Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[dca319]

Oh, I see more clearly now = It's the degree of bankruptcy that's the determing factor, and even though US is currently showing profits and AMR in BK, AMR's people should get a much better deal...well...umm...nope, that didn't really help...I'm still a bit confused about your "logic" in all this.

If both scope and CoC weren't of the slightest interest or value; well..why is it such a point of the company's to want to be rid of both? Just asking, without any expectation of a reasoned response, as your sort, in my estimation, would surrender to a passing Troop of Girl Scouts selling cookies, without so much as even questioning your desire to immediately do so. No matter, I suppose.

AA is showing a profit too, no? And in this case, the degree does make a difference. AA is getting out of BK with or without us. That was not an option we had. We either merged or we liquidated. Work here a little Major, but AA means more to Parker than we do. The APA therefore has more leverage than we do. Honestly, I don't think we have a lick of leverage and if we vote down this MOU this merger would still happen without us. Where do you get leverage from that?

Your obsession with CoC is laughable. If we ever had a legitimate chance of using it, it would have been with this merger. In face, Cleary and company promised it would be triggered. We have no union to prosecute grievances. We've never won a significant grievance, and we never will. You define insanity Major - same thing over and over yet expecting different results.

No matter, I suppose.

 

[dca319]

You make fun of a full figured woman in your avitar.

That's funny!

 

[A320 Driver]

If both scope and CoC weren't of the slightest interest or value; well..why is it such a point of the company's to want to be rid of both? Just asking, without any expectation of a reasoned response, as your sort, in my estimation, would surrender to a passing Troop of Girl Scouts selling cookies, without so much as even questioning your desire to immediately do so. No matter, I suppose.

It's not that COC and scope do not have value, it's the fact that they have limited value and will take time to win in a grievance. The company is not going to just hand them over, just like the LOA93 and 3% grievances (which we lost). The point our advisors made were that ALL the facets of our contract are replaced by a joint contract in the merger. Since the JCBA is on a time line within the merger framework, the chances of our getting these issues into arbitration within that time line are not good, and are you going to throw away the benefits the MOU brings in the hope that we might prevail in a grievance? Rowland Wilder said once that even if we could win say a COC grievance, the benefit from that win would be so limited in point of time, that it would pail in comparison to the benefits from the MOU.
Now, all that being said, I heard all manner of objection, from "we can win a grievance" to "there is more value in COC than the MOU provides". Reasonable points. The question is risk. How confidant are you that we could prevail and actually see any returns from arbitration and even if we did win, is it worth what we are giving up? THAT is the key question...the one I kept asking myself and the one that ultimately convinced me to vote yes for the MOU. I'm tired of losing. I'm tired of being outgunned at the table. I think it's time to move on and stop looking back wards.
You vote the way you see fit.

Driver...

 

[nevergiveup]

Yes to the MOU, definite yes to keep the CLT reps.

 

[mrbreeze]

That's always been our problem - always knowing better. And here we are today.

Dodging the subject, eh?

Typical when you are lying. It's been viewed by most in the videos.
breeze

 

[EastUS1]

Now, all that being said, I heard all manner of objection, from "we can win a grievance" to "there is more value in COC than the MOU provides". Reasonable points. The question is risk. How confidant are you that we could prevail and actually see any returns from arbitration and even if we did win, is it worth what we are giving up? THAT is the key question...the one I kept asking myself and the one that ultimately convinced me to vote yes for the MOU. I'm tired of losing. I'm tired of being outgunned at the table. I think it's time to move on and stop looking back wards.
You vote the way you see fit.

How confident are you that the reasonably possible maximum gains have now been achieved? Was it not your position that the very first, and most utterly pathetic MOU of months back should have been enthusiastically voted into being? "I'm tired of losing.", if anything's ever to be won, isn't a rational basis for any decision ever, nor do cute and sadly fashionable, mindless phrases of "it's time to move on" much inspire the slightest confidence in your "logic" here. How confident are you that this offered agreement won't result in the US side being reduced to nothing more than a minor, regional/commuter "airline" within but a few short years? How confident are you, or can anyone be, that the absurdly vague language contained won't allow management to just pretty much do whatever they want with the US people, aircraft and routes?

Ask yourself this: WHY should team tempe suddenly want to make ANY agreement with the US pilots whatsoever? What's truly in it for them to do so at this time? A small hint here is "Because it's the right thing to do" plays not even the slightest, tiny little part in any of their schemes here.

You might wish to drop your smarmy and "cute" presumptions on military rank here. You're neither a selection board nor the Congress, yet you've whimsically assigned both Colonel and Major in what only amounts to me as yet more extended efforts at pinning-the-tail on your own piteous braying, and no common ground exists for us to discuss anything of the sort....heck...I don't even have a "Dire Wolf" T-shirt, a "spartan" shield/etc, so it's axiomatic that I'm not in your martial league in any case.

"You vote the way you see fit." That much is all we can apparently agree on here, and no one needs your, my, or anyone's permission to do so. All I'd ask is that everyone closely examine the proposal and only then vote. It's your futures you're deciding here. On any purely selfish level?...It really doesn't make much difference to me.

 

[Phoenix]

..... The point our advisors made were that ALL the facets of our contract are replaced by a joint contract in the merger....

Advisors... Can our advisors explain why the West contract is still in full force and not one iota has been changed by the merger, even though the merger happened and the West's union was eliminated?

Can the "advisors" explain why the company not only was unable to unilaterally eliminate and replace the West contract "min fleet and block hours" but has actually replaced 25% of East routes with West pilots in order to be in conformity with a measley West contract?

Personally I'm not too impressed with opinions, costly and high paid they may be, that contradict obvious facts of reality.

 

[A320 Driver]

How confident are you that the reasonably possible maximum gains have now been achieved?

How sure are you they haven't? It's a gamble. Just like when we gambled on LOA93...and lost.

How confident are you that this offered agreement won't result in the US side being reduced to nothing more than a minor, regional/commuter "airline" within but a few short years?

Extremely confidant considering this whole thing lives or dies on market share, not how much you pay an E190 Captain.

How confident are you, or can anyone be, that the absurdly vague language contained won't allow management to just pretty much do whatever they want with the US people, aircraft and routes?

Sure they can, and their dream of running the world's biggest airline goes up in smoke. We lived that little nightmare with Butch

Ask yourself this: WHY should team tempe suddenly want to make ANY agreement with the US pilots whatsoever? What's truly in it for them to do so at this time?

Team Tempe didn't ask for the MOU, we did.

You might wish to drop your smarmy and "cute" presumptions on military rank here.

Pass...I was never in the military and I don't have a clue what you are referring to.

"You vote the way you see fit." That much is all we can apparently agree on here, and no one needs your, my, or anyone's permission to do so. All I'd ask is that everyone closely examine the proposal and only then vote. It's your futures you're deciding here. On any purely selfish level?...It really doesn't make much difference to me.

I agree.

 

[A320 Driver]

Advisors... Can our advisors explain why the West contract is still in full force and not one iota has been changed by the merger, even though the merger happened and the West's union was eliminated?

Can the "advisors" explain why the company not only was unable to unilaterally eliminate and replace the West contract "min fleet and block hours" but has actually replaced 25% of East routes with West pilots in order to be in conformity with a measley West contract?

Sure they can. We don't have a JCBA to trump it. Am I missing something in your argument?

 

[Phoenix]

Sure they can. We don't have a JCBA to trump it. Am I missing something in your argument?

The West is today flying routes out East and not one iota of their contract has been unilaterally changed. Their min fleet and block hours are still in effect, because there is no provision for a company to unilaterally impose a contract on a labor group outside of bankruptcy court.

Since this MOU gives up current min fleet protections for both East and West, how much can DUI reduce mainline? The last MOU allowed 10-15% reductions per year as long as the reductions were equal on AA and US.

What fleet reductions and block hour reductions are allowed (expected) in the current MOU?

 

[A320 Driver]

The West is today flying routes out East and not one iota of their contract has been unilaterally changed. Their min fleet and block hours are still in effect, because there is no provision for a company to unilaterally impose a contract on a labor group outside of bankruptcy court.

Since this MOU gives up current min fleet protections for both East and West, how much can DUI reduce mainline? The last MOU allowed 10-15% reductions per year as long as the reductions were equal on AA and US.

What fleet reductions and block hour reductions are allowed (expected) in the current MOU?

Not equal. Any reductions to East/West block hours reduce AA block hours by a factor of 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 depending on if we are talking narrow body or wide body flying. My point is/was, they CANNOT maintain market share and the revenue stream they need to survive if they dissect the airline. That is in the proposal DP made to the UCC and USAPA. The numbers do not add up if you shrink the airline. That is EXACTLY why AA, as a stand alone, can't keep up the needed revenue over time they need to service their expenses. All I know is what I am told and how much I understand it. I made a decision and that's that. Make yours and be happy with it.

 

[Phoenix]

Not equal. Any reductions to East/West block hours reduce AA block hours by a factor of 2 to 1 or 3 to 1 depending on if we are talking narrow body or wide body flying. My point is/was, they CANNOT maintain market share and the revenue stream they need to survive if they dissect the airline. That is in the proposal DP made to the UCC and USAPA. The numbers do not add up if you shrink the airline. That is EXACTLY why AA, as a stand alone, can't keep up the needed revenue over time they need to service their expenses. All I know is what I am told and how much I understand it. I made a decision and that's that. Make yours and be happy with it.

No need to explain your vote, as it is yours. Really .

I think the pay rates look good. I'm just trying to honestly look at the terms that allow DUI to shrink mainline (while expanding Express and code share to meet his revenue and cost reductions) causing downgrades and displacements to smaller planes, for about the same pay I get now.

How much can he reduce mainline and replace it with Express and code share? How much per year? It's an honest and important question? Can our attrition outpace mainline reductions, and what about the lower portion of our list?

 

[Piedmont1984]

You know, if you read Woody's musings a little more carefully, you realize that he himself admits we lack the leverage which he wants the rest of us to exploit. In one of his recent CC letters he says the PHX pilots have found out the hard way that it takes a long time to win in court - and even longer to lose in court.

Thanks Woody for pointing out what would happen if we tried to derail or postpone this merger with the threat of court action against LCC if they ignored or defied our COC language.

I thought LOA 93 language was pretty unambiguous, but we lost that one because of language and intent which was outside the document itself. Can anyone point to a major grievance in which USAPA has prevailed within a reasonable time frame.

Yes on the MOU. Insufficient data on the recall.

 

[A320 Driver]

No need to explain your vote, as it is yours. Really .

I think the pay rates look good. I'm just trying to honestly look at the terms that allow DUI to shrink mainline (while expanding Express and code share to meet his revenue and cost reductions) causing downgrades and displacements to smaller planes, for about the same pay I get now.

How much can he reduce mainline and replace it with Express and code share? How much per year? It's an honest and important question? Can our attrition outpace mainline reductions, and what about the lower portion of our list?

All GREAT questions. I think one of their main concerns at this point is having ENOUGH pilots. How is a pilot supposed to go from 250 hours with a Commercial/Instrument to an ATP with 1500 hours to get the regional job to ultimately get hired onto mainline? One of the big advantages of this merger is the 1600 or so pilots AA has on furlough. With a pool like that, we are ahead of United and Delta. I also hope at some point that we are able to bring some of that flying that is farmed out back in house using E190s or whatever. How many E190s are on order? None! How many A320/B737s are on order between AA and us? Over 400. Plus we take delivery of 5 A330s this year, 3 next year, and the A350s come on line in four years (I think we have 22 firm orders, I can't remember). These are the things that go into my thinking. The company is in the business to make money. Converting East to E190s won't do it. We have a poison pill in effect that says if they reduce our flying they have to reduce AA flying by at least twice as much. How can they put that on paper and sign it? I think it's because they know that the flying has to remain stable or slightly higher between the two merged airlines to keep the revenue coming in they have promised everyone. There are a lot of questions and very few "sure things". But if their goal is to run a big world class airline, they CANNOT shrink their way into it. History has proven that.

 

[A320 Driver]

Yes on the MOU. Insufficient data on the recall.

I voted yes on the recall. Everyone knows by my posts I have no love for these reps. And I like the two guys that put their names in the hat (I don't know the third one). They are good people and certainly not patsies. They will look at everything reasonably, run the BS flag up when necessary and keep the emotional nonsense out of it. I don't like backbiters and politicians and that is what I believe we have now. They either love you or hate you...depends on whether you are in the club or not. These are STRICKLY my opinions however. What ever happens happens. And if the recall fails, the effort will still have had the desired effect. To get the current reps ATTENTION. They don't represent one group, they represent ALL of us.