Polar/Atlas The Saga Continues
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 742
Because I do have faith that when the merger is done "most of us", indeed the vast majority of us, will fly together without any problems.
OK
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pago Pago
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JT - I urge you to send your comments directly to the negotiating committee.
Of course involuntary extension is a big issue! But you also have to give the company the flexibility to recover from Weather and Mx events without incurring huge costs. It is all part of negotiation.
Personally, I think you need to make it as expensive for them as you can if taking X days is for anything other than protecting the operation.
Conversly many many guys that you hear are out more than 4 days are out because they need the money. So how does the negotiating committee find a way to accomodate them and those that don't want X days used at all?.
There are also many who are out more than four days because they don't know the contract or are unwilling to hold the companies feet to the fire. The contarct says that you must be "in your base by 23:59 on the fourth X day." If you let them keep you out longer then it is your fault. Also the contract says that X days are to be used to protect the operation. If you let them take even one X day ten days in advance (which in NOT protecting the operation) then it is your fault. And if you let them do it once then they think they can do it all the time.
As I said before I average less than 3 X days PER YEAR. So from my experience, and from my knowledge from a project I worked on for the MEC, there is no one that has done 21 days a month for 36 months straight. There are a few guys who will whore themselve out and then complain about it to no end. They usually shut up when I ask them why they let the company take more than 4. And usually these are the guys who volunteer their entire months.
You keep harping on the X day usage - if you feel you are being abused unfairly then I urge you to contact the MEC or the scheduling committee. They can look into it and get you an actual count of your X days used and advise you on how to combat this - or at least help you to file a grievance.
Of course involuntary extension is a big issue! But you also have to give the company the flexibility to recover from Weather and Mx events without incurring huge costs. It is all part of negotiation.
Personally, I think you need to make it as expensive for them as you can if taking X days is for anything other than protecting the operation.
Conversly many many guys that you hear are out more than 4 days are out because they need the money. So how does the negotiating committee find a way to accomodate them and those that don't want X days used at all?.
There are also many who are out more than four days because they don't know the contract or are unwilling to hold the companies feet to the fire. The contarct says that you must be "in your base by 23:59 on the fourth X day." If you let them keep you out longer then it is your fault. Also the contract says that X days are to be used to protect the operation. If you let them take even one X day ten days in advance (which in NOT protecting the operation) then it is your fault. And if you let them do it once then they think they can do it all the time.
As I said before I average less than 3 X days PER YEAR. So from my experience, and from my knowledge from a project I worked on for the MEC, there is no one that has done 21 days a month for 36 months straight. There are a few guys who will whore themselve out and then complain about it to no end. They usually shut up when I ask them why they let the company take more than 4. And usually these are the guys who volunteer their entire months.
You keep harping on the X day usage - if you feel you are being abused unfairly then I urge you to contact the MEC or the scheduling committee. They can look into it and get you an actual count of your X days used and advise you on how to combat this - or at least help you to file a grievance.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Navarre
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wanting to stay out and having to stay out are two different things. If you want to stay out call the company and ask to stay out, I don't begrudge anyone for that. But to force you to stay out if just plain wrong. People bid according to their needs or wants. The Polar contract is far superior and limits the amount of days allowed to be extended. And when you are required to stay out the company is required to pay 2 hours plus guarantee the first day (6 hrs), 4 hours plus guarantee (8 hrs) the second day and 6 plus guarantee (10 hrs) for the following days, and 12 plus guarantee for anything above 3 days. So although the company can keep you out, it becomes very expensive for them to do so. It forces the company to schedule more efficiently, and is fair to the crew member is working beyond his normal schedule. On the other end, if a person volunteers then there should be no financial penalty to the company either. And although some may think I am not connected to Polar needs to look at the combined seniority list, I do have a say and sent this to the negotiating committee.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see the Polar MEC Chairman has done the same job as always of not making friends or allies among the industry brotherhood and the Atlas Chairman took notice of his last message.
The Atlas VARS is out and it looks like the new Atlas Chairman took strong exception to the last statements made by the Polar Chairman's monthly VARS message.
Atlas VARS:
Click Here for HTML Page
The Polar 08-25-08 VARS that started this:
In MP3 Audio 2.5 MB
On a slight change of subject, is the company move to put everyone up in ANC on the Polar side of the equation still happening?
The Atlas VARS is out and it looks like the new Atlas Chairman took strong exception to the last statements made by the Polar Chairman's monthly VARS message.
Atlas VARS:
Click Here for HTML Page
The Polar 08-25-08 VARS that started this:
In MP3 Audio 2.5 MB
On a slight change of subject, is the company move to put everyone up in ANC on the Polar side of the equation still happening?
Last edited by nitty-gritty; 2nd Sep 2008 at 05:43.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: KLAX
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Per Atlas MEC Vars 09-1-2008 - "The Atlas Air Crewmembers know you for what you are, a liar, with no professional credibility. Next time, just report the facts Bobb . . ."
Wow - Rare and super strong wording from Atlas labor leadership . . even if true . . where is Setzer's professionalism with that kind of verbiage?
Note - For legal protection, a wise college professor of law had once said - always use the preface "in my opinion" when publicly writing such a libelous declaration.
Wow - Rare and super strong wording from Atlas labor leadership . . even if true . . where is Setzer's professionalism with that kind of verbiage?
Note - For legal protection, a wise college professor of law had once said - always use the preface "in my opinion" when publicly writing such a libelous declaration.
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Pago Pago
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Note - For legal protection, a wise college professor of law had once said - always use the preface "in my opinion" when publicly writing such a libelous declaration.
The classic definition of Libel is: "a publication without justification or lawful excuse which is calculated to injure the reputation of another by exposing him to hatred, contempt or ridicule." (Parke, B. in Parmiter v. Coupland (1840) GM&W 105 at 108)
The two principal defenses to an action for libel are:
Truth/justification. The defendant will succeed if they can substantially justify or prove the truth of the "sting" of the offending statements. Close analysis of the defamatory statement will avoid launching an ill-considered lawsuit.
Fair Comment. This defense will succeed if it can be shown that the statement is comment on facts truly stated.
libel is easily defeated by the truth; so bring it on.
In fact if there is no action for libel then we will all know that what the truth is - and that Bobb knows his VARS is indefensible.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wouldn't confuse the Atlas Chairman calling the Polar Chairman a liar as unprofessional. I would just call it well overdue in the light of all the facts past and present, especially when the Polar Chairman is using his lies and insinuations to incite more hatred among the groups .... again. Think of it as "calling it as it is" or a wake up call to keep an incident happening somewhere down the road or in flight with the merged crewmember groups.
Dancing around the Polar Chairman's actions is just going to cost someone their job or worse in the future.
Guess I should add that the Atlas For Teamsters link since they have a message for 08-30-2008 and they will most probably be the next bargaining agent for the two combined companies. They have a text and flash audio link on the main page.
Dancing around the Polar Chairman's actions is just going to cost someone their job or worse in the future.
Guess I should add that the Atlas For Teamsters link since they have a message for 08-30-2008 and they will most probably be the next bargaining agent for the two combined companies. They have a text and flash audio link on the main page.
Last edited by nitty-gritty; 2nd Sep 2008 at 14:37.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nitty
I wouldn't confuse the Atlas Chairman calling the Polar Chairman a liar as unprofessional.
Maybe Henderson will issue a new VARS wherein he puts a hex on Setzer. That would at least be in keeping with his alleged unprofessionalism in light of the highly "professional" behavior of his counterpart at Atlas.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: KLAX
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unnecessary VAR's verbiage of mud only promotes more of the pot calling the kettle black, inclusive of another dizzy round of he said she said.
We don't need any of it - so let's move on and build an airline.
It is well known that as an aviator, the fired Polar Cpt was an excellent, safe and professional team player to fly with. Sadly, he seemed to habitually demonstrate an unusual penchant for tempting fate with management - Atlas, Polar, or not. . . As said before, and especially under such circumstances, you are not fired for the reasons that you are actually fired for.
We don't need any of it - so let's move on and build an airline.
It is well known that as an aviator, the fired Polar Cpt was an excellent, safe and professional team player to fly with. Sadly, he seemed to habitually demonstrate an unusual penchant for tempting fate with management - Atlas, Polar, or not. . . As said before, and especially under such circumstances, you are not fired for the reasons that you are actually fired for.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Circle those wagons boys. Looks like the truth has hit a sore spot...again within the Polar council. I know it's tough to face, but you will survive.
This is not the first time the Polar Chairman has lied as you all are well aware of. It's just the first time the Atlas Chairman has decided to say enough is enough of the B.S. the Polar Chairman has been spewing to incite further hatred. Going through an Article VIII against the Polar Chairman only resulted in the approval by the ALPA discipline board that the Polar Chairman has a free license to lie on his VAR's saying it's his personal opinion under their verdict despite what the ALPA bylaws say. I'll have to dig that back out. I still have it in pdf someplace.
So judging from your responses, It's OK to be a liar (the Polar Chairman) but not OK to call the liar out on his lies if you are the Atlas Chairman? Guess that says it all about who and what kind of people we are dealing with here.
This is not the first time the Polar Chairman has lied as you all are well aware of. It's just the first time the Atlas Chairman has decided to say enough is enough of the B.S. the Polar Chairman has been spewing to incite further hatred. Going through an Article VIII against the Polar Chairman only resulted in the approval by the ALPA discipline board that the Polar Chairman has a free license to lie on his VAR's saying it's his personal opinion under their verdict despite what the ALPA bylaws say. I'll have to dig that back out. I still have it in pdf someplace.
So judging from your responses, It's OK to be a liar (the Polar Chairman) but not OK to call the liar out on his lies if you are the Atlas Chairman? Guess that says it all about who and what kind of people we are dealing with here.
Last edited by nitty-gritty; 3rd Sep 2008 at 02:24.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: USA
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Nitty
It's just the first time the Atlas Chairman has decided to say enough is enough of the B.S. the Polar Chairman has been spewing to incite further hatred.
Only someone with a truly anti-Polar agenda would take that Polar VARS as something worth flinging invective over... Seeing something that isn't there, I'd say. "Your" chairman got himself worked into a froth over nothing, and you have fallen for it hook, line and sinker. You know, what you accuse "Polaroids" of doing with their own chairman.
Do you ever tire of seeing an anti-Atlas spin to EVERYTHING that comes from the Polar side? I, for one (and probably not just ONE), have gotten quite tired of your own "POLAR BAD POLAR BAD POLAR BAD" rhetoric. How you don't recognize that YOU are worse than anything from Henderson is a complete, total, baffling, comical mystery.
I'd love to think that the JNC will get everything ironed out and we can all just go on with our lives as one big, not-quite-happy-but-at-least-relatively-content family... But then I wonder how many of "YOU" are out there, just waiting to blame something else on Polar. Your posts are almost uniformly unfriendly and riddled with the "hatred" you plonk on the Polar chairman's head... Again, never seeing any fault whatsoever from "your side". This really should be "our side" (increasingly so, to be sure), but I guess if you are consistently seeing Polar as the enemy, there really will never be peace... In any combined operation you'll have your "Oh, this guy was on the Polar side so he's brainwashed" attitude on full display and you'll be quite the treat to work with. I can't wait.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That's pretty rich.
Your Polar Chairman lies and incites hate not just once, but throughout his terms (there is a library of it) and the true culprit for pointing it out is little old me. Not that he has been caught a number of times doing this or that the Polar membership has always sided with him despite the overwhelming facts. A membership that never once attempted recalling him for his actions which indicate that a majority of the polar council don't disagree with his tactics or actions as unethical as they may be. I'm guessing that is what is encouraging the Chairman to continue it.
Oh yea, I'm the one to blame here. I put those words in the polar chairman's mouth to say on his VARS in the past and present. Culminating over the years into the hostility we have now reflected in the -200 captain getting fired thinking he was carrying out his Chairman's interests.
I think a number of you need to grow up quickly and do something for once, otherwise you are just part of the problem. Take charge for once. Many of you have taken the initiative by sending in your cards to stop this continuing favorites game at ALPA to decertify them and get rid of both MEC's by going Atlas for Teamsters. For that, I thank those. Once the Single Carrier Status is determined by the NMB, Atlas and Polar combined can vote in the new bargaining agent election.
To the rest, you are either very flaccid or backing the polar chairman's unethical actions. Flip a coin on that to see where you land.
If you think we should all "blow off" the polar chairman's continuing actions and statements to incite, then you should seriously re-evaluate what is ethical.
Your Polar Chairman lies and incites hate not just once, but throughout his terms (there is a library of it) and the true culprit for pointing it out is little old me. Not that he has been caught a number of times doing this or that the Polar membership has always sided with him despite the overwhelming facts. A membership that never once attempted recalling him for his actions which indicate that a majority of the polar council don't disagree with his tactics or actions as unethical as they may be. I'm guessing that is what is encouraging the Chairman to continue it.
Oh yea, I'm the one to blame here. I put those words in the polar chairman's mouth to say on his VARS in the past and present. Culminating over the years into the hostility we have now reflected in the -200 captain getting fired thinking he was carrying out his Chairman's interests.
I think a number of you need to grow up quickly and do something for once, otherwise you are just part of the problem. Take charge for once. Many of you have taken the initiative by sending in your cards to stop this continuing favorites game at ALPA to decertify them and get rid of both MEC's by going Atlas for Teamsters. For that, I thank those. Once the Single Carrier Status is determined by the NMB, Atlas and Polar combined can vote in the new bargaining agent election.
To the rest, you are either very flaccid or backing the polar chairman's unethical actions. Flip a coin on that to see where you land.
If you think we should all "blow off" the polar chairman's continuing actions and statements to incite, then you should seriously re-evaluate what is ethical.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: KLAX
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nitty - What's it going to take for you to spool down and re-light, as you seem hung. - Not hung in the pants, but hung on people that possibly have little remaining impact on your ultimate future.
Track to the waypoint ahead Nitty, not to that of where you have been.
Track to the waypoint ahead Nitty, not to that of where you have been.
Last edited by L-38; 5th Sep 2008 at 16:11.