This thread and its predecessors have always baffled me. I joined Atlas not so long ago, working in Purchase (one of the reasons why I stopped moderating, became a conflict of interest). Wouldn't it be better if the hatchet could finally be buried? Just get on with making loadsamoney and burying the opposition? And getting more in our pockets in the process?

I remember the fighting about using an Atlas a/c for a Polar flight and vice-versa.... it still happens. And why not. Does PO simply not operate a flight because there is no a/c available that has PO painted on the side? Does Atlas not accept a lucrative charter because no suitably painted aircraft is free?
Do we ferry a GT -200 from the US to Europe when we could put a PO load on it and release the PO aircraft to do something else?

Am I making sense here? I know I make sense to myself :}

Does PO simply not operate a flight because there is no a/c available that has PO painted on the side? Does Atlas not accept a lucrative charter because no suitably painted aircraft is free?
Do we ferry a GT -200 from the US to Europe when we could put a PO load on it and release the PO aircraft to do something else?

Nobody has a problem with that arrangement. When it becomes morphed into a transfer of Polar flying to Atlas causing 60% of the Polar crews to end up in the unemployment line, why, people can become upset with that.

I really don't want to open old wounds, just wanted to get that off my chest :8

.With Polar's fleet so drastically cut that there will be no aircraft available, you have re-surfaced a sticky wicket here Mr. moderator. What's wrong with someone sitting in your chair while eating your breakfast? After all, they are hungry too . . . no need to answer, the arbitrator will speak next.

Quote:

---

morphed into a transfer of Polar flying . . .. 60% of the Polar crews . . end up in the unemployment line

---

Forgive me L-38 but I thought the arbitrator did speak and it is just a matter of what he will do about it. Am I wrong?

So it's OK to furlough Atlas crews as it was done in the past to Polar's favor and now forgotten about how Polar got those gains and expansion at Atlas crew expense, but not OK to do it to Polar crews?

Sounds like typical ALPA mentality, "I've got mine, pull up the rope."

good grief........here we go again......:ugh:

Should have kept my bloody mouth shut shouldn't I???

Ignore that it says Moderator next to my name, it hasn't been fixed yet. Burocracy takes its time....

A feeling shared by many of us from time to time.

This merger should have been done years ago. May a curse be on both the union "leadership" and the managment "leadership" that have not only let it fester, but played it like some kind of game.

What a joke . . .sometimes I think this board is built and ran by kindergartners. The my daddy is bigger than your daddy mentality. Let the SH$t go, man! Bunch of crybabies! Probably the same type that can't sit on a layover and talk about other things besides work. MOVE ON!

Sorry . . .figure if we're going to have kids here someone needs to step up and be the "dad" and say knock it off.

Now Nitty -- you're next: A lot of information here about the vote. BUT care to divuldge where your MEC and you decide to say that the Polar MEC was forced to sign some protocol aggreements when NOTHING was signed? My source is our MEC attorneys.

You need to take your blinders off...

First off your MEC does not have an attorney, the attorney works for ALPA not your MEC. The Attorney does not have to provide any information to you since they only have allegiance and a responsibility to ALPA the association, They are in place to protect ALPA not the Polar crews.

The representatives on the Polar MEC aren't exactly telling you the whole truth. They are correct they never signed anything...the protocols were forced on you by Capt. Prater and ALPA. Like it or not there are in fact protocols in place forced by ALPA the association and despite your MEC's best efforts to subvert the process.

In a few days ALPA will be posting the notes and resolution under the BOD link on the ALPA page at which time you can pull up all the references for the protocols which are now officially in place.

DBW

Yup did it have to be signed by their MEC? Almighty ALPA did it for them. And yet there is a move afoot among the Polar guys to vote to support ALPA??? WHY?

But the Polar MEC does have an attorney. Dan Katz who is an outside attorney paid for by Atlas Pilots ALPA dues, to support all the grievances which could result in many of the same Atlas pilot losing their jobs. Not really Polar's fault but certainly fodder for a "duty of fair representation" law suit against ALPA.

So now it's a pee contest. No blinders here. Nothing wrong with asking a question and getting an answer -- and I got one. Don't shoot the messenger when I'm only putting on paper what I read. The statement was made that the MEC signed something, I asked, they said no. End of story.

So if Teamsters comes in what happens to all of the grievances? Are they just washed away? I'm sure it's been answered but sure would like to hear it again. This Holden decision is a big one.

I believe it has been stated that the arbitrations and awards of days gone by will not be affected by the http://atlasforteamsters.com movement. It is on their web site.

Now, if we could only get the Polar contingent to honor the awards made by ALPA National on the various things in the past that favored the Atlas contingent. Judging from past Polar conversations, that is not likely. Just like who had what route authorities/aircraft and when.

Actually all current arbitration should have been nullified when a "single carrier" status was declared. Any arbitration award now has a chance of harming either group - or both. Kind of like filing a lawsuit against yourself.

BD,
The key is, the Polar MEC filed against Polar Air, so the collateral damage is not considered. If they had filed against the Atlas MEC, your statement might be correct.

Another consideration, is the need to make right past deeds by management. Just because the Atlas MEC put up with the furloughs out of order and other games, doesn't make the filings by the Polar MEC wrong. Misguided in some cases, but heck, it was already paid for, why not see what sticks.

That is my point. Since we are a single carrier is it still filed against PAC? Also, and unfortunately, the resolutions crafted by Robin and Bobb (and one assumes the attorney) would, if implemented by the arbitrator, harm the Atlas pilots greatly. So we have to ask, now that there are no Atlas or Polar pilots; now that we are a single carrier with a merged, but not yet implemented list; would the furloughs that result from an arbitrators award be borne just by the Atlas pilots or the whole list? Alternatively, if we are one combined single carrier status then why are any of the grievances even germane. Seems to me to be a waste of scarce resources.

And if you want to continue to delve into the past to make the Atlas management pay for their deeds then you need to go all the way back to the purchase of Polar. Using the Atlas pilots profit sharing to upstream the money to AAWWH to buy Polar. Furloughing at Atlas while transferring assets to Polar and hiring at Polar - which is why you even had the number of aircraft and Pilots that you did. This has all been hashed out here ad naseum, and I know everyone who might still read this thread is aware of the total history. Just know that no Atlas pilot will ever forget the history and the injustice done to us - not by management but by another MEC and supported by ALPA. We will of course forgive, and I think we are all willing to move forward.

Perhaps you all should do the same.

Quote:

---

Alternatively, if we are one combined single carrier status then why are any of the grievances even germane. Seems to me to be a waste of scarce resources

---

The many furloughed, street pounding Polaroid's, some many years more senior than those on the combined list that are working today, must be addressed.
Even if the "shoe was on the other foot", an out of seniority furlough issue must be resolved!

you are talking about the engineers and are comparing Apples to oranges. You are comparing the Polar PFEs to the Atlas/Polar FOs.

The Atlas PFEs that are working are for the most part a pretty senior group. Most have been here since the inception of Atlas - compare the Polar PFEs on the street with the Atlas PFEs working if you are going to make a statement like that. If a guy is not qualified to hold a front seat should he still be kept on the payroll? We all know that classics are going away. The FE job is going with them.

And I do believe the remaining 8 (Bobb says9) Polar PFEs were given some options that would have kept them employed until the merger took effect when they would then take their place on the arbitrated list. Is that not true?

The remaining 8/9 have now joined Polar's other furloughed FE's, and are now filling for unemployment. How they will factor in with the no bump / no flush clause of AAWH's combined FE list is yet to be determined (all were hired in July/ August/ September 1994).

The irony here, is that although now a furloughed Polar FE, I had actually operated Atlas's first after inaugural flight, when working for Tower Air back in February of 1993.