Atlas/AABO
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: South of Disorder
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Polax52 and fr8puppy remind me of people who buy things on sale because the flyer in the carpark says "Sale! Huge Discounts!!"
A review of the facts; which appear inconsequential as they only cloud your alternative reality clearly indicate you that Mr. Nitty's comments are indeed factual. The agreement was originally signed by the previous MEC Chairman and put out as a part of the first agreement which failed. The second attempt, under Bourne's tenure also contained the document and was unchanged because the NMB would not allow the Atlas group to change that part of the agreement. What did change, and is part of the factual record, was the Polar MEC Chairman Fell's notification that he intended to have his crews operate Atlas aircraft should Atlas strike. Again, record admitted to by Mr. Fell that we in the public domain shake our heads at. Such honourable men he commanded.
Ah yes and Mr. Rilly has returned to your fold from his lofty perch at FedEx to contribute his bile. Proving yet again that the smartest swimmer does not always get to the egg first.
I'll ask the question again that none have answered. You appear supremely confident of your legal outcomes. Bearing that in mind, do the Polar crewmembers have the collective courage of conviction to refuse to join their new union? Shall you sue your management, or will you be meek and accept what now appears to be the inevitable merger of your two groups to save your arse's and jobs?
A review of the facts; which appear inconsequential as they only cloud your alternative reality clearly indicate you that Mr. Nitty's comments are indeed factual. The agreement was originally signed by the previous MEC Chairman and put out as a part of the first agreement which failed. The second attempt, under Bourne's tenure also contained the document and was unchanged because the NMB would not allow the Atlas group to change that part of the agreement. What did change, and is part of the factual record, was the Polar MEC Chairman Fell's notification that he intended to have his crews operate Atlas aircraft should Atlas strike. Again, record admitted to by Mr. Fell that we in the public domain shake our heads at. Such honourable men he commanded.
Ah yes and Mr. Rilly has returned to your fold from his lofty perch at FedEx to contribute his bile. Proving yet again that the smartest swimmer does not always get to the egg first.
I'll ask the question again that none have answered. You appear supremely confident of your legal outcomes. Bearing that in mind, do the Polar crewmembers have the collective courage of conviction to refuse to join their new union? Shall you sue your management, or will you be meek and accept what now appears to be the inevitable merger of your two groups to save your arse's and jobs?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Navarre
Posts: 311
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Rob old buddy, I am not a racist
. My pick would have been Condi or Michael Steele (my write in)
. Now talk about socialist leaning administrations and then we might have a something to talk about.
The bottom line is that a company will always win the war. The battles are only won when the company lets you win. Example, how many contract violations has AAWH done to your group? What did you actually get done. From what I have read they are still doing it. They did plenty to ours, scope be damned. That is the point and contributers to this post who think just because there is a new regime in that cesspool we call Washington DC will change things is delusional. The companies control the pocketbook ergo, they win.
C.T.
. My pick would have been Condi or Michael Steele (my write in). Now talk about socialist leaning administrations and then we might have a something to talk about. The bottom line is that a company will always win the war. The battles are only won when the company lets you win. Example, how many contract violations has AAWH done to your group? What did you actually get done. From what I have read they are still doing it. They did plenty to ours, scope be damned. That is the point and contributers to this post who think just because there is a new regime in that cesspool we call Washington DC will change things is delusional. The companies control the pocketbook ergo, they win.
C.T.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Gods Country
Age: 72
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What Contracts??
Nitty... You keep saying they moved contracts to Polar. Which ones? You like to keep stating this, but never answer with any facts. The only ACMI contract I ever remember was LH, but that was before AAWH came along.
Granted, they did move some Atlas birds over to Polar, but they did this to replace the Pratt powered ones that they parked. We used them to fly POLAR stuff. I am sure AAWH also did it to pressure your group. But we did not take over any ACMI flying.
Granted, they did move some Atlas birds over to Polar, but they did this to replace the Pratt powered ones that they parked. We used them to fly POLAR stuff. I am sure AAWH also did it to pressure your group. But we did not take over any ACMI flying.
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: South of Disorder
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe what Mr. Nitty refers to is that back in 2002, Atlas approached a couple of operators here and asked them to crew and operate the aircraft to reduce the U.S. pilots. When they found no one to help with the scheme, they moved aircraft to the Polar subsidiary and hired a number of Tower crews for those aircraft.
It appears based on public documents, that their union knew all along that the aircraft in qustion were dry leased and could be returned at any time, minus crews and that those jobs would not be part of the merged carrier. They apparently never conveyed to the individuals that they would not have job rights with the merged carrier.
It appears based on public documents, that their union knew all along that the aircraft in qustion were dry leased and could be returned at any time, minus crews and that those jobs would not be part of the merged carrier. They apparently never conveyed to the individuals that they would not have job rights with the merged carrier.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to me that one group here rarely lets facts get in the way of what they want to believe vs what is the truth. I think I have regularly provided documentation when others only provided their opinion.
I believe it was LH, AMC and those S.A. routes Atlas had that were quickly moved over to Polar to make a negotiation point to the Atlas membership at the time. Furloughing at Atlas after moving the A/C and flights to Polar and hiring off the street. Mostly Tower guys as IslamoradaFlyer stated.
It was also well known that Polar was going to be pretty small in the eyes of AAWW. Around 6 A/C in the end. That point was made numerous times to the Polar MEC before the A/C and flights were moved. That MEC chose to keep that to themselves while telling the membership that they own everything. Those jobs were short term to begin with and a short windfall for the Polar group choosing to ignore the facts behind it or just misinformed by their MEC. Maybe just a hope that your scope would retain that acquired flying and A/C at Polar.
Here is one document from your contract administrator at the time wrote to the Polar MEC at that time over some of the issue of Polar's expected ultimate size (IN PDF). Seems to have played out accurately somewhat considering it was made in 2001.
I believe it was LH, AMC and those S.A. routes Atlas had that were quickly moved over to Polar to make a negotiation point to the Atlas membership at the time. Furloughing at Atlas after moving the A/C and flights to Polar and hiring off the street. Mostly Tower guys as IslamoradaFlyer stated.
It was also well known that Polar was going to be pretty small in the eyes of AAWW. Around 6 A/C in the end. That point was made numerous times to the Polar MEC before the A/C and flights were moved. That MEC chose to keep that to themselves while telling the membership that they own everything. Those jobs were short term to begin with and a short windfall for the Polar group choosing to ignore the facts behind it or just misinformed by their MEC. Maybe just a hope that your scope would retain that acquired flying and A/C at Polar.
Here is one document from your contract administrator at the time wrote to the Polar MEC at that time over some of the issue of Polar's expected ultimate size (IN PDF). Seems to have played out accurately somewhat considering it was made in 2001.
Last edited by nitty-gritty; 21st Jan 2009 at 21:56.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Gods Country
Age: 72
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Routes
Quote:
"I believe it was LH, AMC and those S.A. routes Atlas had that were quickly moved over to Polar"
Nitty - Your beliefs are all incorrect.
LH - Looked back in my logbook. Polar was operating LH ACMI with PRATT powered classics before anything to do with AAWH.
AMC - Atlas never operated AMC due to foreign ownership until after Michael Chowdry's death. Polar was operating AMC long before Atlas thought of it. In fact, the shifting has been the other way around. Cato and company shifted almost all of Polar's AMC award to Atlas until Evergreen blew the whistle. Polar then has flown it's contractual 10%. The Atlas classics have had an AMC gold mine due to this shift.
S.A. - We have been over this before. Both Polar and Atlas had SA authorities. The DOT forced AAWH to give up one of them. Cato, of course, dropped Polar's. The SA customers became unhappy with Atlas' service and continued screw ups, and demanded that Polar operate this route, which we did until DHL. This fliying was not "shifted" either.
"I believe it was LH, AMC and those S.A. routes Atlas had that were quickly moved over to Polar"
Nitty - Your beliefs are all incorrect.
LH - Looked back in my logbook. Polar was operating LH ACMI with PRATT powered classics before anything to do with AAWH.
AMC - Atlas never operated AMC due to foreign ownership until after Michael Chowdry's death. Polar was operating AMC long before Atlas thought of it. In fact, the shifting has been the other way around. Cato and company shifted almost all of Polar's AMC award to Atlas until Evergreen blew the whistle. Polar then has flown it's contractual 10%. The Atlas classics have had an AMC gold mine due to this shift.
S.A. - We have been over this before. Both Polar and Atlas had SA authorities. The DOT forced AAWH to give up one of them. Cato, of course, dropped Polar's. The SA customers became unhappy with Atlas' service and continued screw ups, and demanded that Polar operate this route, which we did until DHL. This fliying was not "shifted" either.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Galt's Gulch
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nitty-----thank you for bringing this document to the forum. I think that it will enlighten all outside viewers as to what started the ongoing “Hatfield and McCoy” feud between Polar and Atlas crewmembers continues to this day.
It shows the root cause (starting in Dec 2001) of all the discord between Polar and Atlas crewmembers that has prevailed over the past 7-8 years. It provides an explanation as to why the Polar MEC took the course of action he did at that time to protect the QOL issues and RLA provisions that the Polaroids had already won in their existing contract.
Here are a few excerpts from the Dec 2001 document that you posted from Polar’s attorney to Polar’s MEC concerning merger protocol negotiations between Polar and Atlas:
[Ref: 4 Dec 2001 Letter from ALPA PAC 23 Attorney to Polar MEC]
“……Atlas Air has also suggested that the Polar Crewmembers agree to be covered by the new Atlas Air Agreement if, and when, there is a complete operational merger.
To that end, Atlas Air is inviting the Polar MEC to attend the final bargaining sessions with the Atlas MEC/Negotiating Committee for the purpose of monitoring the conclusion of the negotiations.
Although the Polar MEC would not be an official party to these negotiations, the Atlas Air negotiators would consider proposed changes to previously tentatively agreed to provisions in the Atlas Air Agreement.
Some of the issues that would be the focus of such discussions are maximum days of work for the month, reserve duty and number of days of extended duty.
The Atlas Air negotiators have given no assurances that they will modify any tentatively agreed to work rules in the Atlas Air Agreement…..” [Polar Quality of Life Issues already addressed and won in their contract].
Now comes the beauty of the proposed Atlas Air Negotiators’ protocol procedures----
“….In addition to the option of permitting Polar Air to engage in Section 6 negotiations with the Polar Air Crewmembers when the Polar Air Agreement becomes amendable, Atlas Holdings has the option of merging the two groups before these negotiations get started.
The Atlas Air negotiators have said that Atlas Holdings would invoke certain provisions of the Polar Air Scope provisions (such as the LPP provisions) to attempt to ensure that the Atlas Air Agreement would apply to the consolidated group.
If successful in this approach, the parties to the Polar Air Agreement may be removed from the jurisdiction of the NMB and, thus, denied the opportunity for permissible self-help under the Railway Labor Act.
Instead, the resulting combined Collective Bargaining Agreement would be determined through tri-party negotiations and/or binding arbitration….”
Can you imagine? Who in their right mind would agree to these protocols? Give up rights so hard won?
Remember, Atlas crewmembers had no contract and were still basically “at will” employees. Polar had a contract with solid scope and QOL provisions. To be asked by Atlas Air negotiators and Atlas Air mgt to rely on their best efforts to incorporate Polar scope/QOL issues----to be told you, Polar, will only monitor, and that if, we, Atlas negotiators and Atlas mgt, cannot agree, then you, Polar will agree that some 3rd party or arbitrator will decide what your QOL/work rules will be.
Obviously, the Polar MEC "puked," negotiation/merger talks failed, eventually leading to a Polar strike in 2005, which further inflamed Polar/Atlas crewmember relations, hence, 7-8 years of continual bickering and finger pointing between the two groups.
Again, Nitty, thank you for posting this letter.
It shows the root cause (starting in Dec 2001) of all the discord between Polar and Atlas crewmembers that has prevailed over the past 7-8 years. It provides an explanation as to why the Polar MEC took the course of action he did at that time to protect the QOL issues and RLA provisions that the Polaroids had already won in their existing contract.
Here are a few excerpts from the Dec 2001 document that you posted from Polar’s attorney to Polar’s MEC concerning merger protocol negotiations between Polar and Atlas:
[Ref: 4 Dec 2001 Letter from ALPA PAC 23 Attorney to Polar MEC]
“……Atlas Air has also suggested that the Polar Crewmembers agree to be covered by the new Atlas Air Agreement if, and when, there is a complete operational merger.
To that end, Atlas Air is inviting the Polar MEC to attend the final bargaining sessions with the Atlas MEC/Negotiating Committee for the purpose of monitoring the conclusion of the negotiations.
Although the Polar MEC would not be an official party to these negotiations, the Atlas Air negotiators would consider proposed changes to previously tentatively agreed to provisions in the Atlas Air Agreement.
Some of the issues that would be the focus of such discussions are maximum days of work for the month, reserve duty and number of days of extended duty.
The Atlas Air negotiators have given no assurances that they will modify any tentatively agreed to work rules in the Atlas Air Agreement…..” [Polar Quality of Life Issues already addressed and won in their contract].
Now comes the beauty of the proposed Atlas Air Negotiators’ protocol procedures----
“….In addition to the option of permitting Polar Air to engage in Section 6 negotiations with the Polar Air Crewmembers when the Polar Air Agreement becomes amendable, Atlas Holdings has the option of merging the two groups before these negotiations get started.
The Atlas Air negotiators have said that Atlas Holdings would invoke certain provisions of the Polar Air Scope provisions (such as the LPP provisions) to attempt to ensure that the Atlas Air Agreement would apply to the consolidated group.
If successful in this approach, the parties to the Polar Air Agreement may be removed from the jurisdiction of the NMB and, thus, denied the opportunity for permissible self-help under the Railway Labor Act.
Instead, the resulting combined Collective Bargaining Agreement would be determined through tri-party negotiations and/or binding arbitration….”
Can you imagine? Who in their right mind would agree to these protocols? Give up rights so hard won?
Remember, Atlas crewmembers had no contract and were still basically “at will” employees. Polar had a contract with solid scope and QOL provisions. To be asked by Atlas Air negotiators and Atlas Air mgt to rely on their best efforts to incorporate Polar scope/QOL issues----to be told you, Polar, will only monitor, and that if, we, Atlas negotiators and Atlas mgt, cannot agree, then you, Polar will agree that some 3rd party or arbitrator will decide what your QOL/work rules will be.
Obviously, the Polar MEC "puked," negotiation/merger talks failed, eventually leading to a Polar strike in 2005, which further inflamed Polar/Atlas crewmember relations, hence, 7-8 years of continual bickering and finger pointing between the two groups.
Again, Nitty, thank you for posting this letter.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: US
Posts: 222
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
AMC - Atlas never operated AMC due to foreign ownership until after Michael Chowdry's death. Polar was operating AMC long before Atlas thought of it. In fact, the shifting has been the other way around. Cato and company shifted almost all of Polar's AMC award to Atlas until Evergreen blew the whistle. Polar then has flown it's contractual 10%. The Atlas classics have had an AMC gold mine due to this shift.
S.A. - We have been over this before. Both Polar and Atlas had SA authorities. The DOT forced AAWH to give up one of them. Cato, of course, dropped Polar's.
The SA customers became unhappy with Atlas' service and continued screw ups, and demanded that Polar operate this route, which we did until DHL. This fliying was not "shifted" either.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Gods Country
Age: 72
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks
Whale -
Thanks for the response and confirming my assertions that no flying was "shifted". Are you stating that Chowdry was a US citizen?
Nitty - Also thanks for the publishing the letter. Everything that Bobb Henderson has always said suddenly becomes true in one document. As John has skillfully illustrated, AAWH's and Atlas Air's intentions and actions toward Polar were neither honorable nor professional.
Also note that the "merger" was always refered to as a "Complete Operational Merger". This was plan "B". It protected the Polar route structure by merging both carriers onto the Polar certificate. Most Polar crews had no problem with this plan to combine all operations. (Plan "A" was, of course, to leave the carriers seperate for "synergy" and now the infamous plan "C" is the Cato dream of the crew leasing scam.)
Thanks for the response and confirming my assertions that no flying was "shifted". Are you stating that Chowdry was a US citizen?
Nitty - Also thanks for the publishing the letter. Everything that Bobb Henderson has always said suddenly becomes true in one document. As John has skillfully illustrated, AAWH's and Atlas Air's intentions and actions toward Polar were neither honorable nor professional.
Also note that the "merger" was always refered to as a "Complete Operational Merger". This was plan "B". It protected the Polar route structure by merging both carriers onto the Polar certificate. Most Polar crews had no problem with this plan to combine all operations. (Plan "A" was, of course, to leave the carriers seperate for "synergy" and now the infamous plan "C" is the Cato dream of the crew leasing scam.)
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Being a non citizen as a CEO has nothing to do with it, but they want you to believe it. We did try using the AABO Euro thing to slow management down when we were doing AMC, but we found out that didn't work according to the AMC regs. It takes only one US guy to sign for the signature service stuff. Nothing else prevents it. Good try guys. Didn't matter much since Polar got most of that flying along with the A/C transfers.
Contrary to some here, we were doing AMC and a large chunk went over to Polar with the shifted A/C from Atlas.
While my intent on publishing the old report from ALPA's Everet Barber to Bob Fell was to report to the masses here that Polar was never intended to be larger than about 6 A/C and 150 crewmembers. Instead it appears that the Polar group chooses to ignore that they were being used as leverage against the Atlas crews when they got those extra A/C and routes above that in the report for obvious negotiation reasons against the Atlas crews.
Never expected anything less from one group here judging from history. Where does Polar find themselves at now? Not to far off those originally proposed numbers in the letter. I do find it entertaining how a few have latched onto very conjectural thoughts to justifying their own purposes in the report despite how history has played itself out to the present.
Contrary to some here, we were doing AMC and a large chunk went over to Polar with the shifted A/C from Atlas.
While my intent on publishing the old report from ALPA's Everet Barber to Bob Fell was to report to the masses here that Polar was never intended to be larger than about 6 A/C and 150 crewmembers. Instead it appears that the Polar group chooses to ignore that they were being used as leverage against the Atlas crews when they got those extra A/C and routes above that in the report for obvious negotiation reasons against the Atlas crews.
Never expected anything less from one group here judging from history. Where does Polar find themselves at now? Not to far off those originally proposed numbers in the letter. I do find it entertaining how a few have latched onto very conjectural thoughts to justifying their own purposes in the report despite how history has played itself out to the present.
Last edited by nitty-gritty; 22nd Jan 2009 at 06:35.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: USA
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"I believe what Mr. Nitty refers to is that back in 2002, Atlas approached a couple of operators here and asked them to crew and operate the aircraft to reduce the U.S. pilots. When they found no one to help with the scheme, they moved aircraft to the Polar subsidiary and hired a number of Tower crews for those aircraft. "
Islamorada
A check of the DOH on the Polar seniority list, along with a knowledge of the indiviiduals reveals no personnel from Tower Air were hired after early 2001.
Islamorada
A check of the DOH on the Polar seniority list, along with a knowledge of the indiviiduals reveals no personnel from Tower Air were hired after early 2001.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: KLAX
Posts: 287
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A check of . . . indiviiduals reveals no personnel from Tower Air were hired after early 2001.
Nitty's document confirms (for me) discussion that I had in August of 2001 with Polar's then Director of Training, warning me to get over to the -400 quickly, as he had some knowledge that Polar was soon to be drastically downsized (to be expected on/about January 2002). The only un-forecasted complication for that prediction, was the upcoming 2002 AMC lift escalation for Gulf War II.
Last edited by L-38; 22nd Jan 2009 at 19:38. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Onto something more useful and constructive for the present collective group since a number of us already know the history.
Looks like they are moving to a more secure Atlas/Polar log on site for union business now instead of using the open http://www.atlasforteamsters.com site.
They are moving to the Local 1224 servers soon it looks like. Might be worth getting your particulars in for contact. You know, mailings and such. They have a link to them at http://www.atlasforteamsters.com.
Looks like they are moving to a more secure Atlas/Polar log on site for union business now instead of using the open http://www.atlasforteamsters.com site.
They are moving to the Local 1224 servers soon it looks like. Might be worth getting your particulars in for contact. You know, mailings and such. They have a link to them at http://www.atlasforteamsters.com.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Gods Country
Age: 72
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Huh?
Huh?
What does the citizenship of the CEO of a publically-traded US corporation have to do with CRAF?
Nothing.
Never said anything about the CEO. It is all about the citizenship of the major stockholder.
It is amazing how you guys modify the statement so that your response is correct.
What does the citizenship of the CEO of a publically-traded US corporation have to do with CRAF?
Nothing.
Never said anything about the CEO. It is all about the citizenship of the major stockholder.
It is amazing how you guys modify the statement so that your response is correct.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: California
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK--Google CRAF
"AMC - Atlas never operated AMC due to foreign ownership until after Michael Chowdry's death."
If you "Google" CRAF you will find a link to a DOD article dated Jan 2000 listing Atlas as a member of CRAF--Chowdrey died in 2001.
If you "Google" CRAF you will find a link to a DOD article dated Jan 2000 listing Atlas as a member of CRAF--Chowdrey died in 2001.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Planet Earth
Age: 65
Posts: 238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Best Angle
Huh?
What does the citizenship of the CEO of a publically-traded US corporation have to do with CRAF?
Never said anything about the CEO. It is all about the citizenship of the major stockholder.
It is amazing how you guys modify the statement so that your response is correct.
Now, who was the major stockholder of Atlas that was a non citizen? If there was, I don't think Atlas could even hold a US air carrier certificate let alone worry about what your inferring. It requires a 51% U.S. ownership just to hold a U.S. air carrier certificate by law.
I covered the AMC part in the earlier post. It only requires one U.S. citizen for signature service. We already fought that battle and found out we were left in the cold.
It would be nice if one contingent would start working with the collective union instead of continuing to believe in the incorrect and self serving oratories of past leadership.
Last edited by nitty-gritty; 27th Jan 2009 at 02:58.