August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[EastUS1]

Very well could be. However I still can't help but think they're after a completely liability free path forward, and are more than happy to wait for it. It would be interesting to be a fly on a few walls, rather than be left to speculate on motives.

Perhaps I'm the far-more cynical of us, but methinks corporate legal's long-ago been, and is always fully aware that no truly "liability free path" EVER exists in this, or could even possibly exist within ANY contractual establishments...ever...period. I can see only a bit more obvious motives for mgmt = $$$$ and delay.

PS: That this whole mess has presented them with functioning, yet mutually hostile employee groups, just couldn't be better for them.

 

[EastUS1]

I have to disagree with you on this one LS. She gave them an answer, mostly one they provided her as a choice. She added a caveat yes, but that really left it up to them to do whatever they wanted. No, I think they just wanted their excuse extended.

"I think they just wanted their excuse extended."

Yep.

 

[Reed Richards]

I think you misunderstand the scope of the DJ appeal. You seem to implicitly assume the 9th will retry the entire DJ from the beginning as if Silver hasn't already ruled in favor of USAPA.

Bookmark this one. Simply outstanding observation. RR

 

[Reed Richards]

Agreed. I wish the man no ill will, and hopefully; quickly renewed health, but if he's listed as a pilot, yet being paid by the company as some sort of special employee that currently isn't qualified....Well....exactly what are they paying him for, or to do/etc? Wouldn't everyone else be burning sick time and addressing disability? It all begs for some unsavory questions to be answered, starting with: Why is the company paying him to be the union's president?

I'd think the only honorable course for him would be to accept nothing more than any line pilot would get under similar circumstances.

Option B: Give all pilots the same benefits....Period!

You have not a clue sir, time for you to log off here and do some reading. I would suggest the USAPA website contract section as a start, specifically LOA 95. RR

 

[EastUS1]

You know, the elderly pickleball players....?

I'm still eagerly awaiting any list you can provide, purely for our mutual amusement of course, of any/all of the greatest AWA/"spartans" athletic accomplishments...? I'd guess that to be, at best, a brief but glossy mini-pamphlet....?

I'd naturally, never dare suggest even the slightest respect for your betters, but mouthy punks do get tiresome at times...even for us elderly types.

 

[EastUS1]

You have not a clue sir, time for you to log off here and do some reading. I would suggest the USAPA website contract section as a start, specifically LOA 95. RR

"You have not a clue sir." In fairness (and in far more times than I'd have liked in life): I've sometimes found that to be the case.

However, in THIS case I must stick with: I'd think the only honorable course for him would be to accept nothing more than any line pilot would get under similar circumstances. Option B: Give all pilots the same benefits....Period!

If you've any compelling argument(s) to the contrary...well...I'm all ears sir...?

 

[Reed Richards]

Looks like full speed ahead for Silver’s forensic investigation as to Section 10h of the MOU. Did Marty really think he was going to be able to exclude that discussion while at the same time suing for non-use of the NIC in said document? Follow the courtroom discussion on the creation of the MOU language as to seniority. You will all soon be enlightened as to the real crafter(s) of said language. Here is some DFR related homework for tonight:

XXXXX helps craft language in the MOU to address seniority.
West members of the NAC pass said language to all USAPA members with a recommendation for approval
West legal also says to vote for said language
West votes for language.
Company tells West the NIC is not the list at US Airways.
West sues saying the NIC had to be in the MOU.

Solve the DFR problem by filling in XXXXX. When you do so over the next two days the answer will be obvious. And please, show all your work. RR

 

[Pi brat]

You have not a clue sir, time for you to log off here and do some reading. I would suggest the USAPA website contract section as a start, specifically LOA 95. RR

I don't think he can. I've been trying to log on all night and can't. Marty and team must be pulling an all-niter for tomorrow and locking it up.

 

[CallawayGolf]

True, and it could also be said that the company did in fact negotiate a new process for seniority. In the event the MOU becomes effective, by its terms, it will render all previous agreements a nullity.

If that's true then why wasn't the DFR case tossed and why is Management testifying that the seniority issue still needs judicial intervention post-MOU ratification?

 

[EastUS1]

Looks like full speed ahead for Silver’s forensic investigation as to Section 10h of the MOU. Did Marty really think he was going to be able to exclude that discussion while at the same time suing for non-use of the NIC in said document? Follow the courtroom discussion on the creation of the MOU language as to seniority. You will all soon be enlightened as to the real crafter(s) of said language. Here is some DFR related homework for tonight:

XXXXX helps craft language in the MOU to address seniority.
West members of the NAC pass said language to all USAPA members with a recommendation for approval
West legal also says to vote for said language
West votes for language.
Company tells West the NIC is not the list at US Airways.
West sues saying the NIC had to be in the MOU.

Solve the DFR problem by filling in XXXXX. When you do so over the next two days the answer will be obvious. And please, show all your work. RR

Agreed, but it'll still be an interesting show to see. We've all seen nothing short of "magic", light or dark, come out of courtrooms in our lifetimes, so I'll wait and watch.

 

[Pi brat]

If that's true then why wasn't the DFR case tossed and why is Management testifying that the seniority issue still needs judicial intervention post-MOU ratification?

Great question!

10h. US Airways agrees that neither this Memorandum nor the JCBA shall provide a basis for
changing the seniority lists currently in effect at US Airways other than through the process set forth in
this Paragraph 10.

Here are a couple more-If there is still a problem with the MOU, why was US Airways released as a defendant? It is a party to the agreement. If it was released, why is it still a party?

I'm sure everything will be answered in the next few days. Yeah, that's it.

 

[Reed Richards]

"You have not a clue sir." In fairness (and far more times than I'd have liked): I've sometimes found that to be the case.

I must stick with: I'd think the only honorable course for him would be to accept nothing more than any line pilot would get under similar circumstances. Option B: Give all pilots the same benefits....Period!

If you've any compelling argument to the contrary...well...I'm all ears sir.

First, stop with the Honor crap, this is not about Honor. Up to now the only choice was for Hummel to quit to stop being paid all compensation, contractually, by the Company. I do NOT support that action. I DO support the BPR doing its job and addressing USAPA compensation in the CBL and UOM to counter and comply with LOA 95. McKee never chose to do so because he said it was "personal" going after Parrella, Cleary, Mowrey, and DiOrio for getting paid to the cap and (in Parrella's case) as a C/O instead of an F/O. Would it be "honorable" for an Officer to step down having suffered a compound fracture one day before his Class I, and being in a cast, maybe even wheelchair for 10 months? No, it would only be tragic and stupid, a waste of election moneys if he could still do the Union job. I actually wish Hummel, Bradford, and Streble would all step down tomorrow. At least in CLT, only about 38 out of every 100 pilots would even care or know. And if you want "everyone" to have the same benefits as given to our ELECTED president trapped in LOA 95, you have to get to a new contract or at least LOA. Kind of hard when we are under an injuntion and legal action for years. RR

 

[Reed Richards]

I don't think he can. I've been trying to log on all night and can't. Marty and team must be pulling an all-niter for tomorrow and locking it up.

Outstanding! RR

 

[EastUS1]

I'm sure everything will be answered in the next few days. Yeah, that's it.

"Yeah, that's it." Indeed sir, and as you also well know; without ANY possible doubts or reasons for either side to appeal! Sorry...I just couldn't help myself but to laugh as well.

A fine sense of irony you've maintained through all this sir. I let myself get too grumpy at times.

 

[EastUS1]

First, stop with the Honor crap, this is not about Honor. Up to now the only choice was for Hummel to quit to stop being paid all compensation, contractually, by the Company. I do NOT support that action.

"Honor crap, this is not about Honor." Yeah. I'm hearing that loud and clear. FYI: Most everything done in life's about some degree of Honor, or simply more base notions, and Honor is never any "crap" to diminish. "Up to now the only choice was for Hummel to quit to stop being paid all compensation, contractually, by the Company." BS sir! Are you trying to tell us all that he had no sick time?...No available opportunity for disability, as is the case for any line pilot?

Explain to us all how anyone should properly accrue "sick time" while off the line for medical reasons? Coming back from Desert Storm in '91; the munificent company told us all we hadn't accrued sick or vacation time in our absence. Of course; that was merely war and not politics...well...unless one's a subscriber to Von Clauswitz. Again noting that I've no wishes for illness on him: WHAT exactly makes Mr. Hummel so truly "special"? Would ANY line pilot be treated as he is being treated?

Spare us all such wanton and wholesale BS.

Would ANY line pilot EVER be treated as he is being treated? When/IF you can ever answer that one....perhaps we'll then talk reasonably.

I truly wish the man a speedy recovery and good health, but that has nothing to do with this discussion.