AAA ALPA Topic 8/31/07 - 9/06/07

[luvn737s]

Like I said, it's a very interesting point to consider. Under USAPA there is not a mechanism for east west negotiations for a new CBA. Just the company and USAPA. Since ALPA would officially be off the property how could a new CBA be negotiated? We believe that ALPA rules and procedures will be replaced with USAPA block representation and voting. After the challenges, we also believe the USAPA mechanism of governing will prevail. Not ALPA's.

USAPA was not a party to the TA, so independent ratification remains. Your only hope for stripping the voting rights of the AWA pilots is for Prater to combine both MEC's in trusteeeship. Would the motivation for USAPA be gone then? I think the vast disenfranchisement of pilots on both sides would make USAPA the shortest-lived union in history.

It probably already is.

 

[Tiger 1050]

Had the arbitrator come out with a list that gave the greatest seniority to those pilots based closest to the Atlantic Ocean, would you still say he is well within his scope and authority?

Yes.

And if your answer is yes, then why even ask if merger policy was violated, it appears merger policy is irrelevant to you once the issue is turned over to an arbitrator.

I suppose because it seems to be a common theme amongst the east pilots regarding their opinion of the award. And yes, I believe the board is in no way bound by the merger policy... It could have just as easily gone the other way. There in lies the risk...

But let's assume you really don't feel that way. Then to answer your question, one side received a windfall at the expense of the other, which violates ALPA merger policy. Had the award been a true compromise, both sides would have been equally unhappy or happy depending on each pilot's individual position.

But that really is my question. We could not agree. So the process steered us to arbitration. Once we get to arbitration we both lose control of our destiny. We hand over our fate to the arbiter. So how can one say the merger policy was not followed? How can you blame ALPA?

The totally lopsided reaction to this award demonstrates just how deeply flawed it is. You guys want it. We do not.

I don't know that I'd say "I want it." It really does nothing for me personally. I was at approx. 80% on the AWA list and I find myself on the new list right at about 80%.

ALPA has dissappointed us many times in the past. This is simply the last straw. Instead of taking responsibility to see that merger policy was complied with, they are doing the Pontius Pilate routine.

Ah yes. Pilate. Well he did not ask the AWA pilots whom he should crucify. Nor were the AWA pilots screaming out for your crucifixion! Pilate, or should I say Prater, has definitely dug himself a deep hole with this one. Question is, can our version of Pilate really interpret the law...?

 

[AAA73Pilot]

I have said it before several times, ALPA is dead to me but I'm a little concerned about the ability of an in-house Union to financially handle a merger with one of the ALPA big boys with deep pockets. It wouldn't surprise me to see assesments in the 1-2k range to pay for another merger.

Think about what makes ALPA expensive. Flight pay loss for 1 day meetings. Some of the ALPA thieves claim the whole month. One pilot on vacation answered an ALPA call. He claimed a FPL for the whole vacation. In affect he was paid twice for vacation. One rep through FPL made 2.5 times his annual flying salary. It was amazing and disgusting. Of course this was hidden and only discovered after the fact.

The most expensive hotels known to man, limo rides because the choice of meeting locations only afforded such transportation. (According to them.) $100 bottles of wine and then entertainment, all at the expense of our dues money. How about National? More of the same. There is a great building in Herndon. Why use a hotel conference resort. Just remember money corrupts. And we keep giving with no oversight.

No USAPA rep. will receive more than he/she is entitled. Meetings at layover hotels. If the company wants to meet, they can stay in the same dumps we do. Or limo in. Lots of places to save money. So it won't be that expensive when you really think about the waste we have uncovered under ALPA. Why we have put up with this is beyond me.

Besides, did you elect Prater? I didn't. Not with my vote. I din't even have a say. To me the benefits out weighs the negatives by such a wide margin, it's a no brainer. Pilots first and foremost.

Addendum: One pilot was so removed from the line he grew a beard. He wasn't off the line on medical either.

 

[smoot4208]

Does anyone know how the ballots are doing for having a new union represent US? Last I heard was that it was at 2300. Not sure how many more they need.

 

[USA320Pilot]

It is my understanding the Rice Committee is going to present its recommendations to the JNC next week, which could include fences, furlough, and future merger protections. It should be interesting to see the Rice Committee recommendations and the results of the meeting during a period when ALPA’s existence is at stake.

Meanwhile, here is today’s AWA Chairman’s message to the West pilots.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

MEC CHAIRMAN’S LETTER

September 3, 2007

State of our Union Labor Day Message to all AWA Pilots

Fellow America West Pilots,

I started writing this message by looking at last year’s Labor Day message to AWA pilots to see what I managed to get right, and what I did not. Interestingly, apparently I managed to get some things right. There was a proposed merger with Delta, and we pledged to and kept our promise to improve our level of communications with our pilots. But I also predicted that we would be well on our way to merging our MECs and probably working under a joint contract with a merged seniority list. Ok, so I was a little off on that one.

As we head into the Fall of ‘07, it strikes me that we have a complete and utter mess on our hands. We have the East MEC divided into two very distinct camps – neither of which is proposing any solutions that are even slightly palatable to the AWA MEC or pilots. We wonder if management (who delayed a joint contract for months and months until they finally made an offer that was certainly inadequate even though they were told to get serious months before) has played us.

And of course it goes without saying that we are all extremely frustrated with the big picture: Namely that we played by the rules, followed ALPA Merger Policy and have been negotiating in earnest for economic gains on behalf of both pilot groups, only to have the other interests in this equation put pressure on us to give even more things up for some future unknown dividend that may or may not become payable.

Meanwhile, some of our East union brothers and sisters keep trying to find ways to mix it up in our politics, hoping we are naïve enough to fall victim to their less-than-altruistic motives (their number one motive seemingly designed to keep us isolated and stagnated by keeping the merged list in limbo while they try to find ways to capture ALL of the merged company’s career progression and economic gains for themselves at our expense.)

But despite all this, and after hearing the Wilson Center poll results, I find my optimism somewhat renewed and I think there is faint glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel. That is to say, the Wilson Center ALPA National poll results indicate there is a joint agreement at a fairly narrow dollar amount range that is similar on the East and West and will jointly ratify on the West AND on the East. We just have to get all the players on the same sheet of music. Of course that will not be easy.

I guess the bottom line has not changed much since my last letter to all of you – you should stay dug in and please keep fast to the principles of fairness. We know that demanding all the players follow the fairness and high road doctrine is frustrating when it appears others are NOT playing by the rules. It angers all of us when the East MEC ’s Communications Chairman refers to AWA pilots as “rookies†in the national media. I know that is very annoying to have to wait while ALPA decides on a simple matter such a presentation of a merged list that is called for in the TA and ALPA Merger Policy. I know that it is painful to have to submit to a committee whose main process appears to be designed to find mitigations to the very Merger Policy that they have on their own books.

But as frustrating and painful as it is to remain on the proverbial high road while having insults and threats and mistruths thrown at you on a daily basis, our high road policy IS working, albeit very slowly. We will continue to remain on a fair, but firm high road; namely, (1) submit the list, (2) continue JNC talks; and, (3) let the respective memberships decide via separate ratification on the adequacy of a joint contract.

Recently, we have engaged in some recent major policy initiatives. Here is a partial list:

Re-reviewed JNC talks versus Section 6 talks with internal and external advisors. Resolved to stay the course in JNC talks. To be reviewed again Oct 1, 2007.

Submitted an Executive Board resolution for the Fall Executive Board meeting proposing amending ALPA Merger Policy to set a timeline for the President submit the merged seniority list to management within thirty (30) days. (Would only affect future mergers.)

Submitted an Executive Board resolution for the Fall Executive Board meeting proposing amending ALPA Merger Policy to include various communication initiatives (including electronic publication of the arbitration transcripts) to help avoid mismanagement of affected pilot groups’ expectations during seniority integration. (Would only affect future mergers.)

Sent a three page letter to Executive Board (all ALPA MEC Chairmen), along with a merger data CD-ROM including all opening and closing statements, transcripts, the Nicolau Award, and various arbitration documents for the MEC’s to distribute to their respective merger committees as a reference.

Asked ALPA to find that the East MEC’s decision to pull out of JNC talks is a breach of the Transition Agreement and that these “parity-only†negotiations are designed to “frustrate†the intent of ALPA Merger Policy and thus violates that Policy.

Send a letter to ALPA requesting an advance for our $300,000 per the Transition Agreement.

Have continued to work with the Rice Committee with the complete understanding that the AWA position is the continuation of joint negotiations and implementation of the merged seniority list per ALPA Merger Policy.

Worked with Group B-4 EVP Russ Webber to submit a resolution requiring presentation of the list for the Sept 18, 2007 Executive Council meeting.

Both MEC Chairman verbally reviewed the ALPA Wilson Center poll results with Phil Comstock and Paul Rice.

Continue to monitor East litigation and work with outside legal counsel to file appropriate responses with court dates expected in October.

Continue to review other legal options.

We will have an extremely busy fall. I know that on Sept 14, 2007, ALPA President John Prater will be in the PHX crew room from 10 am to 4 pm to hear your gripes and complaints and just visit generally with the West crews. LAS dates are TBA (but likely late September). Next week, the JNC and MEC Vice Chairman Mitch Vasin will be in DCA meeting with the Rice Committee and working on a wholly-owned flow through agreement with ALPA staff.

Then both the AWA and AAA MEC Chairman have been summoned to Executive Council the week of Sept 17, and the AWA delegation plans to be at JNC negotiations the week of Sept 24. We intend to be at those JNC negotiations even if it just the West representatives talking to one another. We expect that the Rice Committee will continue to meet and we will continue to hear the demands of the East to mitigate the Nicolau Award, but I want to assure each of you that there is nothing any of you would/could say at these sessions to the Rice Committee and the East that we have not said already. I don’t know what the outcome of those sessions will be, but if we are to get JNC talks back on track, I think we are willing to listen to all complaints, ideas and suggestions. That should not be interpreted by anyone that we are considering mitigating the Nicolau Award.

Of the $122 million the Company says they have set aside for our joint contract, ALPA has done the costing and they have determined that approximately 90 per cent of the total value of this current management offer will go to East pilots. For the East MEC to demand mitigations to the Nicolau Award AND demand the per capita majority of the economic benefits of any contract is morally wrong. This is simply an unworkable solution from our point of view. It fails to recognize the contributions of AWA pilots to the success of the new US Airways.

It goes without saying that the Company will have to pay more to meet the now comparable expectations of both pilot groups. Of course they have mostly themselves to blame for this turn of events. This is the cost of the future value of the past decision the Company made to delay any half serious economic offer until after the list was out. ALPA also needs to figure out a way to get the East MEC aligned with the majority of the East rank and file who like most AWA pilots simply want a fair and decent contract.

On this Labor Day in 2007, please take a moment to reflect on the fact that you are a trade union member, discuss what the true meaning of Labor Day is with your family, and reflect on the fact that we have worked hard to make it in our profession and that we are proud of our legacy as America West Airlines’ pilots.

In the meantime, I promise I will do the best I can to continue to protect and defend our rights as labor.

Fraternally and in solidarity,

Captain John McIlvenna
AWA MEC Chairman

 

[USA320Pilot]

767jetz:

767jetz said: "You keep saying that you want to negotiate a solution, but then comes the stipulation that the Nicolau award will not be implemented. You can't open a door that says negotiate, then slam it shut by putting unrealistic conditions on it. If you want to negotiate then you have to consider the possibility of accepting the list as is and going from there. If not, then it seems like it is your side that is not willing to negotiate. Negotiation is available through the JNC. I believe the West has been saying this all along. It would just involve not reordering the list," 767jetz said.

"I also have a problem when you say that that the West is not complying with the EC resolution, but mean while your side is not complying with the binding arbitration that you guys insisted on. Don't you see problem with this at all? Do you not see even the slightest hint of a double standard here?"

USA320Pilot comments: I understand your point, but let me add a couple of comments.

The East MEC believes the Nicolau Award violates ALPA Merger Policy, which is why they are objecting to the Award. I guess you could say that the West MEC believes the EC Resolutions are not valid, and use the same argument.

Separately, let me give you an example and try to make an apple-to-apple comparison on why the East pilots believe the Nicolau Award violates ALPA Merger Policy.

Lets say next year United Airlines acquires Virgin America or Skyways and both of these pilot groups are represented by ALPA. United and one these companies arbitrate a list and a 1-year Captain is given a relative seniority number one number junior to the most senior United narrowbody Captain, who has over 12 years seniority. Would that be fair?

Moreover, this Virgin America or Skyways pilot, who never had a widebody in their career expectation, would be senior to many of United widebody First Officers and all of its narrowbody First Officers, all of which had more tenure then the Virgin or Skyways pilot.

This would be similar to the situation facing the US Airways pilots.

Just as if US Airways and United had merged it would be unfair for the US Airways pilots to have B747 rights it is unfair for the AWA pilots to be able to hold virtually all of the A350, A330, and B767 flying in the not-to-distant future. Nor is it right for a 3-month AWA F/O who was on probation and an ALPA apprentice member at the time of the merger now be senior to a 18-year US Airways F/O, just like it would be unfair to have a 3-month Virgin America pilot senior to a United pilot who had more tenure.

Does this make sense?

I believe these examples show why the US Airways pilots believe the Merger Policy was violated, why the EC will not pass the Nicolau Award onto the Company, and why the Rice Committee is seeking a solution.

Here is the problem. The East pilots will never approve a joint contract that would trigger the Nicolau Award. As Doug Parker said in his letter to the pilot group last month he has talked to enough US Airways pilots to know that such a proposal would be extremely difficult, if not impossible, to get ratified.â€

Furthermore, I agree with Parker’s comments that he “happens to believe that if we could get everyone together at the negotiating table, we could work something out that meets everyone’s needs – though both sides would need to move some from their increasingly hardening positions.â€

The challenge? The AWA MEC refuses to move from their position of “bindingâ€, which the EC and the US Airway pilots will not accept.

Meanwhile, there is another interesting dynamic in play here. Last week John Prater told a number of US Airways pilots that that while the US Airways are the lowest paid pilots in the industry, all other pilot groups would have a tough time negotiating pay raises when their contracts became amendable because management’s will want to have competitive labor costs. So getting us a better contract is very important in the airline pilot big picture. And, Prater indicated the only way for the US Airways pilots and the industry better contracts is for the Executive Council to help the US Airways-AWA pilots find a solution to this mess.

Finally, it is my understanding the Rice Committee is going to present its recommendations to the JNC next week, which could include fences, furlough, and future merger protections. It should be interesting to see the Rice Committee recommendations and the results of the meeting during a period when ALPA’s existence is at stake.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[Junebug172]

The East pilots will never approve a joint contract that would trigger the Nicolau Award.
Regards,

USA320Pilot

Think so chief? Wilson polling says otherwise.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Junebug,

I'm sure and so is John Prater, Paul Rice, and Doug Paker, which is why the EC will not forward the Nicolau Award.

Furthermore, if the Nicolau Award was ever forwarded USAPA would gain a tremendous boost...then what?

As I indicated earlier the Rice Committee is going to present its recommendations to the JNC next week, which could include fences, furlough, and future merger protections. It should be interesting to see the Rice Committee recommendations and the results of the meeting during a period when ALPA’s existence is at stake.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[P51Pilot]

Think so chief? Wilson polling says otherwise.

You must not be as tuned into ALPA as you try to insinuate because you would know the polling demonstrated the exact opposite. Why do you think ALPA(national) continues to be so indecisive.

 

[700UW]

Like I said, it's a very interesting point to consider. Under USAPA there is not a mechanism for east west negotiations for a new CBA. Just the company and USAPA. Since ALPA would officially be off the property how could a new CBA be negotiated? We believe that ALPA rules and procedures will be replaced with USAPA block representation and voting. After the challenges, we also believe the USAPA mechanism of governing will prevail. Not ALPA's.

The RLA does not change.

Under the RLA changing unions does not give you the right to renegotiate a new CBA unless Section 6 is amendable.

At UAL and NWA the IAM for the mechanic and related were replaced by AMFA, AMFA administered the old IAM CBAs until Section 6 Negotiations occured due to the amendable date.

At WN the IBT was replaced by AMFA for the M&R, same results.

At NWA the IBT was replaced by the PFAA and then AFA, same results.

The new union by law has to administer the current CBA until Section 6 Negotiations occur to the CBA being amendable upon its date.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Is that the east time bomb ticking? You guys are ready to self-destruct any moment now.

You may think you're very clever with your self-destruct comments. What you are missing is that, like it or not, YOUR long-term fortunes or misfortunes are inextricably tied to ours on the east. If we do self-destruct, as you seem to delight in, YOU GO WITH US!

Have a nice day!

 

[electricjet98]

USA320Pilot comments: I understand your point, but let me add a couple of comments.

Oh yes, your comments. So many false assumptions, misinformation and convoluted erroneous thinking that it is difficult to know where to begin.

The East MEC believes the Nicolau Award violates ALPA Merger Policy, which is why they are objecting to the Award. I guess you could say that the West MEC believes the EC Resolutions are not valid, and use the same argument.

Your MEC has agreed that all steps of the policy were followed and no evidence of fraud has been presented. Arbitration is binding. The EC resolutions are being followed by the West MEC (no MEC reolutions passed that only one solution is acceptable and still in compliance with the transition agreement) and the Rice committee suggestions ( the Rice committee has stated that they cannot mandate) will be considered.

Lets say next year United Airlines acquires Virgin America or Skyways and both of these pilot groups are represented by ALPA. United and one these companies arbitrate a list and a 1-year Captain is given a relative seniority number one number junior to the most senior United narrowbody Captain, who has over 12 years seniority. Would that be fair?

First of all, the wide gap between MC's will not exist because AAA has provided a fantastic lesson to all regarding leaving so much to arbitration. Secondly, United Airlines is not now a failing airline as was the case of AAA. Like it or not, that directly plays into the "career expectations" stated in ALPA merger policy.

Just as if US Airways and United had merged it would be unfair for the US Airways pilots to have B747 rights it is unfair for the AWA pilots to be able to hold virtually all of the A350, A330, and B767 flying in the not-to-distant future. Nor is it right for a 3-month AWA F/O who was on probation and an ALPA apprentice member at the time of the merger now be senior to a 18-year US Airways F/O, just like it would be unfair to have a 3-month Virgin America pilot senior to a United pilot who had more tenure.

When I was in new-hire groundschool we launched B747 flights to Hawaii and then Japan, shortly thereafter. If you can pull wild career expectations out of your ass, we can too! The 3-month AWA F/O brought a job to the new merged airline. The 18-year US Airways F/O had been furloughed from US Airways at the time of merger announcement. He may have been working at MDA, but to work there he had to have been furloughed from US Airways (he couldn't simply bid to that operation) and he had to receive a furlough recall letter to return to US Airways.

Does this make sense?

Little that you say, does!

Furthermore, I agree with Parker’s comments that he “happens to believe that if we could get everyone together at the negotiating table, we could work something out that meets everyone’s needs – though both sides would need to move some from their increasingly hardening positions.â€

But, hasn't the east unilaterally withdrawn from JNC discussions?

The challenge? The AWA MEC refuses to move from their position of “bindingâ€, which the EC and the US Airway pilots will not accept.

We refuse to reward bad behavior. After National sends the list to Parker and after the east returns to JNC discussions as previously agreed to in the transition agreement, I believe you will see some flexability. Until then, we refuse to yield to your temper tantrums or National's unwarranted medaling.

Meanwhile, there is another interesting dynamic in play here. Last week John Prater told a number of US Airways pilots that that while the US Airways are the lowest paid pilots in the industry, all other pilot groups would have a tough time negotiating pay raises when their contracts became amendable because management’s will want to have competitive labor costs. So getting us a better contract is very important in the airline pilot big picture. And, Prater indicated the only way for the US Airways pilots and the industry better contracts is for the Executive Council to help the US Airways-AWA pilots find a solution to this mess.

OMG, we actually agree on something!

Finally, it is my understanding the Rice Committee is going to present its recommendations to the JNC next week, which could include fences, furlough, and future merger protections. It should be interesting to see the Rice Committee recommendations and the results of the meeting during a period when ALPA’s existence is at stake.

As I stated earlier, after National sends the list to Parker and after the east returns to JNC discussions as previously agreed to in the transition agreement, I believe you will see some flexability. Until then, we refuse to yield to your temper tantrums or National's unwarranted interference.

 

[PhxMama]

PLease allow me ask a question. I have watched these ALPA threads for a while now and dont have a postion on whether merger policy was adhered to during arbitration or not. I have pondered that question and have looked at each sides objections to the other sides view of what has happened. I dont have any knowlege of your contracts or your unions. So having said this, I wonder what the next step is. Each side seems to be steadfast in their beliefs and not willing to budge. Theres got to be an answer somewhere. I personally believe the arbitration is binding but that does not mean the list in its present form will ever be implemented. So far, I think I've got the gist of what is happening. Although, the list is out can the company in some way add fences in the name of "company policy" so that the eastern half can somehow swallow this? "Company policy" that would prohibit a change of base until you have x number of years with the company? Again, I am sorely uneducated in the way the arbitration was conducted and just looking for a solution. Too many hours and resources are being wasted without any resolution. I shudder to think about union dues spent on this and also company resources. If the list stands what CAN be done to make this more palatable(sp?) for the east without sending the west into an uproar? I know the east has been able to meet with some union officials and the west has some dates on schedual but where is Mr Nic? I would love to attend his meeting and have him explain in person his reasoning for his decision and have both groups of pilots in attendance. I still believe theres a solution out there that has been overlooked. Optomistic, maybe, but for the sake of both east/west pilots something needs to give so they can move on to increasing their compensation and ability to stand together. Mama

 

[767jetz]

The East MEC believes the Nicolau Award violates ALPA Merger Policy, which is why they are objecting to the Award. I guess you could say that the West MEC believes the EC Resolutions are not valid, and use the same argument.

I do see your point of view. I just disagree with you as to the “most fair†or “least worst†solution. In the aftermath of the Nicolau award our MEC did an analysis of the award and the arbitration transcripts. One thing that was stressed to our members with regard to future integrations is the importance of negotiating as many solutions with the other side before going to arbitration. The point is that before going to the arbitrator anything is possible and merger policy guides the process. If an impasse is reached, you lose control of everything and place your fate in the hands of the arbitrator. So IMO (and that of our legal council) merger policy governs the process until you submit your fate to the arbitrator. So IMO the Nicolau award does not violate merger policy, as long as the process leading up to arbitration did not violate the merger policy. The arbitrator is not bound by merger policy. He has wide discretion to rule as he finds fair. That is the risk of arbitration. It is always better to reach a negotiated solution.

Lets say next year United Airlines acquires Virgin America or Skyways and both of these pilot groups are represented by ALPA. United and one these companies arbitrate a list and a 1-year Captain is given a relative seniority number one number junior to the most senior United narrowbody Captain, who has over 12 years seniority. Would that be fair?

I understand your comparison and while I can see why the East is not happy with some of the aspects of the list, I still believe there are solutions that can address these concerns without reordering the list. I know that the East sees DOH or LOS with restrictions as the best path to avoid the pitfalls they are exposed to in this integration. But IMO it would be too detrimental to the West. The cost would be unfairly high to the West.

To answer your fairness question, I guess I would not be happy with anyone going ahead of me, but I do understand that stapling would make pilots on the other side just as unhappy. There is no perfect solution, so IMO relative slotting is the “least worst†scenario. If that’s the way it was worked out, I guess I’d have to eat it. My preference would be to have some fences or bidding restrictions that would mitigate the one year captain being able to move to the widebodies. Also, in theory the combined airline would create faster growth opportunities and profitability. So for one group top claim all the growth would not be fair either. Both sides are contributing to the whole, either directly or indirectly.

Your example using Virgin is a bit extreme. I think Jet Blue is a better hypothetical comparison. And I have always said that a B6 320 captain should be slotted just below a UA 320 captain even though his LOS with B6 is less than many UA 320 F/O’s. I think it’s fair because that is what he brought to the table. To take your example one step further, if UA had furloughed pilots when this hypothetical merger happened, they should come back under the pilots who are currently active, but at the pay scale that they left. (ie: 3rd year pay for example.) IMO an active employee with a job trumps a furloughed employee with the promise of a future recall.

Here is the problem. The East pilots will never approve a joint contract that would trigger the Nicolau Award.

But the West pilots will never approve a joint contract that reorders the list. Hence the need for both sides to come off their positions.

The challenge? The AWA MEC refuses to move from their position of “bindingâ€, which the EC and the US Airway pilots will not accept.

Similarly there is the challenge of the East MEC refusal to move from their position of DOH with restrictions, which the West pilots will not accept. This is what’s causing the stalemate.

I do agree that in the big picture of the pilot’s pattern bargaining throughout the industry, it is important to get ALL US Airways pilots significant pay and benefit increases. But it has to be done in a way that is fair and follows legal procedure. It will be interesting to see what the Rice committee recommends.

On a separate note, I hope you and your family enjoyed your holiday weekend.

767jetz

 

[Tiger 1050]

The East MEC believes the Nicolau Award violates ALPA Merger Policy, which is why they are objecting to the Award. I guess you could say that the West MEC believes the EC Resolutions are not valid, and use the same argument.

Which part specifically?