AAA ALPA Topic 8/24/07 - 8/31-07

[BoeingBoy]

Since we're talking about what "others are saying"......but first an apology - I misspoke, Pollock was MEC chairman in the fall of 2004, not Stephan.

Excerpt of Q & A's from mid-September 2005 meeting between Bill Pollock/MEC officers and MDA pilots:

"All MDA pilots other than “Combined Eligibility Listâ€￾ (CEL) pilots at MDA have been furloughed from Airways and as such, in order to return to Airways to fly other than at MDA, will have to be recalled."

Seems like the arbitrator just put the former MDA pilots exactly where the East MEC (and USA320Pilot) said they belonged......

Jim

 

[TechBoy]

USA320Pilot answers: The same as it was for every other US Airways or America West employee. Both companies were operating as a going concern and nobody can predict the future.

Now this is rich. There is no doubt that, absent a merger, US would have taken drastic actions, ranging from significantly reducing its fleet to liquidation. Absent the merger, there would have been massive layoffs of pilots at US.

But now you argue that no one can see into the future and therefore your career expectations were full. Of course you are contradicting your past self many times over. You were the one who insisted that every concession must be taken because the company might liquidate at any moment. Care to square that circle?

Just curious, but how did Nic (when implemented) affect you personally? Just in round numbers.

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

For a minute, let's assume Prater made those comments. If the MDA lawsuit is successful that would mean a legitimate dispute over the Nicola award would be forwarded to Nic for resolution since he still retains jurisdiction in the matter. (I believe the west already has a dispute over the Nic list for not addresseing the B757 LOA). Let's take it a step further and assume there is some legal long shot technicality that results in the award being thrown out. Do you honestly believe the results will be that much different with a new arbitrator? You guys will ride the DOH horse in the desert once again and die there. Relative seniority will prevail as the only FAIR solution!!

Lark,

As I indicated to BoeingBoy "it's not my opinion or previous comments that count, it's others when discussing this matter."

Since you elected to "chime in" on too on this discussion between HP_FA and myself, if you want to discuss point number 2, what's your opinion on John Prater's comment above in my response to BoeingBoy? Furthermore, would you answer each of my questions in the post above and give us your opinion "of the US Airways pilots who were flying at MDA and that Nicolau did not give them credit?"

I have a gut feeling you will not answer each question above...

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

Now what USA320Pilot had to say about the status of the MDA pilots - after the PID:

"Thus, the only way a person can be a MDA pilot is to be furloughed from mainline, then hired to MDA from a wholly owned carrier via the CEL list, or hired off the street."

"The US Airways pilots flying at MDA are, by default, furloughed US Airways and not active mainline pilots."

And what did USA320Pilot think of the MDA lawsuit (and he even threw in another "their furloughed and not active" remark):

"While it's doubtful the MDA pilots will obtain relief, this lawsuit will probably wind up hurting everyone (especially the MDA pilots) and accomplish nothing positive, especially if the MDA pilots ever try to return to the mainline and work at US Airways after a recall. I would not want to be a co-pilot who sued the captain, which would not be a good experience for the newly recalled pilot."

Jim

 

[ussnark]

Relative seniority will prevail as the only FAIR solution!!

But Relative Seniority would first demand that the two entities be equal in every way. Equal contracts, staffing, etc. Then, and only then would such a division be considered, "equal", otherwise the most efficient group will always be penalized.

Case in point. To equal the vacation parts, the east group must "hire" some 620 pilots just to equal the inefficiencies of the west group. That is a twenty percent increase in the size of the east group.

 

[TheLarkAscending]

Lark,

Since you elected to "chime in" on too on this discussion between HP_FA and myself

Might I take this opportunity to remind you that the discussion is not just between you and hp_fa, if that were the case it would have been taken to a private forum, such as the PM system. Since it was posted here for all to see, it is available for comment from anyone and everyone. I'll chime in anytime I'd like to, so long as I abide by the Rules and Regs set forth by the admin/mods. Should you have a problem with that, you have several options available: You may choose to scoot over my posts without perusal, or place my name on your ignore list and they will not appear for your reading pleasure.

Here (since you've asked) is my complete answer to all of your questions: Everything should have been settled, amicably and mutually, prior to arbitration during the negotiation process. Had this award been kind to you, personally, you would be conspicuous by your absence from this or any other discussion pertaining to the award. You may now resume your repetitive volleying regarding your perceived entitlements.

 

[P51Pilot]

For a minute, let's assume Prater made those comments. If the MDA lawsuit is successful that would mean a legitimate dispute over the Nicola award would be forwarded to Nic for resolution since he still retains jurisdiction in the matter. (I believe the west already has a dispute over the Nic list for not addresseing the B757 LOA). Let's take it a step further and assume there is some legal long shot technicality that results in the award being thrown out. Do you honestly believe the results will be that much different with a new arbitrator? You guys will ride the DOH horse in the desert once again and die there. Relative seniority will prevail as the only FAIR solution!!

As evidenced by the ALPA president's own comments in defense of the "process", the Arbitrator is free to order people from tallest to shortest. He isn't bound to use the date the merger was announced as the starting point. If the award is tossed and the process starts all over next year, he/she has the authority to look at the present list and "relative seniority" to make a decision just as easily. It would be quite a different picture a year from now, but you know it has nothing to do with attrition.

 

[dariencc]

Great catch, Jim! This is a classic example of USA320Pilot acting not as an "analyst," as he often claims, but as a shill for the Give Away Gang on the MEC.

Now what USA320Pilot had to say about the status of the MDA pilots - after the PID:

"Thus, the only way a person can be a MDA pilot is to be furloughed from mainline, then hired to MDA from a wholly owned carrier via the CEL list, or hired off the street."

"The US Airways pilots flying at MDA are, by default, furloughed US Airways and not active mainline pilots."

If this was true, then why did ALPA offer the MDA pilots a settlement of their lawsuit?

And what did USA320Pilot think of the MDA lawsuit (and he even threw in another "their furloughed and not active" remark):

"While it's doubtful the MDA pilots will obtain relief, this lawsuit will probably wind up hurting everyone (especially the MDA pilots) and accomplish nothing positive, especially if the MDA pilots ever try to return to the mainline and work at US Airways after a recall. I would not want to be a co-pilot who sued the captain, which would not be a good experience for the newly recalled pilot."

Here the faux business analyst is posing as a legal expert as well: Doubtful the MDA pilots will obtain relief? He had no clue when he wrote that, and was simply repeating the self serving propaganda of Pollock and Snider.

I would not want to be a co-pilot who sued the captain, which would not be a good experience for the newly recalled pilot."
To their credit, the MDA plaintiffs don't give a **** what this blowhard thinks. Many if not most mainline captains are proud of the MDA group and the feisty unity they have shown in resisting an unethical union leadership. Go for the gold, guys!

 

[hp_fa]

OK, I will try and answer to the best of my ability. I ask you to understand that I do not have access to the information that you have in regards to internal East ALPA information and that much of my information has been what I have seen and read online. I also, obviously, do not have similar information from the West ALPA folks.

HP_FA,

HP_FA asked: "How so? What were you career expectations in mid-May, 2005?"

USA320Pilot answers: The same as it was for every other US Airways or America West employee. Both companies were operating as a going concern and nobody can predict the future. Furthermore, US Airways did not file its merger paperwork with the federal government using the "failing carrier" guidelines, as for example, TWA did with American as a means to influence regulatory approval.

I believe no employee should prosper at the expense of the other, which clearly happended in the Nicolau Award. For example, there is not one AWA pilot who had a widebody job in their career expectation, but with the Nicolau Award that has signficantly changed. Is that fair?

Fair is in the eye of the beholder. Many here have posted thoughts to what they consider fair and for whatever reason most of them feel victimized to one extent or another and often for varying reasons.

From my perspective I honestly disagree with your assertion that US Airways was a going concern in mid-May 2005. At a point in time around the Christmas meltdown of 2004 Dan Reed had an article in USA Today that mentioned possible liquidation for US Airways. ( http://www.usatoday.com/travel/news/2004-1...ays2-usat_x.htm ) Tom Ramstack wrote in The Washington Times in October 2004 “US Airways won permission to cut employee wages by 21 percent in bankruptcy court yesterday, but its executives would not rule out the possibility the airline would liquidate. “ I also seem to recall reading something soon after the initial announcement of the merger attributed to either David Bronner or Bruce Lakefield that spoke to the issue that at the time of the announcement of the merger that US Airways had something in the order of weeks left before it would have been required to liquidate. There is also a Pittsburgh Tribune-Review article from January 2005, quoting Vince Cordle and Mike Boyd regarding their then expectations that US Airways was going to fail. ( http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_291263.html ) I have found nothing even close to painting America West into that kind of financial picture at the time in question. Accordingly, I disagree with your characterization that both companies were operating as a going concern at the time in question. Both companies were indeed operating, but one was clearly in deep, deep trouble.

As for US Airways not filing its merger paperwork as a failing carrier, America West and the other parties to the merger opted to merge with US Airways as it then existed, including all chattels and employees. As I recall, no other business was offering to merge or buy US Airways as a complete entity, but rather they were interested in parts of US Airways. Perhaps out of some loyalty to the employees of US Airways it appears that no serious consideration was given to parceling out the airlines assets, but rather negotiate a deal encompassing the entire airline, albeit one that was going to be downsized as part of the Chapter 11 process.

Because you and I come from widely varying perspectives on this matter, we are not going to agree on much, if anything. From my perspective, US Airways and its employees had little career expectations at the time immediately prior to the merger announcement. Had not some form of transaction occurred it is highly likely that US Airways would have either completely failed or been forced to start selling their best assets, such as the Shuttle, European routes and any equity they had in any aircraft. It is also likely that many, if not all, of its leased aircraft would have been repossessed as part of the ongoing Chapter 11 bankruptcy or, if converted, in Chapter 7 proceedings.

As for your feelings that no employee should prosper at the expense of another, how about looking at it from the perspective of an AWA pilot? AWA was actively hiring and training new pilots up through the time of the merger announcement. A first officer on AWA had a pretty good expectation of steady progress to a left seat position in a reasonable number of years. (One of the AWA pilots can feel free to add how long the upgrade time was running at that point in time.) US Airways had somewhere around 2,000 (give or take a bit) pilots on furlough at that same time. Their was no real upgrade expectation at that time for a US Airways pilot, especially as compared to the then America West Airlines. So while your argument sounds wonderful in a touchy feely way, I would expect that the America West pilots would contend that the merger very much hurt their career expectations once it was announced. They suffered and the US Airways pilots all of a sudden had significantly brighter expectations about being able to fly for more years then what would have occurred absent a merger or wholesale purchase of US Airways.

The Nicolau Award, in my view, complied with ALPA guidelines as I understand them. The three arbitrators heard evidence and even asked for updated position papers prior to closing the Hearings. US Airways pilots, through their MEC, NC and attorney refused to update their position which, as I have posted elsewhere, was a grievous error. Only the MEC and perhaps the NC know what attorney Dan Katz advised them to do and I suspect it will be a long time, if ever, before we know what Mr. Katz privately advised them as to a course of action. It should also be remembered that only one side to the arbitration put meaningful economic testimony before the arbitrators and that was in the form of Robert Mann by the America West Pilots. While I no longer have the transcripts on my computer, I seem to recall that US Airways pilots did not call any non-pilot witness to address economic issues. Whether this was because they could find no expert to buttress their position or because they made a strategic decision to gloss over the economic issues of relative financial strength at the time of the merger, I have no inside information as to why this occurred.

Now, because of the foregoing, I am going to decline to address the rest of your questions and I am not doing so out of disrespect, but because they concern what happened after US Airways was revived from what sure seemed like their deathbed. Had the merger, or some other transaction, occurred in 2005 there would have been no 2007 for the employees of the old US Airways. It would have died as any kind of going concern.

I suspect you will be unhappy with my stated observations. However, as the saying goes, they are what they are.

Respectfully,

hp_fa

 

[Junebug172]

USA320Pilot,

You answered that one in the fall of 2005 when you argued strenuously that the MDA pilots flying the E-170's were in fact not active mainline pilots but were in fact furloughed mainline pilots flying for the E-170 division. In fact, your buddy Jack Stephan argued the same point at that time. Shall I pull those posts and MEC communications up?

Jim

Can you please post those so that I may have them for my "records?"

 

[Bear96]

HP_FA asked: "How so? What were you career expectations in mid-May, 2005?"

USA320Pilot answers: The same as it was for every other US Airways or America West employee. Both companies were operating as a going concern and nobody can predict the future.

Your position appears to be that since "nobody can predict the future," the "career expectations" prong of the ALPA merger policy is meaningless.

Do you suppose the drafters of the ALPA merger policy agree with you that "nobody can predict the future" and therefore purposefully drafted meaningless language?

Or perhaps your concept of "career expectations" is flawed -- or at least is not in line with the drafters of the ALPA merger policy, which is what really matters in this situation.

 

[exB717Flyer]

Your position appears to be that since "nobody can predict the future," the "career expectations" prong of the ALPA merger policy is meaningless.

Furthering your point, it's obvious that at some point educated guesses and opinions have to be put into play. "Career expectations is a subjective opinion and Nicolau clearly explained his. I can't say that USAirways was definitely liquidating but I can say that many analysts were expecting it and no plan of reorganization seemed imminent. Contrast that with AWA which wasn't in Chapter 11 and nobody was even speculating we were close. Dougweiser can easily say AWA was "heading" for bankruptcy but that's not the same as saying it was imminent. He was just speculating, as Nicolau pointed out, to appease the Easties. The truth lies in the SEC filings.

 

[delldude]

Ralph goes away....320 appears......320 goes away and Ralph appears........hmmmmmmmmmmm?

 

[RowUnderDCA]

But Relative Seniority would first demand that the two entities be equal in every way. Equal contracts, staffing, etc. Then, and only then would such a division be considered, "equal", otherwise the most efficient group will always be penalized.

Case in point. To equal the vacation parts, the east group must "hire" some 620 pilots just to equal the inefficiencies of the west group. That is a twenty percent increase in the size of the east group.

that's interesting..... so would LCC pilots be content with re-pegging the bottom of the active list at 620 pilots lower?

 

[hp_fa]

EUREKA,

I think I have a solution to the seniority issue.

East was roughly 2/3 of the pilots and West the remaining 1/3.
Put all the US names in one hat and all HP names in one hat and have it be the luck of the draw. Two picks from US one pick for HP with HP starting first until the "List" is created.

This way most everyone would be pizzed off and as a result focus on the REAL enemy and get substantial raise.

The time to have discussed proportional or relative seniority was before arbitration, not after.