Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Well now it seems some of Gary's inner circle are turning on him over this MOU, they realize that this thing is so full of holes, one of the big one is the healthcare we on the east are paying close to 600 a month for the top family plan while you westies pay quite a bit less, but if this passes you west guys will be paying up to 3 to 4 hundred a month, not to mention the extra vacation you will get (not).

It should be noted that US Airways is one of only a few corporations that
offer insurance coverage options of 100/90/80. The reason we have these
options are because the company wanted to shed the 15 or 16 regional plans
that were a result of the US Air/Piedmont/PSA merger and establish a single
plan. Our plan is self insured and is administered by third party
administrators (BCBS or UHC). It was the result of the Negotiating
Committee, R & I Committee and the company working together to develop a win
win for all. Unfortunately, none of our competitors offer anything but
80/70 or 80/60 plans. It should also be noted that both United and Delta
who have only 80% plans as their top offered also charge their employees a
higher percentage of the premiums. An example..... Delta pay 25% of the
premium for their 80% plan. It was inevitable that we would be asked to
share in the cost a bit more since our union was demanding an industry
standard contract. Since we will only be paying 18% of the premium, I think
I will be able to pay that additional 3% considering I should get a 35%
increase in wages if the MOU passes. It's also my opinion that anyone
healthy, that was paying for the 90% or 100% plan not being prudent or
rational. The premiums for the 100% plan were twice that of the 80% plan.
You would have to have accrued over $20K in medical expenses to make the
100% plan be of economic benefit to you. Considering you can switch
unrestricted to any of the plans each year at open enrollment, the 80%
plans oops max only exposed you to about $2K more and then you had the
option to switch. My entire career I have been on the 80% plan for that
reason. Anyone with questions, feel free to call me.

Rich Alter
 
Wrong again on all counts. Get real. Stop dreaming out loud. The Nic is an ALPA fabrication. Won't be back unless ALPA returns to the property before a combined contract or SLI. Doug AND Scott have told you that the Nic is dead numerous times and you fail to listen. Get the crap out of your ears.

If Parker has told us that the Nicolau is dead why did he appeal judge Silver? You know the ruling that said usapa has to have a LUP in order to avoid the Nicolau.

I believe it is you that needs to get the crap out of your ears.
 
Well now it seems some of Gary's inner circle are turning on him over this MOU, they realize that this thing is so full of holes, one of the big one is the healthcare we on the east are paying close to 600 a month for the top family plan while you westies pay quite a bit less, but if this passes you west guys will be paying up to 3 to 4 hundred a month, not to mention the extra vacation you will get (not).
Was usapa going to protect the west from those big increases?

No!

The vacation you can thank the west for. It is our method not the 21 days you bottom of the pile east pilots have.
 
Officers' Message


usapa_header_newaddresslg_600.jpg


Fellow Pilots,

Recently you may have received a campaign email relating to the Charlotte recall that included an earlier email sent by the chairman and four members of the Pension Investigation Committee opposing the recall.

Every pilot has the right to campaign, comment and otherwise participate in any union election as an individual. However, it is a violation of USAPA rules and regulations for that pilot to do so in his or her official capacity. The PIC email violated these rules to the extent it gives the impression that the PIC was advancing views regarding the recall in its role as an official USAPA Committee.

Debate and discussion within the union is healthy, but it should be done with two things in mind. First, the debate should be factual, honest and respectful. Second, when pilots campaign or comment, they should do so as individuals, not as members of a committee. As officers of USAPA, we take no position with respect to any election or recall.

However, we are forced to respond because these emails contain factual errors and falsehoods. Specifically, the PIC email incorrectly contends that your officers have been “throwing roadblock after roadblock in front of” the PIC’s work. Nothing can be further from the truth. In reality, your Officers and the BPR have supported the PIC’s work despite the enormous cost of the PIC’s investigation.

Furthermore, President Hummel traveled to Washington during the recent Court hearings to show USAPA’s solidarity and support of the important work of the PIC. We have offered the PIC the assistance of our General Counsel and USAPA’s Government Affairs and Business Intelligence Committees. We have urged the PIC to focus on their vital mission and to not be distracted by internal union politics. Sadly, once again they have ignored our advocacy to the detriment of their work and to those of us who have financially supported the goal of correcting the failures from our lost pensions.

Your Officers will continue to build consensus and advocate for a better future for us all.

We recognize that internal union elections can be heated contests and participants may become passionate when they campaign. However, the PIC email was unacceptable, contained factual errors, and violated union policy relating to elections.


Regards,


Gary Hummel, President

Steve Bradford, Vice President

Steve Smyser, EVP

Rob Streble, Secretary/Treasurer
 
The PIC email violated these rules to the extent it gives the impression that the PIC was advancing views regarding the recall in its role as an official USAPA Committee.
 
It was inevitable that we would be asked to
share in the cost a bit more since our union was demanding an industry
standard contract.

Do I have this right here? Whenever seeking a better contract; it should follow as "inevitable" that medical coverage costs would become not lower, nor even remain at existing rates, but soar higher?...As in; become a much worse situation than before? "inevitable"? Seriously..? Wow! What kind of complete nitwit actually "thinks" like that? Small wonder the concession stand was so readily available for so long...Geez!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top