Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[nycbusdriver]

Are all the aircraft groups covered with CoC?

E190 is not, since it wasn't in the fleet in 2002 and no rates were established.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

n my opinion,

USA320Pilot

OK, now what about UAL? Bottom line , this road will have plenty of surprises before it reaches its conclusion, I just luv those news quotes on the "DECISION SOON" hype, but they're apart on each players valuation and who will run this trainwreck! What else is there, paintjobs and uniforms? Forgot HORTON alreay decided those! MM! For all this discussion my bet a very mute point in the end!

 

[Phoenix]

BAZINGA!

I give it two years, three max, and you won't be able to find one pilot who voted yes.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Those same outstanding CLT reps have been reps from the beginning. They have had 5 years to get you to Valhalla. Mike Cleary was in charge for a majority of that time. Paul Diorio had the NAC covered.

What was the result of their effort?

NADA!!!!

You say there is a white paper somewhere. Would that white paper not valuate what the CoC is worth and what the chances of getting those rates are? If those two tiny bits of information are not in that paper it was a waste of money commissioned by Cleary. Why have the outstanding CLT reps not released that white paper?

Maybe it does not match up to the story they are trying to sell.

It's not the job of the reps to provide the "white paper". It's the NAC's, first of all.

Second of all, it sounds like a merger with another carrier is the only eventual option necessary to get us out of the courts and into another contract. I'm not particularly getting a warm fuzzy about the faith it gives concerning the company's side of things.

My only major concern is the confusion caused by the questions about seniority Pat is addressing (not)! That is why, if it does passes, all the more reason to KEEP the CLT reps in place, along with getting the three PHL reps to come together for a common shield....keep the leadership OPEN AND HONEST.

 

[end_of_alpa]

I give it two years, three max, and you won't be able to find one pilot who voted yes.

Yeah, funny how that works.

 

[cleardirect]

n my opinion, the MOU/MTA is the fist bite of the apple towards the JCBA. A JCBA is an amalgamation of multiple documents into one. Every company has a ceiling in what they can afford to pay labor and it does not matter to management how the pie id divided. I believe the risks of voting "no" to the MOU are great and include:

1. No pay raise or other economic benefit.

2. No retro pay and no bonus.

3. No DC Plan improvements.

4. Continued stagnation on C2004 and LOA 93 with the continued loss due to the time value of money.

5. APA becoming our union and deciding the joint contract for us without our input.

6. The MOU puts us on an equal playing field with the APA at the time of the merger PID, which is important to subsequent seniority integration because of the importance economics pay when determining career expectation in an arbitration. How will our career expectation look to a Board of Arbitration with a 4:1 widebody disadvantage and C2004/LOA 93 as our contracts at the PID?

7. The successor Company from leveraging one group against the other.

The merger is likely to happen with us or without us and the MOU is binding on APA, which is required to file for single carrier CBA certification with the NMB within four months of the "effective" date. In my opinion, APA is very likely to be appointed our union and once they do they will negotiate our new contract's Pay, Benefits, Work Rules, Scope, Retirement, and Health & Welfare. Therefore, I believe "voting no" only delays the inevitable of APA deciding our MOU/MTA/JCBA for us, our pilots and their families suffering longer on bankruptcy era contracts, continued time loss of money & no economic gain for some of our colleagues who are retiring in the near future, and a serious SLI risk that could be worse than the the view of how the Nicolau Award effected USAPA's pilots based east of the Mississippi River.

USA320Pilot

Q - I’ve heard that we might be at a disadvantaged in a McCaskill-Bond proceeding if the MOU is not approved. Is that true?
A - According to our Merger Council, yes we will. The relative differences in wages and benefits between pilot groups is an issue in the McCaskill-Bond process. The pilot group with higher wages and benefits customarily argues that it should get credit for bringing the higher wages and benefits to the lower paid pilot group. The MOU gives US Airways pilots the same wages and benefits as American pilots and therefore largely eliminates this argument.

Finally. East pilots beginning to understand why Nicolau did what he did.

East pilots were going to get a huge jump from LOA 93 just parity plus a little more. Nicolau balanced that improvement against seniority. Just like the dispatchers. the west dispatchers were going to get a better contract therefore the east dispatchers got better seniority.

Nicolau did not get anything wrong, he followed standard procedure. It just happened that LOA 93 sucked so bad it took a lot to offset that pig. Thus standard method, furloughed pilots at the bottom. Capts remained capts. If just took a lot longer to be a capt on the east.

 

[nycbusdriver]

algflyr

Where are the 2002 Book Rates found?

These were sent out recently by Compass Correction. (Forum will only allow a bit of this at a time....will post the rest). I assume they are accurate:

The hourly pay rates in effect on June 30, 2002 will be known as the Book Rates.​

​

​

 

[nycbusdriver]

algflyr

Where are the 2002 Book Rates found?

​

​

​

 

[nycbusdriver]

algflyr

Where are the 2002 Book Rates found?

​

​

 

[luvthe9]

Well I wouldn't have believed it had I not heard it come from Dean Collelo himself.

I went to the roadshow today and sure enough, Gary and Co. had their selling shoes on. For most of the sales job,it was Collello giving the presentation. It was apparent what they wanted us to hear. PAY RAISES for EVERYONE!, (if you sign on the dotted line). What they didn't talk about was the language in the MOU, such as "From time to time", "[font=Arial']The Parties further understand,[font=Arial']however, that it will take some period of time for those terms to be implemented", "[font=Arial']earliest practicable time"[/font] or how about, "[font=Arial']reasonably related"[/font][/font][/font]

[font=Arial'][font=Arial'] What is equally disturbing is that Collello claims we didn't really bring anything to the table, how fortunate we all are. The poor AA pilots and how thet brought the 13.5% with them. What the M F fails to point out is that the 13.5% includes us, USAIRWAYS, and it appears as though we are actually supplementing the AA pilots who will get that money.[/font][/font]

[font=Arial'][font=Arial'] What was also missing from the presentation was the parity pay was because the 3 CLT reps and Mike Gillies and Steve Spyrka held out to get it. Thank you Guys![/font][/font]

 

[end_of_alpa]

Just wait till Parker puts a cork in that talk at crew news. "Looking into the future..,blah blah...things not so rosy...,blah blah...streamlined big three blah blah...if not for this merger...blah blah." This will be part 2, only the east will be included this time.

I just read an article where the regionals may have more maneuverability in the new market than the new "big three". Parker has opinions and Parker has facts. I would agree with you for the most part but like all arguments, you weigh the message with the messenger. If you look at last year, I would say the proof is in the pudding. If Parker looks at last year, he has to explain why we get the Kirby proposal, if any seniority issue is resolved first.

Who knows?

 

[cleardirect]

It's not the job of the reps to provide the "white paper". It's the NAC's, first of all.

Second of all, it sounds like a merger with another carrier is the only eventual option necessary to get us out of the courts and into another contract. I'm not particularly getting a warm fuzzy about the faith it gives concerning the company's side of things.

My only major concern is the confusion caused by the questions about seniority Pat is addressing (not)! That is why, if it does passes, all the more reason to KEEP the CLT reps in place, along with getting the three PHL reps to come together for a common shield....keep the leadership OPEN AND HONEST.

NO! The NAC does not control document the BPR does.

To your second point. You are now beginning to understand that the east did not win at the ninth. They put us all in a no win situation. That as long as usapa refused to accept the arbitrated list usapa was never going to get a contract on their own. Judge silver put the bow on the ninth's bad decision as she stated in open court that she thought it was a bad ruling. That without a LUP usapa was locked into the Nicolau.

You are not getting a warm fuzzy. To damn bad, that is the position that the east pilots put us all in because of your unreasonable refusal to accept binding arbitration results. The MOU sucks but that is the best we are going to get because of you east pilots.

This cost ALL of us. But especially east pilots. Karma is a #### and she is going to slap you all.

You are concerned because the lawyer that east pilots hired is confessed or is being confusing. Seham was confused about he law so is PS. If the Nicolau is dead as many here have crowed about why the confusion? Why not a bold statement that the Nicolau will not be used and there will only be one DOH passed to the APA and they will accept it?

 

[end_of_alpa]

Finally. East pilots beginning to understand why Nicolau did what he did.

East pilots were going to get a huge jump from LOA 93 just parity plus a little more. Nicolau balanced that improvement against seniority. Just like the dispatchers. the west dispatchers were going to get a better contract therefore the east dispatchers got better seniority.

Nicolau did not get anything wrong, he followed standard procedure. It just happened that LOA 93 sucked so bad it took a lot to offset that pig. Thus standard method, furloughed pilots at the bottom. Capts remained capts. If just took a lot longer to be a capt on the east.

I don't agree with that assessment, but the problem with arbitration is that it generally becomes a subjective issue whereas we as pilots try to go about our business in a measured and predicable manor when it comes to flying.

That's why everyone hates lawyers and politics.

Here is what Nicolau says about arbitration: "In Federal Express/Flying Tiger (1990) at 23-24, Arbitrator George Nicolau captured the essence of a pilot seniority list integration process in four trenchant verities that ring as true today as when they were first written twenty years ago: "There are four basic lessons to be learned . . . that each case turns on its own facts; that the objective is to make the integration fair and equitable; that the proposals advanced by those in contest rarely meet that standard; and that
the end result, no matter how crafted, never commands universal acceptance".

Stare Decisis is overruled by "fair and equitable". Caveat emptor.

 

[Piedmont1984]

Thank you NYC for posting the rates. So some simple math and simple deduction. If CoC is triggered and if we prevail in a grievance, multiply the applicable rate by more than one but less than two football seasons. Seniority will be determined NOT by a pending grievance, but by actual payrates and we will submit our LOA93/C2004 figures.

Then we'll say to all the 190 drivers - watch out for that bus.

If management thinks we will win this grievance, is there any possibility they could accelerate the timeline to just one football season?

Does anyone else remember Parity + 1% and what a fine summer that was?

 

[end_of_alpa]

Thank you NYC for posting the rates. So some simple math and simple deduction. If CoC is triggered and if we prevail in a grievance, multiply the applicable rate by more than one but less than two football seasons. Seniority will be determined NOT by a pending grievance, but by actual payrates and we will submit our LOA93/C2004 figures.

Then we'll say to all the 190 drivers - watch out for that bus.

If management thinks we will win this grievance, is there any possibility they could accelerate the timeline to just one football season?

Does anyone else remember Parity + 1% and what a fine summer that was?

Does anyone remember "B" scale?