Pilots who went on strike let go by PHI
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Addressing W1's comment: "It is a systematic procedure to ensure aircraft are covered – and in my opinion is geared more to ensuring those who want OT will get it?!?!"
It's not geared toward those who want OT if it's mandatory for all. There will always be pilots who can never get enough overtime. They love the money, hours, whatever. However, there will also be many pilots who value their off time – single and married, who will never want to work over. They are no less dedicated to the success of the company because they value their time off. When you are working long days and are not home at night, this off time is wanted and needed. A good balance of work and family (or social life) is healthy. One of the biggest motivations in working a 7/7, 14/14 type of schedule is the amount of time you have off. It’s one thing to volunteer for workover. It’s another to make it mandatory for someone who doesn't want it - especially with short notice, possibly ruining their vacation or home life.
Isn’t it better to have a valued employee who works hard for a full hitch and never does a workover than to not have him because he quit due to lack of time with his family? Wouldn’t it be better to address the reasons for the high turnover rate of the company that helps create the pilot shortage? If the overtime pay is good enough, won't there be plenty of volunteers? (as far as I can tell it’s working at Air Log).
It's not geared toward those who want OT if it's mandatory for all. There will always be pilots who can never get enough overtime. They love the money, hours, whatever. However, there will also be many pilots who value their off time – single and married, who will never want to work over. They are no less dedicated to the success of the company because they value their time off. When you are working long days and are not home at night, this off time is wanted and needed. A good balance of work and family (or social life) is healthy. One of the biggest motivations in working a 7/7, 14/14 type of schedule is the amount of time you have off. It’s one thing to volunteer for workover. It’s another to make it mandatory for someone who doesn't want it - especially with short notice, possibly ruining their vacation or home life.
Isn’t it better to have a valued employee who works hard for a full hitch and never does a workover than to not have him because he quit due to lack of time with his family? Wouldn’t it be better to address the reasons for the high turnover rate of the company that helps create the pilot shortage? If the overtime pay is good enough, won't there be plenty of volunteers? (as far as I can tell it’s working at Air Log).
Last edited by Rocker; 22nd Oct 2006 at 03:09.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Europe
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Isn’t it better to have a valued employee who works hard for a full hitch and never does a workover than to not have him because he quit due to lack of time with his family? Wouldn’t it be better to address the reasons for the high turnover rate of the company that helps create the pilot shortage? If the overtime pay is good enough, won't there be plenty of volunteers? (as far as I can tell it’s working at Air Log).
Better for the pilots, less good for the owners, because they have to invest more in their workforce. That money they want for themselves. Why pay more tomorrow, for something you get cheaper today? I guess you would only do that, if you had to...
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Guanaja, Bay Islands, Honduras
Age: 68
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RE: Workover. For the thirteen years I was at PHI, I worked-over very, very little...only under extreme duress when they begged. I hated it. I figured that I gave them enough of my time (over half my life!) and that was enough. The Admins and Lead Pilots would always ask, as if they were offering me something special, like a candy treat for a little kid. I'd say no.
The other pilots were, like, "Yeah, but think about the money you can make!" My response was always the same: We should make enough money in base salary so that we do not have to work-over just to earn decent money. Oh, and by the way? Money isn't everything. Not to me.
I never understood how so many married pilots could stand being away from their families for so long? And be proud of it! Babies said their first words, took their first steps while daddy was "on the rig" as my family used to put it. Water-heaters break, problems happen, accidents...stuff that you, Mr. Head-of-Household should be able to be there to handle. Instead, we spend half our lives away from home as a matter of course, and then spend more time away while working-over! Not putting out fires, fighting wars or saving lives or doing something truly useful for society, but shuttling roustabouts around the oil field. Oh yeah, that's important.
Further, I wondered why the company encouraged it? Oh wait...oh yeah...how silly of me. The Director of Human Resources was a soul-less prick who took the "human" out of his title.
Here in Honduras, the workers are used to spending six days at work. (In general, full-time Honduran employees work five and a half days and get paid for six. The labor laws are absolutely bizarre down here.) Astoundingly, my contract employees bristled when I cut them back to a five-day week. Their main complaint was that I was taking money out of their pockets (and we pay better than everyone else on this little island). On Fridays I tell them, "Go home. Have a good weekend! Be with your families...relax! Come back to work Monday rested." They look at me like I'm crazy. Maybe I am.
In America, now that helicopter pilot salaries are approaching what one might consider a decent, livable wage, they do not have to work-over simply to make ends meet. That, combined with the pilot shortage (whether PHI wants to call it that or not) means that fewer pilots are available to work-over. Ergo, PHI had to invoke the mandatory-workover clause. It was something I hated having to agree to include in the original contract, but was absolutely unavoidable.
It all goes into making "Helicopter Pilot" a profession we can all be proud of. We should make good money (we DESERVE that) *and* we should be able to maintain a nice quality of life without having to spend so much time at work. All I ask is: What the hell is wrong with that?
The other pilots were, like, "Yeah, but think about the money you can make!" My response was always the same: We should make enough money in base salary so that we do not have to work-over just to earn decent money. Oh, and by the way? Money isn't everything. Not to me.
I never understood how so many married pilots could stand being away from their families for so long? And be proud of it! Babies said their first words, took their first steps while daddy was "on the rig" as my family used to put it. Water-heaters break, problems happen, accidents...stuff that you, Mr. Head-of-Household should be able to be there to handle. Instead, we spend half our lives away from home as a matter of course, and then spend more time away while working-over! Not putting out fires, fighting wars or saving lives or doing something truly useful for society, but shuttling roustabouts around the oil field. Oh yeah, that's important.
Further, I wondered why the company encouraged it? Oh wait...oh yeah...how silly of me. The Director of Human Resources was a soul-less prick who took the "human" out of his title.
Here in Honduras, the workers are used to spending six days at work. (In general, full-time Honduran employees work five and a half days and get paid for six. The labor laws are absolutely bizarre down here.) Astoundingly, my contract employees bristled when I cut them back to a five-day week. Their main complaint was that I was taking money out of their pockets (and we pay better than everyone else on this little island). On Fridays I tell them, "Go home. Have a good weekend! Be with your families...relax! Come back to work Monday rested." They look at me like I'm crazy. Maybe I am.
In America, now that helicopter pilot salaries are approaching what one might consider a decent, livable wage, they do not have to work-over simply to make ends meet. That, combined with the pilot shortage (whether PHI wants to call it that or not) means that fewer pilots are available to work-over. Ergo, PHI had to invoke the mandatory-workover clause. It was something I hated having to agree to include in the original contract, but was absolutely unavoidable.
It all goes into making "Helicopter Pilot" a profession we can all be proud of. We should make good money (we DESERVE that) *and* we should be able to maintain a nice quality of life without having to spend so much time at work. All I ask is: What the hell is wrong with that?
js,
I'm not tired of the invective due to personal or "family" matters - but rather the effect it IS having on OUR industry. You will be surprised by the comments being made in response to the actions and statements of the union. This is not union country - period. The actions (i.e., name calling, threats, etc.) of a few have made a very lasting impression on those who look at this from the outside. And while PHI may not have been on the up & up at times - at least they kept the dirty laundry behind closed doors and not on the front page. It's your call - but I would rather discuss things on an even keel - our job may depend one day on how someone else perceived this issue.
Rocker,
As I've stated before - my only problem with mandatory OT item is the union should NOT make issue about a process that was voted on and ratified by the union membership (Article 24) - plain and simple. As for airdog, I don't know if they have the same type of process. High turnover rate?? Increase in aircraft - yes; pilots leaving - no.
Northsea - Rocker,
If you look at the majority of businesses you will see that they do not "fill all the seats" to maintain the required business. It puts a built in ability to make sutle changes as the demand flucuates - and there is usually someone to fill the slot (on OT) if needed. I've been told by several pilots that the mandatory OT was not a major issue until after Katrina and Rita. So if that is the case - and the contract provided it - then the company used the provision accordingly. Did it affect one group of pilots over another - yes. Is the same group spearheading the walkout - yes. Is the company right in pushing the limits of this contractual process - that depends on your view point - remember a majority of pilots did not walk!
I'm not tired of the invective due to personal or "family" matters - but rather the effect it IS having on OUR industry. You will be surprised by the comments being made in response to the actions and statements of the union. This is not union country - period. The actions (i.e., name calling, threats, etc.) of a few have made a very lasting impression on those who look at this from the outside. And while PHI may not have been on the up & up at times - at least they kept the dirty laundry behind closed doors and not on the front page. It's your call - but I would rather discuss things on an even keel - our job may depend one day on how someone else perceived this issue.
Rocker,
As I've stated before - my only problem with mandatory OT item is the union should NOT make issue about a process that was voted on and ratified by the union membership (Article 24) - plain and simple. As for airdog, I don't know if they have the same type of process. High turnover rate?? Increase in aircraft - yes; pilots leaving - no.
Northsea - Rocker,
If you look at the majority of businesses you will see that they do not "fill all the seats" to maintain the required business. It puts a built in ability to make sutle changes as the demand flucuates - and there is usually someone to fill the slot (on OT) if needed. I've been told by several pilots that the mandatory OT was not a major issue until after Katrina and Rita. So if that is the case - and the contract provided it - then the company used the provision accordingly. Did it affect one group of pilots over another - yes. Is the same group spearheading the walkout - yes. Is the company right in pushing the limits of this contractual process - that depends on your view point - remember a majority of pilots did not walk!
"Just a pilot"
Wrench1, that's an interesting turn of phrase- "my only problem with mandatory OT item is the union should NOT make issue about a process that was voted on and ratified by the union membership (Article 24) - plain and simple." Correct me, but doesn't that contract specify retroactive pay for the period in negotiation? My understanding is that PHI regards that as unreasonable and ruinous...
I see that as hugely significant, as PHI's the only party that stands to gain by extending the negotiations, especially if they use that very delay as reason to never conclude a contract.
But I digress, mandatory workover is unfair to anybody not involved in the staffing. It's not my fault- the line pilot- that managment over-committed, planned their staffing poorly, or whatever. To make me bear that burden is unfair. That the pilots involved were ever [Uasked[/U] to do so documents a failure of management. That the pilots involved accomodated management expresses better than words their dedication to PHI. Any recurrence of the event is wrong, and indefensible. It is reasonable that anybody so treated make their unhappiness known to their colleagues, and complain. PHI's lucky all the crews involved didn't quit immediately, leaving the company even shorter staff.
As to the GoM not being "union country", that's only technically true. Almost all the companies I contracted to "benchmarked" the offshore staff's compensation to CBAs they had elsewhere. The Locals representing the on-shore divisions were effectively negotiating contracts for the offshore hands, although the offshore hands recieved premium. The offshore operators that weren't in this situation had to compete in a market where unions were a force, even though formal membership might have been minimal.
I see that as hugely significant, as PHI's the only party that stands to gain by extending the negotiations, especially if they use that very delay as reason to never conclude a contract.
But I digress, mandatory workover is unfair to anybody not involved in the staffing. It's not my fault- the line pilot- that managment over-committed, planned their staffing poorly, or whatever. To make me bear that burden is unfair. That the pilots involved were ever [Uasked[/U] to do so documents a failure of management. That the pilots involved accomodated management expresses better than words their dedication to PHI. Any recurrence of the event is wrong, and indefensible. It is reasonable that anybody so treated make their unhappiness known to their colleagues, and complain. PHI's lucky all the crews involved didn't quit immediately, leaving the company even shorter staff.
As to the GoM not being "union country", that's only technically true. Almost all the companies I contracted to "benchmarked" the offshore staff's compensation to CBAs they had elsewhere. The Locals representing the on-shore divisions were effectively negotiating contracts for the offshore hands, although the offshore hands recieved premium. The offshore operators that weren't in this situation had to compete in a market where unions were a force, even though formal membership might have been minimal.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just received some bad news, PHI just lost one of their S76s today. The crew was rescue, and they had no passengers. We heard that it took three hours to find the crew, as the aircraft had sunk. The rumors I heard the crew was in the water for three hours, but someone else said they swam to an unmanned platform. I am hoping to get the real story. The Captain was recently promoted and was low time in the aircraft. The copilot was recently graduated from one of the area flight schools. I guess scabs do not need the same experience as the rest of us. Now the big question, did the low experience level of the crew, or the fatigue factor from mandatory overtime play a role in this accident? Time will tell.
Devil,
I checked the contract again but could you please send me a link to the retro pay question – I’m only human but I could not find it.
The company AND the union have everything gain by prolonging the negotiations – home court advantage. Why do you think transportation workers strike in the winter months – because they like the cold? - or maybe it’s for the effect on the public? I will be willing to bet there was more than one conversation on BOTH sides about the negotiations and hurricane season. So yes there reasons to delay – on both sides.
As best as I know the facts, mandatory overtime was minimal prior to Katrina and Rita. After this significant episode everything changed. Without over talking this issue I’ll sum it up for you – could PHI have done better – yes; could have the 108 done better – yes. Unfortunately, we got hit with the worst natural disaster in history, combined with an energy crisis, and a union contract negotiation. Point the finger where you want.
My reference to “union country” is based on where life is the union – just like where I grew up. So I will agree with you that there are union influences here – but that is it. FYI – in union country there is no open or agency shop – everybody is union. If you cross the line – you would be hard pressed to get even a burger at the local Mickey D’s.
Gomex,
I always thought there was honor among thieves – but I guess this does not include certain pilots. One of your own goes down and you are first in line to kick him?!?!?! While I am usually reserved with my comments …… take a look in the mirror ********, it could have been you!! Don’t try and spin this one until the facts are out, bubba – it may bite you.
W1
I checked the contract again but could you please send me a link to the retro pay question – I’m only human but I could not find it.
The company AND the union have everything gain by prolonging the negotiations – home court advantage. Why do you think transportation workers strike in the winter months – because they like the cold? - or maybe it’s for the effect on the public? I will be willing to bet there was more than one conversation on BOTH sides about the negotiations and hurricane season. So yes there reasons to delay – on both sides.
As best as I know the facts, mandatory overtime was minimal prior to Katrina and Rita. After this significant episode everything changed. Without over talking this issue I’ll sum it up for you – could PHI have done better – yes; could have the 108 done better – yes. Unfortunately, we got hit with the worst natural disaster in history, combined with an energy crisis, and a union contract negotiation. Point the finger where you want.
My reference to “union country” is based on where life is the union – just like where I grew up. So I will agree with you that there are union influences here – but that is it. FYI – in union country there is no open or agency shop – everybody is union. If you cross the line – you would be hard pressed to get even a burger at the local Mickey D’s.
Gomex,
I always thought there was honor among thieves – but I guess this does not include certain pilots. One of your own goes down and you are first in line to kick him?!?!?! While I am usually reserved with my comments …… take a look in the mirror ********, it could have been you!! Don’t try and spin this one until the facts are out, bubba – it may bite you.
W1
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: All The Places I Shouldnt Be
Posts: 1,009
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know I will probably get my head bitten off for this and excuse the ignorance but here goes anyway.
I have read many posts here about SCABS and why they are not welcome etc but how does the union expect a pilot who has a family, mortgage, car payments, school fees etc to pay to stay on strike and support the union line when they are getting further into a hole and cant afford to pay the bills. Isnt there a time when a pilot has to think about their own welfare and that of their family.
I know unions get their union dues from members all over the country for in some cases years without any strike action going on, so why cant they use those funds to supplement the income of the striking pilots while they are on strike. If they are not using those funds for things like this then what the heck are the union members paying those dues for.
You will have to pardon my ignorance on this as dont have a great understanding of unions and their benefits.
Ned
I have read many posts here about SCABS and why they are not welcome etc but how does the union expect a pilot who has a family, mortgage, car payments, school fees etc to pay to stay on strike and support the union line when they are getting further into a hole and cant afford to pay the bills. Isnt there a time when a pilot has to think about their own welfare and that of their family.
I know unions get their union dues from members all over the country for in some cases years without any strike action going on, so why cant they use those funds to supplement the income of the striking pilots while they are on strike. If they are not using those funds for things like this then what the heck are the union members paying those dues for.
You will have to pardon my ignorance on this as dont have a great understanding of unions and their benefits.
Ned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just received some bad news, PHI just lost one of their S76s today. The crew was rescue, and they had no passengers. We heard that it took three hours to find the crew, as the aircraft had sunk. The rumors I heard the crew was in the water for three hours, but someone else said they swam to an unmanned platform. I am hoping to get the real story. The Captain was recently promoted and was low time in the aircraft. The copilot was recently graduated from one of the area flight schools. I guess scabs do not need the same experience as the rest of us. Now the big question, did the low experience level of the crew, or the fatigue factor from mandatory overtime play a role in this accident? Time will tell.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: USA
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know for sure that they're not compromising minimum crew experiece requirements for -76 crew positions.
So I find it very doubtful that a "recent graduate from a local flight school" (and YES, you're trying to imply a 200hr robbie wonder) would be sitting left seat S-76.
So I find it very doubtful that a "recent graduate from a local flight school" (and YES, you're trying to imply a 200hr robbie wonder) would be sitting left seat S-76.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: One Mile High
Posts: 95
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know I will probably get my head bitten off for this and excuse the ignorance but here goes anyway.
I have read many posts here about SCABS and why they are not welcome etc but how does the union expect a pilot who has a family, mortgage, car payments, school fees etc to pay to stay on strike and support the union line when they are getting further into a hole and cant afford to pay the bills. Isnt there a time when a pilot has to think about their own welfare and that of their family.
I know unions get their union dues from members all over the country for in some cases years without any strike action going on, so why cant they use those funds to supplement the income of the striking pilots while they are on strike. If they are not using those funds for things like this then what the heck are the union members paying those dues for.
You will have to pardon my ignorance on this as dont have a great understanding of unions and their benefits.
Ned
I have read many posts here about SCABS and why they are not welcome etc but how does the union expect a pilot who has a family, mortgage, car payments, school fees etc to pay to stay on strike and support the union line when they are getting further into a hole and cant afford to pay the bills. Isnt there a time when a pilot has to think about their own welfare and that of their family.
I know unions get their union dues from members all over the country for in some cases years without any strike action going on, so why cant they use those funds to supplement the income of the striking pilots while they are on strike. If they are not using those funds for things like this then what the heck are the union members paying those dues for.
You will have to pardon my ignorance on this as dont have a great understanding of unions and their benefits.
Ned
First off, a strike is generally considered a measure of last resort. In our case it came after two and a half years of negotiations. During that time we were advised to start putting money away for the possibility. Most of us did that, but of course, the newly hired pilots had much less opportunity.
One of our most vehement complaints during that period was the company's abuse of mandatory workover, but ironically, it was that extra income that made a strike financially viable for many. In another bit of irony, the company cut final paychecks to all striking pilots which included payment for all unused vacation, another substantial sum of money.
As you suggest part of our union dues were put away for strike benefits. Additionally, these funds were augmented by contributions from the national union and from others with a vested interest in the outcome. The result was a strike benefit paid weekly that has been sufficient to keep most of us going without other assistance or having to return to work in order to make ends meet. A number of us have not needed the benefit checks, so we've been returning them to the local, to use for others who may be in a tight spot.
-Stan-
"Just a pilot"
-Wrench1- I don't have the contract to read, if you couldn't find the retro-pay clause, I'll eat crow.
I'm frankly puzzled by your claim that delaying a negotiated settlement benefits the Local. I'm a union member, and what I want is a contract, not drama- get it done. Delay clearly worked against the Local, strategically, in this case.
Those issues are argument. What's not- mandatory workover is wrong. It was exceptional in my 13 years in the GoM. I was astounded to learn it was an ongoing issue last summer. If you'd like a defining point that casts PHI management as exploitive and an organized pilot force beneficial, that's it.
Things happen, and pilots are people too, so on occasion somebody may not be able to report for duty as scheduled. Perhaps an organization doesn't have time to get somebody there tomorrow, so I could see an occasional and exceptional unscheduled emergency arising. Covering the seat the next duty day- that is one day of compulsory workover- is understandable. More than that, management's heads should roll, and changes made. Did that happen? Instead, there are excuses, as you offered.
An exagerated analogy- if your aircraft is AOG, you don't take a gun (dismissal) to get somebody else's aircraft...
The pilots don't do staffing. Shifting the burden of a management failure to the pilots is wrong- especially making one's continued livelihood contingent on accepting the assignment.
Yes, there is blame enough to go around in this occasion and the Local gets some, too- There should have been limiting language covering any forced assignment situation. But- PHI's guilt is exploitation. Their managent philosophy is clear. Was I you, I'd be hoping the union's efforts succeed.
I'm frankly puzzled by your claim that delaying a negotiated settlement benefits the Local. I'm a union member, and what I want is a contract, not drama- get it done. Delay clearly worked against the Local, strategically, in this case.
Those issues are argument. What's not- mandatory workover is wrong. It was exceptional in my 13 years in the GoM. I was astounded to learn it was an ongoing issue last summer. If you'd like a defining point that casts PHI management as exploitive and an organized pilot force beneficial, that's it.
Things happen, and pilots are people too, so on occasion somebody may not be able to report for duty as scheduled. Perhaps an organization doesn't have time to get somebody there tomorrow, so I could see an occasional and exceptional unscheduled emergency arising. Covering the seat the next duty day- that is one day of compulsory workover- is understandable. More than that, management's heads should roll, and changes made. Did that happen? Instead, there are excuses, as you offered.
An exagerated analogy- if your aircraft is AOG, you don't take a gun (dismissal) to get somebody else's aircraft...
The pilots don't do staffing. Shifting the burden of a management failure to the pilots is wrong- especially making one's continued livelihood contingent on accepting the assignment.
Yes, there is blame enough to go around in this occasion and the Local gets some, too- There should have been limiting language covering any forced assignment situation. But- PHI's guilt is exploitation. Their managent philosophy is clear. Was I you, I'd be hoping the union's efforts succeed.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Age: 54
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Devil 49, I agree wholeheartedly with you that the rampant use of mandatory workover reflects a failure of management to plan properly. Obviously we needed more pilots to do the job. I think though, that PHI tried very hard to hire as many people as possible but was somewhat hamstrung by the union's refusal to allow interim pay raises and COLA implementation -things that could have attracted more new employees. You have to believe that the company wants to reduce or eliminate mandatory workover as much as the pilots do. After all, it must cost them a fortune. What do you think of Carlin's 'workgroup' to study the workover problem? A step in the right direction or just a dog and pony?
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skiddriver and Hoss1
I did check out the Captain with a couple of PHI pilots, and I stand by my statememt. I did not mean that this captain was not qualified for the aircraft, but was less experience than the crew he replaced. I also check out the SIC with one of our pilots who went to school with him, and PHI promise him a S76 checkout when he left the school, and PHI honor that promise. I thought this was a rumor network, I am trying to get some information about this accident, as this affect me and all the pilots that actually flies in the GOM.
1. Why did it take 3 hours to find the crew. The company I work for installed flight tracking radios that give our GPS position every few minute, that should have narrow the search area.
2. What phase of flight did this accident take place;ie,takeoff, landing or cruise?
3. Was it a mechanical failure? This is one of the safest helicopter that we fly, it has an outstanding safety record. I would like know since I fly this model.
4. With the work schedule (Strike)that the PHI pilots are working I suspect fatigue and stress are a factor. I was relieved and happy when the crew were rescue,as I wish no one ill will. My company help search for this crew, and our pilots did not care that the crew cross the picket line, they were trying to help.
I did check out the Captain with a couple of PHI pilots, and I stand by my statememt. I did not mean that this captain was not qualified for the aircraft, but was less experience than the crew he replaced. I also check out the SIC with one of our pilots who went to school with him, and PHI promise him a S76 checkout when he left the school, and PHI honor that promise. I thought this was a rumor network, I am trying to get some information about this accident, as this affect me and all the pilots that actually flies in the GOM.
1. Why did it take 3 hours to find the crew. The company I work for installed flight tracking radios that give our GPS position every few minute, that should have narrow the search area.
2. What phase of flight did this accident take place;ie,takeoff, landing or cruise?
3. Was it a mechanical failure? This is one of the safest helicopter that we fly, it has an outstanding safety record. I would like know since I fly this model.
4. With the work schedule (Strike)that the PHI pilots are working I suspect fatigue and stress are a factor. I was relieved and happy when the crew were rescue,as I wish no one ill will. My company help search for this crew, and our pilots did not care that the crew cross the picket line, they were trying to help.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Age: 54
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gomex, PHI aircraft are fitted with Outerlink GPS tracking. Who knows why it took three hours to recover the crew. Who knows what the experience level of the crew is, or how many days they've been on hitch. It'll all come out in due course and I'm sure the results of the investigation will be shared with you. Yes, PPrune is a rumor (or rumour, to be precise) network, but that doesn't mean that armchair quarterbacking another crew's misfortune is any more productive. Especially not when you're trying to use it to further an argument about the relative merits of this strike. Your last comment about your pilots assisting in the search and not caring that the crew crossed the picket line is really priceless. What do you want for the union side, a medal? As human beings we are all morally obligated to help a fellow human in need. That should literally go without saying.
D49,
Contract: try these and let me know if you can find it:
http://www.local108pilots.org//oldsite/contract.pdf
if this won't open try the link below and hit the "resources" button at the top:
http://www.local108pilots.org/
Delay issue: imagine the additional pressure and effect of the labor negotiations if there was a Cat 3 in the Atlantic heading for the slot! Unfortunately, unless you belong to a small local union with no connections to the established unions, you are going to see and get the drama you mentioned. I don't think it was purely coincidental that self help and the strike happened at the peak month of the hurricane season?!?!?!?
OT: First, I've never denied the company was entirely correct in its excessive use of Article 24. But I don't think it was an "exploitation" of resources, but more of a huge supply and demand requirement. Remember, Katrina and Rita wiped out 40% of the GOM production and to get it back on line required 10X the personnel offshore. In my discussions with pilots the MAN OT didn't really hit home until AFTER the hurricanes.
EVERYBODY was looking for transportation offshore and 76, 412, and 92 drivers don't grow on trees. Was PHI 100% morally correct in there use of Art. 24 - NO; were they legally correct in its usage - yes. If my memory is correct I belive the airdog contract has specific verbiage that would have prevented this "abuse" of the contract article. There definitely is a good arguement on both sides for this one - what would you do if you owned the company???
Revo,
You are correct on the ability to hire new pilots during negotiations. I spoke to a number of new hires who showed up after self help. I agree some were here just for the money, but others had been waiting to see the (a) new pay scale. When PHI released the green book they saw and came down. They were just waiting for more info before making a decision. Thanks for your other comments also.
gomex,
If you want answers, act professional with respect and concern for your fellow aviator. Imply anything else during an incident or accident and you just as soon head back to the house, because you won't get it from me or probably anyone else here.
Contract: try these and let me know if you can find it:
http://www.local108pilots.org//oldsite/contract.pdf
if this won't open try the link below and hit the "resources" button at the top:
http://www.local108pilots.org/
Delay issue: imagine the additional pressure and effect of the labor negotiations if there was a Cat 3 in the Atlantic heading for the slot! Unfortunately, unless you belong to a small local union with no connections to the established unions, you are going to see and get the drama you mentioned. I don't think it was purely coincidental that self help and the strike happened at the peak month of the hurricane season?!?!?!?
OT: First, I've never denied the company was entirely correct in its excessive use of Article 24. But I don't think it was an "exploitation" of resources, but more of a huge supply and demand requirement. Remember, Katrina and Rita wiped out 40% of the GOM production and to get it back on line required 10X the personnel offshore. In my discussions with pilots the MAN OT didn't really hit home until AFTER the hurricanes.
EVERYBODY was looking for transportation offshore and 76, 412, and 92 drivers don't grow on trees. Was PHI 100% morally correct in there use of Art. 24 - NO; were they legally correct in its usage - yes. If my memory is correct I belive the airdog contract has specific verbiage that would have prevented this "abuse" of the contract article. There definitely is a good arguement on both sides for this one - what would you do if you owned the company???
Revo,
You are correct on the ability to hire new pilots during negotiations. I spoke to a number of new hires who showed up after self help. I agree some were here just for the money, but others had been waiting to see the (a) new pay scale. When PHI released the green book they saw and came down. They were just waiting for more info before making a decision. Thanks for your other comments also.
gomex,
If you want answers, act professional with respect and concern for your fellow aviator. Imply anything else during an incident or accident and you just as soon head back to the house, because you won't get it from me or probably anyone else here.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Hood River, Oregon, US
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PHI declines National Mediation Boards offer for talks
The following is a copy of PHI's CEO's memo to employees upon declining further negotiations with OPEIU #108:
MEMORANDUM
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
TO:
All PHI Employees
FROM:
Al A. Gonsoulin
DATE:
October 23, 2006
SUBJECT:
Company Response to National Mediation Board’s Offer to Discuss Resumption of Public Interest Conferences
As you’ve probably read, the National Mediation Board (NMB) recently sent both PHI and the union an offer to discuss resumption of “public interest conferences.” Additionally, over the past few days, I have personally received communications from the OPEIU International’s President, Mr. Michael Goodwin, and from Senator Edward (Ted) Kennedy, both generally urging PHI to meet with the OPEIU, with a view to reopening negotiations in order to ultimately reach agreement on a “fair and reasonable contract.”
We appreciate the interest of the NMB, and their invitation to discuss our current situation. We also acknowledge the recommendations by Messrs. Kennedy and Goodwin with respect to how we should resolve the dispute between PHI and the OPEIU.
However, we respectfully note that a fair and reasonable proposal was already submitted, in good faith, to the OPEIU on August 27. That proposal, and our request to have the union representatives take the offer to the pilots for a vote, was rejected. Subsequent to that Company offer, things have changed dramatically. For example, the OPEIU and its Local 108 have:
● Withheld the services of close to 200 pilots;
● Misrepresented to the media, our customers and the FAA, the Company’s ability to safely conduct its business;
● Picketed and issued handbills to our customers and the public;
● Threatened PHI pilots who continued or returned to work with industry-wide “blackballing,” post-strike retribution, and “Death to Scabs” statements;
● Publicly insisting that no one will return until all do (i.e., the firing of all replacement workers);
● Accused us of violating federal and Louisiana law; and
● Publicly disavowed NONE of the above.
Based on these very recent adversarial actions of the OPEIU and statements made to its members and the press, the Company does not feel that the OPEIU has reliable intentions, in fact, to bargain in good faith or respectfully with PHI.
Consequently, under the current circumstances, the Company does not believe it is in the best interests of PHI or its employees to resume discussions with OPEIU at this time, and PHI’s attorneys have been instructed to so advise the NMB today.
I trust the good will and sincerely admire and appreciate the unselfish efforts our employees have consistently demonstrated throughout the strike. We are confident you will understand our decision to stay the course until such time as it is in the Company’s best interest to reconsider its position.
P.S.- Remember the “chicken with lips.” Best regards, Al Gonsoulin
Me thinks the fat lady has sung.
DT
MEMORANDUM
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
TO:
All PHI Employees
FROM:
Al A. Gonsoulin
DATE:
October 23, 2006
SUBJECT:
Company Response to National Mediation Board’s Offer to Discuss Resumption of Public Interest Conferences
As you’ve probably read, the National Mediation Board (NMB) recently sent both PHI and the union an offer to discuss resumption of “public interest conferences.” Additionally, over the past few days, I have personally received communications from the OPEIU International’s President, Mr. Michael Goodwin, and from Senator Edward (Ted) Kennedy, both generally urging PHI to meet with the OPEIU, with a view to reopening negotiations in order to ultimately reach agreement on a “fair and reasonable contract.”
We appreciate the interest of the NMB, and their invitation to discuss our current situation. We also acknowledge the recommendations by Messrs. Kennedy and Goodwin with respect to how we should resolve the dispute between PHI and the OPEIU.
However, we respectfully note that a fair and reasonable proposal was already submitted, in good faith, to the OPEIU on August 27. That proposal, and our request to have the union representatives take the offer to the pilots for a vote, was rejected. Subsequent to that Company offer, things have changed dramatically. For example, the OPEIU and its Local 108 have:
● Withheld the services of close to 200 pilots;
● Misrepresented to the media, our customers and the FAA, the Company’s ability to safely conduct its business;
● Picketed and issued handbills to our customers and the public;
● Threatened PHI pilots who continued or returned to work with industry-wide “blackballing,” post-strike retribution, and “Death to Scabs” statements;
● Publicly insisting that no one will return until all do (i.e., the firing of all replacement workers);
● Accused us of violating federal and Louisiana law; and
● Publicly disavowed NONE of the above.
Based on these very recent adversarial actions of the OPEIU and statements made to its members and the press, the Company does not feel that the OPEIU has reliable intentions, in fact, to bargain in good faith or respectfully with PHI.
Consequently, under the current circumstances, the Company does not believe it is in the best interests of PHI or its employees to resume discussions with OPEIU at this time, and PHI’s attorneys have been instructed to so advise the NMB today.
I trust the good will and sincerely admire and appreciate the unselfish efforts our employees have consistently demonstrated throughout the strike. We are confident you will understand our decision to stay the course until such time as it is in the Company’s best interest to reconsider its position.
P.S.- Remember the “chicken with lips.” Best regards, Al Gonsoulin
Me thinks the fat lady has sung.
DT
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Norway
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Subject: President Goodwin Issues Worldwide Press Release
For Immediate Release October 24, 2006
PHI Inc., the largest provider of helicopter service to oil and natural gas producers in the Gulf of Mexico, yesterday spurned requests from the National Mediation Board, Senator Edward Kennedy, and OPEIU President Michael Goodwin to resume negotiations in an effort to end a month-long walkout by striking helicopter pilots.
The union that represents more than 500 PHI pilots is represented by the Professional Helicopter Pilots Association, OPEIU Local 108, called its historic first nationwide strike of an organized helicopter pilot workforce on September 20, after over two years of fruitless talks with PHI. Along with a subsidiary, AirEvac Services, the company operates in more than 15 states and the Gulf of Mexico.
"This callous and arrogant rejection of meaningful, reasonable discussion, coming one day after the crash in the Gulf of Mexico of a Sikorsky S-76 helicopter flown by a strikebreaker, clearly illustrates that PHI is more interested in union busting than in reaching a fair and reasonable contract with its pilots," said Goodwin.
In recent weeks, PHI has also played fast and loose with its investors, said Goodwin, citing recent filings the company submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The filings contained incorrect and possibly fraudulent information designed to mislead investors about the financial impact the pilots' strike has had on the company, he said.
In a letter to the SEC last week, Goodwin stated that numerous assertions by PHI in three separate filings with the SEC were at odds with the true impact of the month-long strike.
"PHI is losing large amounts of money on a daily basis, and now an S-76," said Goodwin, who called for an SEC investigation into the company's questionable business practices. How much money the company is willing to lose for itself and its investors remains to be seen," he said.
"The company is painting a rosy picture which is false and deceiving its investors," said Goodwin. "At a minimum, PHI should be forced to correct its prior misstatements and give a full, accurate account of the financial impact of the strike, as is required by laws that protect workers, employers, the stock market and the entire business community."
In his letter to the SEC, Goodwin wrote that the company's boast that it was completing 80% of its oil and gas flights and 90% of its air medical flights through its subsidiary, AirEvac Services, which has 66 EMS bases in more than 15 states, was inaccurate, according to union records, media reports, eyewitness accounts and PHI customers. The unfortunate S-76 crash was one flight that wasn't completed.
For further information, and/or a copy of Goodwin's letter to the SEC,
please contact OPEIU President Michael Goodwin at 212-675-3210.
PHI Inc., the largest provider of helicopter service to oil and natural gas producers in the Gulf of Mexico, yesterday spurned requests from the National Mediation Board, Senator Edward Kennedy, and OPEIU President Michael Goodwin to resume negotiations in an effort to end a month-long walkout by striking helicopter pilots.
The union that represents more than 500 PHI pilots is represented by the Professional Helicopter Pilots Association, OPEIU Local 108, called its historic first nationwide strike of an organized helicopter pilot workforce on September 20, after over two years of fruitless talks with PHI. Along with a subsidiary, AirEvac Services, the company operates in more than 15 states and the Gulf of Mexico.
"This callous and arrogant rejection of meaningful, reasonable discussion, coming one day after the crash in the Gulf of Mexico of a Sikorsky S-76 helicopter flown by a strikebreaker, clearly illustrates that PHI is more interested in union busting than in reaching a fair and reasonable contract with its pilots," said Goodwin.
In recent weeks, PHI has also played fast and loose with its investors, said Goodwin, citing recent filings the company submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission. The filings contained incorrect and possibly fraudulent information designed to mislead investors about the financial impact the pilots' strike has had on the company, he said.
In a letter to the SEC last week, Goodwin stated that numerous assertions by PHI in three separate filings with the SEC were at odds with the true impact of the month-long strike.
"PHI is losing large amounts of money on a daily basis, and now an S-76," said Goodwin, who called for an SEC investigation into the company's questionable business practices. How much money the company is willing to lose for itself and its investors remains to be seen," he said.
"The company is painting a rosy picture which is false and deceiving its investors," said Goodwin. "At a minimum, PHI should be forced to correct its prior misstatements and give a full, accurate account of the financial impact of the strike, as is required by laws that protect workers, employers, the stock market and the entire business community."
In his letter to the SEC, Goodwin wrote that the company's boast that it was completing 80% of its oil and gas flights and 90% of its air medical flights through its subsidiary, AirEvac Services, which has 66 EMS bases in more than 15 states, was inaccurate, according to union records, media reports, eyewitness accounts and PHI customers. The unfortunate S-76 crash was one flight that wasn't completed.
For further information, and/or a copy of Goodwin's letter to the SEC,
please contact OPEIU President Michael Goodwin at 212-675-3210.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Norway
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OPEIU Sends Letter to Investors and Customers
Dateline: 24 October 2006
Dear Local 108 Pilots,
Below is text of a letter mailed to shareholders and customers today from President Goodwin. The OPEIU continues to use every means available to insist that PHI lives up to its obligations to bargain in good-faith with its pilots' union, while you continue to show your resolve and determination for a fair contract.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear Sir/Madame:
On Sunday, October 22, 2006, a PHI helicopter, approaching an oil platform in bad weather, got caught in a downdraft and crashed into the Gulf of Mexico. The two replacement pilots, one a new hire and the other with little recent experience flying in the Gulf, were able to swim to an unoccupied oil rig nearby, where they were eventually discovered by a search and rescue team. The helicopter is now at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.
Luckily, there were no passengers on board the aircraft at the time of the crash.
In a news release issued the next day, PHI had the audacity to dismiss this crash as a mere "incident," as if a helicopter slamming into the saltwater approximately 60 miles from the mainland is tantamount to pedestrians running into each other on a busy sidewalk. We are all thankful that we are not referring to a "tragedy."
The crash is now under investigation by two federal agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation and Safety Board.
On the same day PHI issued its press release about the "incident," members of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure wrote to the FAA to "express concern over the safety of helicopter operations in the Gulf of Mexico" in light of the strike at PHI. U.S. Representatives James L. Oberstar and John W. Olver urged the FAA to "closely monitor the situation at PHI."
But even before the crash, PHI's safety practices began drawing Congressional scrutiny. U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy sent what now appears to be a particularly prescient letter to PHI Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Al Gonsoulin, on October 20, 2006. According to Senator Kennedy, "serious safety concerns will develop if the company continues to operate without the striking workers."
We have been warning PHI investors and customers, the general public and the company itself of the inherent dangers of flying helicopters in the Gulf of Mexico since well before the strike began. Now that the company is using replacement pilots working extended on-duty time, and has narrowly averted a tragedy, common sense demands that the company reach an agreement with its highly qualified, highly skilled, experienced striking pilots.
Yet PHI refuses to negotiate with us, and has refused our most recent offer to bargain in good faith. In fact, Mr. Gonsoulin has immaturely stated that he will bargain with us "when chickens have lips."
Especially in light of this near-tragedy, it is time for Mr. Gonsoulin to move past such childishness and ensure the safety of his customers and employees. We ask that you contact Mr. Gonsoulin at 337-235-2452 (phone) or 337-232-6537 (fax) and demand that PHI reach a fair settlement with his pilots.
==========================================end.
Remember, only we can defeat ourselves. Stay together, stay strong and we will win the contract we are entitled to as professional pilots.
No one goes back to work until we all go back to work!!!
In unity,
Local 108 Executive Board
Dear Local 108 Pilots,
Below is text of a letter mailed to shareholders and customers today from President Goodwin. The OPEIU continues to use every means available to insist that PHI lives up to its obligations to bargain in good-faith with its pilots' union, while you continue to show your resolve and determination for a fair contract.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Dear Sir/Madame:
On Sunday, October 22, 2006, a PHI helicopter, approaching an oil platform in bad weather, got caught in a downdraft and crashed into the Gulf of Mexico. The two replacement pilots, one a new hire and the other with little recent experience flying in the Gulf, were able to swim to an unoccupied oil rig nearby, where they were eventually discovered by a search and rescue team. The helicopter is now at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico.
Luckily, there were no passengers on board the aircraft at the time of the crash.
In a news release issued the next day, PHI had the audacity to dismiss this crash as a mere "incident," as if a helicopter slamming into the saltwater approximately 60 miles from the mainland is tantamount to pedestrians running into each other on a busy sidewalk. We are all thankful that we are not referring to a "tragedy."
The crash is now under investigation by two federal agencies, the Federal Aviation Administration and the National Transportation and Safety Board.
On the same day PHI issued its press release about the "incident," members of the U.S. House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure wrote to the FAA to "express concern over the safety of helicopter operations in the Gulf of Mexico" in light of the strike at PHI. U.S. Representatives James L. Oberstar and John W. Olver urged the FAA to "closely monitor the situation at PHI."
But even before the crash, PHI's safety practices began drawing Congressional scrutiny. U.S. Senator Edward M. Kennedy sent what now appears to be a particularly prescient letter to PHI Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Al Gonsoulin, on October 20, 2006. According to Senator Kennedy, "serious safety concerns will develop if the company continues to operate without the striking workers."
We have been warning PHI investors and customers, the general public and the company itself of the inherent dangers of flying helicopters in the Gulf of Mexico since well before the strike began. Now that the company is using replacement pilots working extended on-duty time, and has narrowly averted a tragedy, common sense demands that the company reach an agreement with its highly qualified, highly skilled, experienced striking pilots.
Yet PHI refuses to negotiate with us, and has refused our most recent offer to bargain in good faith. In fact, Mr. Gonsoulin has immaturely stated that he will bargain with us "when chickens have lips."
Especially in light of this near-tragedy, it is time for Mr. Gonsoulin to move past such childishness and ensure the safety of his customers and employees. We ask that you contact Mr. Gonsoulin at 337-235-2452 (phone) or 337-232-6537 (fax) and demand that PHI reach a fair settlement with his pilots.
==========================================end.
Remember, only we can defeat ourselves. Stay together, stay strong and we will win the contract we are entitled to as professional pilots.
No one goes back to work until we all go back to work!!!
In unity,
Local 108 Executive Board