2015 Pilot Discussion.

[Claxon]

.........   Personally I think this red herring is being used to garner more no votes by scaring those that won't read it for themselves.

Read it.  The American pilots should have everything delta has, including vacation, min day. 
 
What about medical insurance protection for the future, 321 replacing group three aircraft pay, E 190 proliferation and many more distorted contract linguistic loop holes.
 
Advancement requires sacrifices and courage, not the I have got mine fear, uncertainty and doubt (fud) you are spreading.
 
Doug Parker has not successfully merged two airlines to date. He wants this one bad. APA wilson made a deal with the devil under the table for future seniority list integration help from the company.
 
Take your american lanyard off, take your apa apparel off and vote no, this is your last chance to make a stand and difference.  The results will be published by bases, you will be asked one day and you need to make eye contact during your response. 
 
Is this the first time an airline dangled money, shiny aircraft and threats in front of you?
 
Vote no, it is the last chance to do so for most of you.

 

[snapthis]

 Fellow LAX/SFO pilots -


Whether the Greeks or Conquistadors made the exhortation above it is reflective of the thinking of some within APA right now who are advocating voting “NO” as a legitimate strategy for countering AAG and achieving an ILC. Forget that fact that the saying ignores the facts that if your forces are poorly trained, ill-equipped, unwisely positioned or badly led, "burning the ships" is hardly a winning strategy. The APA version of this antiquated perspective is to just keep saying “NO”, expecting something productive to happen as a result. In both cases this kind of false bravado just makes you easier to kill - no matter how good it feels to “bang the shields”. It’s just not a plan that goes anywhere good.


AAG’s earnings are out and there are no surprises – record profits and an aggressive stock buy back announcement. Both are good news for the long-term health of the airline. However, this is not a change in the tactical landscape for APA, nor does it alter the assumptions behind a strategy of continuous engagement focused on delivering additional CBA improvements going forward. We’ve previously detailed how DAL pilots used this same strategy in achieving contractual provisions that we consider professional benchmarks. We’ve explained how APA can successfully pursue a similar path, built upon the economic foundations of the current AAG offer. While some are now insisting that AAG’s performance will somehow erase the negative effects of an arbitrated outcome – which Doug Parker will surely employ – or guarantee more options for APA in the short term – we disagree. We expected to be here, we have a strategy to employ based upon the realties we face, and it’s not predicated on hope, fear or the unknown actions of others. We believe APA’s internal valuations on AAG’s asks are accurate, and that the value balance before us is very favorable towards APA’s membership. Does it solve all or our problems – of course not. Arbitration, however, will solve even fewer of our critical issues, introduce new exposures, while leaving historic improvements for AA pilots on the floor. That’s a steep price for a bet on an uncertain outcome.


Some on the APA BOD are attempting to utilize AAG’s financial news, and the emotional response of pilots to it, to stimulate a “NO” vote now. The telephone town hall conferences and recent uptick of BOD member appearances on C&R indicate they intend to leverage pilot angst, suggesting that everything is different now, and that by voting “NO” many new options will be available going forward. We disagree with this assessment and “strategy”.


Some fellow BOD members have now publicly stated that even if Parker renews the terms of the AAG JCBA offer following arbitration that they will still vote to reject it. Per Doug Parker’s comments, the lack of a unanimous APA BOD “request” in this case will cause the provisions of AAG's JCBA offer to be withdrawn, leading to only one certain outcome – the MTA terms for every pilot on the property for years to come. In other words, continued economic sacrifice by pilots (following a decade of the same) in exchange for what? The hope that AAG will come back and negotiate for things like night Sims, “promptly available” language or dropping the INT fence? At what price – and when? Some are clearly willing to sacrifice $1.7 billion in contractual increases now (including lost time/value of money back to Dec 2, 2014) in the nebulous hope that they can get something even close to that at some unspecified time in the future. That’s not a strategy, it’s just a tired replay of failed APA and USAPA “bargaining” tactics of the past that delivered nothing of value to pilots.


Meanwhile, AAG management continues to operate the enterprise – even better than they did under similar conditions at USAir with pilots bitching at them for years as they ran an on-time, profitable airline. The “No” strategy will likely lock AA pilots into an MTA-derived, Delta-lagging CBA for years to come, while we bank on another airline’s pilot group to ride in to our rescue with "foreign" leverage. Throwing away the unprecedented contractual improvements in front of AA pilots now is apparently the cost of entry to this bright future. This is leverage? This is a plan?


Just demonstrating pilot anger and saying “NO” to everything is not a strategy - we’ve had awful results doing precisely that in the past. The “NO” thinking assumes that Parker will come to APA soon, seeking relief – in exchange for what, exactly? To pay more for LOS? Announce new codeshares on Ultra-Long Haul flying? Cancel the Value Option health benefits that they can already cancel today with no penalty or APA agreement?


The potential impact of Obamacare changes is indeed a worthy topic and concern. We cannot ignore the fact that these changes are coming to all corporate plans, that under Supplement K of the CBA management is currently prohibited from canceling both the Standard and Core options, or that LOA 15-02 has risk for AAG as well via arbitration should negotiations fail to produce an agreement. APA does not exist in a bubble, and we will have to address the still developing effects of the ACA as they become known - just as will millions of other corporate employees across this country. There is real exposure to medical cost escalation for union members across the Nation - the fixes and counters to these threats will be developed over the next few years as the legislation and details become clarified. To state that just saying “NO” to this agreement now provides protection or a solution to these challenges conflicts with reality. It’s much more complicated than that.


Are changes coming to our health insurance benefits? Yes. Is the general trend known –also yes. Are the specific details available now – No. These are the issues that APA and its membership will be working to address as they take shape. Whether AAG cancels a plan, fails to live up to their legal or contractual obligations, or we end up in negotiations/arbitration per LOA 15-02, APA is likely to end up facing the decisions of a Neutral - whether in court or via a grievance proceeding (with or without LOA 15-02). That is a fact that some are not telling you about, and it will not be changed by either a “YES” or a “NO” vote on this deal. We agree that health care benefits are a critical concern, however, the allegations that dependents will be dropped (illegal under Federal law) or that 15-02 is a risk-free vehicle for AA to remove health coverage are irresponsible exaggerations, or just flat-out untrue. The full solution to medical benefit protection will continue to be a high-priority for unions across this country in the months and years ahead – and APA will be active in crafting solutions in multiple arenas.


The choice at the moment is clear – reject everything that comes our way from AAG in the hope or expectation that an opportunity for more will present itself when management seeks an unspecified deal sometime in the future, or we can secure as much value as possible for pilots now while constructively engaging AAG for more every week, month and year that follows. That's part of a broader plan to continue building upon what’s available now while also providing long overdue compensation and new jobs to APA’s membership. Arbitration, on the other hand, can only provide a significantly degraded economic basis for any subsequent gains, while introducing additional downside exposure and jeopardy. It certainly will not solve issues like LOS, LTD, Average Duty Day, Obamacare fixes or lifting AA pilot compensation above the industry. Quite the opposite - it's a big step backwards across the board.


Beyond that, what are the “vote NO” protections against the next airline industry crisis, when profit-sharing drops back to zero as airlines respond to renewed threats or economic downturns? Can anyone predict when these industry-shaking events will next occur, what form they will take, or how long the damage will last? Are “NO” voters just assuming that none of these things that have profoundly affected our careers in the past will never occur again? Is just ignoring these possibilities a thoughtful or responsible strategy? So far all we've heard in answer to these serious concerns is...silence. That's unacceptable. Meanwhile, voting “NO” now will definitely “kick the can” down the road on any full economic recovery for AA pilots….until what date, precisely? How does a “NO” vote answer these questions? Does that matter?


We think it does – all of this and more matters a lot. None of these issues are addressed by a “NO” vote, in fact that outcome introduces even more questions and delay to any comprehensive solution.


In the end, the choice is in the hands of APA’s membership. Reasonable men can honestly disagree on the best path forward, and this is not about who is tougher, stronger, nobler or more pure. This is about choosing the best course to take now - either building for the future by leveraging AA’s success starting on January 31st, or passing on that opportunity in the hope and belief that something better will come along at some point in the future.


Meanwhile, the airline will run on time and make lots of money.


Please be sure to vote prior to 0900 CST, Friday January 30th.
 
 

 

[Claxon]

 
"Decide by the 3rd of January or no retro pay."
 
"Decide by the 19th of January or no retro pay."
 
"Decide by the 30th or no retro pay."
 
Scott Kirby
 
Prediction, PHX base 98 percent yes vote.
Prediction, DFW base 91 percent yes vote.
 
Prediction, 100 percent of PHX and DFW pilots will claim they voted no.

 

[Claxon]

There is a reason you have not heard from Neil Roghair lately, he probably does not feel the love from management regarding his future.

 

[Claxon]

 

 Fellow LAX/SFO pilots -


Whether the Greeks or Conquistadors made the exhortation above it is reflective of the thinking of some within APA right now who are advocating voting “NO” as a legitimate strategy for countering AAG and achieving an ILC. Forget that fact that the saying ignores the facts that if your forces are poorly trained, ill-equipped, unwisely positioned or badly led, "burning the ships" is hardly a winning strategy. The APA version of this antiquated perspective is to just keep saying “NO”, expecting something productive to happen as a result. In both cases this kind of false bravado just makes you easier to kill - no matter how good it feels to “bang the shields”. It’s just not a plan that goes anywhere good.


AAG’s earnings are out and there are no surprises – record profits and an aggressive stock buy back announcement. Both are good news for the long-term health of the airline. However, this is not a change in the tactical landscape for APA, nor does it alter the assumptions behind a strategy of continuous engagement focused on delivering additional CBA improvements going forward. We’ve previously detailed how DAL pilots used this same strategy in achieving contractual provisions that we consider professional benchmarks. We’ve explained how APA can successfully pursue a similar path, built upon the economic foundations of the current AAG offer. While some are now insisting that AAG’s performance will somehow erase the negative effects of an arbitrated outcome – which Doug Parker will surely employ – or guarantee more options for APA in the short term – we disagree. We expected to be here, we have a strategy to employ based upon the realties we face, and it’s not predicated on hope, fear or the unknown actions of others. We believe APA’s internal valuations on AAG’s asks are accurate, and that the value balance before us is very favorable towards APA’s membership. Does it solve all or our problems – of course not. Arbitration, however, will solve even fewer of our critical issues, introduce new exposures, while leaving historic improvements for AA pilots on the floor. That’s a steep price for a bet on an uncertain outcome.


Some on the APA BOD are attempting to utilize AAG’s financial news, and the emotional response of pilots to it, to stimulate a “NO” vote now. The telephone town hall conferences and recent uptick of BOD member appearances on C&R indicate they intend to leverage pilot angst, suggesting that everything is different now, and that by voting “NO” many new options will be available going forward. We disagree with this assessment and “strategy”.


Some fellow BOD members have now publicly stated that even if Parker renews the terms of the AAG JCBA offer following arbitration that they will still vote to reject it. Per Doug Parker’s comments, the lack of a unanimous APA BOD “request” in this case will cause the provisions of AAG's JCBA offer to be withdrawn, leading to only one certain outcome – the MTA terms for every pilot on the property for years to come. In other words, continued economic sacrifice by pilots (following a decade of the same) in exchange for what? The hope that AAG will come back and negotiate for things like night Sims, “promptly available” language or dropping the INT fence? At what price – and when? Some are clearly willing to sacrifice $1.7 billion in contractual increases now (including lost time/value of money back to Dec 2, 2014) in the nebulous hope that they can get something even close to that at some unspecified time in the future. That’s not a strategy, it’s just a tired replay of failed APA and USAPA “bargaining” tactics of the past that delivered nothing of value to pilots.


Meanwhile, AAG management continues to operate the enterprise – even better than they did under similar conditions at USAir with pilots bitching at them for years as they ran an on-time, profitable airline. The “No” strategy will likely lock AA pilots into an MTA-derived, Delta-lagging CBA for years to come, while we bank on another airline’s pilot group to ride in to our rescue with "foreign" leverage. Throwing away the unprecedented contractual improvements in front of AA pilots now is apparently the cost of entry to this bright future. This is leverage? This is a plan?


Just demonstrating pilot anger and saying “NO” to everything is not a strategy - we’ve had awful results doing precisely that in the past. The “NO” thinking assumes that Parker will come to APA soon, seeking relief – in exchange for what, exactly? To pay more for LOS? Announce new codeshares on Ultra-Long Haul flying? Cancel the Value Option health benefits that they can already cancel today with no penalty or APA agreement?


The potential impact of Obamacare changes is indeed a worthy topic and concern. We cannot ignore the fact that these changes are coming to all corporate plans, that under Supplement K of the CBA management is currently prohibited from canceling both the Standard and Core options, or that LOA 15-02 has risk for AAG as well via arbitration should negotiations fail to produce an agreement. APA does not exist in a bubble, and we will have to address the still developing effects of the ACA as they become known - just as will millions of other corporate employees across this country. There is real exposure to medical cost escalation for union members across the Nation - the fixes and counters to these threats will be developed over the next few years as the legislation and details become clarified. To state that just saying “NO” to this agreement now provides protection or a solution to these challenges conflicts with reality. It’s much more complicated than that.


Are changes coming to our health insurance benefits? Yes. Is the general trend known –also yes. Are the specific details available now – No. These are the issues that APA and its membership will be working to address as they take shape. Whether AAG cancels a plan, fails to live up to their legal or contractual obligations, or we end up in negotiations/arbitration per LOA 15-02, APA is likely to end up facing the decisions of a Neutral - whether in court or via a grievance proceeding (with or without LOA 15-02). That is a fact that some are not telling you about, and it will not be changed by either a “YES” or a “NO” vote on this deal. We agree that health care benefits are a critical concern, however, the allegations that dependents will be dropped (illegal under Federal law) or that 15-02 is a risk-free vehicle for AA to remove health coverage are irresponsible exaggerations, or just flat-out untrue. The full solution to medical benefit protection will continue to be a high-priority for unions across this country in the months and years ahead – and APA will be active in crafting solutions in multiple arenas.


The choice at the moment is clear – reject everything that comes our way from AAG in the hope or expectation that an opportunity for more will present itself when management seeks an unspecified deal sometime in the future, or we can secure as much value as possible for pilots now while constructively engaging AAG for more every week, month and year that follows. That's part of a broader plan to continue building upon what’s available now while also providing long overdue compensation and new jobs to APA’s membership. Arbitration, on the other hand, can only provide a significantly degraded economic basis for any subsequent gains, while introducing additional downside exposure and jeopardy. It certainly will not solve issues like LOS, LTD, Average Duty Day, Obamacare fixes or lifting AA pilot compensation above the industry. Quite the opposite - it's a big step backwards across the board.


Beyond that, what are the “vote NO” protections against the next airline industry crisis, when profit-sharing drops back to zero as airlines respond to renewed threats or economic downturns? Can anyone predict when these industry-shaking events will next occur, what form they will take, or how long the damage will last? Are “NO” voters just assuming that none of these things that have profoundly affected our careers in the past will never occur again? Is just ignoring these possibilities a thoughtful or responsible strategy? So far all we've heard in answer to these serious concerns is...silence. That's unacceptable. Meanwhile, voting “NO” now will definitely “kick the can” down the road on any full economic recovery for AA pilots….until what date, precisely? How does a “NO” vote answer these questions? Does that matter?


We think it does – all of this and more matters a lot. None of these issues are addressed by a “NO” vote, in fact that outcome introduces even more questions and delay to any comprehensive solution.


In the end, the choice is in the hands of APA’s membership. Reasonable men can honestly disagree on the best path forward, and this is not about who is tougher, stronger, nobler or more pure. This is about choosing the best course to take now - either building for the future by leveraging AA’s success starting on January 31st, or passing on that opportunity in the hope and belief that something better will come along at some point in the future.


Meanwhile, the airline will run on time and make lots of money.


Please be sure to vote prior to 0900 CST, Friday January 30th.
 
 
 

Great waffle of opinion recipe. Thanks.  It sounds like a lot of PHX ingreediants in the mixture.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Great waffle of opinion recipe. Thanks.  It sounds like a lot of PHX ingreediants in the mixture.

I just have to laugh at this whole union "kabuki" dance.  I've read East/West/LAA/LUS material ad infinitum.  And this is the real and ONLY analysis that makes sense to me:  
 
THIS GROUP IS DIVIDED.  THIS GROUP WILL ALWAYS BE DIVIDED.
 
What is FUNNY is the PILOTS here seem to think that that voting YES OR voting NO will make any difference to the Company, the Company BOD, the Shareholders and last but not least.....THE EMPLOYEES!!!
 
In their eyes, Management has done EXACTLY what they want a Management team to do:  MANAGE.
 
Pilots have lost their leadership position in the industry and if you want to go down in the fight, you just may wish to revisit history.  Don't stick your neck out, ALPA and the APA don't have YOUR back.  If history is any guide, large unions are on their way out.
 
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/pdf/union2.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Railroad_Strike_of_1922
 
Just read the PHX and LAX reps support of the JCBA, BTW.  Parkers NEW shock troops.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Read it.  The American pilots should have everything delta has, including vacation, min day. 
 
What about medical insurance protection for the future, 321 replacing group three aircraft pay, E 190 proliferation and many more distorted contract linguistic loop holes.
 
Advancement requires sacrifices and courage, not the I have got mine fear, uncertainty and doubt (fud) you are spreading.
 
Doug Parker has not successfully merged two airlines to date. He wants this one bad. APA wilson made a deal with the devil under the table for future seniority list integration help from the company.  So, the APFA scenario could very well be off the table.  The Board didn't mind the comparably small costs the APFA contract posed.  $615 million is a different story.
 
Take your american lanyard off, take your apa apparel off and vote no, this is your last chance to make a stand and difference.  The results will be published by bases, you will be asked one day and you need to make eye contact during your response. 
 
Is this the first time an airline dangled money, shiny aircraft and threats in front of you?
 
Vote no, it is the last chance to do so for most of you.

 
The FUD is being spread by some of the Board members, especially the PHL reps.  All of the things you pointed out were FINE on January 3rd when the Board offered to ratify the JCBA if the company added the long-rate rig/calendar day.
 
The company has an A321 rate on the books.  They don't have to renegotiate anything if they decide to buy more A321s than God can count.  The company has E190 rates on th books.  They can buy more E190s than God can count, if that is what they wish to do.  We signed the MOU, and we have the MTA.  Those rates will be there even after an arbitrated COST NEUTRAL contract.
 
I am certain the company is exploring all kinds of loopholes in the Green Book that never occurred to Horton and his predecessors.  Glass will find them, and Parker will exploit them.  Green Book is no protection from anything, and a cost-neutral arbitration holds the distinct possibility of overall concessions as the few more efficient aspects of the east and west contract get melded in, and the pilots pay (cost neutral, remember?) to put those inefficiencies in the Green Book into place system wide.
 
Perhaps rejecting the proposed JCBA will be calling Parker's bluff.  Perhaps, in the aftermath, he (or the AA Board of Directors) will call our bluff and take the JCBA off the table permanently.  Parkers is under no obligation to even approach the Board requesting the proposal be honored once the arbitration is issued.
 
Of course, a cost-neutral Green Book moves up Section 6 by (some estimates) two years.  (Interesting math.)  As APA President Keith Wilson alluded to in his letter, going into Section 6 in a position of strength would be a good thing.  How long do you think Parker/Kirby/Glass can draw out Section 6 after a few years of combat with the APA?  Any estimate how many federal court injunctions will be placed in the interim while the APA tries to show just how powerful it is?  Does anyone think this extremely divided pilot group could even come up with a strike vote of more than 51%?  

 

[luvthe9]

I'll bet my son is better with money than a clown like you. I'll bet you scare the kids at parties. http://www.com/watch?v=_r0by4cPvbo&sns=em

Is he smart enough not to spend 675 dollars on a 5 dollar tie?

 

[luvthe9]

Read it.  The American pilots should have everything delta has, including vacation, min day. 
 
What about medical insurance protection for the future, 321 replacing group three aircraft pay, E 190 proliferation and many more distorted contract linguistic loop holes.
 
Advancement requires sacrifices and courage, not the I have got mine fear, uncertainty and doubt (fud) you are spreading.
 
Doug Parker has not successfully merged two airlines to date. He wants this one bad. APA wilson made a deal with the devil under the table for future seniority list integration help from the company.
 
Take your american lanyard off, take your apa apparel off and vote no, this is your last chance to make a stand and difference.  The results will be published by bases, you will be asked one day and you need to make eye contact during your response. 
 
Is this the first time an airline dangled money, shiny aircraft and threats in front of you?
 
Vote no, it is the last chance to do so for most of you.

The company wants us to fly group 3 planes at group 2 rates and group 2 at 1 rates, bet they get a bunch of 190/195s, The medical portion is enough for a no vote. When will we learn.

 

[nevergiveup]

They stole our retirement. The refused to pay the 3% agreed to. I do not trust them......period. I must vote no.

 

[luvthe9]

They stole our retirement. The refused to pay the 3% agreed to. I do not trust them......period. I must vote no.

2) The Company will “meet and confer” in good faith in order to reach agreement with the Union concerning the minimum modification or modifications necessary to avoid application of excise tax or other penalty.
If you think the “meet and confer” language allows us to negotiate the requested modifications, think again. Former Negotiating Committee chairman DiOrio, became very familiar with this language. During east-west contract negotiations, we “met and conferred” with the company regarding the A330 crew rest facility. The company made it very clear from the onset that “meet and confer” was not a negotiation; rather, it was the company explaining to us what they were going to do, and while they would listen to our input/concerns, we were unable to change it. Many of the same individuals who told us what “meet and confer” meant then are the key players today. So if you believe “meet and confer” has some different meaning for this process, you’d better think again. If the company intended for this to be a negotiation, they would have used “negotiation” in the language rather than “meet and confer.”

 

[fr8tmastr]

The company wants us to fly group 3 planes at group 2 rates and group 2 at 1 rates, bet they get a bunch of 190/195s, The medical portion is enough for a no vote. When will we learn.

Never, we just went through the exact same thing two years ago, false deadlines and all.  I think management hires just the types of pilots they want, this is why HR is so big in the interview.   They need good little do boys with just enough intelligence to move an airplane, also with no common sense at all.
 
That is how you convince these pilots to give away their futures for a chance to brag to their neighbors how they have the highest rate in the industry... for 11 months.
Idiots

 

[EastUS1]

They stole our retirement. The refused to pay the 3% agreed to. I do not trust them......period. I must vote no.

 
Anyone who does trust them's an utter fool...Period!

 

[EastUS1]

Never, we just went through the exact same thing two years ago, false deadlines and all.  I think management hires just the types of pilots they want, this is why HR is so big in the interview.   They need good little do boys with just enough intelligence to move an airplane, also with no common sense at all.
 
That is how you convince these pilots to give away their futures for a chance to brag to their neighbors how they have the highest rate in the industry... for 11 months.
Idiots

 
Pretty much...and even that grand and glorious hourly rate of it's self says little to nothing about overall compensation or lack thereof. See listings under "Shell Game"...
 
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shell%20game

 

[im back..!!]

The company wants us to fly group 3 planes at group 2 rates and group 2 at 1 rates, bet they get a bunch of 190/195s, The medical portion is enough for a no vote. When will we learn.

The medical portion is a potential increase of 200$ or so a month. For that you'd pass on a 23% raise.... Really?