ALPA BOS F/o Rep. Update - June 25

[careerfurloughee]

😀 Quoting Samuel Johnson and William Shakespeare will not magically provide a :wacko: poster with integrity, honesty or credibility. 😀 Thanks for the laughs, though!

Nor will quoting US Airways management or Garland! Laughing just as loud!

 

[careerfurloughee]

Nor will quoting US Airways management or Garland!

Oops. That sentence was redundant. Sorry. LOL

 

[USA320Pilot]

BoeingBoy:

The discussion between MEC members to agree to the company’s first proposal was made in caucus, but never made it to a vote because the PA Reps. would not settle for the offer. Interestingly, if my memory serves me correctly from events I witnessed at the meetings, the Advisors told the MEC that if the NC countered with an offer at about 85% of the “askâ€￾ they believe the company would have accepted the offer because it would have provided POR support before the filing giving the ATSB and creditors more confidence the company could successfully restructure without a "labor war.".

It's too bad the PA Reps. decided to just say "no" because as PITBull indicated each company offer got worse and worse and worse again leaving the pilots with a worse contract than necessary, according to PitBull's remarks earleir in this topic.

Meanwhile, what did you think of Kim Snider’s letter/report to the MEC and Michael Glanzer’s opinion that the actions of the PIT/PHL Reps. cost the pilot’s over $70,000 per pilot (more than $100,000 at today’s price) in equity market value?

Would you have liked to have had that money?

By the way, from my previous post and questions to you, "Gosh, never an answer - how typical..." How can that be?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[ClueByFour]

I not only went to the LCC shareholder meeting carrying a proxy, but I also stayed in a Holiday Inn Express, was invited to sit with the board in executive session, and fetch the donuts. Oddly enough, carrying this proxy was the only reason I could get into the executive session: I'd previously run for a board seat at least twice and been unable to garner enough support from the lemmings: particularly those in New York.

How art imitates life sometimes, eh?

 

[700UW]

Once again, he fails to realize even if you would have accepted an earlier offer there was nothing to prevent the company coming back for more as they did again and again, did you not learn anything from the first two rounds of concessions in chapter 11 case #1?

Guess you forgot about the two concessionary contracts you ratified and then the company came back for a third time out of your wallet and took your pension as your MEC let them do it without one pilot voting on it.

Memory problems?

 

[USA320Pilot]

How about quoting ALPA’s Investment Banker and the MEC’s Vice Chairman?

Here’s the bottom line and boy did this topic drift from the PHL Reps. misrepresentation, according to a MEC Rep., which is the fifth time that I can remember an ALPA official publicly indicated the PHL Reps. misrepresent information (There were 3 times by Jack Stephen and 1 time by Bill Pollock).

The PA Reps, including one with a high school diploma and no advanced degree in any subject, ignored the advice of ALPA International’s financial, legal, economic, and negotiating advisors.

These Representatives and their “roll call†picked Negotiating Committee obtained a tentative agreement worse than the company’s offer(s).

In fact, PITBull said, “Every group gave more than the company asked originally. Why? Because we were in BK and the company knew they could. Every time any group came and countered the company, the 'ask' increased and became a demand.â€

That’s true and an excellent point. Moreover, what PitBull said was exactly what the ALPA advisor’s told the MEC would happen, which is why the MEC should have listened to the advisor’s and accepted the company’s first offer, which was basically the America West pilot contract with some work rule changes to offset longevity.

As a retired military officer, I have seen when a situation goes gad the Commander is held accountable and due to ALPA’s constitution and by-laws the Commander-in-charge of the MEC via “roll call†was the RC4.

Could the company have filed a motion to take more of the contract per 700UW’s last post? Sure, but it sure would have been better to have a contract in place that was better than LOA 93 and then waited to see what happened. Moreover, who knows if the company would have gone back into court after signing a S.1113 letter?

The bottom line here is continued misrepresentation allegations against the PHL Reps, plain and simple.

When would now be a good time for the PHL Reps. to be honest?

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

They came back and took your pension after two rounds of concessions and your MEC rolled over and played dead.

Wake up!

Glass, Hemenway and McKeen proved time and time again they cannot be trusted.

The IAM M&R ratified to concessionary contracts and they still tried to steal the Airbus work from us, even a federal judge and later and Mr Bloch ruled it is our work.

They are playing your group like a fiddle and you cant see even see it.

 

[BoeingBoy]

By all means, I don't want to imitate you and evade questions.....I missed them - probably because my mind started going numb from your usual regurgitation of opinion presented as fact.

Meanwhile, what did you think of Kim Snider’s letter/report to the MEC and Michael Glanzer’s opinion that the actions of the PIT/PHL Reps. cost the pilot’s over $70,000 per pilot (more than $100,000 at today’s price) in equity market value?

Would you have liked to have had that money?

By the way, from my previous post and questions to you, "Gosh, never an answer - how typical..." How can that be?

Regards,

USA320Pilot [/font]

1 - I thought it was sleight-of hand with no basis in fact. A fantasy used to malign the PHL & PIT reps. Calculated by a Secretary/Treasurer who can't even verify FPL claims and seconded by a "Consultant" who can't identify potential savings when the company is spending $50 million a year on significantly underutilized gates in PIT (and that's just one of the many he couldn't identify). Of course, the usual GAG devotees bought it hook, line, and sinker.

2 - What money (see #1)

[Edit to add]

Almost forgot - you claim that everyone including the advisors (xcept PHL/PIT) were in favor of accepting the company's first offer but yet say that the advisors rocommended countering with "about 85% of the ask"!!! Seems like a contradiction.....

 

[hp_fa]

BoeingBoy:

The discussion between MEC members to agree to the company’s first proposal was made in caucus, but never made it to a vote because the PA Reps. would not settle for the offer. Interestingly, if my memory serves me correctly from events I witnessed at the meetings, the Advisors told the MEC that if the NC countered with an offer at about 85% of the “askâ€￾ they believe the company would have accepted the offer because it would have provided POR support before the filing giving the ATSB and creditors more confidence the company could successfully restructure without a "labor war.".

It's too bad the PA Reps. decided to just say "no" because as PITBull indicated each company offer got worse and worse and worse again leaving the pilots with a worse contract than necessary, according to PitBull's remarks earleir in this topic.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

What causes you to think that the company would have accepted the ALPA agreement to their ask? How likely is it that even if ALPA had given the company 100% of what it wanted that the company would have found a crisis of one kind or another to prevent signing the agreement or still would have otherwise engaged the court for additional relief?

The mistake every union in every company in BK has made is not having the guts to actually strike once a contract is imposed. So, the Wal-Martization of the air continues until someone, somewhere grows cajones.

p.s. - 700, I responded before I saw your post....

 

[USA320Pilot]

BoeingBoy:

BoeingBoy said: “Of course, the usual GAG devotees bought it hook, line, and sinker.â€￾

USA320Pilot comments: What’s a GAG?

BoeingBoy said: “What money (see #1)â€￾

USA320Pilot comments: Come to think of it, you’re right. I sat in a MEC meeting and heard Doug Mowrey say that the pilots did not need the equity because it would be worth nothing and then he negotiated it away against the advice of the advisors.

Interestingly MEC Vice Chairman Kim Snider’s report to the MEC said, “Some have suggested that since it is possible that once again management might have tried to change a deal (after entering bankruptcy) that there was no opportunity lost by not accepting the offer of 19.33% of the Company stock. Such thinking is in a word "goofy" as no negotiator wants to be dealing from a weaker position instead of a stronger position.â€￾

Moreover, “The loss of stock caused by rejecting the Company's offer, prior to bankruptcy, of 19.33% of the stock has turned out to be much greater than it originally appeared,â€￾ Snider noted.

Yeah, you’re right…what money?

I sat at the MEC table on September 10 as a voting MEC member by proxy and heard Doug Mowrey report what Garland Jones reported that the pilot’s “went from 19.33% to a 1.25% Equity position, and a reduced Profit Sharing Plan, due to escape clauses that the Company added after we entered bankruptcy on Sept. 12. And we also went from a 50% reduction in our DC Plan Contribution (for example, from 40% to 20%) to a flat 10% for everybody post bankruptcy.â€￾

Yeah, you’re right…what money? You and the other pilots lost it due to the PIT/PHL REps. that you seen to lovingly support!

BoeingBoy said: "you claim that everyone including the advisors (xcept PHL/PIT) were in favor of accepting the company's first offer but yet say that the advisors rocommended countering with "about 85% of the ask"!!! Seems like a contradiction..."

USA320Pilot comments: No, it’s not a contradiction because the idea in caucus of accepting the company’s proposal or a legitimate counter of 85% of the company’s ask never proceeded because the PIT/PHL Rep’s used their “roll callâ€￾ vote to stop the process. The counter was about one-third of the ask and then as PITBull said, ““Every group gave more than the company asked originally. Why? Because we were in BK and the company knew they could. Every time any group came and countered the company, the 'ask' increased and became a demand.â€￾

PitBull’s comment is dead-on accurate and an excellent point. Moreover, what PitBull said was exactly what the ALPA advisor’s told the MEC would happen, which is why the MEC should have listened to the advisor’s and accepted the company’s first offer or made an reasonable counter offer, but the PIT/PHL Reps said “noâ€￾ and never let the process proceed.

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[700UW]

The IAM, AFA, CWA and other unions had stock options in thei concessionary agreements only to have the investors balk and had judge Stephen (in the pocket)Mitchell remove it and add a diluted profit sharing plan.

And I see you have no counter the facts I have posted about the company coming back on alpa when you all ready had two concessionary contracts and they took your pension and Pollack did nothing and did not even let you pilots vote on its termination.

Sucks to be a pilot with the lack of leadership and yes men, all the GAG.

GAG= GIVE AWAY GANG

 

[USA320Pilot]

700UW said: "Sucks to be a pilot with the lack of leadership and yes men, all the GAG."

USA320Pilot comments: If it sucks to be a pilot at the pre-America West merger US Airways then why are about 3,000 pilots working here and 55 pilots recently accepting recall?

Moreover, I wonder how does the job compare to other airline jobs?

Are the pay and benefits as high as before? No, of course not, but they're good enough for thousands of pilots to still work at the company.

700UW said: "The IAM, AFA, CWA and other unions had stock options in thei concessionary agreements only to have the investors balk and had judge Stephen (in the pocket)Mitchell remove it and add a diluted profit sharing plan."

US Airways ALPA MEC Vice Chairman Kim Snider said: "“Some have suggested that since it is possible that once again management might have tried to change a deal (after entering bankruptcy) that there was no opportunity lost by not accepting the offer of 19.33% of the Company stock. Such thinking is in a word "goofy" as no negotiator wants to be dealing from a weaker position instead of a stronger position.â€￾

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[careerfurloughee]

USA320Pilot comments: If it sucks to be a pilot at the pre-America West merger US Airways then why are about 3,000 pilots working here and 55 pilots recently accepting recall?

Best regards,

USA320Pilot

They had to go down the recall list over two hundred pilots to get 55.

 

[SoftLanding]

What causes you to think that the company would have accepted the ALPA agreement to their ask? How likely is it that even if ALPA had given the company 100% of what it wanted that the company would have found a crisis of one kind or another to prevent signing the agreement or still would have otherwise engaged the court for additional relief?

The mistake every union in every company in BK has made is not having the guts to actually strike once a contract is imposed. So, the Wal-Martization of the air continues until someone, somewhere grows cajones.

p.s. - 700, I responded before I saw your post....

Couldn't agree more! No matter what agreement the pilots of US Airways had, those agreements would have been gone once the second CH11 was entered.

This USA320Pilot can blame the PHL & PIT reps as much as he wants.

The blame rests with all of the US Airways pilots, myself included. We didn't "hang" together, that's why we hung seperately!

And the beatings will continue until we grow...some BIG...cajones!

SoftLanding

 

[700UW]

Hate to inform you that all unions on this property were in a weaker position then the company.

I know I was there, you were not.