2014 Pilot Discussion

[traderjake]

 
We lost our retirement when a sitting MEC refused to consider a B plan or a freeze when they were told it was time. We lost the NIC arbitration when an MEC told the MC and advisors that it was DOH or nothing...no matter what the price. It's unprofessional, juvenile and self defeating. It's unionism run amuck and I can't wait for them to close the doors on Woodlawn so we can neuter the idiots and their supporters that have cost us so much over the years.

 
We lost the opportunity to own 20% of the  company. 

 

[fatherabraham]

BF opinion ( proven R&F rep ) plus curious absence of the westie spin masters plus chippies endorsement plus total lack of trust in GH = need for extreme verbiage scrutiny IMO.

FA

 

[Claxon]

Case 1:14-cv-00328-BAH   Document 26-1   Filed 05/02/14   more interesting points..
 

Defendant-Counterclaimant Allied  Pilots  Association  (“APA”) moves this Court to compel arbitration of  the  parties’  dispute  over  the  interpretation  of  their Memorandum Of Understanding Regarding Contingent Collective Bargaining Agreement (“MOU”), and to stay proceedings pending the result of that arbitration.  In support of this motion, APA submits this  Memorandum in Support of Motion and adopts the Motion and Memorandum submitted by American  Airlines,  Inc.  (“American”),  and  US  Airways,  Inc.  (“US Airways”),  (collectively,  the   “Company”).    

 
 
Accordingly, these four parties signed the MOU in January 2013 to provide a 
framework for the integration of the pilot seniority lists in the event of a merger involving US Airways and American.  Declaration of Mark  Stephens  (“Stephens Decl.”) ¶ 5, Ex. 1 MOU. To this end, MOU Paragraph 10(a) establishes a schedule and guidelines for negotiating and  arbitrating the seniority integration dispute, and specifies that the arbitration shall be heard by a  three-member panel and shall not commence until the parties have finalized a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (“JCBA”). Id. USAPA negotiated, agreed to and had its members ratify all  of  the  MOU’s seniority-integration provisions.  Id.  Yet USAPA now seeks to escape the procedures to which it agreed.  USAPA claims that it is not bound by the MOU’s  seniority- integration provisions, because the parties could not reach agreement on the terms of the “Seniority Integration Protocol  Agreement” (“Protocol Agreement”)  referenced in Paragraph 10(f) of the MOU.  Because the deadline for finalizing a Protocol Agreement under Paragraph 10(f) has passed, USAPA argues, the rest of the seniority integration framework to  which the parties agreed in MOU Paragraphs 10, 26 and 27 is no longer in effect. The truth is that the parties were able to agree on all material aspects of a Protocol Agreement – which incorporated an agreement, pursuant to MOU Paragraph 10(a), concerning  how to select the arbitrators for the seniority arbitration panel – save one: USAPA insisted on remaining a party to the seniority integration even after it ceased to be a collective bargaining 
representative for the pilots at US Airways
 

Stephens Decl. ¶¶ 33-34.  According to Stephens:  
APA and [the American pilot merger committee] were unwilling to agree to [USAPA’s  insistence  on]  a reservation of rights, for the precise reason that USAPA had argued to the court in Addington    v.  US  Airline  Pilots  Ass’n, No. 13- cv-00471, Doc. 298 (D. Ariz. Jan. 10, 2014), that only the certified bargaining representative is a proper party to the seniority list arbitration, albeit with separate committees representing the pre-merger seniority list pilots, and that APA would  be that representative when the arbitration would occur under the MOU.  The court held 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.”   Stephens Decl., Ex. 11 (quoting Addington v. U.S. Airline Pilots Ass'n, CV-13-00471-PHX-ROS[/size]

 

[luvthe9]

You are in the top 500 no?' Probably has little effect on you.... Needs to be looked at carefully..

More like in the top 275, he was one of the first I bet to sign LOA93 without looking at the details, especially the part about the snap back at the end of 5 years, wording and language by Mowery cost us that one. Our lawyers won't be here when this is over but we will have to live with the results.


We screw these agreements every time and have not learned, I just don't want any mistakes this time.


This protocol language leaves way to many loopholes for me.

 

[algflyr]

Looks like it passed 7-4...

 

[luvthe9]

Looks like it passed 7-4...

Well let's hope for the best!

 

[algflyr]

Well let's hope for the best!

 
Agreed...

 

[Piedmont1984]

An amendment was approved. Para 16 deleted. So now the APA and company must sign off on the amended PA.

 

[algflyr]

An amendment was approved. Para 16 deleted. So now the APA and company must sign off on the amended PA.

 
16 just deleted? I thought USAPA had worked on that wording as it was the last sticking point. So what's to govern the implementation of the new list? Whenever the company feels like it?

 

[Piedmont1984]

 
16 just deleted? I thought USAPA had worked on that wording as it was the last sticking point. So what's to govern the implementation of the new list? Whenever the company feels like it?

Just sayin.

Irony - the opposite of wrinkly.

 

[Al Legheny]

http://www.thestreet.com/story/12866433/1/american-air-and-us-airways-pilots-reach-tentative-deal-on-seniority.html
 
I have been to the BPR meeting today and this is a little premature.  There is no agreement that the BPR passed that I am aware of? 
 
It's been open session all day.

 

[Phoenix]

Someone posted yesterday that it's time to find your intestinal fortitude (Claxon?). Same goes for BF who votes against the PA out of fear. He avoids any fallout by claiming he just voted no. Easy way out. Politically expedient. Kinda like just voting no for the MOU and then saying 'hey, don't look at me'.

I voted against the MOU.

You could accuse me of taking the easy way out. You could say it was easy to vote against the MOU because there was no way it wasn't gonna pass. You could accuse me of taking the easy way out so I could blame others if it didn't work.

Regarding those who voted FOR it, I could accuse them of being too stupid know that Doug would make more than $1B extra each year...

So what? What does pointing fingers at each other get us? What does it get us to have both sides saying, "You guys are weak." "No! You guys are the cowards." "No! You guys are ..."

Whatever, we should just vote and move on.... Not that it will happen. Pilots were at each others throats long before I got here and they will be still long after I have gone. Whatever.

 

[algflyr]

http://www.thestreet.com/story/12866433/1/american-air-and-us-airways-pilots-reach-tentative-deal-on-seniority.html
 
I have been to the BPR meeting today and this is a little premature.  There is no agreement that the BPR passed that I am aware of? 
 
It's been open session all day.

 
The article was talking about the TA that was reached and emailed to the membership yesterday.

 

[traderjake]

More like in the top 275, he was one of the first I bet to sign LOA93 without looking at the details, especially the part about the snap back at the end of 5 years, wording and language by Mowery cost us that one.

 
The PIT ALPA  Reps said in writing to vote against LOA 93 because there was no snap back and the company said the investors would not agree to pay snap backs.
 
Pay snap back and Pension investagation were wild goose chases 
 
As usual your interuption of events is a little off.

 

[Piedmont1984]

I voted against the MOU.

You could accuse me of taking the easy way out. You could say it was easy to vote against the MOU because there was no way it wasn't gonna pass. You could accuse me of taking the easy way out so I could blame others if it didn't work.

Regarding those who voted FOR it, I could accuse them of being too stupid know that Doug would make more than $1B extra each year...

So what? What does pointing fingers at each other get us? What does it get us to have both sides saying, "You guys are weak." "No! You guys are the cowards." "No! You guys are ..."

Whatever, we should just vote and move on.... Not that it will happen. Pilots were at each others throats long before I got here and they will be still long after I have gone. Whatever.

I voted against the MOU as well.

I agree with you. BF was just being honest. He can live with or without a PA. He just could not vote yes for something which would in all probability bring in a west MC which would resurrect the Nic issue. I just don't think a west MC is avoidable. But if the PA is scrapped, all eyes on D.C.