Jumseating on US Carriers for CX Crew

[jumpingdoc]

Does any of you at CX based in the US uses jumpseat privileges or some sort of interline discount tickets?
How is it working out since 9/11?
Able to jumpseat easy with CX ID badge?
How do you purchase interline tickets?
How much interline tickets cost?

Looking for possible commute ATL - JFK.

Thanks mates.

[LittleFokker]

The actual Jumpseating in the US is not longer approved, unless you work for that same air line.

Pilot can request a jumpseat ride in another carrier and if granted, you have to seat in the back. If the flight is full and the J/Ss are open, sorry you won't go anywhere. ahh in other to do that you airline needs to have a J/S agreement with your airline.

It will be extremly hard (since Sept) to allow a jumpseater from a carrier other than a US ones that operates under 121 or 135 FAA Regulations. (I think CX is 129 (but not sure))

Interline tickets have to be purchased with your air airline and is usually a 90% discount of the coach full fare (Y code) since full fares are usually the same in every carrier once you have your ticket let's said a DL from ATL-LAX you maybe able to used the same paper to go with AA if DL is full.

ID 90's have the lowest priority so before you are granted a seat another employee from that airline or even a jumpseater from a different US Airline will have priority over you.

This information is correct as best of my knowledge, I used to commute for several years until I got the ax in Jan like many other pilots in the US.

Hope this help a little enjoy the commute,

[jumpingdoc]

Good info.
I am aware of the new rules as far as the actual J/S use concerned. Not very good for the commuters.
I am not sure if the US based (USABasings) CX freighters do operate under 121 or 129? Do they have reciprocal agreement for J/S or ID 90 (interline agreement) with any US carrier?
Some carriers, if I recall correctly, do not have a list, but rather all 121 pilots welcome. (Southwest)???
Happy Trails!

[crazy_max]

HI Jump.

I am looking also at the possibilty of a job with CX in JFK.
The Jump Seat deal looks pretty bad, and the company will not give you ID 90's until you have passed a certain period.(I believe it is 6 months)
If I do get the job I will need to commute from MIA or FLL, and it is not looking good. The only manner that is looking positive is just paying for my tickets with a company like JetBlue. I would recomend you to do the same with Air Tran.
Let me know if you have any more ideas.

Bubye.

[middle]

Even before 9/11 you had to work for a US carrier to qualify for a jumpseat. One exception ( possibly more, but not the majors) was AWA.(for CX anyway). Of course if you get a good guy on a good day...
I know Blue Eagle will throw a hairy fit but you need fair warning.
IF, and I mean IF you join whilst the IFALPA ban is in place your name will go on the jumpseat protection list, and stay there....period. I.E. No jumpseat ever on a US carrier.

Blue Eagle.
If you think this information needs to be hidden...then so be it. But this isn't a threat, it's info that needs to be out there and is a straight answer to the question asked. I am not inferring that the questioner is joining against the ban. In fact being a N American I assume he/she isn't. To deny this information would be just plain wrong.

grovel grovel...

[BlueEagle]

OK Middle, grovel accepted, what you have posted is up to the wire but just on the safe side, not too specific in reference, no links or detail in depth etc. and no overt threat to 'out' an individual.

[6feetunder]

In other words, joining now would make the question and the thread moot.

[jumpingdoc]

Good information, just what I was looking for.
Middle, I thank you for the cautionary statement. It has a right place on this board, to inform the uninformed.
On the other hand in N. America, I would not be very concerned about the list issue. Although your grievance is IFALPA supported there is no legitimate list of any kind and I doubt that there is even an underground list that many US pilots care about or carry.
I hope this sad situation will end before my time comes to make a decision regarding employment with CX. Until then you have my full, dues paying ALPA pilot support.

[6feetunder]

OK Blue Eagle let's see if we can do this without being nuked.

jumpingdoc, there is a list but the rules of this forum prevent me from telling you where it is. Trust me there is a list, on the web and in my flight bag.

[DALPA Dude]

My buds all carry the reference document. Our friends in the Fragrant Harbor update us on a weekly basis on who our "friends" are. The document is referred to on a daily basis. Best not to ask as refusal often offends;)

49ers.
Keep the faith. Your friends in DALPA and USALPA are 100% behind you. We'll get you back in the seat real soon.



Why are the Brits so touchy about "lists" . It's a daily fact of life here. Knowing who the pond scum are is mandatory. Sorry if I've offended you Blue Eagle but you guys will have to face up to this before too long.

[BlueEagle]

DALPA Dude, what YOU will have to face up to is that, on PPRuNe, a privately owned BB, there is no reference to, links to or details of 'lists' allowed, by the owner of the board, Danny Fyne, as it is he and not you, any of your pals or indeed any other Tom, Dick or Harry who might be called upon to answer a libel hearing in court.

Even if Danny were only required to defend himself the costs alone could cause the board to be closed.

No idea what the libel laws in your part of the world are but in the UK they are very effective and widely used.

Viewing and posting on PPRuNe is entirely voluntary and if you don't like the rules then you are free to go elsewhere.
Due to their industrial situation and their AOA elections later this month feelings are running quite high at CX, some slack has therefore been cut. Please don't push it.

Finally, how come you didn't see the 'sticky' posting at the top of this forum concerning 'lists', I thought it was all explained there:rolleyes:

[shortly]

God I hate those lists, and I for one am pleased to see Blue Eagle to stand firm in this regard. I know of a number of nice guys whose names were wrongly posted on those things to their great pain and suffering. Just remember guys/gals those lists are often very innacurate so be careful.

[DALPA Dude]

Blue, I surely understand your concern. The reference document we all refer to, is in the public domain. I obviously aint gonna post the link here or I'll get busted. If the existence of the document deters someone from taking a position at cathay it's served a purpose. Middle has pointed to the existence of the document so I think we are all happy with the outcome.

Going to stealth on this subject.

[jumpingdoc]

Several years of commuting and offering J/S to commuters I have NEVER seen anyone pulling out a list or looked at any list myself. As a matter of fact the only denial of J/S was by an 83-85 CAL hire to a CALEX pilot who thought ALPA would be better for CAL / CALEX, versus remaining independent.
I know, there are people on both extremes of the Bell Curve. Considering that the legitimacy of HKALPA hiring ban is at least highly questionable (even according to their own members), I am surprised you would even consider carrying an illegitimate list which is not sanctioned, furthermore discouraged by the Union itself.
Interestingly, another DAL pilot (my best friend and advisor in this matter) has a completely different view from yours.
Hopefully the upcoming elections will resolve all these.
Keep in mind in other countries unions have much less power and teeth due to unfriendly labor laws and different morals and values of the work group.
If anyone thinks this hiring ban will get or help to get the 49ers jobs back, in China, may need a drug test.

[bkany]

Why do you worry about a SCAB list when all you got to do is look at the guy's date of hire?
No ALPA pilot worth his salt would allow a Cathay scab to commute to work on his jumpseat!
You guys are setting yourselves up for years of trouble.
Good luck to all the real Cathay pilots out there, I believe the vast majority of US pilots support your fight 100%.

[questions]

think again. i know of at least five alpa members who have sent in their resume's to cathay recently. sorry to dawn the TRUTH.

[shortly]

Bkany lets wind this crap up even more, what a windbag you must be. The real cathay pilots????? Only those who support this ridiculous ban are real nest pas? The odd times |I've needed a jump seat there hasn't been time to play out this charade, stop being a bully.

[yukan fucov]

bkany:

thanks for your support, however we have 'replacement workers' they are not considered SCABS by the AOA. (we do have our share of SCABS from Ansett NZ etc but you cannot tar them with the same brush)

once this fiasco is over we will need these, soon to be 200+ replacement workers, to support our union.

your passion/fanaticism is quite frightning.


yukan fucov:p

[shortly]

I keep reading how the wonderful pilots in the good old Us of A are totally committed to the ban. Even bkany said the 'majority'. I would like a pint of whatever you are drinking, ALL USA POSITIONS ARE FILLED, EVERY INTERVIEW IN THE STATES IS BUSTING AT THE SEAMS WITH APPLICANTS. These must all be from that minority group. Get real guys, the ban is a farce because it has been well publicised that the jobs of the 49ers were filled from within the AOA rank and file. Reducing the numbers in unions anywhere by non-admittance of those conjectured to be in violation of an, at the least, unreasonable ban is self defeating for unions in the long run. If I was senior CX management I would be treating all the newbies with care and attention, ensuring their happiness at CX - outside the union. These newbies will tell their friends etc, why join a union when the company looks after you so well? Then when the AOA -and other unions, are defunct the real management can come out of the loo and screw all of us to the wall.

[Cripple 7]

Shortly,

Can you tell us about the background of the US applicants? Military? Regionals? Main liners? Unemployed?

[jumpingdoc]

I only can tell one applicant's background; mine. Military, currently at the regionals.
Although I have contributed to the deterioration of this thread, I still wonder if there can be one thread that will not result in the heated discussion of the ban and ultimately in name calling.
As far as the SCAB calling concerned, idiots who use the label in this particular issue don't deserve any reply. If one of the "49ers" himself would use the term, I would actually understand, but would disagree. None of the new hires or the Captains who toke the fired pilots position by upgrades fit the term.
Funny, how some make the statement "the majority of US pilots", "the real CX pilots", "all of the pilots" and such. Where do these "scientific" studies are coming from?
The fact is that most of the US pilots I have talked to were not even familiar with the ban. If they were, they said they support the ban, but had no idea about the "49ers" or why and how the ban started. Only a very few read the one-sided article in the ALPA magazine, and none were familiar with dissenting view on the ban.
Not an exact study, but sure does not reflect the supporting opinion of "the majority".
Off my soap box.
Best of luck to the dismissed pilots. If I get hired at CX, I will do anything in my ability to contribute to their re-hiring, regardless of any black listing or crap talking.

[6feetunder]

Yeah right!

[Cpt. Underpants]

I, I, I, I, I...

No "I" in "team", bud. You're planning on batting for the wrong side.

Ex military, eh? A flyer? Not likely.

EVERY ex-military flyer (US) I have met is a man of honour and integrity. No exceptions.

You? No way.

[bkany]

I haven't met many scabs/"replacement workers" during the course of my career, but the ones I have met have always been eager to share their long, complicated, sad stories of how they really, technically, did nothing wrong. It's all a big misunderstanding. Some misinterpreted nuance in a letter from their MEC caused them to cross a picket line. Or some eloquente posting on PPRune convinced them to ignore an IFALPA hiring ban. They knowingly sell out their fellow pilots, then spend the rest of their careers denying it.

[jumpingdoc]

.

[Cpt. Underpants]

Another mental giant from the US of A. I really enjoy your argumentative skills, doc. Keep it up.

[PeterZee]

Oh bkany give it a rest. The same "long, complicated, sad stories of how they really, technically, did nothing wrong" are offered as explanation of why upgrades HAD to be accepted to replace the 49'ers....you know, the terrible anti-labour climate in HK..we just had to do it... they would have hired DE captains if we didn't....just following AOA orders....etc etc etc.

"They knowingly sell out their fellow pilots, then spend the rest of their careers denying it." How dramatic! I commend you on your flare for rhetoric. But sorry to have to introduce some grey into your world of black and white - some guys really just plain need the job..time to face realities of the current pilot labour market!

[pige]

Either way accept the consequences of your actions, whoever you are what ever you do. It's what you see when you look in the mirror that counts.

[SOLO]

The Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals added its voice to the increasingly sensitive arena of federal labor law and state law libel/defamation. The Eleventh Circuit, in Dunn v. Air Line Pilots Association, (11th Cir., Oct. 25, 1999), outlined the applicable analysis in evaluating allegations that one side used words, not as a legitimate tool, but as an unfair weapon in a labor dispute.

In Dunn, the pilot's union called a sympathy strike against Eastern Airlines in 1989. While most of Eastern's pilots refused to work, a substantial number crossed the picket line and flew during the strike. The pilot's union compiled a "scabs" list, a list of pilots who worked during the sympathy strike, and distributed 50,000 copies of the list after the strike ended. A group of airline pilots who flew during the strike sued the pilot's union alleging, among other causes of action, that the union libeled them when the union listed them as "scabs."

The United State Supreme Court held in Old Dominion Branch No. 496, Nat'l. Ass'n of Letter Carriers v. Austin (1974) that state libel and defamation law is partially preempted by federal labor law when the state libel/defamation claim is asserted in the context of a labor dispute. The rationale for the preemption rule is that labor policy "favors free speech, open communication and robust debate...."

The Dunn court recognized that the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed several questions about how the pre-emption rule in labor-defamation cases has changed the litigation landscape. Most importantly, the Court incorporated the actual malice test into labor libel analysis that was originally used in defamation cases involving public figures and issues of public concern and first adopted in New York Times v. Sullivan (1964). The Court also consistently expanded the type of labor activities included in the pre-emption doctrine. Currently, almost all organized labor or union activities fall within the labor preemption rule when evaluating state libel claims.

To prevail on a libel/defamation claim in a labor dispute, a plaintiff must show that the person or organization such as a union or company acted with actual malice. Actual malice means that one must have made the statement "with knowledge that it was false or with reckless disregard or whether it was false or not." The plaintiff also must make this showing by clear and convincing evidence.

In Dunn, the Court of Appeals held that labeling the pilots who crossed the picket line "scabs" was factually true (i.e., the pilots did cross the picket line to work). In addition, the court in Dunn found no evidence that the defendants subjectively believed that the pilots labeled "scabs" were not really "scabs." In the end, the Dunn court affirmed summary judgment for the union and dismissed the libel claim.

The Dunn case has repercussions for corporations that face ongoing labor issues and strong unions. The Dunn case, in the name of promoting free speech, gives both management and labor great latitude in advancing their causes directly and indirectly in labor negotiations. However, often the issue for corporations and management is how to stop, or at least minimize, the unfair use of strong language and allegations of corporate misconduct that often typify labor activities during strikes or periods of labor conflict. The Dunn case limits the ability of a company to use state libel claims to reign in overly aggressive and vocal labor organizations. The clear message of Dunn is that federal labor preemption in the area of libel law is alive and well in the Eleventh Circuit.

[BlueEagle]

Precedent for the USA, perhaps, but not, of course, for anywhere else.

All previous warnings about "lists" on this BB still apply.

BlueEagle - Moderator.

[middle]

BLue E. The lists that have been referred to in the past are ALL on PUBLIC WEBSITES in the PUBLIC DOMAIN. This is not secret squirrel stuff . How on earth can a mention of or a link to a public website leave you open to a libel law suit??? People have a right to know, don't they?

Just asking.

questions
There is no ban on sending your resume or taking the interview. In fact it's encouraged. Lots of ALPA guys on the list in the AOA's office who've interviewed and waiting for the ban to lift.

[BlueEagle]

Middle, may be so, but Danny does not want them here on HIS website. All you are saying is that, so far, (excluding the EAL case), no one mentioned on such lists has been to court but that does not automatically make such lists legal. PPRuNe does not have funds to cater for even the possibility of a court case so the BB policy is to avoid even the slightest chance of one.

By all means feel free to access these public websites you refer to if you need the information, just don't use PPRuNe to try and spread it.

[jumpingdoc]

To those it applies.

Obviously, you don't have the intelligence to see that I am disengaging from your dumbas* innuendos. If your opinion was important to me I would have titled the thread accordingly.
You may want to take into consideration that trying to intimidate the wrong person with your ignorant, lopsided opinions may achieve the opposite effect.

[shortly]

Good old Us of A, don't you love their legal system. Man murders his wife and lover hires top attorneys - gets off, taken on in a civil suit is found guilty and heavily penalised. Battered wife in Texas murders husband while he sleeps after husband starts on daughter, she is poor, court appointed attorneys lose her case she is sentenced to death and no appeals upheld she is murdered by the 'system', Governor who turned down final appeal is a Bush of course. Woman sues Maccas because coffee is hot and wins lmao, group actions pending against fast food manufacturers by great big fat people, lol. If I was a yank I wouldn't ever skite about my legal system, undoubtedly the best that money can buy - if you have money that is.

[crazy_max]

Hey Jump..

Good thing your original question got answered......
What the hell is wrong with you guys? Just answer the friking question.....Can it be that hard?

[Lewis]

Uunwanted
****ty
A$$hole

[jumpingdoc]

Congratulation, Lewis, you rose to your best. I am sure your fellow country men are proud of you and your opinions.

[Eric Zoolander]

In Dunn, the Court of Appeals held that labeling the pilots who crossed the picket line "scabs" was factually true (i.e., the pilots did cross the picket line to work).


Picket Line, where is the picket line at CX ... hey has the AOA MEC even polled the members on support for a strike vote? Hmmm


Oh that's right - I'm supposed to strike for them ... stay unemployed ... support the Ban so some Anti-Union pilot can take the job ... because management will lock them out if they strike.

This of coarse is the right of management even in the democratic North America.

You have the right to deny your services and if you do they have the right to ban you from the property.:confused

Zoolander 3% Body Fat 1% Brain Activity