What's new

2014 Pilot Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
nevergiveup said:
Guys, I apologize for my lack of understanding(old age), but exactly how can we negotiate a list with APA if we are more than 90 days past the effective date? Doesn't this open the door for lawsuits because we are not abiding by the MOU and using binding arbitration?
Didn't the email say something about a modified MTA?  Maybe that reset the timeline or something.  
 
Does anybody have any more info on what has been agreed to, at least by our side?
 
nevergiveup said:
Guys, I apologize for my lack of understanding(old age), but exactly how can we negotiate a list with APA if we are more than 90 days past the effective date? Doesn't this open the door for lawsuits because we are not abiding by the MOU and using binding arbitration?
 
 
As I understand it, MB Arbitration is a statutory obligation of all parties, in the absence of a negotiated alternative.  USAPA filed a lawsuit in D.C. in order to avail themselves of the statutory process, and are seeking an injunction to enforce the obligations of the statute.  The APA would of course like the courts to accept 1) that the MOU itself alleviates them from an obligation to follow the MB Statute, de facto, or 2) hope that an imminent single carrier status, and certification of a single union, eliminates the obligations of MB, de facto. 
 
Not so fast.... The failure of the APA and USAPA to reach a negotiated Protocol Agreement for the SLI is prima facie evidence that there is no negotiated alternative to the MB Statute, therefore the MB Statute is applicable, de jure.   
 
A negotiated settlement is always an alternative to the Statute... I find it hard to imagine a case where the APA gains anything by agreeing to MB arbitration, or by negotiating anything different (until the very last minute).  
 
Delay, delay, delay, makes Jack and Jill a happy couple.  
 
snapthis said:
"Mover" along? Nevermind stupidity the incompetence :lol:
attachicon.gif
image.jpg

I'm sure the APA is more than happy to make you think you are getting what you want. They just want Usaps to go away.

They are just waiting on the NMB to rule on SCS.
 
 
I am sure that private school helped you spell, and even taught you how to type on an iPhone, while riding in a hotel van, without getting an "r" after hitting the "e" next to it.  
 
Did private school also teach you how to "swallow camels.. while straining at gnats"?  
 
Nevertheless, I'll spot you the "r".... mark it on your score card, or send it in an email. 😉
 
nevergiveup said:
Guys, I apologize for my lack of understanding(old age), but exactly how can we negotiate a list with APA if we are more than 90 days past the effective date? Doesn't this open the door for lawsuits because we are not abiding by the MOU and using binding arbitration?
 
I agree that a mutual agreement to extend the timeline is very much a possibility. But the timeline defined in the MOU had a big roadblock built-in... the JCBA. The MOU states in Paragraph 10 on page 6 that a seniority list arbitration cannot even begin until final approval of a joint contract. The JCBA negotiations are going to start in about two weeks. Once they are finished and the JCBA gets final approval, then, and only then, can a SLI arbitration even begin. So there really is no rush on that front...
 
algflyr said:
 
I agree that a mutual agreement to extend the timeline is very much a possibility. But the timeline defined in the MOU had a big roadblock built-in... the JCBA. The MOU states in Paragraph 10 on page 6 that a seniority list arbitration cannot even begin until final approval of a joint contract. The JCBA negotiations are going to start in about two weeks. Once they are finished and the JCBA gets final approval, then, and only then, can a SLI arbitration even begin. So there really is no rush on that front...
If they come out with a list and someone thinks they could have done better through arbitration, then it seems it could be a can of worms. I don't think we will see a JCBA until the NMB rules APA as the union and the 90 day countdown starts.
 
Phoenix said:
I am sure that private school helped you spell, and even taught you how to type on an iPhone, while riding in a hotel van, without getting an "r" after hitting the "e" next to it.  
 
Did private school also teach you how to "swallow camels.. while straining at gnats"?  
 
Nevertheless, I'll spot you the "r".... mark it on your score card, or send it in an email. 😉
I know that you keep hammering and the nails aren't going in as you predicted.

Maybe low expectations are a part of your little world. Is that what you learned at primary PS #101?

I'm tired of the mediocre representation. You keep hanging on to a loser, Usap.

Do you need a refresher?

On Feb. 19, 2014, the US Airline Pilots Association (USAPA) Merger Committee issued a "Protocol Agreement Update" accusing APA of insisting on "a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU." That update is seriously misguided. APA's position remained consistent throughout the protocol negotiations.

By way of background, the MOU that became effective Dec. 9, 2013, provides for seniority-integration negotiations to begin as soon as possible after the merger. If the parties are unable to reach a negotiated settlement, the McCaskill-Bond arbitration will occur after the parties' agreement on a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA) and after the NMB finds that US Airways and American Airlines are operating as a single transportation system. The MOU also provides that the parties will negotiate a Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement ("Protocol Agreement") within 30 days of the merger. That timeline has been extended several times by mutual agreement of the parties.

On Feb. 19, 2014, counsel for American Airlines informed APA and USAPA that the parties had failed to reach an agreement on the terms of a Protocol Agreement. USAPA immediately posted an update that stated: "Unfortunately at the last minute, APA insisted on a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU. . . . With little notice, APA's Merger Committee demanded USAPA allow APA and the Company the option to modify the Protocol Agreement should APA be certified as the sole bargaining representative by the NMB." This statement is incorrect in every respect.

APA and the company have always understood that, at some point after a ruling by the NMB on the single-carrier proceeding, APA would assume representation for pilots at the two carriers and, as a consequence, take on a duty of fair representation to all of the pilots. In recognition of this legally mandated state of affairs, APA therefore agreed that, up until the time APA becomes the representative of the entire pilot group, USAPA would be the sole representative of the pilots at US Airways and handle the merger negotiations within its discretion. However, consistent with the law, once APA becomes the representative of all pilots, APA would of necessity displace USAPA and have authority as the certified collective bargaining representative over the process. USAPA has always insisted that it maintain institutional involvement and a degree of control over the process even after it ceases to be a lawful collective bargaining representative. That, however, cannot be the case under the law, as the Arizona district court judge expressly ruled.

In the litigation between the US Airways East and West pilots over their inability to achieve an integrated seniority list in the eight years since their merger, Judge Silver accepted USAPA's argument opposing the West pilots' request for McCaskill-Bond status. She did so because she accepted the proposition that only the certified representative was entitled to participate in the process. However, in doing so, the court stated that it "has no doubt that as is USAPA's consistent practice USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court's patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration."

USAPA's continuing effort to maintain its role in the McCaskill-Bond process even after APA becomes the certified representative of all pilots at the "new" American Airlines runs directly counter to Judge Silver's unambiguous directive. Given that APA will have the legal duty to represent all pilots and, potentially, liability for failing to do so, and especially in light of Judge Silver's express order, neither APA nor the company could possibly agree to let USAPA control the process after it ceased to be the collective bargaining representative. USAPA's effort to blame APA for this state of affairs is simply nonsense.

Single-Employer Proceeding

As we have previously informed you, APA filed for a declaration of single-employer status on Jan. 14, 2014, and filed its Position Statement in support of its request Feb. 19. USAPA filed an opposition Position Statement, arguing principally that the NMB should wait until the parties reach the JCBA (even though we are all already operating under a single collective bargaining agreement) and produce an integrated seniority list.

It is ironic that USAPA would suggest now that there should be no single transportation system finding without an integrated seniority list, given that it made the polar opposite argument in support of its successful petition to have US Airways and America West declared a single transportation system in order to force an election to decertify the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA). In that case, ALPA made precisely the same argument that USAPA makes now, and USAPA successfully opposed it. As a result, the NMB found that a single transportation system existed even though no single collective bargaining agreement existed. In fact, as you know, in the eight years after the US AirwaysAmerica West merger and six years after the NMB's January 2008 single-carrier determination, there never was either a single collective bargaining agreement or an integrated seniority list at US Airways.
USAPA's position in the current single-carrier proceeding also contradicts the MOU it negotiated and its members ratified. The parties contemplated that the JCBA would not be final until after a finding by the NMB that the two carriers constituted a single transportation system, and the McCaskill-Bond arbitration could not even begin until after the JCBA.

What's Next?

Failure to reach a Protocol Agreement during the time allotted by the MOU has no practical effect on the timeline for implementation of an integrated seniority list. The MOU itself contemplates the probability that negotiations will not result in an integrated list. With that possibility in mind, it incorporates a timeline and procedure for a final and binding interest arbitration that would occur subsequent to the JCBA process and result in a "fair and equitable" final list that integrates the three separate lists that are currently in effect at the "new" American Airlines. Also, the MOU does not preclude future negotiations between the parties regarding seniority integration should that opportunity present itself as we move through the NMB's single-carrier investigation and JCBA process. If we cannot negotiate a list, then we will arbitrate a list; in either case, the objective of the process will be a list that recognizes and maintains the pre-merger career expectations of every pilot at the "new" American Airlines and ensures equitable sharing of any consequential shrinkage or growth between the pre-merger pilot groups.
 
snapthis said:
I know that you keep hammering and the nails aren't going in as you predicted.

Maybe low expectations are a part of your little world. Is that what you learned at primary PS #101?

I'm tired of the mediocre representation. You keep hanging on to a loser, Usap.

Do you need a refresher?

On Feb. 19, 2014, the US Airline Pilots Association (USAPA) Merger Committee issued a "Protocol Agreement Update" accusing APA of insisting on "a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU." That update is seriously misguided. APA's position remained consistent throughout the protocol negotiations.

By way of background, the MOU that became effective Dec. 9, 2013, provides for seniority-integration negotiations to begin as soon as possible after the merger. If the parties are unable to reach a negotiated settlement, the McCaskill-Bond arbitration will occur after the parties' agreement on a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA) and after the NMB finds that US Airways and American Airlines are operating as a single transportation system. The MOU also provides that the parties will negotiate a Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement ("Protocol Agreement") within 30 days of the merger. That timeline has been extended several times by mutual agreement of the parties.

On Feb. 19, 2014, counsel for American Airlines informed APA and USAPA that the parties had failed to reach an agreement on the terms of a Protocol Agreement. USAPA immediately posted an update that stated: "Unfortunately at the last minute, APA insisted on a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU. . . . With little notice, APA's Merger Committee demanded USAPA allow APA and the Company the option to modify the Protocol Agreement should APA be certified as the sole bargaining representative by the NMB." This statement is incorrect in every respect.

APA and the company have always understood that, at some point after a ruling by the NMB on the single-carrier proceeding, APA would assume representation for pilots at the two carriers and, as a consequence, take on a duty of fair representation to all of the pilots. In recognition of this legally mandated state of affairs, APA therefore agreed that, up until the time APA becomes the representative of the entire pilot group, USAPA would be the sole representative of the pilots at US Airways and handle the merger negotiations within its discretion. However, consistent with the law, once APA becomes the representative of all pilots, APA would of necessity displace USAPA and have authority as the certified collective bargaining representative over the process. USAPA has always insisted that it maintain institutional involvement and a degree of control over the process even after it ceases to be a lawful collective bargaining representative. That, however, cannot be the case under the law, as the Arizona district court judge expressly ruled.

In the litigation between the US Airways East and West pilots over their inability to achieve an integrated seniority list in the eight years since their merger, Judge Silver accepted USAPA's argument opposing the West pilots' request for McCaskill-Bond status. She did so because she accepted the proposition that only the certified representative was entitled to participate in the process. However, in doing so, the court stated that it "has no doubt that as is USAPA's consistent practice USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court's patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration."

USAPA's continuing effort to maintain its role in the McCaskill-Bond process even after APA becomes the certified representative of all pilots at the "new" American Airlines runs directly counter to Judge Silver's unambiguous directive. Given that APA will have the legal duty to represent all pilots and, potentially, liability for failing to do so, and especially in light of Judge Silver's express order, neither APA nor the company could possibly agree to let USAPA control the process after it ceased to be the collective bargaining representative. USAPA's effort to blame APA for this state of affairs is simply nonsense.

Single-Employer Proceeding

As we have previously informed you, APA filed for a declaration of single-employer status on Jan. 14, 2014, and filed its Position Statement in support of its request Feb. 19. USAPA filed an opposition Position Statement, arguing principally that the NMB should wait until the parties reach the JCBA (even though we are all already operating under a single collective bargaining agreement) and produce an integrated seniority list.

It is ironic that USAPA would suggest now that there should be no single transportation system finding without an integrated seniority list, given that it made the polar opposite argument in support of its successful petition to have US Airways and America West declared a single transportation system in order to force an election to decertify the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA). In that case, ALPA made precisely the same argument that USAPA makes now, and USAPA successfully opposed it. As a result, the NMB found that a single transportation system existed even though no single collective bargaining agreement existed. In fact, as you know, in the eight years after the US AirwaysAmerica West merger and six years after the NMB's January 2008 single-carrier determination, there never was either a single collective bargaining agreement or an integrated seniority list at US Airways.
USAPA's position in the current single-carrier proceeding also contradicts the MOU it negotiated and its members ratified. The parties contemplated that the JCBA would not be final until after a finding by the NMB that the two carriers constituted a single transportation system, and the McCaskill-Bond arbitration could not even begin until after the JCBA.

What's Next?

Failure to reach a Protocol Agreement during the time allotted by the MOU has no practical effect on the timeline for implementation of an integrated seniority list. The MOU itself contemplates the probability that negotiations will not result in an integrated list. With that possibility in mind, it incorporates a timeline and procedure for a final and binding interest arbitration that would occur subsequent to the JCBA process and result in a "fair and equitable" final list that integrates the three separate lists that are currently in effect at the "new" American Airlines. Also, the MOU does not preclude future negotiations between the parties regarding seniority integration should that opportunity present itself as we move through the NMB's single-carrier investigation and JCBA process. If we cannot negotiate a list, then we will arbitrate a list; in either case, the objective of the process will be a list that recognizes and maintains the pre-merger career expectations of every pilot at the "new" American Airlines and ensures equitable sharing of any consequential shrinkage or growth between the pre-merger pilot groups.
 
Really? :lol:
 
snapthis said:
I know that you keep hammering and the nails aren't going in as you predicted.
Maybe low expectations are a part of your little world. Is that what you learned at primary PS #101?
I'm tired of the mediocre representation. You keep hanging on to a loser, Usap.
Do you need a refresher?
On Feb. 19, 2014, the US Airline Pilots Association (USAPA) Merger Committee issued a "Protocol Agreement Update" accusing APA of insisting on "a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU." That update is seriously misguided. APA's position remained consistent throughout the protocol negotiations.
By way of background, the MOU that became effective Dec. 9, 2013, provides for seniority-integration negotiations to begin as soon as possible after the merger. If the parties are unable to reach a negotiated settlement, the McCaskill-Bond arbitration will occur after the parties' agreement on a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA) and after the NMB finds that US Airways and American Airlines are operating as a single transportation system. The MOU also provides that the parties will negotiate a Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement ("Protocol Agreement") within 30 days of the merger. That timeline has been extended several times by mutual agreement of the parties.
On Feb. 19, 2014, counsel for American Airlines informed APA and USAPA that the parties had failed to reach an agreement on the terms of a Protocol Agreement. USAPA immediately posted an update that stated: "Unfortunately at the last minute, APA insisted on a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU. . . . With little notice, APA's Merger Committee demanded USAPA allow APA and the Company the option to modify the Protocol Agreement should APA be certified as the sole bargaining representative by the NMB." This statement is incorrect in every respect.
APA and the company have always understood that, at some point after a ruling by the NMB on the single-carrier proceeding, APA would assume representation for pilots at the two carriers and, as a consequence, take on a duty of fair representation to all of the pilots. In recognition of this legally mandated state of affairs, APA therefore agreed that, up until the time APA becomes the representative of the entire pilot group, USAPA would be the sole representative of the pilots at US Airways and handle the merger negotiations within its discretion. However, consistent with the law, once APA becomes the representative of all pilots, APA would of necessity displace USAPA and have authority as the certified collective bargaining representative over the process. USAPA has always insisted that it maintain institutional involvement and a degree of control over the process even after it ceases to be a lawful collective bargaining representative. That, however, cannot be the case under the law, as the Arizona district court judge expressly ruled.
In the litigation between the US Airways East and West pilots over their inability to achieve an integrated seniority list in the eight years since their merger, Judge Silver accepted USAPA's argument opposing the West pilots' request for McCaskill-Bond status. She did so because she accepted the proposition that only the certified representative was entitled to participate in the process. However, in doing so, the court stated that it "has no doubt that as is USAPA's consistent practice USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court's patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration."
USAPA's continuing effort to maintain its role in the McCaskill-Bond process even after APA becomes the certified representative of all pilots at the "new" American Airlines runs directly counter to Judge Silver's unambiguous directive. Given that APA will have the legal duty to represent all pilots and, potentially, liability for failing to do so, and especially in light of Judge Silver's express order, neither APA nor the company could possibly agree to let USAPA control the process after it ceased to be the collective bargaining representative. USAPA's effort to blame APA for this state of affairs is simply nonsense.
Single-Employer Proceeding
As we have previously informed you, APA filed for a declaration of single-employer status on Jan. 14, 2014, and filed its Position Statement in support of its request Feb. 19. USAPA filed an opposition Position Statement, arguing principally that the NMB should wait until the parties reach the JCBA (even though we are all already operating under a single collective bargaining agreement) and produce an integrated seniority list.
It is ironic that USAPA would suggest now that there should be no single transportation system finding without an integrated seniority list, given that it made the polar opposite argument in support of its successful petition to have US Airways and America West declared a single transportation system in order to force an election to decertify the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA). In that case, ALPA made precisely the same argument that USAPA makes now, and USAPA successfully opposed it. As a result, the NMB found that a single transportation system existed even though no single collective bargaining agreement existed. In fact, as you know, in the eight years after the US AirwaysAmerica West merger and six years after the NMB's January 2008 single-carrier determination, there never was either a single collective bargaining agreement or an integrated seniority list at US Airways.
USAPA's position in the current single-carrier proceeding also contradicts the MOU it negotiated and its members ratified. The parties contemplated that the JCBA would not be final until after a finding by the NMB that the two carriers constituted a single transportation system, and the McCaskill-Bond arbitration could not even begin until after the JCBA.
What's Next?
Failure to reach a Protocol Agreement during the time allotted by the MOU has no practical effect on the timeline for implementation of an integrated seniority list. The MOU itself contemplates the probability that negotiations will not result in an integrated list. With that possibility in mind, it incorporates a timeline and procedure for a final and binding interest arbitration that would occur subsequent to the JCBA process and result in a "fair and equitable" final list that integrates the three separate lists that are currently in effect at the "new" American Airlines. Also, the MOU does not preclude future negotiations between the parties regarding seniority integration should that opportunity present itself as we move through the NMB's single-carrier investigation and JCBA process. If we cannot negotiate a list, then we will arbitrate a list; in either case, the objective of the process will be a list that recognizes and maintains the pre-merger career expectations of every pilot at the "new" American Airlines and ensures equitable sharing of any consequential shrinkage or growth between the pre-merger pilot groups.
Sounds like more Munn falsehoods. Snap relies on Munn. That, is a good thing.
 
snapthis said:
I know that you keep hammering and the nails aren't going in as you predicted.

Maybe low expectations are a part of your little world. Is that what you learned at primary PS #101?

I'm tired of the mediocre representation. You keep hanging on to a loser, Usap.

Do you need a refresher?

On Feb. 19, 2014, the US Airline Pilots Association (USAPA) Merger Committee issued a "Protocol Agreement Update" accusing APA of insisting on "a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU." That update is seriously misguided. APA's position remained consistent throughout the protocol negotiations.

By way of background, the MOU that became effective Dec. 9, 2013, provides for seniority-integration negotiations to begin as soon as possible after the merger. If the parties are unable to reach a negotiated settlement, the McCaskill-Bond arbitration will occur after the parties' agreement on a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA) and after the NMB finds that US Airways and American Airlines are operating as a single transportation system. The MOU also provides that the parties will negotiate a Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement ("Protocol Agreement") within 30 days of the merger. That timeline has been extended several times by mutual agreement of the parties.

On Feb. 19, 2014, counsel for American Airlines informed APA and USAPA that the parties had failed to reach an agreement on the terms of a Protocol Agreement. USAPA immediately posted an update that stated: "Unfortunately at the last minute, APA insisted on a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU. . . . With little notice, APA's Merger Committee demanded USAPA allow APA and the Company the option to modify the Protocol Agreement should APA be certified as the sole bargaining representative by the NMB." This statement is incorrect in every respect.

APA and the company have always understood that, at some point after a ruling by the NMB on the single-carrier proceeding, APA would assume representation for pilots at the two carriers and, as a consequence, take on a duty of fair representation to all of the pilots. In recognition of this legally mandated state of affairs, APA therefore agreed that, up until the time APA becomes the representative of the entire pilot group, USAPA would be the sole representative of the pilots at US Airways and handle the merger negotiations within its discretion. However, consistent with the law, once APA becomes the representative of all pilots, APA would of necessity displace USAPA and have authority as the certified collective bargaining representative over the process. USAPA has always insisted that it maintain institutional involvement and a degree of control over the process even after it ceases to be a lawful collective bargaining representative. That, however, cannot be the case under the law, as the Arizona district court judge expressly ruled.

In the litigation between the US Airways East and West pilots over their inability to achieve an integrated seniority list in the eight years since their merger, Judge Silver accepted USAPA's argument opposing the West pilots' request for McCaskill-Bond status. She did so because she accepted the proposition that only the certified representative was entitled to participate in the process. However, in doing so, the court stated that it "has no doubt that as is USAPA's consistent practice USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court's patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration."

USAPA's continuing effort to maintain its role in the McCaskill-Bond process even after APA becomes the certified representative of all pilots at the "new" American Airlines runs directly counter to Judge Silver's unambiguous directive. Given that APA will have the legal duty to represent all pilots and, potentially, liability for failing to do so, and especially in light of Judge Silver's express order, neither APA nor the company could possibly agree to let USAPA control the process after it ceased to be the collective bargaining representative. USAPA's effort to blame APA for this state of affairs is simply nonsense.

Single-Employer Proceeding

As we have previously informed you, APA filed for a declaration of single-employer status on Jan. 14, 2014, and filed its Position Statement in support of its request Feb. 19. USAPA filed an opposition Position Statement, arguing principally that the NMB should wait until the parties reach the JCBA (even though we are all already operating under a single collective bargaining agreement) and produce an integrated seniority list.

It is ironic that USAPA would suggest now that there should be no single transportation system finding without an integrated seniority list, given that it made the polar opposite argument in support of its successful petition to have US Airways and America West declared a single transportation system in order to force an election to decertify the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA). In that case, ALPA made precisely the same argument that USAPA makes now, and USAPA successfully opposed it. As a result, the NMB found that a single transportation system existed even though no single collective bargaining agreement existed. In fact, as you know, in the eight years after the US AirwaysAmerica West merger and six years after the NMB's January 2008 single-carrier determination, there never was either a single collective bargaining agreement or an integrated seniority list at US Airways.
USAPA's position in the current single-carrier proceeding also contradicts the MOU it negotiated and its members ratified. The parties contemplated that the JCBA would not be final until after a finding by the NMB that the two carriers constituted a single transportation system, and the McCaskill-Bond arbitration could not even begin until after the JCBA.

What's Next?

Failure to reach a Protocol Agreement during the time allotted by the MOU has no practical effect on the timeline for implementation of an integrated seniority list. The MOU itself contemplates the probability that negotiations will not result in an integrated list. With that possibility in mind, it incorporates a timeline and procedure for a final and binding interest arbitration that would occur subsequent to the JCBA process and result in a "fair and equitable" final list that integrates the three separate lists that are currently in effect at the "new" American Airlines. Also, the MOU does not preclude future negotiations between the parties regarding seniority integration should that opportunity present itself as we move through the NMB's single-carrier investigation and JCBA process. If we cannot negotiate a list, then we will arbitrate a list; in either case, the objective of the process will be a list that recognizes and maintains the pre-merger career expectations of every pilot at the "new" American Airlines and ensures equitable sharing of any consequential shrinkage or growth between the pre-merger pilot groups.
This has more "spin" than a washing machine!
breeze
 
mrbreeze said:
This has more "spin" than a washing machine!
breeze
 
 
I'm sorry I didn't read it. 
 
At the beginning of this most recent exchange with my kind colleague, the infamous Snap, I suggested of him that "He doth protest too much"... yet he seems to be intent on ratcheting up his rejoinders with exponential verbosity.   :blink:  I'm thinking he was trained as a lawyer... I didn't say he passed the bar... but anyone can stay in private school for as long as you are willing to pay the tuition, and your sponsor donates to the endowment.   😀
 
Phoenix said:
I'm sorry I didn't read it. 
 
At the beginning of this most recent exchange with my kind colleague, the infamous Snap, I suggested of him that "He doth protest too much"... yet he seems to be intent on ratcheting up his rejoinders with exponential verbosity.   :blink:  I'm thinking he was trained as a lawyer... I didn't say he passed the bar... but anyone can stay in private school for as long as you are willing to pay the tuition, and your sponsor donates to the endowment.   😀
Spinthis is pretty much the last Spartan standing. The rest figured it out.
 
Phoenix said:
 
 
I am sure that private school helped you spell, and even taught you how to type on an iPhone, while riding in a hotel van, without getting an "r" after hitting the "e" next to it.  
 
Did private school also teach you how to "swallow camels.. while straining at gnats"?  
 
Nevertheless, I'll spot you the "r".... mark it on your score card, or send it in an email. 😉
I'm sure snappy has a small, imported, lower class do such menial tasks a iphone typing for him.
 
It's funny how this has evolved. Originally, the West had the career expectation of being the ruler of PHX with their A-319's and 320's. Then the merger happened with US Airways and they wanted all the higher paying positions on the East flying the widebodies. Well they didn't get that. Then the merger with American was thrust upon them and now they seem to want even more. 
 
At this point, even a true date of hire integration with American would put them in a much better position than the Nic ever would as a stand-alone US/AWE merged carrier. If they could get their wish and never have merged with US Airways, they would have NEVER been in a position to merge with another carrier such as American and become the largest airline in the entire world. 
 
Absent the US Airways merger, had they survived, AWE  would have been right in line with jetblue and Spirit. 
 
Now, even with a DOH integration and the American merger, they now have an expectation much more vast than they EVER dreamed!
 
With a DOH integration, they can now reasonably expect to fly A-330's, A-350's, B-787's and B-777's, or even be the top dog in PHX... I doubt that could EVER even be dreamed of as an expectation prior to the merger with US Airways. So, they now have another lottery ticket (that will cash this time), but it's still not enough...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top