What's new

2014 Pilot Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
USA320Pilot said:
MOU, Paragraph 10. A., states, “A seniority integration process consistent with McCaskill-Bond shall begin as soon as possible after the Effective Date.”

USAPA’s pilot contract does not state the APA-USAPA SLI will be conducted using M-B statute, the contract states the “seniority integration process (will be) consistent with McCaskill-Bond.” That’s a big difference. APA and AAG have offered a process “consistent” with M-B with 3 post SCC MC’s: APA, APA Leagcy USAPA East MC, & APA Legacy West MC. USAPA has said “no” because USAPA has been focused on a 5,000 versus 15,000 pilot SLI, which now appears to be very short-sighted (But, what do you expect by people who have zero ISL/MC experience?). 

Furthermore, once USAPA ratified the MOU the USAPA waived its independent union rights per the RLA and agreed to a specific SLI protocol consistentwith M-B as described in the MOU paragraph 10. As one pilot said, “(USAPA’s approval) of the MOU is basically the same really no different than AirTran's approval of the SWA proposal, the only minor difference being the SWA/AT agreement contained a specific SLI order whereas the MOU defines a specific SLI protocol.”

Clearly, the East portion of the BPR did not understand what they negotiated and ratified and now they’re trying to circumvent the pilot’s contract, specifically MOU paragraph 4 and 10. Recognizing their mistake (just like with LOA 96 – coupled with USAPA’s certification – created the DFR violation when ripe for adjudication) the BPR and USAPA UELs want to violate the pilot’s contract (again). However, AAG and APA will not allow USAPA to violate the contract much to USAPA’s disdain. And, now after about one-month since USAPA provided APA USAPA’s ideas on a draft PA, UMTA and GA in a final effort to remain relevant, in exchange for a MBLS offer, APA continues to ignore USAPA while waiting for the NMB to render a SCC decision. 

If this was not so sad it would be comical watching the UELs try to play chess with checkers.

USAPA = Pyrrhic Victory. 

It might make sense for people to clearly read the contract's language versus accommodating their beliefs to believe what they want versus what is their contractual obligation(s).
 
 
Nothing in the contract releases the APA and the company from complying with the Federal Statute, 13(a).  They will have to comply, just like the NMB complied and performed their duties in accord with the MB Statute.    The NMB just doesn't have the money or motivation that APA has, so the NMB consented more easily.   :lol:
 
USA320Pilot said:
MOU, Paragraph 10. A., states, “A seniority integration process consistent with McCaskill-Bond shall begin as soon as possible after the Effective Date.”

USAPA’s pilot contract does not state the APA-USAPA SLI will be conducted using M-B statute, the contract states the “seniority integration process (will be) consistent with McCaskill-Bond.” That’s a big difference. APA and AAG have offered a process “consistent” with M-B with 3 post SCC MC’s: APA, APA Leagcy USAPA East MC, & APA Legacy West MC. USAPA has said “no” because USAPA has been focused on a 5,000 versus 15,000 pilot SLI, which now appears to be very short-sighted (But, what do you expect by people who have zero ISL/MC experience?). 

Furthermore, once USAPA ratified the MOU the USAPA waived its independent union rights per the RLA and agreed to a specific SLI protocol consistentwith M-B as described in the MOU paragraph 10. As one pilot said, “(USAPA’s approval) of the MOU is basically the same really no different than AirTran's approval of the SWA proposal, the only minor difference being the SWA/AT agreement contained a specific SLI order whereas the MOU defines a specific SLI protocol.”

Clearly, the East portion of the BPR did not understand what they negotiated and ratified and now they’re trying to circumvent the pilot’s contract, specifically MOU paragraph 4 and 10. Recognizing their mistake (just like with LOA 96 – coupled with USAPA’s certification – created the DFR violation when ripe for adjudication) the BPR and USAPA UELs want to violate the pilot’s contract (again). However, AAG and APA will not allow USAPA to violate the contract much to USAPA’s disdain. And, now after about one-month since USAPA provided APA USAPA’s ideas on a draft PA, UMTA and GA in a final effort to remain relevant, in exchange for a MBLS offer, APA continues to ignore USAPA while waiting for the NMB to render a SCC decision. 

If this was not so sad it would be comical watching the UELs try to play chess with checkers.

USAPA = Pyrrhic Victory. 

It might make sense for people to clearly read the contract's language versus accommodating their beliefs to believe what they want versus what is their contractual obligation(s).
I've been citeing....the law you idiot!  You can't even quote a case!  "As one pilot said...".  IS THAT ALL YOU GOT???  Looking forward to seeing you proved WRONG so I can rub your SMUG FACE IN YOUR OWN FECES.
 
We HAVE read the contract, and the LAW, Chip.  You just can't read, you continue to parrot West tripe.  Everyone on here AND on the line know you are full of it.
 
BTW, you better look up the definition of "consistent".  Here, let me help:
 
 

What is CONSISTENT?

1. an order done logically with a pattern. 2. anything that doesn’t change. 3. following the rules of standards.



Law Dictionary: What is CONSISTENT? definition of CONSISTENT (Black's Law Dictionary) 
 
What is 'INCONSISTENT:  CHIP MUNN!!!!  That's funny right there.
 
 
"INCONSISTENT=CHIP MUNN!"
 
This is so simple even a cave man gets it!  At he time of the NIC both East and west had one CBA-ALPA. Alpa got tossed. USAPA is now the CBA. Silver has ruled no NIC is not a DFR and West doesn't get a seat. WHY??? Because at the time of the alleged wrongs USAPA was, and still is the CBA. USAPA is NOW the CBA, not APA. These issues are arising during the time USAPA is the CBA, not the APA, USAPA is a signatory to the MOU...along with the APA. The new CBA will not cause all of these facts to just become moot overnight. For MOU purposes and the rights contained therein USAPA is a party to ALL things not related to the negotiation of a new contract...what would that be .....only the SLI. 
 
AND.........wait for it now.......ya ready......here it is
 
IF IT AIN'T MB THEN IT AIN'T BINDING....APA or USAPA/The Class of East can tie this up for years......sound familiar??  Think Parker wants that??
 
Your move chippy!!
 
NICDOA
NPJB 
 
I will gladly buy a East tie for a grand to tie this up another 5-10 years.
 
What say you Chippy??
 
NICDOA
NPJB
 
end_of_alpa said:
.  Everyone on here AND on the line know you are full of it there. [/size][/background]
 
 
"INCONSISTENT=CHIP MUNN!"
Yes we all know that very well.
 
Anyone remember this?

 
From the July 26, 2002 Charlotte Observer:

UNIONS CAN SINK US AIRWAYS WITHOUT AGREEMENTS FROM ALL ITS UNIONS, AIRLINE'S FUTURE IS BLEAK

In recent days US Airways has made much progress toward ensuring that it will have a future. It has reached tentative contract restructuring agreements with its pilots, flight attendants and the Transport Workers Union, which represents the dispatchers, simulator engineers and flight crew training instructors, and with subsidiary PSA Airlines' pilots and flight attendants.

The International Association of Machinists (IAM) unit representing mechanics is close to a deal, and the IAM Fleet Service negotiators are making good progress.

But that's not enough.

The Communication Workers of America (CWA), which represents customer service and reservation agents, remains far from agreement with the company.

US Airways is on the brink of court-ordered bankruptcy because its situation is "unsustainable." Failure to improve the situation will have devastating effects on employees, customers and companies that depend on US Airways.

The airline has received a "conditional" federal loan guarantee approval, but can't use those funds unless it gets restructuring agreements with all labor groups, in accordance with the business plan submitted to the Air Transportation Stabilization Board (ATSB).

Needed for loan guarantees

Major obstacles remain in the way of a voluntary restructuring.

US Airways may not be able to reach agreements with lenders without tentative agreements with the remaining unions. Unless it has those agreements the company wouldn't get final ATSB loan guarantee approval, government sources believe.

How bad is the situation? The carrier continues to burn cash during what is historically the best-performing time of year. Ten months after Sept. 11, US Airways has not resolved its cost problems, the economy remains sluggish, revenue is off 20 percent and low-cost competitors are aggressively attacking its market share. The industry has not recovered as expected. Domestic fares are at 15-year lows. Shifts in buying patterns and travel options indicate airlines may never get the revenue per available seat mile
they previously enjoyed.

Disturbing reports

US Airways needs restructuring agreements for either a voluntary restructuring or successful bankruptcy reorganization. If the company gets union concessions and qualifies for government financing, then if it's forced into bankruptcy, it probably could get in and out of bankruptcy quickly.

What's disturbing are reports that the CWA leadership is misleading its members. Last Friday, company negotiators asked the union to meet, to try and resolve their differences. The union said its negotiators couldn't meet, but its advisers would be available. However, I'm told that when management tried to schedule a meeting, they were told the advisers had other commitments. Meanwhile, the CWA issued a report telling its members the company met with the advisers last weekend - which management disputes.

Brinkmanship by any union could push the airline into bankruptcy. It's disappointing to see a relatively small group of employees risk the destruction of a viable company, with a devastating effect on 40,000 employees and their families.

No one can be sure what will happen in bankruptcy, but it's certain that if the company reorganizes and successfully comes out of bankruptcy, the labor groups that don't have tentative agreements with the company prior to bankruptcy will lose.

As in other union negotiations, the parties that reach savings targeted in the business plan will get a bankruptcy protection letter, which protects against even deeper salary and benefit cuts if the company enters bankruptcy.

Some may face pay cuts

If the company files for bankruptcy, workers in labor groups without that bankruptcy protection letter may face deep cuts in pay and benefits, loss of unused sick and vacation time, slashed retirement benefits and a crash in the value of common stock in 401(k) accounts. In addition, they'll work for a smaller airline that will hand out layoff notices at once with no severance pay, and will pay members of unprotected unions significantly less.

Each day the company moves nearer bankruptcy. New chief executive officer David Siegel has brought a breath of fresh air to management. US Airways' best chance to survive is for unions and creditors to bet on him and his team. Employees wanting to keep their jobs must impress upon union rank-and-file employees the importance of ordering union leaders back to the bargaining table at once, to reach an agreement that is 85 percent of the targeted concessions.

The choice is simple: Either all stakeholders move past their anger, frustration and denial to obtain and ratify restructuring agreements, or the carrier will almost certainly enter bankruptcy.

History has shown only two major airlines have successfully restructured in bankruptcy - not good odds for this company to continue operation.

Chip Munn is a US Airways captain

 
 
I find it interesting that USAPA's minions resort to personal attacks and webboard violations instead of debating the facts. It's clear those who break the rules also attack others because they fear the message and fear the messenger -- it's so predictable. And, it's just like USAPA and the UELs...the rules, contracts, and binding agreements don't matter to these people. In fact, character and integrity don't matter to these people either.
 
Meanwhile, we are now past the typical time frame for the NMB to rule on SCC. Could the NMB release their SCC ruling and their decision on USAPA's single arbitrator arbitration request (which is asking the NMB to permit USAPA to violate the pilot's contract again) this week? Hummmm?????  🙄
 
Finally, it's so funny watching the UELs and the different union hardliners try to discredit the messenger because they cannot refute the facts. It surely shows desperation and a lack of understanding of the issues. It's really sort of funny and fuels the debate.   😀
 
Your own words bite you back, and there is no such thing as an SCC from the NMB, that would be Single Carrier Status (SCS).
 
No one is violating the board rules.
 
Shall we post your failed predictions?
 
USA320Pilot said:
I find it interesting that USAPA's minions resort to personal attacks and webboard violations instead of debating the facts. It's clear those who break the rules and attack others because they fear the message and fear the messenger -- it's so predictable. And, it's just like USAPA and the UELs...the rules, contracts, and binding agreements don't matter to these people. In fact, character and integrity don't matter to these people either.
 
Meanwhile, we are now past the typical time frame for the NMB to rule on SCC. Could the NMB release their SCC ruling and their decision on USAPA's single arbitrator arbitration request (which is asking the NMB to permit USAPA to violate the pilot's contract again) this week? Hummmm?????
 
You don't debate facts.  You just post an unending list of leading questions, half truths, and visions of doom that never materialize.  
 
The NMB will not decide who participates in MB Arbitration, as participation in MB arbitration is a statutory obligation... an obligation for which USAPA has already demonstrated their intent to comply with the statute, and an obligation that APA is shirking (for now).  
 
[SIZE=10pt]It's so easy to write a post and anticipate the response from a Union Extremist Leader or tough guy. Their emotion creates predictable reactions where they don't look too smart to the reasonable, rational, and forward thinking individual. Furthermore, the UEL/Union Thug reactions on this message board likely causes the tough guys to lose even more of their dwindling support. [/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Here’s another fact. U.S. District Court Judge Rosilyn Silver said, “USAPA has succeeded here but it is a Pyrrhic victory. As contemplated by the MOU, in the very near future an election will take place and a new representative will be chosen by all of the post-merger pilots. It is almost certain USAPA will lose that election. Once that happens, USAPA will no longer be entitled to participate in the seniority integration proceedings. The Court 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. That is, having prevailed in convincing the Court that only certified representatives should participate in seniority discussions, once USAPA is no longer a certified representative, it will change its position and argue entities other than certified representatives should be allowed to participate.”[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]USAPA = [/SIZE]Pyrrhic Victory
 
USA320Pilot said:
It's so easy to write a post and anticipate the response from a Union Extremist Leader or tough guy. Their emotion creates predictable reactions where they don't look too smart to the reasonable, rational, and forward thinking individual. Furthermore, the UEL/Union Thug reactions on this message board likely causes the tough guys to lose even more of their dwindling support. 
 
Heres another fact. U.S. District Court Judge Rosilyn Silver said, USAPA has succeeded here but it is a Pyrrhic victory. As contemplated by the MOU, in the very near future an election will take place and a new representative will be chosen by all of the post-merger pilots. It is almost certain USAPA will lose that election. Once that happens, USAPA will no longer be entitled to participate in the seniority integration proceedings. The Court has no doubt thatas is USAPAs consistent practiceUSAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. That is, having prevailed in convincing the Court that only certified representatives should participate in seniority discussions, once USAPA is no longer a certified representative, it will change its position and argue entities other than certified representatives should be allowed to participate.
 
USAPA = Pyrrhic Victory[/size]
You're an idiot Chip.
Idiot = Chip Munn
 
USA320Pilot said:
[SIZE=10pt]It's so easy to write a post and anticipate the response from a Union Extremist Leader or tough guy. Their emotion creates predictable reactions where they don't look too smart to the reasonable, rational, and forward thinking individual. Furthermore, the UEL/Union Thug reactions on this message board likely causes the tough guys to lose even more of their dwindling support. [/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]Here’s another fact. U.S. District Court Judge Rosilyn Silver said, “USAPA has succeeded here but it is a Pyrrhic victory. As contemplated by the MOU, in the very near future an election will take place and a new representative will be chosen by all of the post-merger pilots. It is almost certain USAPA will lose that election. Once that happens, USAPA will no longer be entitled to participate in the seniority integration proceedings. The Court 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. That is, having prevailed in convincing the Court that only certified representatives should participate in seniority discussions, once USAPA is no longer a certified representative, it will change its position and argue entities other than certified representatives should be allowed to participate.”[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=10pt]USAPA = [/SIZE]Pyrrhic Victory
So you want to turn over complete control of the SLI to the APA and the company and trust them to represent us and do the right thing???
 
Are you NUTZ???
 
Munn go play on your own board where you can fool those idiots that pretend to listen you. You should have stayed fired, you know who to thank for your job.......USAPA.
 
A320 Driver said:
So you want to turn over complete control of the SLI to the APA and the company and trust them to represent us and do the right thing???
 
Are you NUTZ???
Can you imagine the DFR lawsuit? It would stagger the mind! Wildcat strikes a dime a dozen.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top