2015 Pilot Discussion.

[luvthe9]

Did you get a refund yet?

There will be no refund for anyone probably till the end of the year.

 

[luvthe9]

Can't do anything but sit there and take hundreds of upgrades. Many of them 330 captain seats. You are correct. And the big summer/ retirement one is being drawn up right now. What is in your bid west pilots?

The kids are stil locked in their PHX playpen.

 

[AWE Dog]

Being based at home. That's all I care about. Believe it or not, not everybody has your shortman/little dick syndrome Mike. Most of us are happy right here and would never consider commutting for any seat.

Based at home, Dallas?

 

[dariencc]

EVERYBODY sees you scabs for what you are. Most importantly, the Arbitration panel.

 
Yes, we all know about what the rest of the world thinks, especially the arbitration panel. 
 
What is more interesting is what the FBI and CIA think.  They wisely branded you as a mentally defective wack job, unfit to serve as an agent of the US government.  This accurate assessment is substantiated every time you post one of your unhinged rants. 
 
You have a documented history of unnatural seething over personal disappointments and rejections, coupled with a childlike need to make others feel proud of you.  The FBI's professional staff of polygraph experts is trained to focus on such infantile traits.  In addition, the interrogations are necessarily thorough in uncovering the sexual deviancies which often accompany arrested development.  Perversions such as uncontrollable masterbatory urges, dominatrix defecation fantasies and candaulism are clearly unacceptable for the most elite levels of the federal service.
 
Lucky for you that the fun AWA hiring regimen was far less stringent than that of our distinguished federal agencies.  Ditto for the admissions process at the less than stellar South Texas College of Law.
 
 
 
Polygraph Statement of Mr. Mark C. Doyal
I had always wanted to be an FBI agent. With that singular goal in mind, I enrolled in Southwest Texas State University in the fall of 1988. My major was Law Enforcement with a minor in Economics. I graduated in December 1990 and I took the written FBI exam that next January. I passed and was scheduled for an interview in March of 1991. The interview went great and I achieved a perfect score. However, the FBI determined that I needed more experience and informed me to re-apply in two years. I immediately took the Law School Admissions Test and applied to South Texas College of Law in Houston, Texas. I was excepted for the class beginning in January 1991. I was fortunate in that I was able to obtain employment on a full time basis with the Harris County District Attorney's Office - Economic Crime Division. I remember my new boss asking me after he interviewed me what I planned on achieving with a law career. I immediately responded that I wanted a career with the FBI. Everyone who I met knew that that was my goal.
Working full time for the District Attorney while attending law school at night was tough, but I knew I had to get the right kind of experience and education to make myself the best possible candidate for the FBI. Upon graduation from law school (Dec. 1994), I re-applied with the FBI. I was scheduled to take the written exam on a Monday following the Bar exam. I again passed the written exam and had to wait to be selected for the interview. I wrote letters nearly every month to the applicant coordinator asking to be interviewed and explaining what I was doing each month. Finally, I was selected to be interviewed in Kansas City in July of 1996. Seven of us in our region were selected to go, but only two of us passed the interview process. Myself and another girl. I was on top of the world, knowing that I was about to realize my dream.
The polygraph exam was next, August 7, 1996, in San Antonio, Texas. I knew I had nothing to worry about, since I had never violated the FBI's drug policy and I had not lied on my application. The agent administering the polygraph noted during the pre- polygraph interview that I had attended a university that he believed was a "party school" and that I needed to tell him what drugs I used when I went there. I stated that I had taken none, that I didn't live on campus, I lived in another city, and that I was an older student and wasn't influenced to do such things. He repeated that that couldnít be the case and told me again to tell him what illegal drugs I had done. I countered again that that just wasn't the case and that I was telling the truth. This went back and forth for about 10 minutes and he seemed to be getting upset that I wouldnít admit to taking drugs. Finally he stated that if I was lying he was about to find out. I was upset at the unbelievable accusations he was making. Up until that point I had been treated with the utmost professionalism by the FBI staff, now I was being treated like an accused criminal. After the polygraph was over, he told me I had failed. I almost passed out in disbelief
I wrote several letters to FBI Director Freeh, and in October of 1996 I was polygraphed again, by another agent with the first agent who polygraphed me present. The results were the same, he told me I had failed. I just could not believe it. I had not lied on the polygraph. Even the first agent that had polygraphed me told me as I was leaving that he now believed me, that I was telling the truth. I wrote the Director several more times to no avail, my application was terminated in November of that year. My dreams were shattered.
Finally, as a side note, I later applied with the Secret Service. I did just as well in the testing and interview stages as I had with the FBI. When it came time for the polygraph, the agent administering it asked me if I had been polygraphed before. I told him yes, and under what circumstances and the results. He thanked me for my honesty, unhooked me from the polygraph without testing me and told me that he would have to contact his superiors for their advice. I could not believe it. Two months later I received a form letter stating that I was no longer competitive with the other agent applicants. I am a licensed attorney, professional pilot, have law enforcement experience and with top scores but I was not competitive? Obviously I had been "black balled" by the erroneous polygraph results from the FBI.
I will probably always be effected by the injustice of what happened. I wrote a final letter to Director Freeh this summer asking for another polygraph. I even offered to pay all expenses associated with retaking it if I were to fail. I guess I still haven't accepted that you can fail a polygraph while telling the truth. Or the fact that the FBI could make this kind of mistake. I had always looked up to that agency as the pinnacle of professionalism. I received the same form letter back that I had received almost two years earlier. It is a shame, since all I wanted to do was to have a chance to serve my country and make my family proud.
 
Sincerely,
 
Mark C. Doyal

 

[end_of_alpa]

Re: APA Designation a/West Pilots Merger Committee
This email and attachment serves to advise you that a Preliminary Arbitration Board
consisting of Joshua Javits, Stephen Crable, and Shyam Das has "order[ ed] APA to designate a
West Pilo!s Merger Committee as a full participant in the seniority integration process."
For months, APA, American, and USAPA had been unable to resolve a dispute over the
appointment of a West Pilots Merger Committee; however, they resolved the dispute in
mediation before George Cohen by agreeing that a Preliminary Arbitration Board of three
arbitrators would decide the question set forth in Paragraph 8 a. and b. of the attached Seniority
Integration Protocol Agreement. Following briefing and several days of live testimony, the
Preliminary Arbitration Board issued its decision on January 9, 2015. While that Board has
continuing jurisdiction to resolve any dispute related to their decision, neither the record of that
proceeding nor the opinion may be disclosed to this panel.
Eischen
Jaffe
Vaughn
January 12, 2015
Page 2
APA received one request for the appointment of a West Pilots' Merger Committee from
counsel representing the former America West pilots, Messrs. Marty Harper and Jeff Freund.
Accordingly, APA designates the pilots identified by Messrs. Harper and Freund as the West
Pilots Merger Committee.

Oh, its not over yet.

 

[A320 Driver]

Oh, its not over yet.

Oh, yes it is. They won the arbitration, now let it go!

 

[nycbusdriver]

Oh, yes it is. They won the arbitration, now let it go!

 
I agree.  Let it go.  But I wish the APA, which now has the authority to appoint a committee to protect west interest, 
open an election by west members to present their choices for represenation on their MC.  
 
None of the whack-a-doodle AOL leadership was elected by the west members, so they have no claim to automatically staff their merger committee.
 
Granted, they will probably elect the same nut jobs...but at least the APA would have given them a choice in the matter.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Oh, yes it is. They won the arbitration, now let it go!

 
 

 
I agree.  Let it go.  But I wish the APA, which now has the authority to appoint a committee to protect west interest, 
open an election by west members to present their choices for represenation on their MC.  
 
None of the whack-a-doodle AOL leadership was elected by the west members, so they have no claim to automatically staff their merger committee.
 
Granted, they will probably elect the same nut jobs...but at least the APA would have given them a choice in the matter.

Then you better talk to USAPA because the law says they (the West) don't.  And you just brought up the problematic point of whom exactly "elected" the West AOL leadership or their merger committee.  USAPA has rights, too.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Oh, BTW we can't MAKE USAPA (the four National Officers) do what they can (and can't) do.  

 

[Res Judicata]

Oh, its not over yet.

Yes it is scab, you're just to stupid to know. Keep spending those stolen dues. THAT is a subject that isn't hardly over.

 

[Res Judicata]

Then you better talk to USAPA because the law says they (the West) don't.  And you just brought up the problematic point of whom exactly "elected" the West AOL leadership or their merger committee.  USAPA has rights, too.

The right to Fk over a minority group IS NOT A RIGHT ASSHOLE!

 

[EastCheats]

Oh, its not over yet.

Is that what you said when you lost the election, JJ?

4%

Loser.

Vice President (please check one) Total Percent
Stephen Bradford 1089 34.51%
Jamie Javurek 136 4.31%
Randy Dopp 803. 25.44%
Jeff Koontz 1128 35.74%
Total 3156

 

[end_of_alpa]

Is that what you said when you lost the election, JJ?

4%

Loser.

Vice President (please check one) Total Percent
Stephen Bradford 1089 34.51%
Jamie Javurek 136 4.31%
Randy Dopp 803. 25.44%
Jeff Koontz 1128 35.74%
Total 3156

So what.

 

[EastCheats]

So what.

4% means get a clue. You're too nutty even for the East.

 

[luvthe9]

Luis,
 
From AA
 

Dear LOS Supporter,
We would all agree the comapany's offer of 2 years LOS is insulting at best. There is another component of the company's latest offer which is just as heinous, which is the Medical Demand. In essence, the company is asking you to afford them the ability through future abitration to transfer medical cost back to the pilot group. The language also unilaterally gives the company the ability to terminate your medical coverage as we currently know it, should an agreement not be reached between the parties.
What can you do?
1. Read the language. I will post it.
2. Read DFW Chair Tom Westbrooke's response to this component, which I have copied and pasted below from the C&R thread "The Medical Elephant in the Room".
3. Point this fact out to the Captains you fly with and show them the language.
4. Send a soundoff requesting this be removed from any future agreements should the company's offer go down to defeat.
Tom Westbrook's response:
Matthew has hit the nail on the head.
Tom Westbrook's response
For those who don't read "lawyer" - please allow me to translate.
To begin with - every pilot should open up their contract and read Supplement K.
Supplement K is our collectively bargained medical benefits. 
a. The Company will offer two medical options in the Medical Plan: (i) the Standard medical
option (contractual) and (ii) the Core medical option which is the Health Savings Account compatible (non-contractual) medical option. All Medical Plan provisions are subject to
change at the Company's sole discretion with the exception of:
(1) the Standard medical option design features in the Chart of Active Medical Coverage
Option Design Features in subparagraph (I) below,
(2) the employee contribution methodology for the Standard and Core medical options
described in subparagraphs (B) and (E) below,
(3) changes noted in subparagraph (D) below,
(4) the right to purchase dental coverage on similar terms as provided to eligible pilots
prior to January 1, 2013,
(5) the provisions of Supplement F(1) paragraphs 4 and 5(g), and
(6) the provisions of Supplement Z.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The letter demanded by the company would be triggered "In the event the Company determines the Standard or Core design options provided for in this Agreement(each and "Option") would be or become subject to an excise tax or other penalty included in The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA) or any excise tax or penalty which may replace the PPACA".
Read that carefully - if the COMPANY would determine if either the Standard or Core plan WOULD BE or BECOME subject to a tax OR OTHER PENALTY.....then the we are agreeing to meet to determine what concessions we would have to make to reduce plan coverage to avoid any tax or penalty.
IF we can't agree (what do you think the chances are of that happening?), then an arbitrator will decide to modify our contractual language to bring the plan below the level where it would be subject to the excise tax OR OTHER PENALTY (undefined). If the tax becomes effective before an arbitrator can rule, the company would be able to unilaterally impose changes to our contractual plan.
Think about this for a moment - this letter has the effect of pre-agreeing to let an arbitrator modify or eliminate our collectively bargained medical plans if THE COMPANY determines one of our plans "would be" subject to "an excise tax or other penalty."
We are being asked to sell our contractual rights to bargain over (or to refuse to accept) changes the company might seek should our two contractually required medical plans become subject to an Obama-care tax that was specifically designed to target plans that offered benefits the government deemed "too generous." 
The only way the company will be able to avoid this tax is if they convince us to modify our contract and they are trying to buy our pre-approval to modifications years in advance and with no way to know what modifications might be demanded of us.
The Standard Plan coverages and contribution rates for both Standard and Core plans are OURS and any changes must be bargained - unless we sell our rights to do so. Is a year's advance on a pay raise enough to buy your rights to a contractually agreed to medical plan?
Think about that long and hard.........
tom