ALPA/USAPA topic of the week

[Leonidas]

I think usapa is going to implode within 6 months, they will be able to deliver nothing to the easties except lot's of assessments.

From the west:


Plan B
We as pilots know how safe fl ying can be; however,
contingency planning is part of what we do every
time we go to work. The AWA MEC is prepared to
fi ght this raid on our union perpetrated by USAPA.
However, in order to responsibly represent the pilots
of America West, strategic planning for a worst-case
scenario has been on-going for some time; this plan
is known as “Plan B.â€￾ A Plan B is necessary because
even though USAPA publicly claims that they will
represent all US Airways pilots, their proposed plans
and actions do not and will never refl ect that. USAPA
will fail to be a viable agent for the West pilots,
putting all of us at a disadvantage. Plan B
incorporates defensive and offensive strategies,
which include but are not limited to legal approaches
and political avenues. In the paragraphs below, we
will outline some of the aspects of Plan B. However,
not all of our strategy will be discussed here, for
obvious reasons. Please understand that we simply
cannot lay all of our cards on the table at this time.
The legal strategy developed will be adjusted
depending on how USAPA follows through with their
claims. Our outside merger counsel will be prepared
to take immediate and aggressive legal action if and
when USAPA attempts to discriminate against the
West pilots.
The political front will also develop as USAPA fails to
represent not only the West pilots but all US Airways
pilots with empty promises and a bankrupt
organization. USAPA has made claims that they will
be able to implement a new seniority list, negotiate
a new contract, not assess the membership, provide
seamless services on par with ALPA, etc. When the
harsh reality dawns on pilots that USAPA has neither
the expertise nor leverage to deliver on their
guarantees, the pilots undoubtedly will demand
answers.
One of the most important aspects of Plan B is how
we, the West pilots, maintain unity and affect a
signifi cant amount of leverage to protect our careers.
The key is communication. A communication system
is already in place where information, direction and
assistance will be disseminated in a timely fashion to
all West pilots. There will be many issues facing our
group, and collectively, we will show our strength.
Issues such as dues payment, representative
elections, legal fund and more will all be managed
through this communication network where USAPA
and management will face 1,770 pilots standing
together.
Even though the doors to the ALPA offi ce may be
locked on April 17, should USAPA prevail, there will
be another go-to place to organize our side. Please
adjust your email settings to receive emails from
AWAPPA.org in order to assure that we are all
receiving the same information. This website will be
a central location for all AWA pilots to get details on
the plan of action should USAPA be installed as our
bargaining agent.
Additionally, a strategy has been developed to allow
for the monies from our last merger assessment to be
used in defense of AWA pilots. The MEC will soon
announce this plan, which will give you a choice in
how to protect your interests.
We hope Plan B will never need to be used, but we
are ready, willing and able to implement it as soon as
the voting results are released. If we stick together
and act as a single unit, your careers, your livelihood
and your integrity will be protected."

 

[EastUS]

I think usapa is going to implode within 6 months, they will be able to deliver nothing to the easties except lot's of assessments.

From the west:


Plan B

"Plan B incorporates defensive and offensive strategies, which include but are not limited to legal approaches and political avenues."

Do what you think you should. I've no personal issues with anyone standing up for what they believe to be Right, whether I agree at all or not. Seriously though; I'd suggest future caution when putting lines like the above out for the world to see..."not limited to legal approaches and political avenues". That sort of phrase may easilly be turned against you in future events, and serve your purposes poorly. If you meant that as any attempt at "intimidation"..well..good luck. I don't see any nearby ALPA Goat or film crew..so I see no sense in getting too upset.

PS: "We hope Plan B will never need to be used, but we are ready, willing and able to implement it as soon as the voting results are released" OK..that could be seriously bad..I mean..I didn't ask before..only having seen the one goat in cinematic action: How many ALPA Goats do you actually have in reserve Leonidas? We'll need to find that out ASAP in order to plan a proper "perimeter" defense For all I know; Your first "film" may have just been intended as an instructional video, and you've secretly been training entire divisions of the beasties!

 

[Bear96]

"Let's not distort reality Mr. EastUS. To say that the West did not give ANY support is not accurate. The West MEC was in full support and agreed with the East MEC stance on positive space travel for union travel."

I'll necessarilly assume that was offered toungue-in-cheek, and respond in kind.

Gosh!..you're right!!. That awesome measure of "full support" for all the "fellow pilots" suffering inferior pay rates/etc, had somehow earlier escaped me. Umm..it couldn't be that they were merely concerned only with themselves, and their fellow Alpoid shills?..Just a thought

So if elected USAPA thinks it will be able to do a better job serving its members by travelling NRSA instead of postive space?

Interesting. No doubt USAPA will move quickly to give up whatever PS benefits it might inherit from ALPA, correct? YOu know, to show "support" for the "fellow pilots suffering inferior pay rates/etc."

 

[AAA73Pilot]

You gotta admit - it takes some intelligence to do it so consistently....

Jim

Yep. From ALL parties concerned.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

None of it will matter. The pockets will be empty. ALPA won't be able to give an financial support to "Plan B" without facing all kinds of legal issues. You think the ALPA pilots at other airines really give two cents about what happens to ALPA at LCC? Think again!

 

[BoeingBoy]

Yep. From ALL parties concerned.

If you're including me in that ALL, Id appreciate an example - if I've done such it wasn't on purpose and should definitely be the exception. And an apology is due if I've done it to someone.

Jim

 

[AAA73Pilot]

So if elected USAPA thinks it will be able to do a better job serving its members by travelling NRSA instead of postive space?

Interesting. No doubt USAPA will move quickly to give up whatever PS benefits it might inherit from ALPA, correct? YOu know, to show "support" for the "fellow pilots suffering inferior pay rates/etc."

Geez, nice twist there Bear. You are really a piece of work, having "No bone in this". But your flame bait post is ridiculous at best. Maybe when you use that supposed intelligence for constructive purposes as a neutral bystander you might begin to carry some thoughtful consideration by those who read your posts.

 

[dariencc]

If you're including me in that ALL, Id appreciate an example
Jim

How 'bout this example, Jim?

How horrible - thinking a pilot should be able to take his longevity along when jobs are sold to another airline. Can I take it that you'd be ok with going with the airplanes sold (fragmented) to another company but being treated like a new hire when you got there? You believe in longevity as sacred but would willingly give it up if you went with the jobs that were sold under the East contract's fragmentation language?

This was from a discussion about the Trump integration. Don't think the argument was ever about the Shuttle pilots being treated as "new hires," but about which DOH should be used, Trump or Eastern. Be that as it may, the above quote was from a colloquy with oldie in which his points were treated with artistic license in your reply.

I now understand why you'd be in favor of the Shuttle pilots not getting their Eastern DOH. Your furloughed brothers/sisters didn't deserve it so neither do the Shuttle folks.....

Jim

You were on a roll that day, Jimbo. I thought oldie wanted to treat the Trumps like new hires, but it turns out he wanted them to get the same raw deal that our furloughees got. I think this non sequitur falls under the category known as "twisting of words."

 

[b737fo]

Well so far it looks like the membership cost at USAPA will be the same 1.95% that we pay for ALPA. Supposedly it we be lowered at some arbitrary time when the "fund is built up". I'm not saying they aren't telling the truth but I have always been wary of the "we anticipate" or "sometime in the future" ambiguous language.

 

[CactusFlyr]

Yep. From ALL parties concerned.

Aren't you the "pot meet kettle' guy??? Can't you ever come up with an original thought instead of saying "you too"???

 

[Bear96]

Geez, nice twist there Bear. You are really a piece of work, having "No bone in this". But your flame bait post is ridiculous at best. Maybe when you use that supposed intelligence for constructive purposes as a neutral bystander you might begin to carry some thoughtful consideration by those who read your posts.

Sorry, but was there an answer somewhere in there to the questions I posed?

Or was it just the typical modus operandi of ad hominem attacks against those who don't agree with you to dry to dodge the issues.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Aren't you the "pot meet kettle' guy??? Can't you ever come up with an original thought instead of saying "you too"???

Only if you say so.

I come up with a lot original stuff when warranted. Your problem is you can never tell the difference. Besides, I get really tired of having to repeat myself to people who don't like or agree with what I say. But if you want answers that I know, why don't you ask something original instead of repeating the same old line phrased a thousand different ways. Kind of like the ALPA web boards. It does get old.

We all know our sides, do you really think you're going to sway opinions to your side with FUDS?

I will give credit where it's due. Jim, BoeingBoy, did point out a vote that I either missed or simply forgot. That was good and I appreciated him bringing it up. I'll do the same for you, but right now you haven't even come close.

 

[BoeingBoy]

You misread, or I wasn't clear enough - the "new hires" referred to when they went to Trump, not as of the integration with US.

The context:

The issue as I saw it was not nearly as simple as you paint it. The issue was which date of hire should the shuttle guys get, their Eastern or Trump DOH, since they were made to resign from Eastern to work at Trump. Now, where does that put the folks hired at US that had previously been at Eastern, many of whom had gone on strike against Lorenzo and subsequently lost their jobs? Some paid for their support of ALPA with their livleihoods, only to be placed behind their brethren that did not. I, fortunately was not one of them, but I see the complications which were raised in that merger.

Would not you agree that using their Trump DOH was the same as saying they were nothing but new hires when they went there?

You'll also notice the 2nd bolded part. Putting them behind their former colleagues could imply treating them as new hires when they integrated into US. But I didn't pounce on that line because I understood what oldie was saying in that context (although I can see where you might think that is the part I was referring to). A line like that would be low hanging fruit for someone like EastUS

You were on a roll that day, Jimbo. I thought oldie wanted to treat the Trumps like new hires, but it turns out he wanted them to get the same raw deal that our furloughees got. I think this non sequitur falls under the category known as "twisting of words."

Well, let's see. The Shuttle issue was "not as simple as that" (see oldies quote above). "The issue was which date of hire should the shuttle guys get, their Eastern or Trump DOH" (see oldies quote above)

Would you not agree that not giving them the fragmentation rights afforded them at Eastern by using their Trump DOH is exactly what happened to the MDA folks? They didn't get the fragmentation protection specified by the contract when planes were sold to Republic, courtesy of the East pilots vote, did they?

Jim

 

[EastUS]

So if elected USAPA thinks it will be able to do a better job serving its members by travelling NRSA instead of postive space?

Interesting. No doubt USAPA will move quickly to give up whatever PS benefits it might inherit from ALPA, correct? YOu know, to show "support" for the "fellow pilots suffering inferior pay rates/etc."

OK..Enough with the "dry to dodge" BS. The postings were in reference to a wholesale lack of any tangible support for east pilots receiving equal pay with the west. It was answered by an observation that union travel for the east would be space positive..as if that, in ANY way shape or form equated to millions lost through inferior wages for the line pilots. Perhaps you don't find any comparative value of the two to be utterly absurd? I've no problem with union reps traveling space positve, but that's not any great gift from Alpo, and is widely practiced throughout the industry. I had not mentioned ANY idiotic notion about that being given up as some noble sacrifice towards the east...that absurd implication's entirely your own. The point was that space positive travel for union work most directly beneifts those who personally do such, and is hardly comparative to lost millions in line pilot's wages, and thusly, represented NO 'support" for the east. Is that horse now sufficiently beaten so as to suit your "neutral" perspective?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Very true. But just saying "that's over - I can't do anything about it now" and going back to flying your trips and paying no attention until the MEC either gives away something else or starts "the sky's falling, we gotta do something, agree to this" rhetoric all over again isn't the solution either. What's that saying - doing the same thing over and over while expecting a different outcome is the definition of insanity or something like that. The East pilot group (ok EastUS - the voting majority of the East pilot group) did the same things over and over by buying into that same lame rhetoric from many of the same people repeatedly. I know that I was constantly amazed by the trained dog trick - the company says jump, the MEC says "how high", and enough of the pilot group shouted "don't waste time asking questions, we're jumping already" to pass whatever the company wanted (or the MEC was so anxious to jump - just like too many pilots - that they jumped enough for everybody).

Jim

This isn't what I witnessed at all. It was more like the MEC asking the company, "mind if we jump?" and after the initial jump the company saying "not high enough". Then the MEC said "how about we just give you everything we have in our pockets too?. Then the company replied, "OK, we'll take that, but you still have to jump higher". After which the MEC responded, "why not take my pay, workrules and retirement". The company responded "OK, but you still have to jump". That sort of negotiating resulted in LOA 93. The pilots were then advised by the "all knowing" ALPA to take the deal or else.

That's my recollection. I'll bet a lot of others saw it the same way.

And, by the way, I still believe that if everyone was given their DOH for seniority and all other purposes from the day they began working at LCC or a predecessor airline (with appropriate no bump, no flush provisions) we would not be in this situation. The F/As have always done it this way, and it works.