Alpa Close To A Ta?

[USA320Pilot]

Upon furher review...

ALPA’s September 28 proposal states, "All rates of required contributions to the Pilots’ Defined Contribution Plan that are above 10% shall be reduced to 10%. Make all contributions that were not made to Pilots’ Defined Contribution Plan, July 2004 and thereafter. All pre petition and post petition notional money shall be paid in accordance with the Pilots’ Defined Contribution Plan in six equal installments after the pilot retires; a retiring pilot shall receive 1/6th of the amount on his retirement date and equal payments each six months thereafter until the entire amount is paid."

The proposal also provides an ERIP for more cash pay outs to the older pilot's in seniority order.

Therefore, if I understand the proposal correctly, the new pilot retirement plan would provide 10% of the current DC Plan monies, versus the company’s proposal for a 10% 401(k), for pilot's who continue to work.

Again, it appears the RC4/NC are protecting the top of the seniority list and leaving the remaining pilot’s with virtually no further retirement monies.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[UseYourHead]

Why am I not surprised...the RC has not represented the pilot group since they took office; rather, they have attempted to take care a small group within.

If ever 4 reps deserved removal or worse, these are them! Very sad....

Upon furher review...

ALPA’s September 28 proposal states, "All rates of required contributions to the Pilots’ Defined Contribution Plan that are above 10% shall be reduced to 10%. Make all contributions that were not made to Pilots’ Defined Contribution Plan, July 2004 and thereafter. All pre petition and post petition notional money shall be paid in accordance with the Pilots’ Defined Contribution Plan in six equal installments after the pilot retires; a retiring pilot shall receive 1/6th of the amount on his retirement date and equal payments each six months thereafter until the entire amount is paid."

The proposal also provides an ERIP for more cash pay outs to the older pilot's in seniority order.

Therefore, if I understand the proposal correctly, the new pilot retirement plan would provide 10% of the current DC Plan monies, versus the company’s proposal for a 10% 401(k), for pilot's who continue to work.

Again, it appears the RC4/NC are protecting the top of the seniority list and leaving the remaining pilot’s with virtually no further retirement monies.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="185755"][/post]​

 

[fatherabraham]

Therefore, if I understand the proposal correctly, the new pilot retirement plan would provide 10% of the current DC Plan monies, versus the company’s proposal for a 10% 401(k), for pilot's who continue to work.

Again, it appears the RC4/NC are protecting the top of the seniority list and leaving the remaining pilot’s with virtually no further retirement monies.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

[post="185755"][/post]​

What i do not understand is the PHL first oficer rep motivation in agreeing with the "RC4" thought process. Is he not a younger FO who would be harming his own career ( and those he represents ) by allowing the same ole tired practice of senior protecting thier respective arses @ at cost of rest (majority). Seems insane to me!

 

[vc10]

Some US Airways first officers have been there a very long time. The most junior guy flying at mainline has something like 16 or 17 years at the company. So some FOs are probably pretty close to retirement themselves.

What i do not understand is the PHL first oficer rep motivation in agreeing with the "RC4" thought process. Is he not a younger FO who would be harming his own career ( and those he represents ) by allowing the same ole tired practice of senior protecting thier respective arses @ at cost of rest (majority). Seems insane to me!

[post="185773"][/post]​

 

[FM2436]

What i do not understand is the PHL first oficer rep motivation in agreeing with the "RC4" thought process. Is he not a younger FO who would be harming his own career ( and those he represents ) by allowing the same ole tired practice of senior protecting thier respective arses @ at cost of rest (majority). Seems insane to me!

[post="185773"][/post]​

fatherabraham:

Would I be correct in thinking that maybe the PHL first officer's motive was delibrate knowing the rest (majority), if permitted to vote, would vote no. Or am I total off-base and have no idea what I'm talking about?

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Some US Airways first officers have been there a very long time. The most junior guy flying at mainline has something like 16 or 17 years at the company. So some FOs are probably pretty close to retirement themselves.

[post="185787"][/post]​

Could be. There are only 300 active pilots at this company under the age of 45. The last union meeting resembled an Shriners Convention minus the fez. :huh:

 

[EyeInTheSky]

What i do not understand is the PHL first oficer rep motivation in agreeing with the "RC4" thought process. Is he not a younger FO who would be harming his own career ( and those he represents ) by allowing the same ole tired practice of senior protecting thier respective arses @ at cost of rest (majority). Seems insane to me!

[post="185773"][/post]​

fatherabraham, the whole point of being an LEC rep is to follow the requests of the pilots you represent. Believe me, these guys were indeed listening to the pilot groups in PIT and PHL. Some on here have a real hard time with that, then again, they are not based in PIT or PHL.

 

[fatherabraham]

fatherabraham, the whole point of being an LEC rep is to follow the requests of the pilots you represent. Believe me, these guys were indeed listening to the pilot groups in PIT and PHL. Some on here have a real hard time with that, then again, they are not based in PIT or PHL.

[post="185793"][/post]​

Above post(s) seem reasonable enough.

However I gotta question his real motives.....after all he is human.

1. He appears to be much closer to age 45 than 55.

2. Other posters indicate that around 2/3 of seniority list is under 55.

3. Would have to guess the majority of First officers in any base to be under 55.

4. What does he and those he represent gain from a defeated ta?

 

[Art at ISP]

I have to chime in with Piney Bob here--making one seniority list makes perfect sense, and would result in tremendous operational savings by eliminating duplicitous management and other functions--which is one reason perhaps it won't happen.

There should only be one list--or at the most two-with pay commensurate with experience and type. In circumstances where there are temporary shortages in one type, couldn't a pilot who had moved up a type or two go back for a short while if needed with minimum recurrent training? This would add some flexibility which does not exist today.

I am saddened when I speak to your colleagues as I travel through the system, as many of them just want this to be resolved--one way or the other--it's the not knowing what will happen which is driving them nuts.
I do notice though that the overwhelming majority are putting their best face forward, and working even harder not to show the frustration and anger they feel to the customer--and that is greatly appreciated.

I do not have all the answers, but continue to support and will keep flying US Airways until it is no longer possible to do so...

My best to you all.......

 

[UseYourHead]

I am a PHL based pilot.

These irresponsible idiots do not represent the majority. Due to pilot apathy, a vocal minority of angry pilots have elected suicidal reps who have held the suicidal line. I would guess that these criminal actions will get pilots out in roves to take care of this.

Like they were going to prevent concessions by not negotiating...all they have done is taken away the choice of the pilot group and let the company and the BK judge do it for them so they don't get tagged with it.

Gee, I wonder if it has anything to do with the lawsuit they have? Either way, these are the actions of COWARDS who are afraid to report back to the pilots that we have a long list of painful choices, all of which are better choosen by us, and not a BK judge.

There were hundreds of pilots at recent meeting, while these dingbats just stared at the floor and mumbled they were following their gut instead of the paid advisors urging them to take responsiple actions in obtaining an agreement...something they clearly have not done.

They told everyone they would save the DC retirement plan...well guess what, they did not, and now have opened a contractual Pandora's Box.

Shame on them, they are about about to destroy the lives of over 1000 pilots and thousands of other employees.

fatherabraham, the whole point of being an LEC rep is to follow the requests of the pilots you represent. Believe me, these guys were indeed listening to the pilot groups in PIT and PHL. Some on here have a real hard time with that, then again, they are not based in PIT or PHL.

[post="185793"][/post]​

 

[ITRADE]

Wow UseYourHead. Watch out, PitBull is now going to be convinced that you actually work at CCY since you haven't toted the kamikaze party line.

 

[700UW]

Slander on the INTERNET is a suable offense

 

[ITRADE]

Your point is.

And cite me a case.

 

[repeet]

UseYourHead
Posted Today, 08:42 AM

Shame on them, they are about about to destroy the lives of over 1000 pilots and thousands of other employees.

Shame on them? Nonsense. It's never wrong, to do what's right.

 

[700UW]

You are the lawyer, you go find it.

Braintech vs. Kostiuk
Wagner v. Miskin (libel)