Arbitrator's Motive?

[AWA320]

Are you even paying attention? Perhaps you would like to illuminate me on how exactly this FINAL AND BINDING award goes into effect absent a RATIFIED AGREEMENT. Because although I am a simple non-pilot, I just don't see how you get this award you are so proud of to mean something more than printed paper without at least one more vote by the East. Care to illuminate me?

And while I'm sure you were thrilled with your two whole quarters of profitability prior to the merger, you might want to check and see how last year's profit broke down between East and West before flexing that financial muscle. And before you spout off about "saving your @ss" you might want to look into whose money it was that came in, got the merger done, and "saved" the East. Hint: It wasn't AWA's.

I don't need to check last years P&L to realize that you would have NOTHING without us!! You were a failed washed up has been until we pulled you out of the fire. Without AWA there would be no USAirways today. This is a real fact that you are going to have to grasp.

Section 45 ALPA merger policy states not only that awards are binding and final but THAT ALPA MUST DEFEND THE AWARD!! Look stall the contract talks that's cool then we go sec 6 get a deal without you and whipsaw you into the the future!! Choice is yours...

 

[SoldWholeSale]

Well ALPA issues notwithstanding ALL as in 100% of the Profit generated by US Airways came from what is currently known as US East.

In fact HP LOST money for the full year so you may ask yourself just who is carrying who?

You may ask yourself which management team leads the league in DOT Complaints?

Your may ask yourself which management team presided over the rise in Lost Baggage Q1?

You may ask yourself which management team gave you 55% on time performance.

Same as it ever was

Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was

Add to that: Before USAirways, HP had garnered the largest, most frequent maintenance violations in the history of the industry. The only major carrier whose passengers would rather see a Mesa RJ at the end of the jetway, than a mainline jet because it would then have a chance of departing when it was scheduled. There is a very good reason why the surviving name is USAirways.

SH

 

[700UW]

I don't need to check last years P&L to realize that you would have NOTHING without us!! You were a failed washed up has been until we pulled you out of the fire. Without AWA there would be no USAirways today. This is a real fact that you are going to have to grasp.

Section 45 ALPA merger policy states not only that awards are binding and final but THAT ALPA MUST DEFEND THE AWARD!! Look stall the contract talks that's cool then we go sec 6 get a deal without you and whipsaw you into the the future!! Choice is yours...

Gee rewriting history? Let me post the facts:

How US Airways/America West merger got off the ground
Talks between airlines began in 2003, but didn't get serious until this year
Sunday, May 22, 2005

By Dan Fitzpatrick, Pittsburgh Post-Gazette

The on-and-off, 18-month courtship between US Airways and America West Airlines finally clicked into place May 12 in Washington, D.C., high above the floor of the MCI Center, where executives from both airlines had gathered in US Airways' skybox to watch a Washington Wizards playoff game.

Just minutes before tip-off, with the din of exploding fireworks filling the arena, US Airways adviser John Luth received an e-mail on his BlackBerry from Air Canada Chief Executive Officer Robert Milton. It confirmed that Air Canada's board had approved an investment in the combined airline -- the final piece of a $1.5 billion financing package needed to make the deal work.

Luth waved his BlackBerry, smiled and gave everyone the news. He congratulated Doug Parker and Bruce Lakefield, the chief executive officers of America West and US Airways, and broad smiles broke out throughout the box.

The merger was on.

Announced a week later at the Tempe, Ariz., headquarters of America West, the agreement between the nation's seventh-and eight-largest airlines paired a twice-bankrupt, East Coast legacy carrier with a younger, smaller, low-cost airline that does much of its flying on the West Coast.

If they can win a slew of antitrust, shareholder and bankruptcy court approvals, US Airways and America West together would surpass discount king Southwest Airlines in size, becoming the No. 6 carrier in the nation. Together, they also could usher in an era of consolidation in the troubled airline industry, which has lost more than $30 billion since 2001.

But there were several twists along the way, according to people familiar with the events. America West was not the only carrier to express interest in US Airways, nor was America West the only partner US Airways pursued.

The search for a deal began in the fall of 2003, when David Siegel was still US Airways' chief executive officer. Siegel had led US Airways through its first bankruptcy and wrested more than $1 billion in concessions from the company's labor unions. But even as the carrier completed a painful round of cost cuts and emerged from bankruptcy, Siegel knew US Airways was still too small and too inefficient to compete against discounters such as Southwest, which had already announced plans to start service in Philadelphia, a US Airways' hub.

Siegel was convinced that for US Airways to avoid the fate of failed carriers such as Eastern Airlines and Pan Am, both of which liquidated in the 1980s, he would have to bring US Airways' costs down further and position the airline for consolidation with another carrier. He explored several options.

Acquire United Airlines, the nation's No. 2 carrier. That option was code-named "Project Minnow," with US Airways as the small fish gobbling the bigger one.

Combine with British entrepreneur Richard Branson's Virgin Atlantic, which was interested in US Airways' Washington-Boston-New York shuttle, along with slots and gates in the Northeast.

Split the airline in two and merge the Philadelphia and Charlotte, N.C., hub-and-spoke network with one carrier and its slots and gates in Washington, Boston and New York with another.

But US Airways ultimately rejected those options. United did not have any interest in a deal and was too distracted by its own struggles in bankruptcy. Virgin Atlantic wanted lots of US Airways assets -- gates, planes, airport equipment -- to help launch a new U.S. airline, but all it would offer in retrun was the Virgin brand name. US Airways also turned down several inquiries from other carriers -- including Southwest, JetBlue Airways and AirTran Airways -- about acquiring the company's assets but not its employees.

In the end, only America West wanted both.

Siegel made the initial connection. He knew Parker and Executive Vice President Scott Kirby at America West. Their first face-to-face meeting was in October 2003, over dinner in a Washington, D.C., restaurant. They were joined by then-US Airways Chief Financial Officer Neal Cohen.

But the talks ended several months later. At the request of US Airways' board, Siegel departed from the company in April 2004. According to Parker, the first round of discussions failed because US Airways' costs were still too high. Siegel had started a campaign to lower union costs further, but labor leaders refused to deal with him, contributing to his ouster.

Retired Lehman Bros. executive Bruce Lakefield, a friend of US Airways chairman David Bronner, replaced Siegel and sought to save US Airways. He asked unions to help with another round of concessions. When that failed, Lakefield took the company into bankruptcy again and squeezed another $1 billion in concessions from the unions, using the power of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court to hammer home new contracts modeled after America West's labor agreements.

In January, with fuel prices at a record high and doubts aired about US Airways' survival after its Christmas baggage meltdown in Philadelphia, Lakefield picked up the phone and called Parker, suggesting that "maybe we should begin those talks again," according to Parker.

But America West did not have enough cash to lift US Airways out of bankruptcy. It was up to Luth, the US Airways adviser, to find enough investment money to piece the deal together and give the combined company a fighting chance to thrive in the battered airline industry.

Luth and US Airways had serious discussions with more than a dozen investors. They all requested shared participation in a merged airline -- no one wanted to take on all the risk. The Retirement Systems of Alabama, which rescued US Airways from its first bankruptcy in 2003 with a $240 million investment, stands to lose it all if US Airways emerges from bankruptcy and issues new stock.

Luth went after the companies that had something to gain from an investment in US Airways and America West. Aircraft maker Airbus agreed to provide $250 million in exchange for US Airways' pledge to buy dozens of A320 jets in the future. Regional commuter carrier Air Wisconsin Airlines made a $125 million investment in exchange for a jet services partnership. The Appleton, Wis.-based airline will fly for the merged carrier on a contract basis.

Credit card companies may provide $300 million in order to reach new customers. And once-bankrupt Air Canada offered $75 million, good for a 7 percent stake in the new company, in exchange for the rights to bid on the maintenance contract for the new carrier's fleet of 361 jets.

Air Canada was the last in line.

Once its approval came last Thursday, employees at both airlines scrambled to obtain approval from their boards of directors. US Airways' directors signed off Wednesday, over the telephone. America West's board approved it Thursday, in Tempe.

Labor leaders were briefed, and a press release was sent out. Parker and Lakefield spent much of Thursday night explaining the deal to reporters before Lakefield took a red-eye flight back to Washington. Parker, who has been tapped to lead the merged airline, met with employees and went home. Before going to bed, he explained the deal in one final live shot with local TV, from his house.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Dan Fitzpatrick can be reached at dfitzpatrick@post-gazette.com or 412-263-1752.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Correction/Clarification: (Published 5/23/05) Air Canada, as part of an investment in the proposed US Airways-America West Airlines merger, has the right to bid only on the maintenance work that can be outsourced under existing labor contracts. It does not have the right to do the maintenance work on all 361 jets belonging to the combined airline, as described incorrectly in a story Sunday

 

[nycbusdriver]

ALPA merger policy states NO WINDFALLS, that in itself will be enough to turn over the 'binding arbitration', imho.

BINGO!

Thank you for simply spelling out what we've been here dancing around for a week.

 

[john john]

Well ALPA issues notwithstanding ALL as in 100% of the Profit generated by US Airways came from what is currently known as US East.

In fact HP LOST money for the full year so you may ask yourself just who is carrying who?

You may ask yourself which management team leads the league in DOT Complaints?

Your may ask yourself which management team presided over the rise in Lost Baggage Q1?

You may ask yourself which management team gave you 55% on time performance.

Same as it ever was

Same as it ever was
Same as it ever was

Pilots do not have to deal directly with the customers so the result of there job actions have noting to with them dealing with the customer directly, therefore they are quick to make a point

 

[nycbusdriver]

Pilots do not have to deal directly with the customers so the result of there job actions or not dealt with them directly therefore they are quick to make a point

Say WHAT?

 

[john john]

Say WHAT?

get the point now.
Pilots do not have to deal directly with the customers so the result of there job actions have noting to with them dealing with the customer directly, therefore they are quick to make a point.Sorry, got home late and up early in the morning

 

[exB717Flyer]

One thing that has not been mentioned, didn't Nicolau come back and ask both parties if they couldn't work out a deal or help him to work out a deal several weeks after the hearings ended ? Why would an arbitrator make that request several weeks after the final hearings ? Seems like he was having trouble making a fair decision on his own.

The arbitration process starts out as mediation. Hence, it's Nicolau's job to attempt to bring the positions of both sides as close as possible before forcing him to render a decision. What he did was the normal process so don't mistake that as indecision. In fact, he probably had a pretty good idea of what he was going to rule early on in the process. Witness the fact that his ruling came down a month earlier than anticipated.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

ALPA merger policy states NO WINDFALLS, that in itself will be enough to turn over the 'binding arbitration', imho.

You best read the whole Merger Policy to get the whole story. The part you are quoting is required in the mediation process it is NOT REQUIRED for the Arbitrator to abide by.

 

[exB717Flyer]

Charlie_Tuna:

Interesting point. I scoured the policy and you are technically correct. However, as evidenced by the text of Nicolau's Award, he clearly felt bound by those tenets and he repeatedly used the expression "fair and equitable". I dare say he felt his Award abided by them.

 

[Charlie_Tuna]

All I'm saying is BEFORE you do something rash, take the time to dissect this document because IF I'm reading it right there are some pearls in the award for the East Pilots.

I am sure their rage will take your pearls of wisdom worth a grain of salt.

 

[fatherabraham]

I don't need to check last years P&L to realize that you would have NOTHING without us!! You were a failed washed up has been until we pulled you out of the fire. Without AWA there would be no USAirways today. This is a real fact that you are going to have to grasp.

Section 45 ALPA merger policy states not only that awards are binding and final but THAT ALPA MUST DEFEND THE AWARD!! Look stall the contract talks that's cool then we go sec 6 get a deal without you and whipsaw you into the the future!! Choice is yours...

awa320,

"what comes around ....goes around" Would not want to be in your shoes going forward with the post I have read of yours today.
Fact is, not one red cent came from your pocket to save anyone! You appear to be a pilot and not a financial org. that put it all together. Get over yourself!

FA

 

[AWA320]

awa320,

"what comes around ....goes around" Would not want to be in your shoes going forward with the post I have read of yours today.
Fact is, not one red cent came from your pocket to save anyone! You appear to be a pilot and not a financial org. that put it all together. Get over yourself!

FA

I am way over this FA!! ALPA will defend this award and we move on plain and simple. Your people did an awful job managing your expectations and there is where your anger should be placed. DOH is the past you were NEVER entitled to anything on the backs of our crews.

It's not our fault that you and your committee pushed an for unreasonable and totally unfair position. The award is what it is and it's fair. Where your pilots were prior is where they are today. If the were on the bottom prior they are on the bottom today, no loss.

You expected to upgrade and place unemployed pilots ahead of line flying captains. You expected to make up for two failed bankruptcies using our crews. UNFAIR and the arbitrator saw that!!!! get over FA and let's move on. We have much bigger fish in the pan.

 

[JAMAKE1]

AWA320:

I have to disagree with most of what you have discussed here. You continue to throw out hypothetical situations as to what the future would've held for USAirways (the former USAirways). You are merely hypothesizing. Furthermore, it is a weak argument to consider the East's financial position at merger. AWA inherited a company that brought assets, routes, and ultimately value to the "new" corporation. Both companies needed each other and what the future may have held for both airlines is a big unknown in the equation. Airways was a going-concern and not in liquidation. Years of service with regard to seniority should have been factored into the arbitration ruling. Historically, when two (or more) companies join together, DOH is the most equitable. AA/TWA was no way to integrate seniority lists as the repercussions of that boondoggle are still being felt today. I think that you are truly deceiving yourself if you think the East pilots are going to accept this arbitration award. I would suggest that you (and your fellow Westies) be prepared to operate under a separate contract for quite some time...

 

[AWA320]

AWA320:

I have to disagree with most of what you have discussed here. You continue to throw out hypothetical situations as to what the future would've held for USAirways (the former USAirways). You are merely hypothesizing. Furthermore, it is a weak argument to consider the East's financial position at merger. AWA inherited a company that brought assets, routes, and ultimately value to the "new" corporation. Both companies needed each other and what the future may have held for both airlines is a big unknown in the equation. Airways was a going-concern and not in liquidation. Years of service with regard to seniority should have been factored into the arbitration ruling. Historically, when two (or more) companies join together, DOH is the most equitable. AA/TWA was no way to integrate seniority lists as the repercussions of that boondoggle are still being felt today. I think that you are truly deceiving yourself if you think the East pilots are going to accept this arbitration award. I would suggest that you (and your fellow Westies) be prepared to operate under a separate contract for quite some time...

JMAKE1,

You might disagree but the facts don't lie!! You guys were furloughed 18 plus years into the list!! you continue to have over 1400 pilots on FURLOUGH!!! You were bankrupt came out and went right back in WHY???? Because you were a faliure!!! It's not your fault, that little gem belongs to your management.

Now understanding yours and many others on the east frustrations and you may not want to accept this award but it will be upheld by the national union. Believe me they will not sacrafice the union in whole for the east pilot group.Even if they did the DFR lawsuit would bankrupt the union not to mention destablize the entire structure. Decertify then, you have the numbers! You won't get one not one west pilot to accept a new union and we will not pay one dime towards any dues, so make your move.

Now as for a new contract?? Would much rather do it with you but more than willing to leave you behind to work under LOA 93!! Choice is all yours on the east.