AA still will not bargain in good faith

[EX_AA_HDQ]

I guess I'm just lost here...

I didn't feel I was anti-union in my initial posts...if I was, forgive me...I don't feel eolesen, FWAAA, or the others (Frequent_FlierCA) or myself are biased towards management...Eric and I are former management, sure...but I don't think we're biased...even though I was accused of still working for the company, and being Arpey's lapdog...

The union guys here, to me, for he most part, have a sense of entitlement, and want to ignore the economic conditions...you refuse to acknowledge what PUP is really about, and continue to think Arpey is stealing from your paycheck...

You refuse to acknowledge the consequences of your own choices to get into the airline industry...and now you want to blame someone...

First it was Carty, now it's Arpey...funny how you pine for Crandall (really?)...

No, I DON'T work for the company anymore....and NO I'm not biased toward management...

In fact, I voiced alot of criticism while I was there...but for y'all to think everyting is so "cushy" for management is pure fallacy...as I offered before, go spend a few days at HDQ before you criticize them as unnecesary pencil pushers...we sure as hell never did that to the front line folks...not in my department...

 

[Winglet]

Yes, I think you are lost. Ask a pilot where you are. We're pretty good at knowing where we are, navigating to the desired point, and actually leading people.

There's another old truism that we learned in management school . . .

"Every management gets the unions it deserves."

Hmmm. Labor strife, executive compensation, management effectiveness, customer satisfaction, and profit?

Let's apply and compare Southwest to say . . . . American, United, and US Airways.

See any trend here?

 

[Hopeful]

I guess I'm just lost here...

I didn't feel I was anti-union in my initial posts...if I was, forgive me...I don't feel eolesen, FWAAA, or the others (Frequent_FlierCA) or myself are biased towards management...Eric and I are former management, sure...but I don't think we're biased...even though I was accused of still working for the company, and being Arpey's lapdog...

The union guys here, to me, for he most part, have a sense of entitlement, and want to ignore the economic conditions...you refuse to acknowledge what PUP is really about, and continue to think Arpey is stealing from your paycheck...

You refuse to acknowledge the consequences of your own choices to get into the airline industry...and now you want to blame someone...

First it was Carty, now it's Arpey...funny how you pine for Crandall (really?)...

No, I DON'T work for the company anymore....and NO I'm not biased toward management...

In fact, I voiced alot of criticism while I was there...but for y'all to think everyting is so "cushy" for management is pure fallacy...as I offered before, go spend a few days at HDQ before you criticize them as unnecesary pencil pushers...we sure as hell never did that to the front line folks...not in my department...

Let's clarify something here and I only speak for myself....When I refer to "management" and "greed" I refer to the execs at top, not the level 5's and 6s, etc.
I have heard in this forum those obviously pro company preaching how our unions have not served us well and we should seek new representation. It's even been said we don't need representation at all. I'm sorry, but with greedy airline managers, we need a union, although a flawed, company one.

But then we express a desire to fight for what was taken from us, we are called unrealistic and are reminded that we are lucky to have a job.

But its not unrealistic for the fat cats to continually real the rewards, is it?

 

[eolesen]

I guess name-calling the professional pilots of AA "Pirates" is the best you can do. Make sure the next time you fly on AA that you pop your head in the cockpit and tell the Capt and FO you think their overpaid "Pirates."

There's a difference between the individuals in the profession and the union representing them. Just ask the wrenches.

Compared to how it was perceived under Darrah, Lavoy, Hunter, and Sovich, APA now looks and acts like a second rate union.

 

[Winglet]

There's a difference between the individuals in the profession and the union representing them. Just ask the wrenches.

Compared to how it was perceived under Darrah, Lavoy, Hunter, and Sovich, APA now looks and acts like a second rate union.

There was difference under the past leadership you mention. The past leadership you mention are overwhelming viewed as failures by the APA membership. They were docile and easily manipulated by a slippery management. Things are different now and unity within the ranks, I think, is very good.

It's going to take a while, but we will get a contract. But it's going to be messy. It probably won't get terribly close to restoring compensation that management has been taking away, but it's going to be a substantial gain. And we're not going to give away our jobs by accepting the company proposal that would allow our jobs to be outsourced to Eagle, code-shared away, or "alliance-ized." If they continue their regressive proposals to an already very onerous contract, and stonewall by refusing to even meet, then they can expect eventual self-help, hopefully without the certainty of the workers being Bush-wacked.

Like I said, this is basic union-busting 101 going on. Nothing new. All of it is very predictable and by the book. The company has their hired guns and they're using the classic playbook.

Fortunately, there looks like there will be a President and Congress in office that is finally NOT blatantly anti-labor. Further, hopefully, this is the end of the corporate-free-for-all "rules don't apply to me" imperial senior executive corporate aristocracy . . . many of which have done grave damage to this country and it's citizens.

 

[FrequentFlierCA]

I'm all for a debate about the merits of each side's good faith (or lack thereof) but please, let's not pour propagandistic untruths on the real issues in order to confuse them. AA has not refused to meet APA. APA requested the help of a federal mediator, and its his schedule that determines the meetings.

If you want someone to blame for the slow pace of meetings, look no further than Captain Hill.

 

[Winglet]

I'm all for a debate about the merits of each side's good faith (or lack thereof) but please, let's not pour propagandistic untruths on the real issues in order to confuse them. AA has not refused to meet APA. APA requested the help of a federal mediator, and its his schedule that determines the meetings.

If you want someone to blame for the slow pace of meetings, look no further than Captain Hill.

The mediator is not required to hold talks and he's said as much. The APA wants to meet to try and make progress between mediated meetings, but the company refuses to without the mediator present.

Nice try to blame the APA President, but, that doesn't pass the critical thinking test.

Who benefits most by stalling the negotiations? Ans: Not the APA

Standard stuff.

Recommended reading for understanding the dynamics of airline labor negotiations:

Flying the Line

Confessions of a Union Buster

 

[The Goose]

The mediator is not required to hold talks and he's said as much. The APA wants to meet to try and make progress between mediated meetings, but the company refuses to without the mediator present.

Nice try to blame the APA President, but, that doesn't pass the critical thinking test.

Who benefits most by stalling the negotiations? Ans: Not the APA

Standard stuff.

Recommended reading for understanding the dynamics of airline labor negotiations:

Flying the Line

Confessions of a Union Buster

Maybe we might see in the next week or so the tack negotiations will take, depending on which party actually walks away with the presidency and perhaps control of both congressional houses.

 

[Winglet]

Maybe we might see in the next week or so the tack negotiations will take, depending on which party actually walks away with the presidency and perhaps control of both congressional houses.

I don't think it will have any affect whatsoever. The tone of the executive branch towards airline labor won't be known until self-help is imminent. Given the vast power that corporate CEOs in this country wield, I think they would view an Obama administration with a combination of contempt and unconcern about what he thinks.

 

[Flyboy4u]

I don't think it will have any affect whatsoever. The tone of the executive branch towards airline labor won't be known until self-help is imminent. Given the vast power that corporate CEOs in this country wield, I think they would view an Obama administration with a combination of contempt and unconcern about what he thinks.

Obama is Pro "UNION", something we haven't seen in a long ( 8 plus years )...He is about the "Average" Joe, and not the "JOE" plumber...I personally know many "JOE" plumbers who need "NO Help", and are voting for the McCain/Palin ticket for a reason? Hmmm....What would that be? More than $250K? Not that, Right? It's time for this Country to Wakeup and STOP the PUPS!....The "Average" person runs this country, and will always Rule....CONGRATS OBAMA!!!! Finally, America Got it RIGHT!

 

[Winglet]

Obama won't be any different than any of the others. Probably more like Jimmy Carter if you had to make a comparison. Hopefully not that incompetent and self-rightous, but the jury's out. Both choices on the ballot for President this year were disheartening and unacceptable. I voted for neither. McCain because he's more of the same, and Obama because he's an empty suit and, I think, dishonest.

I heard him tonight say we're all going to have to "sacrifice" and he didn't say it to just the people with over $250k income. The votes aren't even counted yet and he's already telling me I'm going to be paying more taxes . . . . probably to pay for other people's mortgages, other people's medical care, other people's pensions, more for my electricity (I wonder if Al Gore gets an exception), etc, etc, etc.

Both parties are all about big money and pushing social agendas. They're all cut from the same cloth, just different colors.

 

[AirLUVer]

The union will soldier on, bargain in good faith on their side, then finally when the mediator can't possibly ignore any longer that the company is deliberately stalling, there will be an impasse declared. Maybe just prior to that, the company will spring some new chaff out there to further obfuscate the issue. So far the company has done exactly what everyone expected.

I personally know one of the guys on the negotiating team for the company, prior to the NMB Mediator being assigned the union walked out of almost every meeting scheduled. The union representatives would not stay on agenda, and would start discussing pending grievances. When the AA rep's wouldn't go off tangent, they (APA rep's) would walk out. The APA has been working for an impasse to be declared since Lloyd has taken over the leadership. The big problem will be if it is declared and they are forced to binding arbitration.

 

[Bob Owens]

I personally know one of the guys on the negotiating team for the company, prior to the NMB Mediator being assigned the union walked out of almost every meeting scheduled. The union representatives would not stay on agenda, and would start discussing pending grievances. When the AA rep's wouldn't go off tangent, they (APA rep's) would walk out. The APA has been working for an impasse to be declared since Lloyd has taken over the leadership. The big problem will be if it is declared and they are forced to binding arbitration.

So the union reps would not stay with the company's agenda? Why should they? The union is not subordinate at negotiations. Binding arbitration? Where did that come from?

 

[Winglet]

Binding arbitration? I can't imagine the APA agreeing to that. I think the APA will get released for self-help sometime in the late spring. Hopefully an Obama administration that is not blatantly anti-labor will let the process run its course.

And you're right Bob, AA wants total control of the negotiations. ALL the proposals they've presented are grossly regressive, from getting rid of scope to raising work hours to mandating a new bidding system that would probably kill 1000-1500 pilot jobs.

If they want to get rid of pilots, they can drive the company over the cliff and declare bankruptcy. Even if management hints at it there will be hundreds, if not 1500 pilots retire immediately, take their lump sums, and jump ship before the corporate captains steer a course for the rocks.

Or they could negotiate in good faith with their employees and set a new tone of labor relations.

 

[AirLUVer]

Binding arbitration? I can't imagine the APA agreeing to that. I think the APA will get released for self-help sometime in the late spring. Hopefully an Obama administration that is not blatantly anti-labor will let the process run its course.

APA doesn't have to agree to binding arbitration, it can be forced upon them with an executive order. The last democratic president stopped the last APA strike.

It is not about staying on agenda as much as discussing things that are outside of the section 6 negotiations in the negotiating sessions. I.E. outstanding grievances. And again, the ones that walked out of those meetings were the APA negotiators, not the AA negotiators.