2014 Pilot Discussion

[mrbreeze]

I've had personal conversations with him. He seems wound a little tight.

Yes, that was the problem I had with him....and he tried to push his objective.
 
He is 13 yrs, 9 months, junior to me via DOH (8/21/2000), so the NIC would put him ahead of me on the SLI. He has a big chip on his shoulder. Knowing that AOL doesn't have a leg to stand on is eating him up. 
 
breeze

 

[end_of_alpa]

That's right Dan. No DOH for APA, they deserve to go beneath US Airways pilots because they were in bankruptcy and we saved them. Even the APA recognized that. Don't let those facts get in your way.... Goes for you too Chip.

 

[Freighterguynow]

These latest AOL updates are not on the public page.

?

 

[end_of_alpa]

Leonidas Update July 17, 2014
All New American pilots are likely aware of the growing disagreements between USAPA and the Allied Pilots Association. These matters include a dispute over Single Carrier Status before the NMB, a lawsuit in the Federal District Court in Washington DC in which USAPA seeks, an order declaring that the McCaskill-Bond Amendment requires that the integration of the seniority lists of US Airways and American pilots must be completed pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions (Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs), and the failure to negotiate a Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement. The last item has recently become the subject of a very public and open dispute between APA and USAPA. You may read USAPA's account of events here, and APA's version here For additional foundational information, reference APA's latest proposal for a protocol agreement found here . We are pleased that the process is getting so much attention by both parties, yet remain skeptical that West Pilots will be fairly represented by either union.

It is also important to distinguish the forthcoming seniority integration process (and the related disputes) from the cooperative bargaining now taking place between APA, USAPA and New American in effort to reach a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA). While there have been some positive joint communications from the unions about the JCBA, they have no relation to the seniority dispute. USAPA claims that APA's latest counter-proposal isregressive, while clearly expressing consternation that, t is a step backwards from the proposal we rejected in February. APA, on the other hand, claims [n]othing in the APA proposal was a surprise to USAPA or its merger counsel and, we made our protocol proposal last week at USAPA's specific request. It could not have surprised them, here the APA update clearly takes a tone of indignation with USAPA. Lastly, APA claims, at their [USAPA's] suggestion, APA has proposed that the West pilots be afforded the opportunity to petition a neutral arbitrator for the right to a separate and independent merger committee in the seniority integration process, while concluding its APA update with the sentence, [p]lease forward this email to every US Airways pilot you know and tell them that APA is committed to the fair process that we all signed up for. [Emphasis added] With these conflicting statements, wherein does the truth lie? Just how committed to a West Merger Committee is APA?

We have no doubt, and the evidence shows, that USAPA has no plan to protect any West pilot's interests in the upcoming SLI. When it comes to APA we are encouraged at some of the language they have included in their recent publications regarding West inclusion in the process. That being said, we must have more certainty from APA regarding the use of the NIC and/or West participation in the SLI process than that provided by words like "may, might, and should we desire" before we throw our unconditional support behind APA.

First, review APA's proposed language regarding an independent West Merger Committee found in paragraph 3 of its June 18, 2014 APA Protocol Proposal:

Within __ days following the execution of this Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement, a committee claiming to represent the interests of all pilots on a separate pre-merger seniority list referenced in paragraph 4(b below, may invoke the dispute resolution procedures of paragraph 20 of the MOU to apply to receive party status as a Merger Committee on behalf of the pilots on such separate pre-merger seniority list under the provisions of this Protocol Agreement. New American, any certified bargaining representative, and the existing Merger Committees shall have the right to respond to any such application. The Arbitrator designated under paragraph 20 of the MOU shall have the authority to rule on any such application, with the ruling being final and binding on New American, APA, USAPA, the Merger Committees, and the pilots of American and US Airways. Any Merger Committee authorized by the arbitrator pursuant to this paragraph 3 shall thereafter be treated as a Merger Committee under this Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement for all purposes.

Paragraph 4(b referenced above states:

The certified seniority lists will reflect the status quo of the three seniority lists in effect at the carriers on December 9, 2013 (i.e., American, US Airways (East), US Airways (West); provided, that this will be without prejudice to any Merger Committees position on the appropriate snapshot or constructive notice date.

As you can see, the actual APA proposal offers little to the former America West pilots. While preferable to USAPA's position, which aggressively seeks to exclude any independent West committee from the entire seniority integration proceedings, it provides no actual assurance of a West committee. Many unanswered questions remain (or are made even more problematic) by this current proposal. For example, paragraph 3 of the APA proposal allows all other parties to respond to any such application (for an independent West Merger Committee). What's to keep all parties (and not only USAPA) from opposing such an application? In fact, in the event that more than one committee makes such an application, who will determine which committee will be recognized for the purpose of invoking the MOU paragraph 20 dispute resolution process? Is it possible for the company, APA, and USAPA to affect (if not choose outright) the committee who will represent the West pilots? Might the other parties ensure the selection of a committee less committed or capable of enforcing the seniority rights of West pilots in order to relieve themselves of liability to the West pilots' DFR? West pilots expect a fair process and that starts with West pilots choosing their own merger committee.

A look at the recent history and the MOU illustrates how it might be possible to disadvantage ALL US Airways pilots. Paragraph 28 of the MOU states, US Airways and USAPA agree to be bound by and abide by the arbitration decision contemplated by Letter of Agreement 12-05 of the 2012 CBA. Most didn't give this paragraph a second thought and no information was provided about its meaning to US Airways pilots. LOA 12-05 relates to the closure of the STL domicile (populated almost exclusively by former TWA pilots) and the elimination of the fence around the base known as Supplement CC. Supplement CC was an extensive list of Conditions and Restrictions protecting the former TWA pilots based in STL. The planned closure of STL as part of the AA bankruptcy led to the need to eliminate these protections, in turn leading to the need to fashion some sort of replacement provisions. This led to LOA 12-05 which enacted a process ostensibly designed to provide a fair and equitable solution to the termination of Supplement CC, pitting the interest of Native AA pilots against those of the former TWA pilots by way of arbitration among committees created and controlled by APA (which, of course, is dominated by Native pilots). The TWA pilots really had no choice other than to go along with the process, in spite of the onerous preconditions to the arbitration agreed upon between management and APA.

In the words of the arbitration panel in the LOA 12-05 Award itself:

LOA 12-05 incorporates substantial restrictions. Among these, none is more clear than that the TWA Pilots existing seniority placements on the Pilots System Seniority List are final and shall continue and the related mandate that In no event shall the arbitrators have authority to modify the Pilots System Seniority List Thus, while the TWA pilots have vigorously urged the Panel to respond to what they characterize as inequitable and oppressive results visited upon them by the 2001 seniority integration, the LOA unequivocally precludes any result that would alter seniority placements on the Pilots System Seniority List. Other restrictions include the mandate that our newly prescribed conditions be non-economic, such that there be no material costs beyond training to the Company. Finally, LOA 12-05 incorporates the agreement that nothing in this Award shall require the establishment or continuation of any flight operation at any location

Without taking a position as to the fairness or propriety of the resulting award, the arbitrators themselves make it clear that their hands were tied by substantial restrictions in crafting their award. Furthermore, these restrictions were agreed to among the company and APA and were clearly objected to by the affected TWA pilots. The TWA pilots believed they could not achieve a fair result from what they found to be a rigged process. As you might guess, this is now the subject of yet more DFR litigation (you may read the complaint here) against the APA by the TWA minority within.

This is recent history for the APA and AA management, most of which was concurrent with the negotiation of the MOU. It should serve as a cautionary tale about strategies which the APA may employ against all US Airways pilots, East and West. APA may attempt to ensure that Native American pilots participate only in a process wherein APA controls the rules and sets preconditions which serve to insulate its pilots against any risk and/or give them an unfair advantage. APA's latest protocol proposal does nothing to ensure that this will not occur, a fact which will undoubtedly be exploited by USAPA as it seeks to protect East pilots against this potential outcome (while continuing its campaign against West pilots) through litigation in DC, as well as its opposition to Single Carrier Status at the NMB.

While counterintuitive (and not something West pilots have supported), USAPA's resistance and breach of the MOU has caused a delay which forced APA to move, if only a little, in the direction West pilots require. It appears the longer USAPA is able to delay the process and cast doubt upon the ultimate outcome, the closer APA moves toward a clear, unambiguous, fair, tamper-proof and unalterable integration process for all pilots of new AA.

In summary, we believe APA did take a tiny step in the right direction with its latest proposed protocol agreement. It is an improvement over its prior version in which APA promised nothing more than,the discretion to provide for the separate participation of the West Pilots in the seniority integration process if APA so chooses. [See Leonidas Update of 18 June 2014. However, nothing therein provides the sort of ironclad assurances all US Airways pilots (East and West separately) should realistically expect. West pilots certainly anticipated that USAPA would play games with the process. West pilots are also pleased that APA has consistently recognized the need for a separate West Merger Committee in the process through its public statements. But, in order to unquestionably comport with Judge Silver's order, defeat USAPA's litigation in DC, meet its duty of fair representation to all pilots, and address any lingering concerns the NMB has, we believe APA must take concrete steps and clearly outline its entire post-certification intentions to bring about the fair and equitable integration of all New AA pilots. It is important that APA voluntarily yield its authority to renegotiate its plan once it becomes the bargaining agent. APA must make a plan, communicate it, and then stick with that plan until the process is complete.

This is by no means an endorsement of USAPA as it continues to work against West pilots, nor is it a call for West pilots to offer their unqualified support for the APA. Given the lack of any concrete commitment to an independent and autonomous West Merger Committee (chosen by West pilots), APA has thus far presented no real reason for West pilots to support it other than not USAPA. Whether intended or not, West pilots have been misled by false propaganda and ambiguous commitments before. We are rightfully leery and skeptical of representations made by any union (or management) and our trust and support must be earned. As you can see from the language in APA's actual proposal (as contrasted with its communications), West pilots remain without any real ally in our struggle.

Enthusiasm for the end of USAPA should not cloud your judgment. All US Airways pilots should carefully read what APA publishes or proposes paying close attention to the many conditional statements which may feel warm and fuzzy, but really provide nothing more than false hope that APA will do right by us all.

Stay informed, don't lose sight of the facts, and thanks again for your continued support.

Sincerely,

Leonidas, LLC

Appeals and cross appeals in Federal court are as follows.  Look who has the LAMEST argument... why AOL of course.
 
AOL:
"In 2007, an arbitrator determined how the (sic) integrate the seniority of the pilots from two merging airlines (America West and US Airways).  The pilots from the larger airline (US Airways) refused to abide by a 2005 agreement to implement the arbitrated seniority list and formed a new union (defendant-appellee USAPA) that refused to use the 2007 arbitration as the basis for integrating seniority with the pilots from a third airline.  As a consequence, the airline that resulted form (sic) the 2005 merger of America West and US Airways still has two separate pilot operations nine years into the merger.
 
After a trial to the bench (sic), the court ruled that USAPA did not breach the duty of fair representation by making a contract (in the process of merger with American Airlines) that abrogated the 2005 agreement to use the 2007 seniority arbitration because it had a legitimate union purpose for doing so.  The court also ruled that the plaintiff class of former America west pilots from (sic) did not have the right to choose who would represent their interests in the process of integrating seniority with the American pilots.
 
The dispute arises from one sides refusal to abide by what was agreed to be a binding settlement of the seniority integration dispute.  After years of litigation it is clear that there is no possibility of compromise."
 
US Airways:  
 
"This lawsuit is one of many in the long-running seniority dispute between two groups of pilots following the merger
of US Airways, Inc. and America West Airlines, Inc. ("America West") in 2005 that created a single airline known
as US Airways. On August 2, 2013, plaintiffs-appellees, who are all former America West pilots ("West Pilots"),
filed an amended complaint alleging that defendant US Airline Pilots Association ("USAPA"), the union currently
certified to represent all US Airways pilots (both East and West), breached its duty of fair representation ("DFR") to
the West Pilots by entering into a Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU") with US Airways, American Airlines,
Inc. ("American") and the Allied Pilots Association ("APA") (the American pilots' union), which adopted a process
for integrating the US Airways and American pilot seniority lists following the then-anticipated (and nowcompleted)
US Airways-American merger that was perceived by the West Pilots to be less favorable to them and
more favorable to the East Pilots. The West Pilots also sought a declaratory judgment that, pursuant to a federal
statute known as "McCaskill-Bond," they have the right to separate representation (vis-a-vis their union, USAPA)
in the US Airways/American pilot seniority-integration process. US Airways filed a motion to intervene, which
was granted by the district court, in order to protect its significant interests in a prompt resolution of the merits of
the West Pilots' DFR claim against USAPA and in a determination that the West Pilots have a right under
McCaskill-Bond to separate participation in the seniority-integration process.
 

On October 11, 2013, US Airways filed a motion for summary judgment regarding the West Pilots' right under
McCaskill-Bond to participate separately in the seniority-integration process. In a January 10, 2014 Order (Doc.
298), following a bench trial, the district court denied US Airways' motion and agreed with USAPA that the West
Pilots were not entitled to separate participation because only certified union(s) could represent affected employee
groups in proceedings under McCaskill-Bond. The court stated that if and when USAPA was replaced by APA as the certified union for all of the pre-merger US Airways pilots, USAPA would have to immediately stop
participating in the seniority-integration proceedings. In footnote 15 of the January 10 Order, the court made
certain comments (which US Airways contends are incorrect) about how an integrated seniority list would be
generated once the APA had replaced USAPA. On February 7, 2014, US Airways filed a motion to modify the
January 10 Order by, inter alia, deleting footnote 15. The West Pilots and USAPA agreed with the deletion of
footnote 15, and USAPA also requested the deletion of a number of other statements in the January 10 Order
regarding USAPA's right to participate in the seniority- integration proceeding after it was decertified. The district
court denied US Airways' and USAPA's requested modifications of the January 10 Order.
The main issues for US Airways' appeal involve whether, and if so, how, the West Pilots' discrete seniority interests
are entitled to separate representation in the US Airways-American seniority-integration process.
 

On February 27, 2014, USAPA filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia
against the APA, US Airways and American, seeking to repudiate the MOU seniority-integration provisions to
which USAPA had agreed, and which US Airways, American and APA all contend are valid and enforceable
pursuant to McCaskill-Bond, and to compel utilization of a different set of seniority-integration procedures (see
Case No. 1:14-cv-00328-BAH). APA and US Airways/American have filed motions to compel arbitration and stay
USAPA's lawsuit; the briefing on those motions is not yet complete.
 

The seniority dispute between the West Pilots and USAPA has spanned many years and many lawsuits. It has
never before been capable of a negotiated resolution. There is no reason to believe that this dispute can be settled
now.
 
USAPA:
 

On August 2, 2013, plaintiffs-appellants filed an amended complaint alleging that defendant-appellant USAPA
breached its duty of fair representation ("DFR") by failing to require implementation of the ALPA seniority
proposal ("Nicolau Award") as part of a conditional Memorandum of Understanding ("MOU"). The MOU
established a process for negotiating a joint collective bargaining agreement applicable to the merger pilot groups of
US Airways and American Airlines in the event the merger of the two airlines was approved and provided that pilot
seniority will be integrated trough the process required by the McCaskill-Bond Amendment to the Federal Aviation
Act. Plaintiffs-appellants sought a judgment that USAPA violated its DFR by entering into the MOU that did not
require implementation of the Nicolau Award. Plaintiffs-appellants also sought a declaration that they had the right
but not the obligation to participate as a party in the McCaskill-Bond seniority integration process.
 

In its January 10, 2014 Order, the District Court held that (1) USAPA did not breach its DFR to plaintiffsappellants;
and (2) plaintiffs-appellants were not entitled to participate in the McCaskill-Bond seniority integration
process. The District Court made several other statements in the Order concerning the rights of USAPA and nonparty
APA (the bargaining representative for the pre-merger American pilots) if APA was certified as the
representative for the merged pilot group. These statements were beyond the scope of the issues litigated, were not
briefed by any of the parties, were not essential to the court's holdings, and were, in any event, erroneous. US
Airways made a motion pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. Rules 52(b) and 59(e) requesting that the District Court modify its
January 10, 2014 Order to delete footnote 15. USAPA did not oppose the requested relief, but did oppose the
grounds for modification arguing that footnote 15 and several other statements should also be deleted. The District
Court denied the motion. It is USAPA's position the District Court's holdings contained in the January 10, 2014 Order were correct and should be affirmed but that the District Court erred in failing to delete footnote 15 and the
extraneous statements from said Order."
 
 
AOL....LAME LAME LAME LAME!

 

[snapthis]

Slow learner? Remember, integrity matters.

I remember the term which is foreign to Tony the cheat. The snake in the grass beneath my boot.View attachment 10328

 

[Claxon]

Spinthis is simply posting AOL filings and commentary. Commentary by 2005 hire Eric Ferguson. Commentary which has been refuted by a court of law on every occasion.
Leonidas is a shell organization which has funneled millions of dollars to Marty Harper.
Ferguson has endangered every west pilot by refusing to accept the Nicolau is dead, and he needs to bargain in good faith towards an agreement all pilots east and west can live with.
Instead, he marches on, Ponce de Leon style, searching for his mythical and unattainable goal.
Unfortunately, the venue is closed for west pilots to bargain- due to Fergusons' intransigence.
APA is savoring the opportunity of a 3 way, where they can display the west pilots in the harsh spotlight of one lone base, no widebodies, stagnant growth, and furloughs.

 

[Claxon]

Eric Ferguson scorched earth Nicolau or Nothing separate ops and pay disparity bit him in the buttocks.
There will be no medals for Fergie for his buttocks wound.

 

[luvthe9]

Eric Ferguson scorched earth Nicolau or Nothing separate ops and pay disparity bit him in the buttocks.
There will be no medals for Fergie for his buttocks wound.

The west pilots, especially Spinthis Tony should take advantage of the flyer that was given out for "Mental Health for Pilots" seems he is going off the deep end.


Ferguson and Koontz ruined the careers of the west pilots.

 

[Zone5]

New East bid out for October. 38 new group 3 and above Captains positions, in a month!

Oh well.


seajay

 

[Claxon]

New East bid out for October. 38 new group 3 and above Captains positions, in a month!
Oh well.
seajay

Every bid that comes and goes proves the destructive effect of Leonidas on the west pilots.
More and more economic harm is happening due to Ferguson, Koontz, Doyal, Horner and Marty Harper.
Ferguson checks in by phone at his gate rather than face the angry pilots in the crew room these days.

 

[algflyr]

New East bid out for October. 38 new group 3 and above Captains positions, in a month!

Oh well.


seajay

 
There were actually no 190 Captain positions on this bid shown as vacancies. So actually the 38 new Captain positions are actually Group 2 and above... but who's counting... 🙂

 

[EastUS1]

Every bid that comes and goes proves the destructive effect of Leonidas on the west pilots.
 

 
Oh well. At NO past time were these people even the tiniest bit interested in EVER even discussing rational/real world compromise of ANY sort. Just a few fine gems from the past: "Final and binding!...It's OVER! Get used to it!" "NO fences!" You won't even get 200 cards! Send the cards, I DARE you!" "Ho ho ho! St nic is coming to town!" "The nic will be crammed down your throats!" "Those gray haired, slope shouldered old eastholes won't even see this one coming." "An inexorable glacier of righteousness.." "There's a west and an east..and we HATE you guys!" "You know why I hate you guys?...I hate every one of you'se!" "You can live on LOA93 forever!" "This is sparta!", ad infinitum/ad nauseam. All the while, their "noble" goal was merely that of placing even their brand new hires ahead of people who had already worked some 16-17 full YEARS! Among my own earliest/2007 entries: "Guys/Gals, this nic thing isn't going to really work. Can we talk?"
 
Somehow, call me crazy here, but I'm a bit short on sympathy.


 

 

[luvthe9]

New East bid out for October. 38 new group 3 and above Captains positions, in a month!
Oh well.
seajay

Ferguson and Koontz really screwed the west pilots over!!!!!!


DUMP AOL NOW!!!!


WAKE UP WEST PILOTS!!!!

 

[EastUS1]

Ferguson and Koontz really screwed the west pilots over!!!!!!


DUMP AOL NOW!!!!


WAKE UP WEST PILOTS!!!!

 
1) That much is obvious.
2) Why even care if they do or don't at this point?
3) Good luck with that last ever happening in any meaningful way. Even the smallest step in that direction would first require their exiting "sparta"/Fantasyland. Before anyone could reasonably attempt some Moses-like action with that sad lot; just consider the types of fully delusional and hopeless village idiots involved:
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YT8H9smpK3U&list=PL5DCDEE4D2ADA2659

 

[luvthe9]

1) That much is obvious.
2) Why even care if they do or don't at this point?
3) Good luck with that last ever happening in any meaningful way.

You know most of them are pretty decent guys, then you have the guys like Spinthis Tony and the other westicles that really put a bad image for the rest of their group, I'm sure most of the west knows this has been long over, they call in to the office and ask what they can do to join in the growth and are tired of being screwed over by AOL, time will tell.