NJE calling back pilots?
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: around
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for your reply NB, I have just watched your videa and read your statement.
Can you see how it might seem divisive since you want to represent only a particular section of the crew, ie those on JS, so your interests are not necessarily for everyone, but for those on JS.
I just dont understand how you can put forward a mantra that you want to represent those who have suffered the most, how about put another way, JS guys were actually pretty lucky, because it was that or being made redundant, as we have been frequently told, no other company offered this kind of deal.
Dont get me wrong, I dont blame you or anyone on JS, we all had choices to make regarding our jobs, so can you see the irony in wanting to be part of a process which is set up and run by those who caused your 'suffering' as you called it.
When did you have the chance to vote for the union board?
A. There will be yearly elections, more frequent than Out. 7 candidates- 6 positions, hardly an election?
Oh dear, the outreach scheme must have you very worried if you resort to cheap shots like that
A. Your manifesto seems to offer only an interest in JS people, so again, your motives are, to protect them at any cost?
Ensure that everyone has a voice. Not just those who elected themselves
A. How can you be our voice if we will not know how representative of us you are because vote numbers will not be published.
And no one knows you either. At least those standing had to put their case forward and take their chances in public. They will not be appointed by divine right, holy writ or just by having been around the longest.
A. 6 out of 7 might aswell be appointed by divine right.
SEA is by no means perfect, but I have more faith in it it than Out.
Can you see how it might seem divisive since you want to represent only a particular section of the crew, ie those on JS, so your interests are not necessarily for everyone, but for those on JS.
I just dont understand how you can put forward a mantra that you want to represent those who have suffered the most, how about put another way, JS guys were actually pretty lucky, because it was that or being made redundant, as we have been frequently told, no other company offered this kind of deal.
Dont get me wrong, I dont blame you or anyone on JS, we all had choices to make regarding our jobs, so can you see the irony in wanting to be part of a process which is set up and run by those who caused your 'suffering' as you called it.
When did you have the chance to vote for the union board?
A. There will be yearly elections, more frequent than Out. 7 candidates- 6 positions, hardly an election?
Oh dear, the outreach scheme must have you very worried if you resort to cheap shots like that
A. Your manifesto seems to offer only an interest in JS people, so again, your motives are, to protect them at any cost?
Ensure that everyone has a voice. Not just those who elected themselves
A. How can you be our voice if we will not know how representative of us you are because vote numbers will not be published.
And no one knows you either. At least those standing had to put their case forward and take their chances in public. They will not be appointed by divine right, holy writ or just by having been around the longest.
A. 6 out of 7 might aswell be appointed by divine right.
SEA is by no means perfect, but I have more faith in it it than Out.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Manchester,uk
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your manifesto seems to offer only an interest in JS people, so again, your motives are, to protect them at any cost?
Can you see how it might seem divisive since you want to represent only a particular section of the crew, ie those on JS, so your interests are not necessarily for everyone, but for those on JS.
we all had choices to make regarding our jobs, so can you see the irony in wanting to be part of a process which is set up and run by those who caused your 'suffering' as you called it.
Any clarification from SS will be most welcome and I am certain the junior outreach members will be happy to amend their position in the light of a concrete assurance that SS will support those on voluntary options.
As long as SS give the impression that they are posing a threat to the voluntary options agreement on ringfencing, they will be treated as a threat by those directly affected. And rightly so.
6 out of 7 might as well be appointed by divine right.
I do not remember ever being asked to vote for the SS board. They just happened. If they put themselves up for election in the future then all to the good. Sadly it may be a bit late for many of the potential electors by then. Had the issue been put to a democratic ballot from the outset, then there would have been a lot less opposition. I certainly would have viewed SS in a more favourable light.
A. How can you be our voice if we will not know how representative of us you are because vote numbers will not be published.
SEA is by no means perfect, but I have more faith in it it than Out.
Fine by me, that is your choice and your right and I respect that. I have more faith in outreach for the reasons argued above. That is my right and I expect that to be respected in turn.
Last edited by northern boy; 29th Aug 2010 at 01:26.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: France
Age: 56
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't really want to criticize "outreach", but when I look at the list of nominees I am a bit skeptical about it being representative of the "base". Because that's what we are talking about right ? Representing the base.
2/3 of the ground staff nominees are either "senior consultant", "managers" or "team leaders" etc etc..... How come is that possible ? Why some more people did not apply ? The answer is I am afraid due to the fact that people down there are scared to death to speak up. MW personally called few pilots to push them to apply, I have to guess they did the same with the ground staff....
About the pilots reps.......sorry to say, and all charming people, that if you have been a little while in the company you have no surprise in reading who applied.
Out of the 7, 2 are in Richard Weeks team and perfectly know as company's soldiers. 1 is the head of the fuel project and if you ever meet him you will materialize what is ambition. 1 is an ex-AFM that is currently discussing a position as a SOF. Out of 7 you can already count on 4 super hyper company minded reps. hmmm......sorry but not good enough I am afraid.
And one last thing that can be at one stage a little issue to me. We are a trans-national company aren't we ? How many different nationalities and culture are present within Netjets ? Do you think that this is reflected within the nominees ? I don't think so. It might not be important for everybody but it is for me.
I wish good luck to the nominees in outreach. Courage they will need when they will be faced by the reality of having participated in this mockery.
2/3 of the ground staff nominees are either "senior consultant", "managers" or "team leaders" etc etc..... How come is that possible ? Why some more people did not apply ? The answer is I am afraid due to the fact that people down there are scared to death to speak up. MW personally called few pilots to push them to apply, I have to guess they did the same with the ground staff....
About the pilots reps.......sorry to say, and all charming people, that if you have been a little while in the company you have no surprise in reading who applied.
Out of the 7, 2 are in Richard Weeks team and perfectly know as company's soldiers. 1 is the head of the fuel project and if you ever meet him you will materialize what is ambition. 1 is an ex-AFM that is currently discussing a position as a SOF. Out of 7 you can already count on 4 super hyper company minded reps. hmmm......sorry but not good enough I am afraid.
And one last thing that can be at one stage a little issue to me. We are a trans-national company aren't we ? How many different nationalities and culture are present within Netjets ? Do you think that this is reflected within the nominees ? I don't think so. It might not be important for everybody but it is for me.
I wish good luck to the nominees in outreach. Courage they will need when they will be faced by the reality of having participated in this mockery.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Manchester,uk
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You and anyone else have every right to ask the questions and I will always give a reply.
The views expressed here, which would appear to be in support of ss and the silence from ss on this matter. Plus of course the company going on record in stating that such a move would lead to cut backs and the scaling down of expansion plans. Such a situation would bring the issue to centre stage. Whether the situation is engineered or not, those who are vulnerable have to address this. As I said, a clarification from SS would be welcome and I am perfectly willing to change my own views in the light of such evidence. In fact I would be very happy to do so. However whilst there is doubt over an issue that is such importance, I must assume the worst case until I have evidence to the contrary.
In one respect this is no different than the widely held and publicized view on the SS side that those who are standing have been directly approached by management to do so or are trying to "cut themselves a deal".
Certainly, but no one has been barred from standing and no one has been barred from voting. If only 100 people bother to vote then only 100 people will have their views represented. That is not the fault of Outreach.
How does encouraging people to engage in a democratic vote represent a bulldozing attitude?
Being told what to do by a body that saw no need to put itself up for election falls more into that category IMHO.
I'm not trying to scare anyone. I just want people to know what, in the lack of evidence to the contrary, would appear to be being suggested in their name. Also JS aside, there are other valid reasons why many people think that a union would be bad for NJE and their prospects. My own view is that those who most want a show of industrial muscle are those who are, by virtue of their position in the career list, the least likely to suffer the consequences.
If that is the case, and those are the rules then I shall have to abide by them. I would not be happy but that's life. As I have stated over and over again, my primary concern is that the promises made and the contract variations issued be honoured for the period that they are valid. After that time , well it's anybodies guess. I sincerely hope that no cuts will be required either now or in 3 years time. My other concern is that the application or potential threat of industrial action will make such cuts inevitable. I believe that there are others who share this view, and not only from the lower reaches of the career list.
This is obviously an area where we will disagree.
Thank you, and I respect your position. To misquote someone famous and long dead, "I may disagree with your views but I will fight to the death for your right to express them." I would hope that this is reciprocated.
Me too. I would hope that SS and Outreach have the same strategic aims despite a different tactical approach A successful company and a contented and secure workforce. If the differences can be debated in a respectful and civilized manner then so much the better. I am not looking or a fight, there are more important things to do. I will however, vigorously defend my position. Personal attacks on an individual's integrity and motives are not worthy of reply. Attack the message by all means, not the messenger.
As above, it is you again who is offering misinformation and actually it is you who is telling people that this is the view of Skyshare, perhaps you should stop publishing unsubstantiated facts? Please provide facts that this is the case and not your own personal speculation.
In one respect this is no different than the widely held and publicized view on the SS side that those who are standing have been directly approached by management to do so or are trying to "cut themselves a deal".
Yes, you are are correct, but what you fail to address from the previous poster is that the number of people who actually take part in the vote is also important and the company have said they will not publish that number.
Do you not agree that if only 100 people vote in something then it is hardly representative of 950 people and the question of why there has been such a poor turnout needs to be addressed, in this case because people dont believe in the programme or how it will be run.
Do you not agree that if only 100 people vote in something then it is hardly representative of 950 people and the question of why there has been such a poor turnout needs to be addressed, in this case because people dont believe in the programme or how it will be run.
Its that kind of bulldozing attitude which we have had for the last 6+ years and which Outreach was suppose to stop, well it seemsa live and healthy and now you are continuing it.
Being told what to do by a body that saw no need to put itself up for election falls more into that category IMHO.
What annoys me even more is that it would appear you are fighting your campaign almost on a scare-tactic effort
The JS time frame of 4 years is completed with no further redundancies and everyone is called back to full time, followed by an announcement that due to the company needing to re-structure itself more accurately to its level of flying, redundancies will be necessary and they will be done by the seniority method.
This is obviously an area where we will disagree.
I genuinely respect your right to stand and to have whatever opinion you so choose, and none of this is aimed at you in an aggressive or insulting way, however, I hope you also respect that since you are theoretically asking for my vote I think I have the right to question your views.
I dont want it to be a slagging match, more respectful debate.
Last edited by northern boy; 29th Aug 2010 at 14:34. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: here and now
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OUTREACH "NOMINEES" ARE Mr. SMITH's (matrix) ;-)
Why do we bother discussing with these people? Why engage in respectful comunication with those who have allowed themselves to be the ambassadors of a our collective dispowerment?
Leave them in total silence!
1) Outrage is and always was designed to destroy Skyshare
2) 7 nominees 6 places so any vote is a waste of time: we are stuck with these people for two years, any vote just strengthens managements grip
3) Skyshare has representatives from ALL sections of the company
4) As seen on the poll of 86 Employees (open management and outrage nominees) 89% voted Skyshare.
The argument that if we create Skyshare Union then Sokol will reduce the size of NetJets is the same one used in the USA. This is the moment to realize that we are facing a historic choice in our lives: -ceed to the bully or remain calm, resolved and stand our ground together. Skyshare has no leeway to make any demands on NetJets at present and will not be allowed to be seen to make any progress by NetJets who will make "generous" gestures to their own "Mr.Smith's who sit on the outrage commitee meetings.
The entire set up is an illusion forced into place using fear. Any decisions about downsizing have already been made: - all the managment need now is a way to present it to BH shareholders that focuses the blame on a Union. Circumstances "beyond our control", management "victim" of nasty left wing organisation representing "greedy" employees attempting to "steal" shareholder value etc etc.
Do you really want to be part of the illusion?
Leave them in total silence!
1) Outrage is and always was designed to destroy Skyshare
2) 7 nominees 6 places so any vote is a waste of time: we are stuck with these people for two years, any vote just strengthens managements grip
3) Skyshare has representatives from ALL sections of the company
4) As seen on the poll of 86 Employees (open management and outrage nominees) 89% voted Skyshare.
The argument that if we create Skyshare Union then Sokol will reduce the size of NetJets is the same one used in the USA. This is the moment to realize that we are facing a historic choice in our lives: -ceed to the bully or remain calm, resolved and stand our ground together. Skyshare has no leeway to make any demands on NetJets at present and will not be allowed to be seen to make any progress by NetJets who will make "generous" gestures to their own "Mr.Smith's who sit on the outrage commitee meetings.
The entire set up is an illusion forced into place using fear. Any decisions about downsizing have already been made: - all the managment need now is a way to present it to BH shareholders that focuses the blame on a Union. Circumstances "beyond our control", management "victim" of nasty left wing organisation representing "greedy" employees attempting to "steal" shareholder value etc etc.
Do you really want to be part of the illusion?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: europe
Age: 53
Posts: 161
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
top level management at Netjets in lisbon called 2 of the crew nominee to ask them put they name forward as only a cadet and a pilot with seniority above 900 only applied at the beginning.. and if you look at the representative of the other departments , they are most of them already team leader... so outreach is just a vehicule to be use by netjets like the working group before to validate what they want and said that it have been done with the approval of the employees representation..remember that they won t release the number of people who vote..a transparancy made in North Korea ..
the skyshare members (about 700 now) won t vote for any of those crew representative
about the ring fence its pretty simple, the company have budget it for 4 years so it will go on this way, then at the end at the JS either we will have demand for integrating again those 32 airplane planned for 2010 and everybody will keep his job or the 300 excess position will be put redundant...
the skyshare members (about 700 now) won t vote for any of those crew representative
about the ring fence its pretty simple, the company have budget it for 4 years so it will go on this way, then at the end at the JS either we will have demand for integrating again those 32 airplane planned for 2010 and everybody will keep his job or the 300 excess position will be put redundant...
Last edited by falconbis; 30th Aug 2010 at 10:52.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Manchester,uk
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't really want to criticize "outreach", but when I look at the list of nominees I am a bit skeptical about it being representative of the "base". Because that's what we are talking about right ? Representing the base
Just asking.
1 is the head of the fuel project and if you ever meet him you will materialize what is ambition.
Ambition is human nature. I have no doubt there is as much ambition to be found amongst SS members as there is among any group of people. Nothing wrong with it either.
top level management at Netjets in lisbon called 2 of the crew nominee to ask them put they name forward
as only a cadet and a pilot with seniority above 900 only applied at the beginning..
I thought the whole point of seniority was that everyone was equal and no one better than anyone else regardless of position in the list. Or are some considered more equal than others?
Human nature again. Awkward business isn't it?
the skyshare members (about 700 now) won t vote for any of those crew representative
Dogmatic opposition is less effective than pragmatic give and take. After all we all do the same job and want the same things.
about the ring fence its pretty simple, the company have budget it for 4 years so it will go on this way, then at the end at the JS either we will have demand for integrating again those 32 airplane planned for 2010 and everybody will keep his job or the 300 excess position will be put redundant...
Good luck. You may not choose to believe it but I do know where you are coming from. I have seen all of this before and I would like to think that history does not necessarily always repeat itself.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: at the whim of people I've never met
Age: 46
Posts: 607
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are no cadets currently standing - so unless one started but then withdrew before the candidates were announced, then this is another unfounded rumour.
PPRuNe Handmaiden
What is the makeup of the skyshare board in terms of nationalities and spread of employees represented?
The rest of the board of directors have representatives from France, UK, Scandinavia, Germany and the Netherlands.
On that board are captains and first officers.
I have seen all of this before...
We have seen the promises broken, we have seen unilateral changes to our signed and agreed contracts, we have seen written agreements changed without our knowledge or consent, we have seen the surveys and forums all before.
The only thing that got our conditions improved was the resignation rate during 2007.
NB I understand and appreciate your frustration. However, to try and attribute some blame to the pilots that are more senior seems misguided. We didn't cause the financial meltdown nor did we buy too many aircraft.
Believe it or not, the senior pilots tried to get other options put forward such as pay cuts so no one would be made redundant. It fell on deaf ears.
They (ie our directors, some who are still in position with no cuts at all) wanted pilots to leave the company. Originally, the cadets would not have been touched at all. Is that fair for the direct entry pilots such as yourself?
That's what was wanted before the pilots senior to you said no.
Many of us have been on working groups organised by the office. The agenda was usually already set by the office and that was the framework we could discuss factors affecting our T&Cs. (Note, I am not talking about pay, but things like leave, travel, hotels etc). There was very little if any flexibility and the directors/managers would steer it to the goal that they wanted.
It took a while to realise that we'd been manipulated.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: France
Age: 56
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You know what NB ? The best is that you save you energy for the meetings you are going to attend in Lisbon. You are either very naïve or have a personal interest in playing their game. I don't mean to attack the messenger, but in that case you have chosen to put yourself on the front line and have to accept the tough game. I sincerely hope for you that it won't take you too long to realize that you are just an instrument they are using. They are using you, and you play very well this game, to an end that is not the one you think it is. Can't blame you for that, experience will tell you.
Best of luck with this and I am sure you will enjoy reading all these posts in some months to come...
Best of luck with this and I am sure you will enjoy reading all these posts in some months to come...
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Manchester,uk
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately NB you have not been exposed to that side of NJ, through no fault of your own, but purely because I guess you havent been in the company as long as some of those who have seen this all before, be it with expensive company surveys, working groups, roadshows, town hall meetings, web-conferences, web broadcasts, promises of better communication by each CEO/COO since DM, etc, etc.
The admin board are French. Understandable as this is the formative year.
The rest of the board of directors have representatives from France, UK, Scandinavia, Germany and the Netherlands.
On that board are captains and first officers.
The rest of the board of directors have representatives from France, UK, Scandinavia, Germany and the Netherlands.
On that board are captains and first officers.
Why will it be any different this time?
We are now dealing with a different group of people to the ones who got us into this mess, at least at the top levels. I've been off since last November so I'm still catching up with the comings and goings in the office. Basically, we have to try. At the end of the day they run the company and we work for them. That is not to say that we should take any old cr*p that is launched in our direction and we are all entitled to decent working conditions and fair renumeration. However if you want to have everything your way and dictate terms then you should go off and start your own company. You take the risks and find the capital. Then you are entitled to call the shots. If you accept a salary then at least to some extent you have to dance to the tune of your employer.
To that end and particularly in the light of the events of the last couple of years I believe that co operation rather than confrontation is the way to go at least for the moment. If at the end of the day we are treated like puppets then it won't work. Nor will it deserve to. If the company are serious about a proper dialogue with the employees then they will realise this and will in turn, do their best to make it work. After all, their credibility is at stake. I understand that many think that the management only look to their next bonus and have no regard to the long term, there are plenty of examples of this in the business world, but unless or until they prove themselves to be of this mind We have to try
Holding the company to ransom from the outset and forcing a confrontation from day one will result in a hardening of attitudes and probably the loss of jobs, even if only to make a point. I do not think that such posturing is worth the job of anyone. Jaw jaw is better than war war until such time as there really is no other option. That time is not now, when the industry is struggling to get off its knees. Damaging the business will benefit no one and no responsible management will allow it to happen. There are certainly some amongst the crew who share this view and they deserve representation as well, whatever some posters may think.
Just to wrap up, I would like to say something about the idea that the nominees were ordered or enticed to stand with the promise of great things.
I cannot speak for the other nominees but seeing as most folk seem to know who I am I would like to state that I have had no such communication. As for doing myself a deal, I wish. I stand to gain nothing from this and in fact could loose everything. Judging by the tone of some postings I can expect a degree of hostility when I start flying again. I hope this will not be the case but if so, I am willing to put my money where my mouth is. I would not be standing if I did not believe it was the right thing to do. Just like the skyshare board members in fact. Anyhow the results are not in yet so I may have exposed myself to all of this for nothing. That is the risk you take when you stand for election.
Last edited by northern boy; 30th Aug 2010 at 19:52. Reason: spelling, grammar
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: France
Age: 56
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When I read this :
"Holding the company to ransom from the outset and forcing a confrontation from day one will result in a hardening of attitudes and probably the loss of jobs, even if only to make a point. I do not think that such posturing is worth the job of anyone. Jaw jaw is better than war war until such time as there really is no other option. That time is not now, when the industry is struggling to get off its knees. Damaging the business will benefit no one and no responsible management will allow it to happen. There are certainly some amongst the crew who share this view and they deserve representation as well, whatever some posters may think."
I say to myself that you are the perfect person for outreach and that EC has done a good job on you. He could have written it down himself !
I would just like to remind you, in case you forget this during your meetings to come, that while you were crossing the Atlantic in your previous company, we where enjoying a crappy "off shore" contract with a 6/4 roster and 14 days of holidays. The "on shore" contracts and the other improvements that have been implemented under Bill Kelly's regime have only lasted for a couple of years. Before that we have been working incredibly hard for not much.
For sure given your fleet you can't realize that. The knowledge of the past explains the reasons why all this is happening. So you make me feel very sad to see you coming along and giving lessons on "forcing a confrontation". You have no idea what so ever about the efforts made in the past by us because we believe in this company.
Where I believe you are right is to stand up for what you think is right.
"Holding the company to ransom from the outset and forcing a confrontation from day one will result in a hardening of attitudes and probably the loss of jobs, even if only to make a point. I do not think that such posturing is worth the job of anyone. Jaw jaw is better than war war until such time as there really is no other option. That time is not now, when the industry is struggling to get off its knees. Damaging the business will benefit no one and no responsible management will allow it to happen. There are certainly some amongst the crew who share this view and they deserve representation as well, whatever some posters may think."
I say to myself that you are the perfect person for outreach and that EC has done a good job on you. He could have written it down himself !
I would just like to remind you, in case you forget this during your meetings to come, that while you were crossing the Atlantic in your previous company, we where enjoying a crappy "off shore" contract with a 6/4 roster and 14 days of holidays. The "on shore" contracts and the other improvements that have been implemented under Bill Kelly's regime have only lasted for a couple of years. Before that we have been working incredibly hard for not much.
For sure given your fleet you can't realize that. The knowledge of the past explains the reasons why all this is happening. So you make me feel very sad to see you coming along and giving lessons on "forcing a confrontation". You have no idea what so ever about the efforts made in the past by us because we believe in this company.
Where I believe you are right is to stand up for what you think is right.
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Brighton
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NB
The names at the top in Lisbon may have changed, their game plan has not. They still take their orders from those who first sought to stymie your colleagues across the pond with union busting tactics.
Those same tactics were described to us by the Teamsters who outlined in detail what we could expect. Every step, every working group, every employee survey, every tame crewmember, every trick they described has been used in the sequence they predicted.
The threats, and make no mistake they are threats, that expansion plans and other things are in peril if a union comes into play are hollow. Why would the company refuse to grow because of a union? It makes no business or economic sense.
Management have NO intention of relinquishing their control over the workforce. None. Outreach is merely another tactic, another one of their layers of defence. Your approach is to give it a chance. Read reddo's post. We gave it a chance, several times. Just as you are tired of being made redundant we are tired of being lied to.
Most people are more than happy to negotiate and co-operate. Being threatened and dictated to (again) is not negotiation.
The names at the top in Lisbon may have changed, their game plan has not. They still take their orders from those who first sought to stymie your colleagues across the pond with union busting tactics.
Those same tactics were described to us by the Teamsters who outlined in detail what we could expect. Every step, every working group, every employee survey, every tame crewmember, every trick they described has been used in the sequence they predicted.
The threats, and make no mistake they are threats, that expansion plans and other things are in peril if a union comes into play are hollow. Why would the company refuse to grow because of a union? It makes no business or economic sense.
Management have NO intention of relinquishing their control over the workforce. None. Outreach is merely another tactic, another one of their layers of defence. Your approach is to give it a chance. Read reddo's post. We gave it a chance, several times. Just as you are tired of being made redundant we are tired of being lied to.
Most people are more than happy to negotiate and co-operate. Being threatened and dictated to (again) is not negotiation.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NB,
I'm on JS. Don't have an axe to grind and want the company to succeed so I can provide for my family. That's the bottom line.
****happens - you have a very combatative attitude. If you really think so little of the structure that is largely there to support you then are you sure you're in the right job? Connor doesn't tell me how to fly my jet - I'm not going to tell him how to make money. That doesn't make me his "Mr Smith".
I respect the right of ss to form as a union. However to gripe over minor reductions in T&Cs during the worst worldwide recession in a generation doesn't fill me with confidence that they're either getting priorities right or appreciating the financial **** we are in. Having to take a bus instead of a taxi to/from work would actually be pretty appealing to someone who has recently been made redundant.
Representing the almost limitless vareity of issues from a multi-national workforce with any parity is going to require a sense of perspective that, on reading the cover page of the ss website, appears (currently) to be missing.
It's interesting that I'm one of a significant number of crew who found out about SS only when NJE told me about them! Thanks for introducing yourself before claiming to represent me Mr President.
NB, right or wrong, you have the bottle to stand up and be counted. You'll get no anymosity from me on the line. I've given you a vote (for what it's worth), and I'll buy you 60% of a beer if our paths cross.
I'm on JS. Don't have an axe to grind and want the company to succeed so I can provide for my family. That's the bottom line.
****happens - you have a very combatative attitude. If you really think so little of the structure that is largely there to support you then are you sure you're in the right job? Connor doesn't tell me how to fly my jet - I'm not going to tell him how to make money. That doesn't make me his "Mr Smith".
I respect the right of ss to form as a union. However to gripe over minor reductions in T&Cs during the worst worldwide recession in a generation doesn't fill me with confidence that they're either getting priorities right or appreciating the financial **** we are in. Having to take a bus instead of a taxi to/from work would actually be pretty appealing to someone who has recently been made redundant.
Representing the almost limitless vareity of issues from a multi-national workforce with any parity is going to require a sense of perspective that, on reading the cover page of the ss website, appears (currently) to be missing.
It's interesting that I'm one of a significant number of crew who found out about SS only when NJE told me about them! Thanks for introducing yourself before claiming to represent me Mr President.
NB, right or wrong, you have the bottle to stand up and be counted. You'll get no anymosity from me on the line. I've given you a vote (for what it's worth), and I'll buy you 60% of a beer if our paths cross.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Broome
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi NB
I grow ever tired of listening to the unionist view of creating a panacea called Skyshare. It is doomed to confrontation and therefore will cause more trouble than it seeks to prevent. The only way to progress (IMO) is initially go with the company scheme in a positive manner, if that then fails, Skyshare may then have a justified existance.
The company has to face real change to exist. This will unfortunately involve some tough decisions.
Navoff
I grow ever tired of listening to the unionist view of creating a panacea called Skyshare. It is doomed to confrontation and therefore will cause more trouble than it seeks to prevent. The only way to progress (IMO) is initially go with the company scheme in a positive manner, if that then fails, Skyshare may then have a justified existance.
The company has to face real change to exist. This will unfortunately involve some tough decisions.
Navoff
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: here and now
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nominees consider demission now and join SEA: - get a real mandate
Given that just under 700 Aircrew are members of Skyshare, (the abreviation for Skyshare is not ss but SEA), we can assume that nominees to management's "outreach" are a very small minority.
There is no doubt that there will be very few voters and we must do all in our power to obtain the truth about how many Aircrew did vote. We already know that managment intend to keep this a secret, (like their salaries and bonuses). The same question must be asked: -what are you trying to hide?
There are always one or two who will inevitably take part in such an outrageous scam. I ask the others who may have felt that their participation would be in some way useful to their fellow colleagues to now review their decision to be nominees. The power in your hands is significant because if you demission now then managment misuse of a system designed for democacy will be weakened.
SEA Executives have worked for months behind the scenes to create a moderate representative body. They have exposed themselves and their careers to considerable risk to bring together all national Aircrew groups under one Association. This Association came, (undefended by Union status), and was given a premeditated public slap in the face: - in total disregard and disrespect for the 670 Aircrew who mandated and paid for the SEA delegations trip to Lisbon. The months of legwork, risk and the common desire of the vast majority of NetJets Aircrew is compromised by a handful of people whose only engagement has been to send an e mail saying they are ready to be a nominee and posting a message on Bom Dia: - no need even to be elected! Excuse me but I have nothing but contempt for this undemocratic process, this cheap trickery and those who are prepared to be ambassadors for it. It is classic divide and rule: the perfect example of having the slaves fight their masters battle for them.
SEA needs moderate voices and former nominees will (I am sure) be welcome to voice their opinions and to be heard. Join with your colleagues: - we are dedicated to the perenity of this company while maintaining our dignity as human beings.
There is no doubt that there will be very few voters and we must do all in our power to obtain the truth about how many Aircrew did vote. We already know that managment intend to keep this a secret, (like their salaries and bonuses). The same question must be asked: -what are you trying to hide?
There are always one or two who will inevitably take part in such an outrageous scam. I ask the others who may have felt that their participation would be in some way useful to their fellow colleagues to now review their decision to be nominees. The power in your hands is significant because if you demission now then managment misuse of a system designed for democacy will be weakened.
SEA Executives have worked for months behind the scenes to create a moderate representative body. They have exposed themselves and their careers to considerable risk to bring together all national Aircrew groups under one Association. This Association came, (undefended by Union status), and was given a premeditated public slap in the face: - in total disregard and disrespect for the 670 Aircrew who mandated and paid for the SEA delegations trip to Lisbon. The months of legwork, risk and the common desire of the vast majority of NetJets Aircrew is compromised by a handful of people whose only engagement has been to send an e mail saying they are ready to be a nominee and posting a message on Bom Dia: - no need even to be elected! Excuse me but I have nothing but contempt for this undemocratic process, this cheap trickery and those who are prepared to be ambassadors for it. It is classic divide and rule: the perfect example of having the slaves fight their masters battle for them.
SEA needs moderate voices and former nominees will (I am sure) be welcome to voice their opinions and to be heard. Join with your colleagues: - we are dedicated to the perenity of this company while maintaining our dignity as human beings.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Manchester,uk
Posts: 283
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The months of legwork, risk and the common desire of the vast majority of NetJets Aircrew is compromised by a handful of people whose only engagement has been to send an e mail saying they are ready to be a nominee and posting a message on Bom Dia: - no need even to be elected!
I'm sorry that some have had the temerity to have an independent view but there you go. They have as much right to be heard as anyone else. If that is such a threat to Skyshare then maybe you should be looking to your own guiding principles rather than lashing out in such a manner.
There are always one or two who will inevitably take part in such an outrageous scam.
no need even to be elected!
I have nothing but contempt for this undemocratic process, this cheap trickery and those who are prepared to be ambassadors for it.
Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.
It is interesting to consider that in wider society, "minorities" are protected in law for the good of society as a whole. After all many argue that minorities should not have any access to housing or health care because they have only been here for 5 minutes. Some would go further and verbally or physically attack minorities for being different. Sound familiar? However, society chooses to include minorities in public life and to ensure that they have a voice. Companies reflect the societies from which their members are drawn so why does this principle not apply equally as it does in the wider world? Would you walk down a street and smash the windows of any who are different from you? If you did you would be in trouble. So why should you (metaphorically) do the same here and expect to get away with it?
Tolerance is a virtue. Think about it.
Last edited by northern boy; 31st Aug 2010 at 19:28.
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: UK
Age: 55
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
South Coast - been in 4 years so haven't seen the bad days of DM - just the glorious excess of Bill K! As for the rock - you aren't that far off from the truth
Here's how I see it. The company is in the poo and any de-stabilising effect, from a "union" or otherwise is not going to help. It's almost irrelevant what crew think about management or vice versa as it's the effect any disruption, implied or not, may have on attracting new owners. That's the only thing that will have us back to work and t&c's re-stored and improved.
Someone had a moan about their contract promising free health insurance rather than paying 100euro. OK fair point, but neither did the contract mention having LOL insurance and I didn't see anybody protesting about that when it was introduced. 100euro is neglible pain to bear if the costs saved contribute to staving off compulsory redundancy. It's a recession! The bets are off and entire companies are folding. We are fortunate to have a fantastic job in a company with an element of financial flexibility. The company has to make money and attract business and, like it or not, it's management who are paid the big bucks to do it - within whatever boundaries uncle Warren allows. We are mearly assets and anyone who thinks they are doing the company a favour by working for them and taking a salary has delusions of grandeur.
I agree whole heartedly that we should have a voice, have rights and ideas to offer in how our company goes forward. But effectively picking a fight at a time when we are most vulnerable seems at odds with what I hope the majority of us want. Adopting such an openly hostile attitude (****happens - that's you) from some claiming to represent Skyshare is one of the reasons I'm not willing to committ to it. I understand there is resentment at the way the approach to the company was received, but might also suggest that the timing of such a challenge to the progress the NEW heirarchy is trying to make is less than ideal.
I'm not going to fall out with colleagues who are nominees or those who are directors of Skyshare. But I would urge everybody to think long and hard about what is actually required to get us back on our feet - if the company doesn't recover under EC, then wether or not we have a union may be an irrelevant issue.
Back to my rock.
Here's how I see it. The company is in the poo and any de-stabilising effect, from a "union" or otherwise is not going to help. It's almost irrelevant what crew think about management or vice versa as it's the effect any disruption, implied or not, may have on attracting new owners. That's the only thing that will have us back to work and t&c's re-stored and improved.
Someone had a moan about their contract promising free health insurance rather than paying 100euro. OK fair point, but neither did the contract mention having LOL insurance and I didn't see anybody protesting about that when it was introduced. 100euro is neglible pain to bear if the costs saved contribute to staving off compulsory redundancy. It's a recession! The bets are off and entire companies are folding. We are fortunate to have a fantastic job in a company with an element of financial flexibility. The company has to make money and attract business and, like it or not, it's management who are paid the big bucks to do it - within whatever boundaries uncle Warren allows. We are mearly assets and anyone who thinks they are doing the company a favour by working for them and taking a salary has delusions of grandeur.
I agree whole heartedly that we should have a voice, have rights and ideas to offer in how our company goes forward. But effectively picking a fight at a time when we are most vulnerable seems at odds with what I hope the majority of us want. Adopting such an openly hostile attitude (****happens - that's you) from some claiming to represent Skyshare is one of the reasons I'm not willing to committ to it. I understand there is resentment at the way the approach to the company was received, but might also suggest that the timing of such a challenge to the progress the NEW heirarchy is trying to make is less than ideal.
I'm not going to fall out with colleagues who are nominees or those who are directors of Skyshare. But I would urge everybody to think long and hard about what is actually required to get us back on our feet - if the company doesn't recover under EC, then wether or not we have a union may be an irrelevant issue.
Back to my rock.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Far away from LA
Posts: 1,032
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NB,
You are blind, and i am sorry for you, truly.
There is no point discussing with you on this particular matter, you pledge to defend the poors and the orphans, you will have to live with their tears and sorrow.
It is a shame that it always take 3 years for any individual to remove it's rose tinted glasses ( whatever the company); and that new comers do not use what is the essence of our job : EXPERIENCE.
you cannot live long enough to make all the mistakes, this is why you have to learn from the others, apparently your 15 years of experience and sour grapes crossing the ATL and copiloting at 60% a G550 left some unfinished taste in your mouth.
You can believe or not what was written by my colleagues in the above posts, but everything is true and correct. You are now part of a scheme that will let people down BIG time, and you will be responsible for it.
You do want to protect your colleagues, let's all the flight line that has some independance to withdraw from this, and ask for a true representation; because, actually, who need outreach for aircrew since we have SEA ? Election can be held at any time to run for the board, and representatives from all quadrants are there. Why reinventing the wheel ?
So my question is : Would you stand up with this idea ? Or what is the difference ? ( do not say strike, because SEA has no right nor power to do so)
I leave you with your ego tortured mind, and hope that you will sleep nicely with the blood bath that YOU are acknowledging.
You are blind, and i am sorry for you, truly.
There is no point discussing with you on this particular matter, you pledge to defend the poors and the orphans, you will have to live with their tears and sorrow.
It is a shame that it always take 3 years for any individual to remove it's rose tinted glasses ( whatever the company); and that new comers do not use what is the essence of our job : EXPERIENCE.
you cannot live long enough to make all the mistakes, this is why you have to learn from the others, apparently your 15 years of experience and sour grapes crossing the ATL and copiloting at 60% a G550 left some unfinished taste in your mouth.
You can believe or not what was written by my colleagues in the above posts, but everything is true and correct. You are now part of a scheme that will let people down BIG time, and you will be responsible for it.
You do want to protect your colleagues, let's all the flight line that has some independance to withdraw from this, and ask for a true representation; because, actually, who need outreach for aircrew since we have SEA ? Election can be held at any time to run for the board, and representatives from all quadrants are there. Why reinventing the wheel ?
So my question is : Would you stand up with this idea ? Or what is the difference ? ( do not say strike, because SEA has no right nor power to do so)
I leave you with your ego tortured mind, and hope that you will sleep nicely with the blood bath that YOU are acknowledging.