Record Q3 profit for US Air! Thanks USAPA!!! That profit was taken from each of our families! Well done scabs!!!
97% of the America west pilots voted away profit sharing you idiot.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Record Q3 profit for US Air! Thanks USAPA!!! That profit was taken from each of our families! Well done scabs!!!
In opposing the class certification motion, USAPA’s only meaningful argument10. h...
Why would it just be the west that stagnates? Parker has fixed the east. Got enough pilots for staffing and vacation and the new rest rules. The west has had attrition for the last 8 years that needs to be dealt with.
Plus Parker just got a new toy to play with and a new best friend. APA. Remember what Parker did when he got the east as a new toy? All the benefits went east with east flight ops management asking sure. Parker puts AMR flights ops and his new best friend Parker now stagnates the east and grows that west a little bit.
Easy enough to shift that flying from PHL to JFK. He has already transferred the route authority to AMR. Those 26 WB are going to look good with APA pilots in them. Don't forget the APA changed the MOU already and took out the WB protection pay.
Enjoy those 190's Mike. After all those east coast hubs were nothing more than regional hubs for short haul commuter flying. You easties can get back to your roots of short haul up and down the east coast.
The denial of jump seats to west pilots have been minimal, one.
The west pilots denied jump seats to East pilots in large numbers, make no mistake about it. The west attempts to make this denial of jump seats look even on both sides is an outright lie.
"USAPA alleges that the Defendant and their co-conspirators have
engaged in a concerted effort to deprive USAPA members the ability to
commute to work by denying them the use of the cockpit “jump seat” on
flights flown by West pilots and flights flown by pilots at other carriers. [Id.
at ¶113]. USAPA cites to several postings on the AWAPPA Web Board
which indicate the active solicitation of pilots at US Airways and other
airlines to deny the jump seat to USAPA members, including the following
postings:
• A posting on April 19, 2008 by Defendant
Gabaldon stating, “I will NOT allow any scab to ride
my jumpseat (in the interest of safety) .... I’m
networking all of ALPA friends at other carriers to
put forth motions before their MEC’s to deny
jumpseats to ALL USCABAS.” [Id. at ¶116];
• A posting on April 28, 2008 by Defendant Auxier
stating, “Hey, the UAL guys have the balls to deny
the Eastholes, the least we can do is follow suit.
They are the pariahs of the industry, and frankly I
think it IS unsafe to have them on our jumps ....”
[Id. at ¶117];
• A posting on April 22, 2008 by Defendant Metzker,
stating, “I passed along our jumpseat concerns to a
friend at Alaska ... and told him how to tell an
America West pilot apart by looking for the P
number on the back our id, right corner. He passed
19
it along to his MEC chair along with the link to our
AWAPPA donate page.” [Id. at ¶119];
• A posting on May 14, 2008 by Defendant Vasin,
relating a message received on the AWAPPA
website from an American Eagle pilot who wrote,
“Hi, Eagle guys have the Pxxxx information for
jumpseat usage, so you guys should be fine. Best
of luck, I have a lot of friends with your airline.” [Id.
at ¶119].
USAPA alleges that the denial of jump seats to USAPA members has
resulted in US Airways pilots being unable to commute to the cities in
which their scheduled flights were to originate. [Id. at ¶120].
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDINGREGARDINGCONTINGENT COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTPursuant to this Memorandum of Understanding Regarding Contingent Collective Bargaining Agreement (this “Memorandum”), US Airways, Inc. and any successor (collectively, “US Airways”), American Airlines, Inc. (“American”), Allied Pilots Association (“APA”), and US Airline Pilots Association (“USAPA”, and with US Airways, American, and APA, the “Parties”), hereby agree as follows:
1. US Airways and APA agreed to a Conditional Labor And Plan Of Reorganization Agreement executed April 13, 2012 and as amended from time-to-time (the “CLA”). Upon the Memorandum Approval Date (as defined in Paragraph 18), this Memorandum shall supersede and replace the CLA. This Memorandum provides a process for reaching:
(a) a Merger Transition Agreement (the “MTA”) between APA and an entity (“New American Airlines”) formed in connection with a plan of reorganization (“POR”) for such of those AMR Corporation-related debtors required to effectuate a combination of American and US Airways (the “Merger”). The MTA shall consist of the collective bargaining agreement between American and APA approved on December 19, 2012 by the Bankruptcy Court in In Re AMR Corporation, et al., jointly administered Ch. 11 Case No. 11-15463 (SHL) (the “2012 CBA”), as amended pursuant to the provisions of this Memorandum;(B) a Joint CBA (the “JCBA”) to apply to a merged workforce composed of pilots employed by American and US Airways.
Looks to me like the MOU provides a process for reaching a JCBA, but I'm no lawyer.
Since when did the courts see what is written in black and white?This is the Silver bullet
Where in the list of covered parties does the MOU SAY IT PERTAINS TO "East" pilots and "west" pilots...whatever they are? The MOU is crystal clear that the process is to merge APA and USAPA pilots.This is the Silver bullet
I have never argued 10h prevents the West from pursuing the Nic.In opposing the class certification motion, USAPA’s only meaningful argument
involves the vote approving the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”). According to
USAPA, the MOU was approved by 97.69% of the West Pilots and that approval rate means
certification would be inappropriate. In other words, “[t]he fact that 1,017 West Pilots voted
to approve the MOU raises the question of whether any of those 1,017 have a dispute with
USAPA regarding the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 135 at 10). This argument cannot be taken
seriously.
During the vote on the MOU, USAPA repeatedly assured all its members that the vote
would have no bearing on adoption of the Nicolau Award. In USAPA’s own words, “no East
pilot should vote against the MOU because they fear that ratifying the MOU will implement
the Nicolau Award, and no West pilot should vote for the MOU because they believe the
MOU will implement the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 136). In light of this and similar
statements during the ratification vote, USAPA’s current position that the vote was a clear
statement by the majority of the West Pilots that they are no longer interested in pursuing the
Nicolau Award is very close to frivolous.
In opposing the class certification motion, USAPA’s only meaningful argument
involves the vote approving the Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU&rdquo. According to
USAPA, the MOU was approved by 97.69% of the West Pilots and that approval rate means
certification would be inappropriate. In other words, “[t]he fact that 1,017 West Pilots voted
to approve the MOU raises the question of whether any of those 1,017 have a dispute with
USAPA regarding the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 135 at 10). This argument cannot be taken
seriously.
During the vote on the MOU, USAPA repeatedly assured all its members that the vote
would have no bearing on adoption of the Nicolau Award. In USAPA’s own words, “no East
pilot should vote against the MOU because they fear that ratifying the MOU will implement
the Nicolau Award, and no West pilot should vote for the MOU because they believe the
MOU will implement the Nicolau Award.” (Doc. 136). In light of this and similar
statements during the ratification vote, USAPA’s current position that the vote was a clear
statement by the majority of the West Pilots that they are no longer interested in pursuing the
Nicolau Award is very close to frivolous.
When you quote someone, you should cite the source. Unless this is from Judge Silver, it's only one side's nonsense.
Not only who will fly them but what the heck are these management teams thinking by demanding concessionary contracts?
Have you seem them? F/O pay rates capped at 4th year longevity pay never to go any higher.
$28,000 top pay for a decade awaiting a chance to upgrade - better start cruising the local YMCA for applicants.
Shame to say the people responsible will be long gone when the chickens come home to roost with labor footing the bill.
It was judge Silver, but her opinion about what the West wants is only meaningful to the extent that extraneous "wants" are enforceable in contracts.