouldn't take it as personal when the company is forced to pay what it promised. Everyone is screwing everyone and the worker bees are really the only ones who lose. It is amazing that 3 or 4 executives can manipulate 6-7 hundred pilots who think they are smarter than everone. I sometimes feel like we are all in some pow camp surrounded by 3 guards but too weak to stand together and fight. I guess the problem with that senario is that some people are fooled into thinking that the guards are looking out for them. Anyway, time to go with one last thought. Sometimes I get the feeling that certain people who post on this board really like to take the company position. That is scary. Remember why you have a union in the first place, the company cannot be trusted to act in your best interest.

dumbdumb

13th Jun 2008, 05:01

If it's being reported all throughout Atlas, why don't you quote your source with a posting here?

nitty-gritty

13th Jun 2008, 11:43

If it's being reported all throughout Atlas, why don't you quote your source with a posting here?

It is out.

I think the bigger question is, "why isn't your leadership not sharing the info to your membership?" Think about that and that same regularly repeated behavior of your MEC.

WhaleDriver

13th Jun 2008, 14:28

I don't know if I am misreading your statement but the downgraded Captains are not currently getting paid as Captains.

This was the one looking to get some Captains their seat back, not just the captains pay, which they were receiving,

I didn't make that clear. I just used "were" indicating past tense. You are correct. When AAWW "stopped alliance flying" they felt they no longer needed to pay the FO's as captains.

As to you not being notifed, talk to your MEC. They may be waiting for the lawyers to review it, but it's pretty clear and in plain english.

Atlas CM's got a copy emailed to them on Tuesday from the Atlas MEC.

trashhauler

13th Jun 2008, 18:41

Why should the Atlas MEC get anything about a Polar grievance. It isn't their business. Easy answer, they are in the pocket of AAWWH management

WhaleDriver

13th Jun 2008, 19:00

Why should the Atlas MEC get anything about a Polar grievance. It isn't their business. Easy answer, they are in the pocket of AAWWH management

Your right, the fact that some of these grievances could have a MAJOR impact on Atlas Air has nothing to do with it? Just keep the BS coming. God forbid a union actually communicate with the company in anything other than grievances and arbitrations!

I'm positive the Polar MEC was told at the same time as the company, with respect to the arbitrator letting the major players know the result, but the Polar MEC has ALWAYS been a little slow getting it to the masses.

v1andgo

13th Jun 2008, 19:51

The Polar MEC is slow when the facts do not support their misguided perception.

nitty-gritty

13th Jun 2008, 20:12

Why should the Atlas MEC get anything about a Polar grievance. It isn't their business. Easy answer, they are in the pocket of AAWWH management
For the same reason the arbiter allowed the presence of the Atlas Negotiation chair to attend the arbitration. Because it was going to affect the Atlas crewmembers jobs during the grab for A/C and flights. I remember that from posts here back during the arbitration. Also remember that the Polar Neg. Chairman had a fit about it saying the Altas Neg. Chair was going to witness against Polar which DIDN'T happen, but makes a good story to the Polar crews.

This is another fine example of Atlas crews providing information to Polar crewmembers and the usual subsequent attacks on us because you don't like it.

Maybe you should ask your MEC why he thinks he doesn't need to tell you what is going on. It's pretty black and white on the award. Disclosing it to you shouldn't be a problem. He can still come out with his cover story after disclosing it. Maybe he just wants his cover story out first so that you will avoid reading the award. Who knows but them. Maybe you should call him up?

The Polar MEC Chair was also very wrong about "the small number of Atlas crewmembers" wanting to leave ALPA in his last VARS message. Head over to Atlas for Teamsters (http://atlasforteamsters.com) for the press releases and info on the 91% card turn in for decertification of ALPA. Cards will still be accepted until the seniority list is turned in by the company to the NMB. So any of you Polar or Atlas guys that have not turned one in, download a card at that link above and send it in pronto to the enclosed address on the instructions.

http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/rob/logs.pl

WhaleDriver

13th Jun 2008, 21:29

I have a question for the Polaroids. Two years ago and ongoing, the Polaroids here and on other forums have chastised and publicly questioned the position of the Atlas MEC because they had not started section 6 negotiations when the amendable date of their contract was reached. So, now that the Polar contract is more that a year beyond your amendable date, how are the negotiations going? Still putting together an opener? Yea, right.

The Atlas MEC's position was that they had asked for the negations to begin, but AAWW had said no, since there was going to be a merger. AAWW had made it clear that they would go to the NMB and be able to hold up any individual negotiations since there would be negotiations as part of the merged contract.

This and other answers weren't good enough for the Polaroids. More of the Atlas MEC in bed with AAWW spew forth. Well here we sit, well over a year beyond the Polar amenable date, with a Polar MEC that has sworn there was no merger, yet nothing? Anyone care to address this one?

nitty-gritty

18th Jun 2008, 03:46

Sure got quiet and no answers to the Atlas questions. Didn't really expect any though. At least not honest ones.

It took about a week for the Polar MEC to decide to give out the information to their membership. The same info the Atlas membership already had a week ago. At least the Polar MEC came out with the information, finally. Very selective in verbiage of the events on his VARS message June 17 in WMA format (http://atlasmergerfacts.com/pac06172008.wma). I hope everyone reads the award and opinions from the arbiter, not just listened to the MEC message. I hope it matches what was distributed to us on the Atlas side.

On the Teamsters front, It is now up to 92 percent. Thanks for all the cards. Keep them coming. Get your card at http://atlasforteamsters.com. They will be accepted up until the company provides the crew roster to the NMB. Their is a mailing list signup for the mass emails to stay informed also. Polar guys can signup for it and also your cards are wanted and welcomed.

whaledriver101

18th Jun 2008, 05:06

How the hell did you Atlas guys get my mailing address to sent me these Teamsters cards???? I think I speak for the entire Polar pilot group when I say "take these cards and stickem up your A$$".

zerozero

18th Jun 2008, 08:48

Nice.

Prepare to be assimilated.

Resistance is futile.

:cool:

nitty-gritty

18th Jun 2008, 08:52

How the hell did you Atlas guys get my mailing address to sent me these Teamsters cards???? I think I speak for the entire Polar pilot group when I say "take these cards and stickem up your A$$".

Oh yeah, real NICE.

Pretty resourceful bunch aren't they. Atlas for Teamsters (http://atlasforteamsters.com)

Judging from the card response, you will probably be in the minority on the Polar side of that statement soon. Maybe your membership is tiring of having only a few verbally rabid berserkers representing the whole Polar group.

Dealt with Hogg

BELOWMINS

18th Jun 2008, 13:35

Beaver_Driver

18th Jun 2008, 15:56

I believe it is required to be attached to the NMB - probably would not be smart to show it publicly.

layinlow

18th Jun 2008, 18:41

I wonder how the Teamsters are going to help you when the slime called management shuts the doors to reorganizes because of fuel costs. Read the Gemini post guys. It is coming and smoozing with management or the Teamsters is not going to help you. There are some pretty dark clouds on the horizon and the Darth Vadars will take their profits, deny yours, and go on like nothing happened. And what will you have, "Well we are Teamsters". Didn't help Gemini crews did it?

Intruder

18th Jun 2008, 20:03

Why would Teamsters be any worse than ALPA in this case? It appears there was no protection from ALPA even in terms of notice prior to furlough!

To the extent you are employed under the Agreement between Gemini and the Air Line Pilots, effective as of September 1, 2006 (the “Agreement”), which does not provide for “bumping” rights, this letter constitutes: (i) notice of discharge under section 19(A)(2) of the Agreement if you are currently within your "Probationary Period" (as defined in the Agreement), with your employment ending today, June 17, 2008; or (ii) notice of furlough under section 23(A) of the Agreement if you are beyond your Probationary Period; your furlough will begin today, June 17, 2008, and you will not be receiving any pay in lieu of notice.

joetommy

18th Jun 2008, 21:07

I thought you flew for ATLAS.

Thanks

Po Boy

18th Jun 2008, 21:38

nitty-gritty

19th Jun 2008, 00:44

Nitty
What you seem to be implying, without saying it outright, is that close to a majority of Polar crewmembers have submitted authorization cards.
The filing published on the Atlas for Teamsters website states the name list of authorization cards is attached. Conveniently it is not.

Maybe you should think about that one for a minute. Considering how a number from one group loves to create lists with their MEC's sanction (illegal scab lists, snake lists and who knows what other type of lists at Polar) when provided the means. We are not dealing with ALPA disciplinary action like how the Polar MEC skated on last time, but with federal labor protections that could result in felony charges and bye-bye career with that let alone the time and fine. Keep that in mind if you decide to start a new list of guessing who sent their cards within your ranks.

"Well we are Teamsters". Didn't help Gemini crews did it?

The Gemini crews are ALPA. Didn't help them did it, not that it matters anyway. You have way too much time on your hands after taking that Polar job buy out and started your new roost at FDX.

whaledriver101

19th Jun 2008, 04:13

Joetommy

Its obvious on this forum who's who. And its damn obvious from your previous posts your an Atlas guy. Please dont mistake me. Thats the ultimate insult. I have guts, balls, and a spine. You would have gotten a better contract a few yrs back had you had at least of those things. So,, please dont mistake me for Atlas. My kids may read this thing.

atlast

19th Jun 2008, 12:22

whaledriver101 I have guts, balls, and a spine.

Still laughing minutes later after my wife pointed out,
" He didn't mention anything about a brain "
She's so astute. By the way, if you do work for Polar,
I believe your paycheck comes from AAWH.
You're an Atlas guy too!

MOVE ON!

iahtexan747400

19th Jun 2008, 13:43

I was thinking the same thing! :p

Beaver_Driver

19th Jun 2008, 15:31

He didn't mention anything about a brain I was wondering why his kids had to read it to him. I guess if he is so insulted then he should quit pretty quick. The company just combined AIMS which is one of the the last hurdles, besides the seniority list, which will make us all Atlas pilots. Welcoms to the party pal!

BELOWMINS

19th Jun 2008, 16:29

Nitty
I have no interest in compiling a list of who (if anyone) from Polar sent in authorization cards. My interest is in finding out what leads you to believe that whaledriver101 will "Judging from the card response" be "in the minority on the Polar side". You seem to be indicating that you have information that, according to your last post, would cost the rest of us mere mortals a hefty fine and a stretch in a federal prison.

BillyBob521

19th Jun 2008, 23:58

Good luck to Both Groups, unfortunately, I think your all going to be screwed. Hope I'm wrong, but since my new carreer will have very little to do with the air cargo or air anything. I'm out of here good luck you poor bastards!

atlast

20th Jun 2008, 00:45

BillyBob521Good luck to Both Groups, unfortunately, I think your all going to be screwed. Hope I'm wrong, but since my new carreer will have very little to do with the air cargo or air anything. I'm out of here good luck you poor bastards!

Congratulations on MOVING ON to YOUR new CAREER!

nitty-gritty

21st Jun 2008, 02:08

http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/rob/logs.pl

Nitty
I have no interest in compiling a list of who (if anyone) from Polar sent in authorization cards. My interest is in finding out what leads you to believe that whaledriver101 will "Judging from the card response" be "in the minority on the Polar side". You seem to be indicating that you have information that, according to your last post, would cost the rest of us mere mortals a hefty fine and a stretch in a federal prison.

Apologies. I guess I wasn't clear.

It has been proven that the Polar Council cannot be trusted with confidential information as you asked for earlier. Exampled by the company delivery of the Atlas crew list for merger purposes to Polar which resulted in the Polar council creating a Scab list just a few days later with all the same misspellings and errors as the company supplied crew roster. Coincidence? Not!

Your questioning of the missing filed NMB attachment list led me to this conclusion due to Polars past actions. Your Council has a habit of sanctioning the creation of these lists to intimidate others (illegal scab lists, snake lists, and what ever other lists compiled since those). The Polar Council doing such again in this case could result in federal prosecution of those individuals. Not just a limp ALPA disciplinary action like on a previous list created by the Polar council.

So you will not get any specific info from me. If someone decides to make a new list anyway, by guessing or just faking it with names in disfavor, I'm sure there will be a fine or a cell for them somewhere. Hopefully with a cell mate being paid a couple of cartons of smokes a week to make sure they can't s*!t right during their stay.

On another subject, I was given this just recently. It's a cargo airline contract comparison done by ALPA. Since Polar is always bringing up their contract and how superior it is, I thought I would put this up from a party outside of Atlas and Polar argument albeit from ALPA.

Cargo Contract Comparison March 08 in pdf (http://cptaudio.com/CARGO_CONTRACT_COMPARISON_March_2008_ALPA.pdf)

Fr8Dog

21st Jun 2008, 08:09

BillyBob, Good luck at your new job! (Flipping Burgers?) Hope they don't let you near the cash register at Stucky's. :p

layinlow

21st Jun 2008, 17:13

I know that BillyBob just started with a position and a salary that makes me jealous and I make more than I did flying in Japan. He won't be flip burgers but he may a buy few places and hire you to do it.
Statements like yours diminishes my opinion of you.

You guys better quit the bickering before the management slime a AAWWH puts everyone out of business.

trashhauler

26th Jun 2008, 19:08

This anonymous comment was posted on the Atlas for Teamsters web site.

Atlas Pilots For Teamasters

After everything Dave Bourne has done for us, He deserves our support.
1. He has been an avid leader gaining Alpa's support. (wait we're going Teamsters)
2. He attained a hard fought contract with industry leading pay. ( Oh yeah, good hourly pay, the rest of the contract written by company lawyers costing us 17 days a month, extendable to 21 and junior manned to 24 days per month.)
3. He helped establish out bases (31 days at an out base for a small payback, and allows us to double out heavy time on the road costing me even more time with my family)
4. Worked hard to establish basing. ( Ya, this turned into gateway basing, adding to my taxable income. Good Deal)
5. Guaranteed a Combined Contract. (wait, this lead to 3 years without a pay raise with no way out)
WHY AM I FOLLOWING DAVE BOURNE TO THE TEAMSTERS?

WhaleDriver

26th Jun 2008, 20:27

It's official, Atlas MEC was notified that N516MC will be returned to Atlas on 1 Aug '08 and all Polar classic drivers will begin -400 training beginning of Aug. Polar FE's offered a deal to come over to Atlas temporally until combined contract is done.

And before all you Polaroids have a cow about why Atlas MEC was notified, the FE deal requires both MEC's to agree to the terms.

Also official, is the two classics being returned from Tradewinds, will be activated to the Atlas fleet, upgrades and hiring to follow.

nitty-gritty

27th Jun 2008, 00:40

Come on now trash. We know better.

1. Gained ALPA support until ALPA Pres. Prater's election.

2. 17 day month with involuntary extension up to 4 more days at increased pay. There is no junior manning to 24 days.

3. Outbasing was established before the contract and continued. They are voluntary and not assignable.

4. Worked at getting gateway basing. While the taxing was a by-product of the company to leverage taxes against us to get rid of it. They have used it against Polaroids also on their hotels at their bases (i.e. reserve at base and getting taxed on the hotel). It has it's advantages for the Atlas crews. Such as when all the Polaroids bases are closed and only ANC is open. Atlas crews would get tickets to work and hotels when they close their bases. Polar crews get a moving allowance should they choose to move to their new base and commuters just get what is left of their travel bank which won't last long. So Polaroids living in ANC will do great and the remaining Polar crews are just SOL trying to find their way to work in ANC begining Sept 2008. Enjoy that commuting guys!

5. Combined contract failure is not any fault of Dave Bourne. That lays squarely on the shoulders of the Polar MEC and ALPA National depending on which time frame of the on-again off-again on-again merger BS you want to talk about. Here we are with Polar's contract a year into it's amendable date with nothing happening on that side other than filing grievances that are being found in favor of the company. So what do they say about rocks in glass houses? Thanks for log jambing the Atlas side on getting a new contract during this process. This is probably the main reason for the push for Teamsters. The influence for votes (Polar votes for Prater and Prater jumps for Polar) in the union infighting vs doing what is right.

WHY AM I FOLLOWING DAVE BOURNE TO THE TEAMSTERS? Integrety and doing the right thing for all, not just a select few.

After your wrong disection of the Atlas contract, I would like to say Polar did well with their first contract negotiated with a weaker management group prior to Atlas purchasing them. I'm not advocating Atlas management, just saying they are ruthless.

Since then, you have gained little. You went on strike and came back to a contract that had less than what was offered on the table prior to the lock out. Now you are a year into it's amendable date sharing a similar problem with the Atlas crews.

L-38

27th Jun 2008, 02:02

. . . deal requires both MEC's to agree to the terms. . .

Are all remaining Polar FE's being temporally offered to the Atlas side (if MEC agreed) Whale, or just those that crew N516MC?

WhaleDriver

27th Jun 2008, 02:08

All Polar FE's being offered to the Atlas side Whale, or just those crewing N516MC?

Sorry, don't know the answer to that. I suspect those crewing N516MC? At this point, it's probably a mute point, because the Polar MEC never agrees to anything. They'd rather grieve it.

742

27th Jun 2008, 04:01

trashauler:

There is no junior manning at Atlas. Fuzzy math can even come up with your numbers. Sorry.

Outbasing is an established system and voluntary. No one is doing it that does not want too. Maybe they hate their wife. Or need the money for reasons that are not our business. But not a labor issue. Sorry.

As for the rest – pretty much the same. What next? UFO abduction?

That would be a good thread. "UFO Abduction of Bourne Results in Nasal Implant--Cato Seen on X-Files!"

dumbdumb

27th Jun 2008, 06:20

Seems kind of ironic that August is the projected date for the training of crews. Hmm . . gee, wonder what the timeline is for the vote for Teamsters? We all know it's coming just a matter of when. But as you can tell by my screen name I don't know anything and only here to listen.

Yep it takes about two months to train so enjoy your training and then get ready for ANC about October!

:ok:

WhaleDriver

27th Jun 2008, 06:37

At this point, it's probably a mute point, because the Polar MEC never agrees to anything. They'd rather grieve it.

I reread this and it came across harsher than I intended. I'm not saying that the Polar MEC should approve this letter. If Cato wrote it, it has a catch, or will effect one of the many arbitrations ongoing. I'm sure they're aware and have the lawyers looking out for that stuff.

EJetCA

27th Jun 2008, 11:12

There is no junior manning at Atlas.

Taking your days off and keeping you at work. You can call it extension, taking your X days, or whatever you want. If it's not voluntary overtime, it equates to Junior Manning.

Don't say it doesn't happen. I had one of ya'll on a flight. He said the company was taking 3 X-days, and they moved X days around. It wasn't by his permission. Personally, I felt bad for the guy. He was nice and social.

How did the culture get to this point? At the end of the day, it's OUR, collective, quality of life being affected. Those in the 10577 zip code go home at 1700 and spend weekends coaching little league or boating. I guarantee if they had to stay an extra hour in the office, they'd pitch a fit. While I certainly understand the Atlas' pilots being upset due to a delay to an improved life promised by the company when a merger is completed, there must be understanding of the reasons for Polar pilots actions.

Scope, scope, scope. Issue number one. Let's say the pilots are removed from the PO certificate. The CO has a letter to use a third party contractor for pilots for PO. Everyone assumes that this will be pilots leased from AAWH's Crew Leasing division (as envisioned in all the quarterly and public presentations). However, the elephant in the room is another AABO-like situation with them hiring outside a combined seniority list. Unless a scope clause prevents it, promises and intentions don't put food on the table. Unless there is specific and steadfast language to prevent such a perversion to the pilot group of AAWH, as has historically been demonstrated, this is a VERY real and specific threat to the pilot group.

CBA enforcement. If the company is allowed to interpret the CBA in their best interest (which no one can expect otherwise) with no action from a pilot group, why have a CBA? Yes, I know, I know. This isn't my first shop under the draconian RLA. Delays suck. However, what precedent is set when a CBA is allowed to be violated willie-nillie? A CBA is a full-meal deal. It's not ala-cart. The MEC negotiates the CBA, not individual pilots. That's when you hear "Yeah, but CA Bubba waived this part" from sked on the phone.

At the end of the day, while the "scab" issues still spark up people, the appropriate authorites ruled on the 5Y fiasco, and a coulda-woulda situation equates to a no-action. We all have to get over it. Quit throwing feces at each other.

It's time to stand up, stand together, and act like we work for the 3rd largest US cargo carrier (by FTK's of course) instead of a bunch of high school football heros trying to live off the state championship they coulda had.

nitty-gritty

27th Jun 2008, 13:13

I think one crew group has attempted numerous times to try an cooperate and get things done to absolutely no avail. Usually to their detriment to get along and work things out. I have yet to see any level of cooperation reciprocated from the other side. Only grabs at gains for themselves.

Maybe that is why the Atlas side (along with a number of Polar crews) have gotten fed up and have gone looking for other representation. 92%+ of just Atlas crews says a lot. Hopefully putting things back on an even keel instead of this votes for influence exhibited in the past at ALPA National.

Lets get a combined contract with scope. Your scenario fits what the Polar MEC wants heard, but little with the actual facts at hand. I can't remember if it was you or another that had the republic CBA out their (Teamsters Neg. BTW) which would even hold the holding company to the CBA and scope. It would not be hard to incorporate that into the proposed merger of two certificates one pilot group scenario (like Air Micronesia/Continental).

Even our lowly Atlas CBA prevents the creation of new Crew Leasing Companies to fly our A/C. AABO created prior to the CBA only survives with about 50-60 guys due to a previous LOA at an attempt to save jobs when they and Polar were being used against us during our unionization. All new hires are required to be hired under the Atlas CBA domestically and internationally based despite what you have been told.

WhaleFR8

27th Jun 2008, 14:14

Shame we have to mistrust our fellow trade unionists and indeed our national union, with the same fervor we mistrust management. Whether it be ALPA, The company, or our dear Polar bretheren - watch what they do, not what they say. Bobrobbin are not all that unlike Cato who is not all that unlike Helling/Prater.

I am tired of being beaten with the olive branch.

EJetCA

27th Jun 2008, 14:26

742

27th Jun 2008, 15:15

EJetCA—

This is getting into minutia, but “junior manning” is the practice of requiring a crewmember to come into work from OFF days. Extension on the backside is a different thing. And extension does happen at Atlas too often. Junior manning, however, does not.

As for moving X days, that can only be done if the majority of someone’s schedule was reserve. Movable OFF days for reserve pilots is common ALPA contract language. I don’t like it, at this job or my previous one (which was also ALPA), but it is an issue that is hardly unique to Atlas.

The point is that you guys rant on and on about things at Atlas that are, at best, only half understood. There are real issues, but chasing imaginary ones does not serve the long term interests of the crew forces. It does generate good propaganda, however.

L-38

27th Jun 2008, 16:06

A very astute comment, WhaleDriver.

I'm not saying that . . . . approve the letter. If Cato wrote it, it has a catch, or will effect one of the many arbitrations ongoing. . .
Curiously, Polar's FE arbitration result (Horowitz) will share the same time frame. . . .Also, the recent Holden ruling seemed to favor mngmnt because Holden felt that Polar's downgraded captains were employed in the best of poor circumstances (a mngmnt attitude that Horowitz may also be looking for). This may all relate.

How many Atlas FE's are now on furlough?

nitty-gritty

27th Jun 2008, 19:35

You may not realize it, but your fingerpointing is part of the problem. Like most of the others, your intelligable points are lost as soon as you make a statement like that. I'm sure people can point the other way too. Yet NOTHING is accomplished with statements like that.

I am fully aware that it does not help just as the Polar MEC has done to "not help".

It's just as someone else put it before, "I am tired of being beaten with the olive branch."

This process is being fixed via an alternate route as we speak. By a group tired of this continuous goat rope. The true problems to this equation will be removed shortly and I want to thank all the Atlas and Polar crews that have helped already and will help in the future.

Atlas for Teamsters (http://atlasforteamsters.com)

L-38

28th Jun 2008, 19:09

Quote from James R. Cato (excerpt text from correspondence of June 26, 2008)

“. . . . for at least twelve months (the estimated time before the merged CBA and seniority lists are implemented), if ever . . .”

Beaver_Driver

28th Jun 2008, 19:52

Nice! Typical Polar misinformation and misdirection. That quote could be from anything! Better publish the whole thing to put it in context.

For instance it could say We will be negotiating for at least twelve months (the estimated time before the merged CBA and seniority lists are implemented), if ever there was a time to get your act together it is now.

Or it could say: You will be paid a huge bonus for at least twelve months (the estimated time before the merged CBA and seniority lists are implemented), if ever you are in Purchase feel free to visit.

anyone else...?

v1andgo

29th Jun 2008, 21:45

if ever.
Maybe JC knows something. Maybe AAWW will sell PAC aircraft and traffic rights to UPS so they can more efficiently support the DHL flying.
DHL just waked away from other huge investments that did not produce in the US. And we all know what UPS does with the Pilots of the arilines they purchase.
if ever....... could mean this is your last chance.

rob rilly

29th Jun 2008, 22:44

Nitty-Gritty:
WHY AM I FOLLOWING DAVE BOURNE TO THE TEAMSTERS? Integrety and doing the right thing for all, not just a select few.

Integrety ? More Kool Aid anyone ?

iahtexan747400

29th Jun 2008, 23:13

This text is published where? Was this to only Polar crew?

EJetCA

30th Jun 2008, 00:12

This text is published where? Was this to only Polar crew?

In a letter from JC to BH. Oddly enough, not posted on GlobalNet. I've read the text, and it says what was quoted in reference to the FEs.

nitty-gritty

30th Jun 2008, 04:25

I think that everyone should be more interested in a resent email. The one currently discussed is trivial compared to what the Polar MEC is sitting on now.

Since everyone has the inability to "cut-n-paste" the whole story, I guess I'll demonstrate the same.

Beaver_Driver

30th Jun 2008, 05:59

EJ,
Let me fix that one for ya...

In a letter from JC to BH. Oddly enough, not posted on GlobalNet. I've read the text, and it says what was MIS-quoted in reference to the FEs.

or at least taken out of context. Typical.

nitty-gritty

30th Jun 2008, 17:13

Well, I guess some of the secret is out.

Curious if the Polar MEC has decided to divulge it to their membership.

Atlas June 30th message (https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=43248)

BELOWMINS

30th Jun 2008, 17:33

Nitty
Can you keep us updated on the Atlas VARS on a regular basis? They make interesting reading.

L-38

30th Jun 2008, 17:41

. . .and it says what was MIS-quoted in reference to the FEs. . .

Don't blow my post out of proportion, Beaver. I was merely demonstrating that Cato believes that an implementation of merged seniority is at least a year off, and that he may be doubtful at that.

Nothing else. Nothing more.

Beaver_Driver

30th Jun 2008, 18:04

I doubt that - if so then post the whole thing. The quote is quite obviously taken out of context - especially the "..., if ever..."

Besides that, there is already a merged list and you and Mr. Cato well know it. The list was put in place by Arbitrator Harris two years ago in November. So none of what you have said has any ring of truth to it.

nitty-gritty

9th Jul 2008, 15:37

Just curious on the Polar thoughts of the recent company proposal mentioned in the Polar VARS ( WMA audio (http://atlasmergerfacts.com/pac06282008.wma)). I also believe the mentioned short term outsourcing is due to ongoing maintenance checks on one or two Polar -400's which is allowed. Thought that some of that was selectively left out of the message to give his argument more leverage.

WhaleDriver

9th Jul 2008, 16:48

Some good news...

Atlas Air Achieves Globally Recognized Safety Benchmark
Wednesday July 9, 12:11 pm ET

PURCHASE, N.Y.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc. (AAWW) (Nasdaq: AAWW - News) today announced that its subsidiary, Atlas Air, Inc., has achieved a globally recognized safety and quality standard following a stringent audit of its operational standards and procedures.
ADVERTISEMENT

By completing the International Air Transport Association’s Operational Safety Audit (IOSA), Atlas Air continues to demonstrate an international and industry-leading commitment to safety.

“Our inclusion in the IOSA registry is a further acknowledgement that our operations rank with those of the best air carriers in the world,” said William J. Flynn, President and Chief Executive Officer of AAWW. “Our customers also benefit from this achievement as they will be able to take advantage of our IOSA registration without having to conduct separate safety and quality audits of their own, therefore saving them time and reducing their costs.”

Atlas Air received the IOSA registration as part of its membership in IATA following a series of stringent audits by an IATA-accredited auditor. It is valid until November 2009, and is renewable thereafter every two years subject to future audits.

The audit covers key areas of Atlas Air’s operations: corporate organization and management structure; flight operations; flight dispatch; aircraft engineering and maintenance; ground handling; cargo operations; and airline security.

About Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc.:

AAWW, a leading provider of global air cargo assets and services, is the parent company of Atlas Air, Inc. (Atlas) and the majority shareholder of Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc. (Polar). Through Atlas and Polar, AAWW operates the world’s largest fleet of Boeing 747 freighter aircraft.

Atlas and Polar offer a range of air cargo services that include ACMI aircraft leasing – in which customers receive a dedicated aircraft, crew, maintenance and insurance on a long-term lease basis – military charters, commercial cargo charters, scheduled air cargo service (including express network service for DHL Express later in 2008), and dry leasing of aircraft.

AAWW’s press releases, SEC filings and other information may be accessed through the Company’s home page, Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings (http://www.atlasair.com).

Contact:
Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc.
Dan Loh, 914-701-8200

nitty-gritty

11th Jul 2008, 16:21

Gotten real quiet out there.

Anyhow, the Atlasforteamsters.com (http://atlasforteamsters.com) site now reports 93% sending in cards. They also have the company response to the NMB and the NMB call for responses on it documents section.

L-38

11th Jul 2008, 18:00

Wow, Looks like this game will go on for at least 17 innings. The Atlas / Polar / AAWW situation could not be more complicated!

WhaleDriver

14th Jul 2008, 02:04

At least you guys don't have to fly into PIK anymore.A small blessing.

HHN is a heck of an upgrade to PIK. Nice facilities and great hotel. Also close to RMS to pick up military flights, vs doing Ryan Air out of PIK to get to Germany.

FirstStep

14th Jul 2008, 07:03

The station personnel in PIK were great, but the catering was awful and the typical ATIS was "WET-WET-WET", followed by gusty winds at 90 degrees that were at times over company limits. I will not miss this station. Although, after 14 years going there, I was beginning to pick up their language.
Having recently dead headed on POLAR,( yes, I'm from the other side ), I found the crew to be friendly, and quite professional. Of this I am not surprised. I just wanted the readers to know that as pilots, I have found that both sides treat each other with respect when on the aircraft/crew bus/hotel crew room, ect. I have no doubt the when the day comes for us to operate together, there won't be a problem. It seems that this forum is a good place to vent by those that need to.

dumbdumb

14th Jul 2008, 09:58

Hey this is all great and all to throw stones at each other but has anyone from the Polar or Atlas side dug up the information on the company AAWH has started out of Prestwick??? All I can find thus far is a DRY LEASE company with two classics on the certificate. Our fearless leader had mentioned it at the employee exchange.

I sure would hate to have a wonderful contract that's not worth the paper it's written on (a certain Wilmington, Ohio based pilot group comes to mind if they lose the arbitration) if all they do is agree to it and then it's tossed out the window. Let's hope for a REASONABLE contract and strong scope.

Later,

DumbDumb

Aftershock

14th Jul 2008, 10:15

Dumbdumb, what company out of Prestwick are you referrng to? Where can I find any info on that?
Thought Polar/Atlas had finished at PIK (apart from Panalpina ACMI flights).

Beaver_Driver

14th Jul 2008, 10:26

All I can find thus far is a DRY LEASE company with two classics on the certificate. Our fearless leader had mentioned it at the employee exchange.
References please?

742

14th Jul 2008, 13:06

From the Feb 27 press release dealing with 2007 results:

"In February, we established a wholly owned subsidiary of AAWW based in Ireland that will focus on the acquisition, sale, dry leasing, marketing and servicing of aircraft and related equipment. Still in its nascent phase, this Irish company has already dry leased one 747-200 to a third party in the first quarter of 2008."

This was the conduit for the two airplanes that went to Tradewinds. Dry lease airplanes, furlough engineers. Get airplanes returned, have insufficient crews to operate them. Have airplanes sit. Oppps--that didn't work out too well :E

"the word" is that this is how they hope to place Classics as the fleet winds down. And I would not be suprised if a few -8s get dry leased, depending on the market. Or so they have hinted.

Beaver_Driver

14th Jul 2008, 13:58

Well that much is all old news. Last time I checked PIK was in Scotland. Even Cato isn't powerful enough to move it to Ireland. :ugh:

742

14th Jul 2008, 14:04

Well that much is all old news. Last time I checked PIK was in Scotland. Even Cato isn't powerful enough to move it to Ireland. :ugh:

Yep, old news. But it seemed to be unkown to some of the earlier posters.

trashhauler

14th Jul 2008, 15:27

Wasn't there something to the effect that AAWH wanted to get into the aircraft leasing business? This was about a year ago I believe.

nitty-gritty

14th Jul 2008, 16:34

If anyone has ever check out where the A/C are currently coming from, you will note that a large number of them come from some leasing company created by some Atlas Air World Wide subsidiary or a sub-subsidiary of such since inception. Usually done for tax reasons, upstreaming income offshore, and minimizing liability. If they create a new one, it does not really change anything labor wise. It's just a new one to the existing fold of leasing companies that own the A/C. Neither the Atlas or Polar labor contracts have any really good ties to the A/C in number scope wise.

I do remember R. Shuyler (sp?) a number of years ago making a point of publicly asking the board of directors during labor contract negotiations if they should go to dry leasing only to put some leverage on negotiations.

If they want to do that now, there is nothing labor can do about it in it's existing labor state at Polar/Atlas. Doing dry leasing is not really a big money maker compared to wet leasing. Profit being the chief motivator will probably rule, but they have moved A/C to make a point with labor. Such as A/C moved to GSS, Tradewinds, Focus, Polar and Atlas back and fourth.

BELOWMINS

14th Jul 2008, 16:54

Nitty
So despite all the ranting to the contrary on this and many previous threads, there are no Atlas aircraft for Polar to take away, or Polar aircraft for Atlas to take away. Just pawn aircraft to be used in the ongoing AAWH labor shell game.

nitty-gritty

15th Jul 2008, 00:56

Many here confuse "the flying" vs A/C and how both can easily be re-branded/moved to fit managements desires to shaft labor. It's been done to the Atlas and Polar labor forces back and forth. Probably why getting on with a merger now would be helpful for us and any subsequent companies formed to circumvent labor in the AAWW group. That's possible for the US based companies, the overseas ones like GSS are a different story with current US law.

nitty-gritty

15th Jul 2008, 18:41

I'm curious as to why the Polar MEC failed to respond in a timely fashion on the fate of the Polar FE's. Was it some kind of tactic? Would be interested on the Polar MEC spin on it if they disclose it to you.

Anyhow, here is the Atlas MEC side of it in their weekly VARS:

Audio in WMA format (http://www.atlasmergerfacts.com/aai07152008.wma)

Text version link (https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=43323)

L-38

16th Jul 2008, 17:26

Yes, there was a Polar MEC written response to Cato (dated the 14th). Yes the Polar MEC's wriitten response has been disclosed to it's members.

Beaver_Driver

16th Jul 2008, 20:38

.....and did he also tell the membership it was sent too late. Bobb missed the deadline. And did you all note that it was not a response but another attempt to delay the process by asking questions etc.

dumbdumb

17th Jul 2008, 04:38

What I noticed was a counter proposal. Deadline? Was there a time on it? If so I guess I missed that part of the deal.

Do you really think this letter was going to come to fruition? I didn't. There was no way in hell anything was going to happen here. Cato knew Polar would counter and now he looks good by offering jobs (albeit not to all) F.E.'s. Ohh, how you can spin things I can see it now: Look Mr. Arbitrator I tried to help them out but as you can see they don't want it. They want to fight. See? Look at this letter I sent. Isn't it nice?

Then the company gets their way and wins the grievance, doesn't pay the F.E's didly squat and kicks the rest on the street. THEN . . . he'll blame the Polar MEC for doing such a thing.

Oh well . . .

Beaver_Driver

17th Jul 2008, 04:59

Yes there was a deadline. Read the initial letter from Cato. You will see that any counter-proposal, especially one at the last minute, would be seen for what it was in this case. A simple delaying tactic. Too bad Mr Henderson is using the Polar crewmembers for his own agenda.

nitty-gritty

17th Jul 2008, 05:34

How did the Polar MEC put it once, "It's just collateral damage."

I'm sure the FE's appreciate that.

I don't think Mr. Cato was required to offer anything. That being said, I'm not stupid enough to think that he was being magnanimous with the offer. At the same time, I think that the Polar MEC did a good job of helping the FE's out the door without realistically examining the options with the last minute theatrics at the expense of the FE's.

We at Atlas have had a few of these similar situations during the past "whip-sawing" events. Some offers we could negotiate with to some resolution and some we couldn't. We didn't wait to the last minute to work it out and knew what we had and what we didn't have to negotiate with.

dumbdumb

17th Jul 2008, 17:13

Well, Nitty . . .sad but true but yes, I think it's going to be bad news on the Polar side pretty quick. I won't point fingers but I will say that it's going to hit the fan . . . just a matter of when.

layinlow

17th Jul 2008, 19:13

I find it amazing that the Atlas crew members are so cognizant of the Polar MEC intentions. Must be that direct line to Cato that they so enjoy because I have yet to hear one disparaging word from any FE or pilot at Polar. Gosh, I wish I had your insight.

Beaver_Driver

18th Jul 2008, 07:18

And we all find it amazing that one such as yourself with a great post-Polar job at FedEx, continually takes the time to post your inflammatory remarks. Time to move on W.T.

BELOWMINS

18th Jul 2008, 12:02

Yeah.. Leave the inflammatory remarks to those actually working at Atlas!

L-38

18th Jul 2008, 18:06

Anyhow . . . Cato may have agreed to a broader offer of Polar's FE employment if it were not for his pissing contest with Bob H . . . Oh how Cato just loves telling Bobby H where to pound sand!

Although the Atlas MEC did not have a chance to factor in yet, I wonder - how would they have responded? (especually considering that Polar appeared to be holding the shorter end of the stick.)

rob rilly

18th Jul 2008, 22:19

Ah, good to see Beav....uh WhaleFR8 got a new name !

nitty-gritty

19th Jul 2008, 05:25

Came out today in an Atlas VARS the original management proposal, the late Polar counter offer and some pretty informative email traffic back and forth. I'll put the first two up. Don't think I'll do the email one. Not sure if the Polar guys got to look at the original proposal looking at the previous posts and hearing stuff from Polar guys on the line sounded wildly different than what I read.

Polar Fleet Reduction Management offer in PDF (https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=43405)

The late Polar MEC Response in PDF (https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=43404)

WhaleDriver

19th Jul 2008, 14:50

BobbRobbin continue to be a piece of work. Every time I think I've seen it all, they top themselves.

First and foremost, their counter is total BS and is designed as showpiece to their members of how hard their working for them? There is no way in Heck the Atlas MEC would have agreed to this and they know it. "Extremely fair"....give me a break! That's beyond the fact that they dated it the 14th but sent it after emails dated the 15th ....continued total BS.

This is another example of them trying to override the system and/or impress their members with their moxie. They are the perceived winners in the seniority arbitration, yet they continue to try and navigate around the award with improvements, all to the detriment of the people they're suppose to merge with. They've just added to the ways to separate the pilot groups, even more than Cato could have dreamt up.

Let me make clear, it is none of my business that they accepted/declined the original proposal as is. It just bothers me that my friends over at Polar are completed buffaloed by these guys.

What should bother the Polaroids is the email trail on the 14/15th, then say in a VARS that they responded on the 14th is an outright lie. We've told you, they have a habit of that, just that no Polaroids will believe it. Well I say that, but having spoken to a couple Polar FE's lately, they are starting to have their doubts?

L-38

19th Jul 2008, 17:17

The letters posted by nitty (post#200) were the same as those previously distributed to all of Polar's crewmembers by it's MEC.

Cato's offer of intent appears to only benefit the first 9 out of all of Polar's furloughed FE's, and logically, it had become an invitation to negotiate an expansion - thus benefiting all of the furloughed. . . . . Although moot, would the Atlas MEC have agreed to even this (Cato's original offer)? No one will ever know, as Cato's offer appears designed to have been simply a nose thumbing tease by mngmt (and / or perhaps later - by the Atlas MEC). - - With regards to typical AAWW / labor operations, anybody could see where this was going to go.

nitty-gritty

20th Jul 2008, 02:05

I remember once upon a time the same happening (maybe twice?) in reverse of current events except the big obstacle was the Polar MEC/Neg Com. Back when Atlas A/C and flying were being moved over to Polar for management to make a negotiation point to the Atlas crew force.

Essentially back then, the Polar MEC/Neg Com would be happy to have us over at the bottom of the Polar list at best forever-and-always without accrued longevity pay and the same currently offered caveats such as merged seniority when the merger was completed similar to both the current Polar counter offer and management offer just discussed. So I guess you would be right that the Atlas MEC and crews would probably remember that past experience and not have much interest in helping out again when it was to be presented to the Atlas MEC for approval.

So pretty much a dead offer to begin with as you said. Worsened by the Polar counter offer. I think the biggest part was the Polar counter offer. It appears to be another attempt to get another piece of the Harris seniority award Polar didn't already get in the arbitration.

Here is the Atlas VARS in text with it's documents mentioned covering the general thoughts on it as sent to the crews.

Atlas 07-18-2008 (https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=43406)

Beaver_Driver

20th Jul 2008, 16:29

It is interesting to see, now that the whole document is public, how out of context Cato's words were taken by some on this board. Here is the full paragraph:

"As you can see, our proposal ensures no Polar Crewmember will be involuntarily furloughed or downgraded as a result of Polar’s discontinuing its Classic flying in August rather than October. Moreover, rather than face a furlough with no chance of recall for at least twelve months (the estimated time before the merged CBA and seniority lists are implemented), if ever, our Polar Flight Engineers will be able to continue their employment uninterrupted, and at a pay scale higher than they enjoy today. And those Flight Engineers who do not elect to take a position at Atlas will not be disadvantaged, indeed they will be advantaged, as they will receive pay continuance for now work through October, the time at which Polar will park N516MC in any case, if not before."

For those that don't remember, the boldfaced sentence above was included in a post by L-38 where he intended to indicate that Cato thought the merger might not happen. However, if you read the thing in context (removing the comment in parenthesis) you will see that the if ever comment is talking about the Flight Engineers chance of recall ".....for at least twelve months, if ever...." Granted the sentence structure is pretty poor, but the meaning is clear. Just wanted to post this to show how out of context certain things are, that have been broadcast by some of the Polar leadership.

flite idol

20th Jul 2008, 17:08

Mr Cato is the master of the contract double entendre! Anyone familiar with the "business or better" travel clause will know exactly what I mean. Anyhoo there is no need to mislead or confuse ourselves or eachother with cynically edited quotes!

layinlow

21st Jul 2008, 12:18

A crewmember trusting Cato is like a chicken trusting Col. Sanders. The furlough notices would go out, "for unforeseen business reasons", before the ink dried.

L-38

21st Jul 2008, 22:20

Yo Beaver (post #204) . . I suppose that you can interpret Cato's "if ever" that way. . I however, had interpreted it another way.

Per nitty - So I guess you would be right . . the Atlas MEC . . would probably remember . . . and not have much interest in helping . .
Perhaps the only possible future resolve to such "bad air" would be to create two fresh new MEC's, but then even that may be moot now.

(I confess that at that time - R Fell was a little too hard line for my tastes, as I personally did not really like the man. Fell's MEC was elected prior to Polar being acquisitioned).

nitty-gritty

21st Jul 2008, 23:41

I would expect a single IBT carrier of us both now more likely. I don't think recalling and electing two new MEC's will be much of a starter now. ALPA ignoring the movement just goes to show how much they care about Atlas and Polar crews.

The single carrier responses to/from NMB are listed on the Atlas for teamsters (http://atlasforteamsters.com) site under it's documents section. I imagine a decision will happen soon by the NMB.

Maybe load shedding the leadership on both sides will move us forward. If moving forward is not the interest of some of the Polar membership, I guess they will have to be dragged kicking and screaming judging from the number of cards submitted by both.

Beaver_Driver

21st Jul 2008, 23:56

Yo Beaver (post #204) . . I suppose that you can interpret Cato's "if ever" that way. . I however, had interpreted it another way.
Understandable. That always seems to happen when partial quotes are cut and pasted out of context. Perhaps the letter was read in a hurry and the meaning taken one particular way - then posted with the meaning you interpreted made clearer by the way you partially quoted it.

As others have said in the last few posts, Cato is famous for "weasel words" in his LOAs and contractual language. If the truth be told, his grammar in that post is not up to his usual par. I think that was probably typed by his secretary and not edited too well by him before it went out. As I said the sentence structure is terrible; and one has to break it down into grammatical parts of a sentence to understand where the "if ever" qualifier fits. I can see how it wasn't done purposely and my thanks to you for admitting that.

bd

EJetCA

28th Jul 2008, 18:37

...sometimes it's fun to go to the zoo and watch the monkies throw feces at each other because they're taunted by some little kid standing outside the cage...

:ugh:

Intruder

28th Jul 2008, 20:44

So, were you so bored after a week of peace that you just had to start the taunting? :(

nitty-gritty

1st Aug 2008, 23:24

I think the silence is the acceptance of the Teamsters coming. Noticed that Capt. Prater sent out a letter to the Atlas and Polar crews finally on the decertification. Teamsters side came out with some stuff on it also at Atlas for Teamsters (http://atlasforteamsters.com).

L-38

3rd Aug 2008, 01:34

All in search of the promise land.

nitty-gritty

3rd Aug 2008, 05:24

Probably more, "In search of equal representation that the smaller union sister receives."

A union is only as good as it's members. We have pretty good quality of those on both sides. It's when the National headquarters starts picking favorites among it's councils to support financially and otherwise that we get what we have now.

WhaleDriver

3rd Aug 2008, 14:26

There's rumblings that the money train is about to stop.

I guess the Polar MEC is working up another grievance, which will naturally end up in arbitration. There is some noise coming from national that they've had it. If Polar wants to go to arbitration anymore, they can pay for it themselves, as in assessments. We'll see what kind of hero's BobbRobbin are when the members have to start paying for their antics.

Also, low level rumblings that the Polar MEC have been notified of the results of the latest arbitration. No written findings yet. Only word is, no transfer of aircraft. No indication, pro or con, of monetary awards in the rumblings.

L-38

3rd Aug 2008, 16:40

As they are in concert with that of the nation's trucking company's, at least the Teamsters are focused when it comes to ground freight movement. . . . when strike time comes, nothing domestic moves, period.

Yes, the Block (FE) arbitration was due out 30 days after June 30. Don't know how you do it Whale, but as in the past, you've proven to sniff out the first of arbitration result rumblings.

nitty-gritty

3rd Aug 2008, 21:01

I think it is more appropriately explained by the fact that the Atlas side has a regular and substantial presence and participation of many of our council committee chairmen and volunteers at ALPA Herndon despite the lack of National support for us. Not just the MEC chairman and Negotiation Chairman as with the PAC Council. We are not a one or two man show at ALPA. So we get a lot of info probably before the PAC council chairman get's it. Probably because he would have to put his beer down and come in off the deck of his boat to answer the phone.

Second. Since both the Holden and Bloch arbitrations were going to affect both groups, we are in the award delivery chain also.

BELOWMINS

4th Aug 2008, 12:12

And the direct line from Purchase is functioning.

WhaleDriver

4th Aug 2008, 17:27

Your right, God forbid a Union ACTUALLY communicating with management in any situation other than an arbitration hearing!

Beaver_Driver

7th Aug 2008, 16:14

Did I hear right? Did Robin and Captvac quit the negotiating committee?

Intruder

7th Aug 2008, 17:03

Nothing yet on their VARS...

dumbdumb

7th Aug 2008, 18:18

Yes, they resigned as it was decided that the negotiation comittee's need to be fresh on both sides. From what I gathered off of the message is that your side is supposed to do the same.

Beaver_Driver

7th Aug 2008, 19:10

From what I gathered off of the message is that your side is supposed to do the same.
ahahahahah - now THAT is some great spin.

layinlow

7th Aug 2008, 19:44

That was their message at resignation.

Beaver_Driver

7th Aug 2008, 20:28

Sure, a message from the same guys that could not even be professional enough to sit in the same conference room and negotiate. Had to have an ALPA person running back and forth. Sorry but I wouldn't believe them if they said the sun was going to come up tomorrow.

There are no "sides." That committee was supposed to be one "combined" negotiating committee and they couldn't even be in the same room with each other.

Harbinger of things to come I guess.

nitty-gritty

7th Aug 2008, 20:35

How typical. Years have gone by saying their is no merger on the Polar side. Now that they see they have to do something by ALPA order, they resign on the Polar side. Good to see our dues going out the door for nothing but wasted time. How do I get on that Polar gravy train? 100 hours guaranteed per month and nothing to do but say "NO MERGER" and go into a fit on the floor during meetings once in a while. Then enjoy the rest of the month off.

Kind of a dead point anyway. These continuing games will be ended once the single carrier status is determined and the Teamsters are voted in.

Good to see that the Polar MEC and Negotiation committee made out so well money wise at our collective expense.

dumbdumb

8th Aug 2008, 19:20

Personally, I want single carrier. It couldn't happen soon enough and juding by some of the others I have talked to there are more here than are willing to admit it. It's time for change.

LANCERDVR

8th Aug 2008, 23:33

Your continuing bashing is maddening. The Polar MEC and negotiating committee have been in an ongoing battle to fend off Cato's tireless efforts to erode the Polar CBA since the day AAWH acquired Polar. The Atlas pilot group has been the benefiting recipient of Cato's work in that they are now flying a good percentage of Polars flights on a daily basis in violation of the Polar scope protections. The Atlas MEC has been gutless in going after the rights of the Atlas pilots for a new CBA and better terms on its existing CBA. In fact when the Atlas MEC realized that the Polar MEC could/should prevail in its scope fight, they (in conjunction with AAWH management) put together a successful effort to extort ALPA into submission by threatening to go Teamsters. I am embarrassed to be a part of a union with the likes of the Atlas union leadership and to anyone who would have the cohones to insinuate that all of the history is somehow the fault of the Polar MEC and Negotiating committee for not bowing to management. The reasons for the resignations were multi-faceted, the abandonment of ALPA National in standing up for the rights of the minority pilot group, the selection of a very inexperienced Atlas negotiator to chair the combined negotiating committee in lieu of a dual or neutral chairmanship proposed by the Polar group, the obvious bad blood created by the small group who spew misinformation on this website in order to subdue the minds of the ill informed, and most importantly the maintenance of there sanity and families. If ALPAs leadership were as strong and resolved as the Polar MEC and Committee members our profession wouldn't be in the disarray it currently finds itself. If we are to successfully move forward the likes of the few bashers on this website need to shut the ___ up and give the Atlas and new Polar negotiators a chance to succeed, or is it your true intentions to continue to work for Cato and squash this unions effort to move forward?

Beaver_Driver

9th Aug 2008, 01:03

The Polar MEC and negotiating committee have been in an ongoing battle to fend off Cato's tireless efforts to erode the Polar CBA since the day AAWH acquired Polar. How so? What erosion? What have they done?
The Atlas pilot group has been the benefiting recipient of Cato's work in that they are now flying a good percentage of Polars flights on a daily basis in violation of the Polar scope protections. Again, how so? Polar does not have the aircraft to fly half of what they "claim" is their flying. In fact the Polar MEC claimed that if they ever flew any routes or landed at any airports anywhere in the world then it was "their" flying and not Atlas's. Simple ingnorance of the world of business.

The Atlas MEC has been gutless in going after the rights of the Atlas pilots for a new CBA and better terms on its existing CBA. Impossible to do in light of the fact that the company says there is a merger; arbitrator Harris said there was a merged list; even ALPA now agrees that there is a merger - the company refused to negotiate with only one group - especially in light of how they were screwed by the Polar MEC when they violated the back to work agreement after their ill conceived strike.
In fact when the Atlas MEC realized that the Polar MEC could/should prevail in its scope fight, they (in conjunction with AAWH management) put together a successful effort to extort ALPA into submission by threatening to go Teamsters. Bovine Scat! The company had nothing to do with the Teamsters push. It was all Atlas pilots who were sick of dealing with a national union who continually favored one pilot group over another when they were supposed to be neutral.

I am embarrassed to be a part of a union with the likes of the Atlas union leadership and to anyone who would have the cohones to insinuate that all of the history is somehow the fault of the Polar MEC and Negotiating committee for not bowing to management.Guess it is time to quit then.
The reasons for the resignations were multi-faceted, the abandonment of ALPA National in standing up for the rights of the minority pilot group, the selection of a very inexperienced Atlas negotiator to chair the combined negotiating committee in lieu of a dual or neutral chairmanship proposed by the Polar group, hahahahahahaha now THAT is really funny - you mean experience negotiating the SALT II treaty is not negotiation experience. You have just proven how clueless you are. The Atlas negotiator has ten time the experience that Hair does.

the obvious bad blood created by the small group who spew misinformation on this website in order to subdue the minds of the ill informed, Hopefully you are including yourself in that category.

... strong and resolved as the Polar MEC and Committee don't forget ill educated and ill informed - do they still think that "revenue" is better than "profits?"

The last thing Hair did is tried once again to negate arbitrator Harris ruling by asking to have Polar pilots move up into slots created by retirements and resignations. Does he REALLY think we are that stupid. It is high time he left. He and Bobb cost both groups MILLIONS of dollars in bargaining power all to protect a scope clause that is going to be renegotated anyways. Spin it however you want - this debacle can be laid right at their feet.

rob rilly

13th Aug 2008, 17:00

Did I hear right? Did Robin and Captvac quit the negotiating committee?

When is the official announcement ? Is this more of your unfounded rumors ? :ouch:

You give island boys a bad name.

nitty-gritty

20th Aug 2008, 20:33

I noted that the Atlas side put out a Joint Negotiations Report on the last round of negotiations with the company to it's membership. Did the Polar side pass it around over there?

BELOWMINS

21st Aug 2008, 14:07

Maybe the Chairman of the Joint Negotiating Committee should consider addressing his remarks to the Joint pilot group.

Deltabravowhiskey

21st Aug 2008, 15:52

Recv'd: Mon 8/18/2008 7:17 PM

To: All Atlas and Polar Crewmembers
From: The AAI-PAC Joint Negotiating Committee
Date: August 18, 2008

Fellow Crew Members,
Negotiations began this past week for a new joint collective bargaining agreement, an
important first step to improve the compensation, benefits and work rules for Atlas and
Polar pilots.

Meetings took place on Tuesday and Wednesday, August 12th and 13th, at the Rye Town
Hilton in Westchester County. Present for the ALPA Joint Negotiating Committee were:
Paul Alves (JNC Chairman), Tom Butler and Philip Piraino from Atlas; and Robin Hair,
Allan Atherton and Craig Baker from Polar. Also present from ALPA were: ALPA
Executive Council representative Joe Fagone (FDX), Steve Nagrotsky, Esq. and Everett
Barber, Esq. from ALPA representation, and Bruce York, ALPA Director of
Representation. Management was represented by Jim Cato, VP Flight Ops/Labor, Chief
Pilots Mike Bryant, Scott Welty, Scott, Lindsay, Chief Scheduling Resources, and Curt
Acton, the newly assigned Controller in Operations.

At an introductory dinner meeting hosted by the Company, Atlas CEO Mr. Bill Flynn and
COO John Dietrich joined the group and Mr. Flynn expressed the Company’s
appreciation for the start of joint negotiations, and the Company’s commitment to the
efficient completion of bargaining and sincerely thanked crewmembers for their hard
work and dedication to the Company’s success.

The ALPA JNC presented the following opening contract proposals to management:

Section 9 – Miscellaneous
Section 10 – Management and Non-Flying Duty
Section 26 – General
Section 30 – Uniforms
and language for (but not the term of)
Section 34 – Duration

Management presented a proposed Letter of Agreement continuing our
Professional Standards Committee and setting out its operation, a proposal on
Section 18 – Association Representatives, and made certain counter proposals to the Association.

The next negotiating sessions are scheduled for September 16 – 18th. During the
intervening time, the JNC will continue preparation of sections to present to the
company. It’s the JNC’s plan to progress systematically from the administrative, to
operational, to the economic sections of the joint agreement. The JNC will continue to
keep you informed of our work and any developments.

Thanks for your continued support and interest in negotiations.

Fraternally,
Paul Alves, Robin Hair
Philip Piraino, Allan Atherton
Tom Butler, Craig Baker

It was addressed to Atlas and Polar, Polar leadership should have sent it out at the same time.

If the JNC does not yet have all the Polar contact information then they need to be provided with it.

DB

layinlow

22nd Aug 2008, 12:40

What's to report? As far as I can see it was a kissy-kissy session

joetommy

22nd Aug 2008, 19:23

I heard the company wants 17 days a month plus flexibility. Translation: 21 days a month plus commute.

Beaver_Driver

22nd Aug 2008, 23:48

Ya think?

http://bestsmileys.com/doh/2.gif

layinlow

23rd Aug 2008, 01:34

The Atlas guys may not mind but I bet the Polar will never give their quality of life without a knockdown drag out fight.

joetommy

23rd Aug 2008, 09:52

That is not industry standard.

joetommy

23rd Aug 2008, 10:10

How many days a month should the most junior crewmember owe the company?

742

23rd Aug 2008, 11:45

I heard the company wants 17 days a month plus flexibility. Translation: 21 days a month plus commute.

That has happened to me exactly once in the past 3 years. And there is considerable money involved in such an extension.

This is not to say that I like it, but you guys need to stop foaming at the mouth over rumors and start digging for facts. Then the real issues and problems will follow.

layinlow

23rd Aug 2008, 14:53

True, so true, but you have to admit, 21 days on (you really think the company wll actually honor 17 days on) and then add the commuting is not what I call a quality of life proposal. 17 days including commuting with no extentions... yeah that is ok. Polar crews see nothing wrong with the Polar contract as far as days on are concerned. So you are telling me that Atlas prefers their scheduling to Polar's? Most crew shortages are due to scheduling incompetence and I see no reason to punish crews for the company's shortcomings. At Polar, when the 16th day hit, it was time to see the family.

Beaver_Driver

23rd Aug 2008, 15:21

That was sarcasm there Joe Tommy. If they could get it, the company would like 30 days a month with 30 days worth of extension for no extra pay.

nitty-gritty

23rd Aug 2008, 19:41

I think it has been long held that the Atlas crews want the work rules that Polar negotiated with their previous owners with enhancements while maintaining the Atlas crew pay scales adjusted for inflation and such (Atlas crews had to deal with the ex-Lorenzo lieutenants in their management willing to buy airlines, start other airlines, crew leasing companies to keep everyone under their thumb and subjugated) .

Everyone wins if this comes to pass and is plausible. Past actions by one side has done everything to shoot that in the foot, particularly from those ex-Polaroids that sit in an office at FedEx posting here (layinlow) which continue the Henderson-Hair agenda at every opportunity. ALPA finally realized that the backing of only the minoriity "scheduled" carrier has only resulted in them loosing around 900 combined dues paying members to the Teamsters. All of a sudden, a merger is on despite the years of stalling by one minoriity side.

I believe the sections the JNC have worked on with the company are the openers. They have not been TA'd. They are openers and of course the company is going to plead rape just looking at them. Many here need to remember that and understand negotiations and how it works.

Having said that, I hope the new Polar JNC negotiators prove their worth and not just as proxies of the previous ones.

BELOWMINS

23rd Aug 2008, 21:05

Ditto for the Atlas JNC members.

layinlow

23rd Aug 2008, 21:24

Belowmins

Nitty still has figured it out. Time to switch again.

joetommy

24th Aug 2008, 02:52

How many days a month should the most junior crewmember owe the company? Please give me a number.

THANKS

bpp

24th Aug 2008, 02:55

layinlow,
I just have to ask why you feel it's necessary to comment on the Atlas/Polar issues if you don't work for either company? Wouldn't both parties be better off working through the issues with current employees, not one that feels he needs to represent one side while working at Fedex? Would Fedex pilots appreciate a digruntled Polar or Atlas pilot telling them what they should or shouldn't do or accept? Let it go and focus on your current job.

bpp

Beaver_Driver

24th Aug 2008, 04:40

JT - I would say no more or no less than the most senior crewmembers. Right now that is 17 days for Atlas and 16 for Polar (except that Polar may publish 17 day lines as long as they publish the same number of 15 day lines). The Polar days may be wrong as I am looking at an older contract. My guess is that the JNC will be asking for 13 or 14 days of work with no involuntary days and the company will want 18 days with 6 involuntary days available. That is TOTALLY just a W.A.G. but you get the picture. There will probably also be some back and forth or (go figure) *negotiation* about gateway vs. home basing and travel to and from the pattern start point and how that affects days off and work.

So what do you want? Are you Atlas or Polar? Have you e-mailed your wishes to the Negotiating Committee? Is pay most important of is QOL? Days off? Travel on company time or days off?

I agree with Nitty - I would love Atlas pay and Polar work rules. Unfortunately in this economy we may get neither. Too bad we weren't merged and negotiating together two years ago when we should have been.

WorldRunner

24th Aug 2008, 08:47

I have never been on this site before but was encouraged to read every thread. While there are some informative well written posts, for the most part it reads like angry teen age kids with Beaver and Nitty leading the pack. What happened to the meaning of the term "Professional Pilot?" I would be embarrassed to have my family read most of these posts. Why can't you guys take a chill pill and attempt to understand most all pilots simply want to go to work, get a correct paycheck, not be hassled, fly, and go home.
These union/legal proceedings are out of the control of most of the rank and file pilots so what is there to gain by increasing division between the two pilot groups? Most all crews I have met in Atlas AND Polar have been professional, safe, and enjoyable with a few jerks on both sides. This makes me wonder if this is a pilot problem or a power play by AAWH and some of the Union Reps to maintain their money, status, and power? It looks as if the Polar AND Atlas crews are victims of some self serving power players. The crews once again are simply pawns. Another point that becomes painfully clear is that Atlas Crews blame Polar Crews for their problems and Polar Crews blame Atlas Crews. It is unclear how either pilot group has ANY control over the other. AAWH is simply playing one pilot group against the other – divide and conquer.
Most Polar Pilots I have talked to do not wish to merge, most Atlas Crews do want a merger. My question is---what does Polar have to make Atlas Pilots want to quickly merge?
Hopefully the end result will be that all pilots can stay employed and all crews have a stronger airline (or two) of which to be proud.

dumbdumb

24th Aug 2008, 12:34

Worldrunner:

I'm on the Polar side of the house and I've always thought that there's safety in numbers. Not just in a seniority list but everywhere. Look at nature. Lobsters "train" across the ocean floor to get somewhere faster, fish "school" and swirl in balls, etc. I'm sure you know what I mean, right?

Now, what is NOT right about the whole deal is Atlas getting to reap the benefits of the Polar certificate. They're already flying two airplanes for DHL service. No, I'm not mad or will even think about being mad at the pilot group; except for people who SCAB. They don't deserve anything -- period! And the crap of them wanting to go with the Polar certificate if it was sold. Nope, huh uh. Sorry.

So for all of your Atlas for Teamsters supporters I'm waiting for a rebuttle to the recent Prater letter to contradict going to Teamsters. When I have asked some of the guys that have jumpseated/deadheaded on our flights why they want to go to Teamsters it seems they only have the answer of they're mad at ALPA. No, I'm not looking for a fight when asking them. I'm only trying to gather information and asses the situation. Sure, I understand that side and mad, too. But we, I mean you guys need to make sure we get EVERYTHING in service that ALPA brings to the table, too. Yes, I've been to the atlasforteamsters.com web site, but I see nothing in writing as of yet about insurance programs, stranded in a foreign country, legal representation, etc. Trust me, I'm one of the Polaroids swaying to the Teamster side. But I'm not "taking my ball and going home" just 'cause I'm not getting my way. If the benefits add up and representation then so be it. Otherwise, we're stuck with the ugly Step-Mom! And she's really going to Pi$$ me off if she gets away with taking 401K money to support dues. Don't get me started on that one.