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

[Callsign_Cactus]

WRONG!!! WRONG!!! Today's problems lie on the backs of the east pilots and their leadership for failing to abide by ALPA merger policy and not honoring our agreements!!!!!!!!!!!!! You talk about others being a coward as if you are anything less than that. Men honor agreements -you guys are a bunch of spineless welchers.

We have the law on our side that says you are doomed for failure. On principle alone, I'm prepared for stagnation and status-quo for as long as it takes - time is on my side.

Finally, I believe much of today's pilot problems is due to the AWA MEC's position to not abide by the EC's two resolutions, not work with the Rice Committee, and not agree to Doug Parker's position that the parties need to negotiate a solution to the seniority integration problem; as well as the misrepresentation by the AWA MEC.
Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

What an absolutely moronic comment. USAPA, ALPA the choice is yours. How does choosing one or the other equal no representation?

Simple - if 50%+1 of those eligible to vote don't cast a vote for either, you have no representation......

Then again, I hope you do participate and vote like the rest of us.

Clue isn't even an employee, much less a pilot on either side. He's right far more than wrong, though, so one would be foolish to disregard what he says.

Jim

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Callsign Cactus wrote:

Ah yes, the truth does lie between the lines. You see, the very sticky points you mention (your retirement, CIC, etc.) had to be addressed by Parker. This was a business deal that Parker et al would have no part of if the "transaction" triggered a Change-In-Control (CIC), or your "retirement" stayed intact. It was a structured deal that AWA controlled to their desire. Think about it, what did Doug say about the Delta hostile bid...retirement had to go or no deal. Same deal with US, which is the reason why you will not find "proof" of any acquisition. This had to be considered a "merger" for many reasons, two of which I already mentioned.

This is the one area that stands out as bizarre with you guys. Everyone in the entire industry knew the fate of US except apparently the pilots. Or, maybe you did back in 2005, but you just won’t admit it today since you know that is part of the rationale Nicolau used for constructing the list.

Your still missing the point. Our DB plan (retirement) fell in BK1. You guys came around after the fact. Therefore Doug and Co. had no control or input about my retirement now being held at the PBGC. PBGC rules allows for drawing a retirement at reduced rates after certain events. One being a "Change of Control". Now the folks at PBGC say there isn't a change of control.

Our ramp guys are going to arbitration to prove there was a change. You say they are correct. Then why is DOUG fighting this tooth and nail to say there wasn't a change in control? You can't have it both ways. The outcome in either case is good for me.

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

Because there are significant dollars involved if CIC can be proven - SIGNIFICANT dollars. An amount that Doug has publicly said would have been a show stopper. AWA specifically made sure the US transaction would not trigger the CIC provision and structured the deal accordingly. None of this is a secret. Doug put out a letter and he has talked about it publicly.

Callsign Cactus wrote:

Ah yes, the truth does lie between the lines. You see, the very sticky points you mention (your retirement, CIC, etc.) had to be addressed by Parker. This was a business deal that Parker et al would have no part of if the "transaction" triggered a Change-In-Control (CIC), or your "retirement" stayed intact. It was a structured deal that AWA controlled to their desire. Think about it, what did Doug say about the Delta hostile bid...retirement had to go or no deal. Same deal with US, which is the reason why you will not find "proof" of any acquisition. This had to be considered a "merger" for many reasons, two of which I already mentioned.

This is the one area that stands out as bizarre with you guys. Everyone in the entire industry knew the fate of US except apparently the pilots. Or, maybe you did back in 2005, but you just won’t admit it today since you know that is part of the rationale Nicolau used for constructing the list.

Your still missing the point. Our DB plan (retirement) fell in BK1. You guys came around after the fact. Therefore Doug and Co. had no control or input about my retirement now being held at the PBGC. PBGC rules allows for drawing a retirement at reduced rates after certain events. One being a "Change of Control". Now the folks at PBGC say there isn't a change of control.

Our ramp guys are going to arbitration to prove there was a change. You say they are correct. Then why is DOUG fighting this tooth and nail to say there wasn't a change in control? You can't have it both ways. The outcome in either case is good for me.

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

Edumacate: It's slang for someone needing a little more knowledge and maturity. Sorry, different era/culture.

And it's educate.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Simple - if 50%+1 of those eligible to vote don't cast a vote for either, you have no representation......


Jim

Forgot about that one. But really, in this case, I seriously doubt 50%+1 of the eligible pilots would not vote for someone.

So as long as 50% +1 of those eligible votes. The new rep will be chosen with the highest vote total. Or 50%+1 of the votes cast.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I seriously doubt 50%+1 of the eligible pilots would not vote for someone.

Better hope they purge the furlough list quickly then.......1000+ furloughees who may have little interest in returning plus the normal apathy gives at least a remote possibility that you could have no union.

Jim

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Edumacate: It's slang for someone needing a little more knowledge and maturity. Sorry, different era/culture.

I know what it is. My son uses it. Thought an educated pilot would know better when discussing issues. At least my son has more maturity on when it's appropriate to use slang.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Because there are significant dollars involved if CIC can be proven - SIGNIFICANT dollars. An amount that Doug has publicly said would have been a show stopper. AWA specifically made sure the US transaction would not trigger the CIC provision and structured the deal accordingly. None of this is a secret. Doug put out a letter and he has talked about it publicly.

You still can't have it both ways. Either you bought us or you didn't? You say you did. I say you didn't. And I hope I am wrong. I really hope so and it can be proven by the ramp guys. Enough said til after the arbitration.

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

I was just surprised the CIC issue is all news to you. I think if you do the research you will find this is one of the primary reasons, IMO, from day one Doug has been adamant this is a merger and not an acquisition.

I know what it is. My son uses it. Thought an educated pilot would know better when discussing issues. At least my son has more maturity on when it's appropriate to use slang.

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

Don;t you get it - it's just semantics. AWA made the deal happen, period. Without AWA, US would have been liquidated IMO (and the opinion of just about everyone elses in the industry, except for US pilots of course).

You still can't have it both ways. Either you bought us or you didn't? You say you did. I say you didn't. And I hope I am wrong. I really hope so and it can be proven by the ramp guys. Enough said til after the arbitration.

 

[TWAFlyer]

According to US Airways MEC Chairman Jack Stephan, "On another matter related to equal pay for equal work, and equally as irritating, the AWA leadership continues to report to their pilots and other parties that we are not truthful in our communications to our pilots. I personally take exception to their claim. While I served you as Communications Chairman and while I have served you as MEC Chairman, your leadership has consistently reported the good, the bad, and the ugly and we will continue to do just that. To suggest that your leadership is guilty of protecting you from the truth, reflects a mindset that “just doesn’t get it.â€￾ I hope you share the indignation of your elected representatives and your MEC Officers over this totally inappropriate accusation. We remain committed solely to the US Airways pilots and we work for you, period. As for the offhand comments of the AWA leadership, we will consider the source and we will refrain, as always, from commenting on their affairs. We will continue to be professional in all our communications."

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

Example of "Not Truthful":

From the AAA MEC August 21 and 23, 2007 Code-a-Phone:

Educate to Vacate:
The Nicolau award integrates the bottom AWA pilot hired on 4/4/05, senior to all US Airways pilots who were actively flying EMB Aircraft under the ALPA US Airways CBA. Arbitrator Nicolau’s opinion incorrectly states that the US Airways Merger Committee’s certified list shows these pilots as furloughed. This placed the AWA pilot hired on 4/4/05 senior to the AAA pilot hired on 7/18/88.

The Reality........

Yes, pilots were flying for MDA, however those USAirways pilots had to be furloughed in order to fly for MDA. To say otherwise, is not reality.

According to AAA LOA 91, Section B-1, a USAirways pilot eligible to fly for MDA, had to be on the APL list (Affected Pilot List) or CEL list. In order to be on this APL list, the pilot had to be furloughed, period. A junior, mainline pilot could not bid back to MDA. Additonally, while flying for MDA, longevity does not accrue for mainline status.

In order to transition from MDA back to mainline USAirways, a pilot had to receive a recall notice from furlough. This did not occur until February of 2006. Additionally, the sale of MDA to Wexford (Republic) was announced in mid-March, 2005, a full 2 months prior to the announcement of the USAirways/America West deal.

This is exactly the type of misinformation that makes the pilots of the west very skeptical as to the integrity of the east leadership.

Here is another example of how the east changes things around:
From June 4, 2003, every MEC Code-a-Phone signed off with "Please remember, we have 1879 pilots on furlough." This continued up to April 20th, 2005.


MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE
April 20, 2005

This is Jack Stephan with a US Airways MEC update for Wednesday, April 20th, with one new item.

In a recent interview with the Associated Press, Dr. David Bronner, Chairman of the US Airways Board of Directors, said that US Airways and America West are in discussions about the possibility of a merger between the two carriers. At this time your MEC is unable to speculate on these discussions.

Know that your MEC continues to focus on the representational needs of all US Airways pilots, regardless of any ongoing discussions management may have with other parties. Contract compliance, management accountability, preserving our $7 billion investment in our company and emerging from bankruptcy remain paramount.

However, if any purported discussions with other airlines culminate in a merger agreement, know that we have many resources at our disposal, including having our MEC Merger Committee in place.

Please continue to use the code a phone and the pilots only website so that you will have accurate, timely information on these and other issues

Please remember we have 1,879 pilots on furlough.


Thank you for listening.


After almost 2 years of the exact same sign off, this message changed:

MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE
April 26, 2005

This is Jack Stephan with a US Airways MEC update for Tuesday, April 26th, with three new items.


Item 1. MEC Chairman Bill Pollock has recorded a new Chairman's message to the pilots in which he addresses the US Airways-America West merger discussions. He tells pilots that regardless of any ongoing discussions management may have with other parties, ALPA will continue to focus on the representational needs of all US Airways pilots. Contract compliance, management accountability, preserving our 7 billion dollar investment in our company and emerging from bankruptcy are at the forefront for your MEC and officers. Captain Pollock expects US Airways to continue developing a business plan that will ensure US Airways' viability, and that they continue talking to potential investors so that enough equity is raised to facilitate our emergence from Chapter 11. In this message, he also provides an update of last week's MEC meeting on MDA issues, and reviews actions from the recent IFALPA meeting he recently attended.

You can listen to the Chairman's message to the pilots by calling the code-a-phone number at 800-FOR-ALPA, or 800-367-2572, and then pressing 2. It is also posted on the US Airways public and pilots only home page at http://www.usairwayspilots.org/.

Item 2. As a reminder, ALPA's Age 60 web survey will be available online until 10 a.m. Friday, April 29th. The information gathered from this poll will help to determine the Association's future policy and course of action regarding the FAA's Age 60 Rule. Instructions on how to access the survey are available on both the ALPA International and US Airways pilots only websites.



The web-based survey is conducted by the Wilson Center for Public Research and will be open to all active ALPA members in good standing. The poll will be augmented by traditional telephone polling to ensure internal accuracy. To participate in this survey, you must be an active member who was in good standing by the end of March. Please take the time to participate in this important survey.



Item 3. We have recently updated our data concerning the number of pilots currently on furlough. Taking into consideration retirements and resignations, we now have 1,574 pilots on furlough with over 400 pilots currently working at MDA or other J4J carriers.

Thank you for listening.


The East MEC even admits to updating this data, however it was not reflected on the January 2005 seniority list. Nor was a MDA category designed into the 2004 seniority list. This issue was also noticed by many USAirways mainline pilots when the CEL pilots (Combined Eligibility List: wholly owned pilots) mysteriously appeared on the new 2005 Seniority List, published June 27, 2005, which is more than a month after the constructive notice date of the AWA/AAA deal.


I have to admit, after all of the mis-information that I have read from the east MEC, I too am very skeptical as to the integrity of the East leadership.

Just one pilot's observations, your mileage may vary...........

Cheers

 

[hp_fa]

Finally, I believe much of today's pilot problems is due to the AWA MEC's position to not abide by the EC's two resolutions, not work with the Rice Committee, and not agree to Doug Parker's position that the parties need to negotiate a solution to the seniority integration problem; as well as the misrepresentation by the AWA MEC.

I still do not believe you have ever addressed the question of how you can claim that the West MEC's alleged violation(s) of the resolutions and alleged failure to work with the Rice Committee rises to the degree of the failure of the East MEC to abide by the binding Arbitration Award entered by Mr. Nicolau and two other ALPA pilots, as well as the TA.

 

[P51Pilot]

I still do not believe you have ever addressed the question of how you can claim that the West MEC's alleged violation(s) of the resolutions and alleged failure to work with the Rice Committee rises to the degree of the failure of the East MEC to abide by the binding Arbitration Award entered by Mr. Nicolau and two other ALPA pilots, as well as the TA.

Didn't you hear? That arbitration wasn't part of a Merger policy! It was part of a Merger guideline?! Who knew it was just feel good ink to to fill up a page of the C&BL? Since its a guideline there are no requirements to accept it. My guess is the East guys won't.

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

That may be true, but there will be consequences and a price to pay, and in the end, it will be forced on them as well.

Didn't you hear? That arbitration wasn't part of a Merger policy! It was part of a Merger guideline?! Who knew it was just feel good ink to to fill up a page of the C&BL? Since its a guideline there are no requirements to accept it. My guess is the East guys won't.