Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[jetjok1]

Thanks FA, right back at ya. I thought I already said I'm an 04' hire, guess not, there it is. I was holding a line prior to the merger and got knocked to reserve after. I'm not looking to upgrade on anybody's widebodies, I'd just like to have back what I had prior to the first merger (in more ways than one). Like I've said before, I don't think the NIC was fair, but DOH isn't any better. I would expect to be towards the bottom of any list, but to place AWA's senior captains below east US FOs I can't agree with. Oh, the little one stopped barfing and the big one started. Hopefully I'm not next. Have a good night.

Bean

P.S. To my knowledge DC is not a west pilot. I've heard east pilots talk like him on the jumpseat before, it is possible he's east.

Fair enough Bean..........agreed

 

[dca319]

You forgot to mention the world ends also.

No, I'm pretty sure with the way you've been posting that that would be your line.

 

[dca319]

No they won't. For the same reasons when you tried as Move2clt

OK, it's time to use the ignore feature.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Please try to get this. This comes from the APA and the NAC.

1 Pilot data consisting of DOH, longevity, seat position, etc is exchanged between pilot groups. The order of the pilots in the data being exchanged is irrelevant.

2 Each union then takes the other unions DATA (not list) and then orders it and integrates it into their own list.

3 Each union then comes back to the table and exchanges their respective lists. They will differ from one another because of differing priorities in their methodology for integration. We, obviously, are looking for a DOH list. They're looking for a slotting-type list.

4 Then each side will try to meet in the middle with their methodology. That will fail.

5 Arbitration.

IMHO, the APA will take our data and order it in accordance to the Nicolau award and then slot us into their list. Again, IMHO, it'll be done to avoid any potential litigation.
DOH won't work on our end. It failed miserably before and it will fail again. The last few mergers have proven this.

That opinion comes from the APA pilots at the meeting...mainly, but that is their opinion. If they try to arrange our list the way they "think" it should be that is not their job. That again is making USAPA argue how to present the sequencing of their own pilots and that would be a poor argument. But you know what, then we reorganize their list our way and present that.

It makes no logical sense. You're entitled to your opinion but the APA advocates its own side, not ours. Again, if that were so, why even bother to have an arbitration. They chose their way and that's it.

 

[end_of_alpa]

That's not my interpretation. That came from the APA and NAC.

Oh, BTW, we can change our argument from DOH to slotting if going to arbitration as well....only we slot them lower than us. We can always argue for better tan DOH.

 

[dca319]

There's your CoC luv:


USAPA Negotiating Advisory Committee Update: Change of Control

This update addresses the Change of Control (COC) provision of the US Airways East/LOA 93 contract –and specifically how it compares economically to the proposed MOU approved by the Board of Pilot Representatives.
The COC provision was designed to ensure that US Airways management deals with your union concerning major transactions such as the potential merger with American Airlines. While COC applies to some US Airways East Pilots, we were able to use it to negotiate an MOU with significant economic gains for all US Airways pilots.
Our cost estimates show that the economic values received by all US Airways pilots from the MOU exceed what only some would receive from a successfully executed grievance triggered by a Change of Control.

• If the MOU is ratified and the merger is approved, all US Airways pilots will begin receiving the new MOU pay rates as of the date of the POR (estimated to be July 1, 2013) and an increase in pension contributions to 14%. In addition, all US Airways pilots will receive the new MOU pay rates retrospectively back to the date of ratification (February 8). On January 1, 2014, the pay rates increase by 8% and the pension contribution increases to 16%. All US Airways pilots will also share a $40 million lump sum payment. The MOU establishes all pilots as equal for compensation and working conditions at the POR, which will allow for the best outcome for seniority integration.
• If the MOU is NOT ratified and the merger moves forward, USAPA would most probably file a grievance for the COC Scope provisions in our contract. If successful with the COC grievance, only some US Airways pilots would accrue snap back wages as of the date of the POR, since the COC provision does not apply to E-190 Pilots or West Pilots.

If this were to happen, and if USAPA is successful in pursuing a COC grievance, then the snap back wages would most likely continue until the new representative of the combined pilot group (probably APA) negotiates a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA). At that time all US Airways pilots would most likely be removed from the snap back wages and provided with the same wages of the APA pilots. Barring a significant change in the industry that would support continuing the COC, those wages would be the wages currently being provided to all US Airways pilots by ratifying the MOU.
According to USAPA’s Merger Counsel, arriving at a seniority integration process with disparity in wage rates may negatively impact the outcome for US Airways pilots.
MOU Timeline
The MOU indicates that the JCBA would be concluded 13-15 months after the POR date:

• 4 months for a single carrier petition to be filed with the NMB
• 6-8 months for the NMB to issue a decision,
• 30 days to negotiate the JCBA
• 60 days to resolve any disputes in arbitration.

Note:

• The COC rates would ONLY apply to EAST Group 2 pilots and above.
• EAST E-190 pilots and West Pilots would NOT be included in any COC snap back wages.

This table represents the impact of Wage and DC to the JCBA – Calculated @ POR + 18 Months
All Pilots (East and West)

MOU​

COC​

2013

$665,498,135​

$613,887,275​

2014

$ 718,948,037​

$747,439,632​

TOTALS

$1,384,446,172​

$1,361,326,907​

Example: Group 2 Crew (East and West) at 85 hrs. Pay + DC over the 18 months (POR+18 months). This uses Group 2 A-320 crews for comparison based on the majority of our fleet and block hours, and the ability to depict both East and West flying.
A-320 CREW

MOU​

COC​

Captain​

First Officer​

Captain​

First Officer​

EAST

$419,681​

$284,909​

$499,766​

$333,254​

WEST

$436,760​

$299,719​

$354,059​

$234,029​

TOTALS

$856,441​

$584,628​

$853,825​

$567,283​

We will complete the roadshow schedule this week in Philadelphia at the airport Marriott, with the following presentation start times:
Monday, January 28[sup]th[/sup] - 10 AM, 1 PM and 4PM
Tuesday, January 29[sup]th[/sup] - 9 AM and 1 PM
The presentation will take about an hour and a half followed by a question and answer period. We have received a number of great questions at each domicile visited. Please click here to review these questions on the USAPA website. We will frequently update this question bank, so be sure and check back periodically.
We look forward to seeing you at the PHL road shows.

 

[machflyer]

We paid dearly with LOA 93, and the only ace up our sleve is the CoC.
It's worth more than what the NAC is bringing to us in the form of an MOU.
Re-read the MOU. The veribage is very clear, very clear. They know that it's a well worded clause and they can't get out of it unless we waive it.
The company was smart and held hostages knowing that it may come down to this...E190 and Westies.
They can't and should not be sacrafical lambs.
First blush is to send the MOU back and get more lump sum...for everyone. Say $100M+

 

[Walmartgreeter]

As to the latest COC update from the NAC..go figure. I thought nobody was actually doing any work on all this stuff. In fact, reading this forum you would get the sense this is a cram down ala LOA 93. It is not. It is a business transaction we choose or not to choose to be a participant in. The numbers have been crunched, the options weighed.

All the BPR. All the Officers. All of Legal. All support the transaction. Yet we read here we are jumping in unprepared and unexamined. Not the case. There is quantifiable risk. There is quantifiable gain. I choose the MOU. What say you?

Greeter.

 

[machflyer]

About to retire are you Greeter?

 

[Walmartgreeter]

About to retire are you Greeter?

If you mean go to bed, yes.56 years old, 28 years here. I have a little more skin in this game. Sorry to disappoint.Greeter

 

[machflyer]

Same age...and just a couple years less here...you're not so special.
You need to chop down on that cigar, put on your poker face and stay the course.
That's been the problem with this pilot group for decades...no backbone.

 

[dca319]

But you know what, then we reorganize their list our way and present that.

I knew you'd get it eventually.

 

[dca319]

Same age...and just a couple years less here...you're not so special.
You need to chop down on that cigar, put on your poker face and stay the course.
That's been the problem with this pilot group for decades...no backbone.

Isn't that what we did when we kept walking away from the company's LOA93 offer only to come back to something worse every time? The NAC made it clear that if we vote no it's status quo until the merger is complete.

 

[Walmartgreeter]

Same age...and just a couple years less here...you're not so special.
You need to chop down on that cigar, put on your poker face and stay the course.
That's been the problem with this pilot group for decades...no backbone.

I don't smoke, I don't plan on staying any "stale" course. The problem with guys like you is a little bit higher than the backbone.Don't play poker if you don't know your hand. Ours was wasted summer of 2011.Enjoy your single "no" vote. I choose a different path for my family.Done deal.Greeter

 

[dca319]

Oh, BTW, we can change our argument from DOH to slotting if going to arbitration as well....only we slot them lower than us. We can always argue for better tan DOH.

See? You do get it. Question is whether or not the arbitrators agree with us.