All unions must eventually support ALPA

[pitguy]

Look at it this way. We have had pilots admit even on this very board they did whatever they felt they had to in 1992. Including cleaning airplanes and whatever. The fact remains that the pilots was in a labor coalition with the other labor groups. The pilots choose to break away from the group and make their own deal for the betterment of themselves. They mechanics and related went on strike and the pilot group did cross their lines and flew. If you want you can deny that, but it is in the very forefront of most mechanics minds and will never be forgotten. Along with your decision to cross comes other consequences like you will never get any kind of support or sympathy from the mechanic group. Feel free to deny that too. The only thing now you can do is to accept this.



--No one ever said that all pilots are mean, but you guys sure make it hard to weed out the nice ones.

 

[mlt]

diogenes,
You wrote:
Biffe, I always enjoy your posts. I understand your concerns regarding 92, and I would not support a unilateral 'rally round ALPA' at this stage.

However, I would endorse ALPA, IAM, CWA and TWU sitting down and negotiating a mutually agreeable partnership going forward......


What about AFA? We were the only group who supported the IAM and now you want to exclude us?

 

[savyinvestor]

I'll put my money on you Biff! Savy

 

[oldiebutgoody]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 3:43:20 PM MrAeroMan wrote:

Biff is right oldie. I also have family and friends that are in ALPA and they got paid. It's true too what happened to fleet and customer service. They got the ultimate suppository.
----------------
[/blockquote]
Nope. He's absolutely wrong. ALPA had guys on furlough then NOT GETTING PAID. I already explained why we were paid, and no one in ALPA could have or would have turned it down. BIFFE IS WRONG, PILOTS DID NOT PERFORM WORK OF OTHER GROUPS. Anybody that can give me or anybody else a name, date and time, please do so. You can't because IT DIDN'T HAPPEN. I think the blue water has affected Biffe's mind. Anybody that agrees with him is wrong too. It's as simple as that. ALPA got paid because they weren't on strike. The company, by law, has to pay you unless they give you notice of a layoff. It's the LAW! That is, unless you strike, which ALPA did not do!

 

[sabre]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 2:27:51 PM real world wrote:

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 11:08:46
Sabre,

Let me propose an alternative, how about we all chose to work together (management and all labor groups) to make this airline the best airline in the business. The US management team is committed to making this airline profitable and competitivly viabile for the future. It is this driving principal that has caused us to make these extraordinary decisions to ensure the franchise ultimately survives, without everyone’s sacrifices the entity would not be here for any of us. The airline industry has changed and air travel no longer holds the same value in the consumers mind. Consumers expectations have changed and their expectations are to pay $79 to fly to PIT-LAX not $1779, because of this we have had to modify our cost structure and for that matter our entire franchise to work within this new reality, if we do not, we will not be around very long and I for one do not want that happen.

----------------
[/blockquote]

Working with management is like working with Dr. Evil or Saddam Hussien right now. We worked with management twice and management back stabbed us.
What do you mean work with management? Who the heck do you think been working with management? We all have! It's time for management to work with us.

Whatever, we are done working with management.

 

[real world]

Working with management is like working with Dr. Evil or Saddam Hussien right now. We worked with management twice and management back stabbed us.
What do you mean work with management? Who the heck do you think been working with management? We all have! It's time for management to work with us.

Whatever, we are done working with management.
----------------------------------------

I am not sure that I would put management in that category (pretty harsh characterization). Management did not back stab you "twice" they worked with your elected union leadership to come up with a plan that would help return our company to profitability. I will refer back to my original comments that airline industry is very different and the cost structures of the past are no longer sustainable and the sad reality for all of us is that we have to make a choice whether this is an industry we want to remain a part of and if so this is the new reality that we must contend with. Nobody in management wanted low fare competitors, the terrible events of 9/11 to occur and the related traffic declines, insurance premiums and increased security costs however they are here and we have to deal with them if want to remain a viable entity. Instead of turning your back on management I would hope you would chose to work with the management team to make this a better place for all of us to work and help us to rebuild the best possible airline.

Management is listening to you and wants you to help the airline succeed because that is good for all of us.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 5:12:12 PM pitguy wrote:

It is not the law. People are laid off without pay due to strikes all the time.
----------------
[/blockquote]
That's right. ALPA was NOT on strike.

 

[Do_it_for_Dave]

Dave Siegel did not hire "union busters" as you have claimed. It was essential that we seek these concessions to meet the qualifications of our government loan.

 

[mlt]

Real World,
Our union leaders worked with management? Your chief "Union Buster" issued ultimatums...Accept it or we liquidate.

 

[autofixer]

With the dismal performance of this company as of late, it may be moot what happened in 1992.

 

[Biffeman]

Hey oldie, here is one from another message board:

Subject: Re: Payback-Karma
Date: 2/5/2003 4:36 PM Eastern Standard Time
From: Spadulator


You're right , the pilots are scabs for what they did in '92. Worked to Rule' under their contract and FAA regulations. Nothing would have gotten off the ground. Instead they were brought onto the property via a special shuttle so they wouldn't have to cross the picket lines in my location, and helped clean the aircraft on many thru flights.

 

[diogenes]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 5:51:28 PM real world wrote:



Management is listening to you and wants you to help the airline succeed because that is good for all of us.

----------------
[/blockquote]
-------------------------------------------

Real World,

Let me tell you how I would interpret that sentence, as I have experienced management to date.

"Managment is listening for anyone who questions them, so as to know who to line up in the crosshairs next. The airline will be more successful when we get rid of troublemakers like you."

Now perhaps change is a comin', and just hasn't gotten around to my neck of the woods, yet.

 

[mlt]

DoItForDave,
You didn't hire 'Union Busters'? I guess Jerry Glass posts on his website when referencing unions "When they roar, We Pounce" because it sounds good. I guess he "investigates union financial statements" and "educates the work force" to fill his spare time.

Please, you are not writing to Chip...In fact, you happen to be writing to those of us who live in the "real world".

 

[Biffeman]

Oldie, the F/As were not on strike and the company had to go to court to order them back to work. And it is not the law, the company can layoff people and not pay them due to work stopages.

Just learn to accept the facts, pilots sold their souls for the all mighty dollar. Pilots during the 30 day cooling off period and during the five day strike, cleaned airplanes. There were hundreds of grievances filed alone in CLT. Why cant you fathom that.

And go ask your MEC who was around in 1992, your MEC had a side agreement with US Air that if you did not honor the IAM picket all the pilots would get paid. So hundreds if not thousands of f28, f100, dc-9 and md-80 crews that did not fly got paid, that is fact.

Where were you in 1992 when fleet and customer service had their penison taken away?

The pilots in general would feed their young to the wolves if it lined their pockets. That is why your group is always the first to cave. You caved in 92,99, and twice in 2001.

 

[diogenes]

[blockquote]
----------------
On 2/5/2003 2:27:51 PM real world wrote:


Let me propose an alternative, how about we all chose to work together (management and all labor groups) to make this airline the best airline in the business. The US management team is committed to making this airline profitable and competitivly viabile for the future. It is this driving principal that has caused us to make these extraordinary decisions to ensure the franchise ultimately survives, without everyone’s sacrifices the entity would not be here for any of us. The airline industry has changed and air travel no longer holds the same value in the consumers mind. Consumers expectations have changed and their expectations are to pay $79 to fly to PIT-LAX not $1779, because of this we have had to modify our cost structure and for that matter our entire franchise to work within this new reality, if we do not, we will not be around very long and I for one do not want that happen.

----------------
[/blockquote]
------------------------------------------

Real World,

That all sounds very nice; from this observer's perch, it seems to be a little one-sided so far.

1. Pre-parity, U's CASM's exceeded those of the comparable airlines used in the parity review - AA, DL, NW and UA. Post parity, U's CASM's still exceeded those of the Big 4. If labor costs were equivalent among us, what costs drove our CASM's higher?

Post concessions, U's CASM's still exceed those of WN's, even though WN pays its' employees more than U pays theirs. How is this possible? What costs, other than labor, are driving U's CASM's so high?

What I'm looking for here is for management to step up and take some responsiblity for the mess U is in. Or, do you believe U's sole problem is labor and vendor costs?

2. Messr. Glass's letter to the CWA dated July 19, 2002 states "Knowing that a Chapter 11 filing remains a possibility, we have given each union with whom we have reached restructuring agreements a letter which commits that the company will not ask the court to increase the level of concessions as contained in their restructuring agreements, if the restructuring agreement is ratified by the membership. this is the single most important protection any union can receive in a Chapter 11 restructuring process because, in the event a chapter 11 filing becomes necessary, the company would undoubtedly face further degradation in traffic and revenue, resulting in the need for greater concessions."

The ink had not dried on the ballots for Concessions, part I, when Concessions, part II were demanded. Now, one can finesse this til the cows come home (we didn't approach the courts for further concessions - we threatened liquidation). But to a layman such as myself, Messr. Glass's letter said if we accepted the initial concessions, no further concessions would be sought, even if revenues deteriorated. Yet declining revenues were exactly what Concessions, part II were based on. Apparently, the 1113 letters turned out to have less value than was indicated.

More to the point, would you have me accept management at face value, and that there is no hidden agenda? Or do I need a Philadelphia lawyer every time managment posts a memo?

Trust was granted at the beginning of this process. Unfortunately, trust must now be regained.



You speak of choosing how we work together to make this the best airline in the business. Does managment have the sole initiative in that business model, or do we have some choice, other than vacating the premises? If so, I'd choose to have some meaningful input, and to have transparent relations with managment. I'd choose for managment to abide by the contracts it entered with its' employees, rather than contesting plain language. I'd choose for managment to hold itself as accountable as it holds us.

I worked for the best airline that ever was. I brought that work ethic to U, and along with thousands of others, busted my gut to make U as successful. But it takes a team to make any concern a success.

What is the vision going forward? Surely it is not merely cutting labor and vendors costs, for if that is all there is, U will not make it.