Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[EastUS1]

8. If the POR date is protracted, is there any remuneration for the interest free loan being provided by the US Airways Pilots?
Answer= NO

Not even that one part concerns you in the least?

How about the effects of anything like this little gem then? "If the Company obtains a new equity investment in an amount greater than $250 million, the percentage of the economic value of the common equity, on a fully diluted basis, offered to the Association's members shall be reduced on a proportionate and appropriate (i.e., related to the size of the investment) basis to be determined...." That's right folks..."to be determined"...? My point on this last is only that language is VERY often quite damning within any such documents. The currently proffered MOU's no exception to that.

"5. What have the West and East Pilots received in the way of return value, for the concessions totaled above in answer in 1 & 2?
Answer= 35 million Jan 2010, 35 million Jan 2011, Stock, Profit Sharing, a job, and a Opportunity to merge with America" In other words, NOTHING that's now in play at ALL, save for the glorious "return" of, hot dang! "an opportunity to merge with American"...? Who could possibly want anything more from life than that?

"10. Extra credit Question: What is the net gain in value to the New American Airlines subsequent to a merger with LCC?
Answer= US Airways "estimates at least 1.2 billion in annual synergies" USAPA estimates it to be 1.5 billion...."
So kids, 1.2 to 1.5 BILLION in annual synergies....and yet many seem as contented as happily squeeling piglets in a freshly watered mud pit at the awesome prospect of a whopping 10K signing "bonus" and below-industry-standard wages? Wow! Sigh!...Suit yourselves then.

"E) Grimm's "Hansel and Gretel" Indeed. Don't overdose on all that sugar kids, and don't you worry, since there's really no witch anywhere to be found....trust her/them on that, so you can just drop all that silly scope and CoC nonsense! Who needs very specific details of what aircraft or even firmly established, minimum fleet size will be left on the US side, and for how long? Who needs any such nonsense when such abundant "trust" is all around?

 

[Portly Dorman]

Wow! You've no idea what sorry volumes you've just spoken to all readers about yourself and your lovely bride's notions of both character and principled behavior. You've both my deepest sympathy there...seriously.

No matter, since you've missed the point of all expressed concerns completely. Let me put it as simply as possible here. It's my reasonable belief that more could be had from management at this time. It's glaringly obvious to any who actually read and consider the language of the MOU, that sufficent holes exist to sail entire fleets of lawyer-laden ships through. That last consideration's adequate reason alone for at least a re-write of the existing language, even if you're happy with the terms.

I'll now leave you to return to your wife, who can further instruct you on what supposed "principles" of yours you may need to disregard immediately, perhaps today, tomorrow, or whenever it suits her...And you've the temerity to assign the term "a-holes" to others? Ummm...Did she say it was ok for you to do that?

At least I didn't make the 'dog' comments....

I thought all along this was about the principle, not the $$$. Your moving target approach has me confused.

How many on the east have told their significant other how much $$$ has been left on the table?

Again, usapa was marginalized day one because of the continual bad behavior, remember the injunction. Go ahead and get chumlee to bargin for you...

PD!!!!

 

[Portly Dorman]

And then what?

He'll get back after a nice buffet lunch. He can consult with his mentor, mike cleary.

PD!!!!

 

[EastUS1]

I thought all along this was about the principle, not the $$$.

Your previous post demonstrates an individual posessed of not the slightest clue as to what the term "principle" means. Mine are the same today as before. I don't feel the least compunction to change them like clothing so's to please anyone else. Your actual mileage in that clearly differs. I'll never vote in favor of anything that's nic-inclusive. What's you supposed "point" here?

Btw little "spartan": When the real King Leonidas left for battle and virtually certain death; he asked of his wife that she find a good man, marry and have strong sons....not how he should vote just so's to grant her some more money.... Somehow?....I just can't think he'd have been much impressed by the likes of you and your ...ummm..."principles".

 

[Phoenix]

You obviously don't have anything in the way of real skill or any "game" to offer there. I'd happily sit at the same table with you. It's more an issue of "knowing" the hand(s) of others. Pretty much the ONLY unquestionably concise verbage within the MOU concerns the surrender of CoC. Your thoughts on that sir?

Dear sir, are you trying to suggest that one could surmise the desires of one' opponent by the clarity of their request? Even perhaps the intensity of their desires by the clarity and frequency of their request? Oh rubbish! Just because DUI has repeatedly said he wants a merger, and has repeatedly said he can't have a merger if CoC remains, and has repeatedly asked for CoC to be relinquished, and has once again made it more clear than anything else in the MOU ...

... Oh my wow.. wow! Have you seen this beautiful glossy brochure! You must get yourself a copy! It simply a stunning sight to behold! It's so wonderful to see cheer leaders again! It was getting so drab and negative around here. Oh, I beg your pardon. Did I interrupt you? Yes, go ahead what were you saying?

 

[EastUS1]

Dear sir, are you trying to suggest that one could surmise the desires of one' opponent by the clarity of their request? Even perhaps the intensity of their desires by the clarity and frequency of their request? Oh rubbish! Just because DUI has repeatedly said he wants a merger, and has repeatedly said he can't have a merger if CoC remains, and has repeatedly asked for CoC to be relinquished, and has once again made it more clear than anything else in the MOU ...

... Oh my wow.. wow! Have you seen this beautiful glossy brochure! You must get yourself a copy! It simply a stunning sight to behold! It's so wonderful to see cheer leaders again! It was getting so drab and negative around here. Oh, I beg your pardon. Did I interrupt you? Yes, go ahead what were you saying?

1) "Just because DUI has repeatedly said he wants a merger, and has repeatedly said he can't have a merger if CoC remains, and has repeatedly asked for CoC to be relinquished, and has once again made it more clear than anything else in the MOU ..." Yep, and yet people seem to completely miss the tactical value of such in the timing here. How any can fail to see it must remain a mystery.

2) Indeed.

 

[Walmartgreeter]

EastUS1 just said: ""10. Extra credit Question: What is the net gain in value to the New American Airlines subsequent to a merger with LCC?
Answer= US Airways "estimates at least 1.2 billion in annual synergies" USAPA estimates it to be 1.5 billion...."
So kids, 1.2 to 1.5 BILLION in annual synergies....and yet many seem as contented as happily squeeling piglets in a freshly watered mud pit at the awesome prospect of a whopping 10K signing "bonus" and below-industry-standard wages? Wow! Sigh!...Suit yourselves then."

I kind of like the idea of 1.6B in improvements over the next six years. You are concerned about the interest on your few months of back pay? Really? Good thing YOU were not at the table. You have to be kidding me. But I understand, NOTHING will ever please you.

And now you resort to comparing "yes" voters to pigs? Just like the CCC, you think our pilots are too stupid to figure this all out, shiny brochure and all. Don't worry, you will soon get the answer of the rational and thinking majority.

Greeter

 

[EastUS1]

I kind of like the idea of 1.6B in improvements over the next six years.

Don't worry, you will soon get the answer of the rational and thinking majority.

1) Umm..."the next six years..."? Wonderful! I must now apologize sir! I'd no idea you were posessed of the only accurately working crystal ball in the commercial aviation world! I'm still a bit curious though: Exactly how will you ensure such gains are to be had in "the next six years", assuming a financially pristine, future enviornment just for starters of course?

2) "...rational and thinking majority.."? Given that directly implies your inclusion, and with that, the additionally required exclusion of any/all that differ with you...well...thanks for the Joke of the Day there.

No matter really. It's your future. Good luck with your choices.

 

[Walmartgreeter]

Dear sir, are you trying to suggest that one could surmise the desires of one' opponent by the clarity of their request? Even perhaps the intensity of their desires by the clarity and frequency of their request? Oh rubbish! Just because DUI has repeatedly said he wants a merger, and has repeatedly said he can't have a merger if CoC remains, and has repeatedly asked for CoC to be relinquished, and has once again made it more clear than anything else in the MOU ...

... Oh my wow.. wow! Have you seen this beautiful glossy brochure! You must get yourself a copy! It simply a stunning sight to behold! It's so wonderful to see cheer leaders again! It was getting so drab and negative around here.    Oh, I beg your pardon. Did I interrupt you? Yes, go ahead what were you saying?

You continue to ridicule both those that have done the work and those now voting. Guess you still know better than all our pilots. Please give me an example of ANY agreement with ANY improvements you or your posse ever brought to this pilot group. And you also seem displeased with the shiny brochure. At least it beats the two color website we all had to look at for years.Greeter

 

[EastUS1]

You continue to ridicule ..... Guess you still know better than all our pilots.

"all our pilots" being of course, found only within the portion that agrees with yourself, and thus magically constitute the only "rational and thinking" ones?

Walmartgreeter: "I kind of like the idea of 1.6B in improvements over the next six years. You are concerned about the interest on your few months of back pay? Really? Good thing YOU were not at the table. You have to be kidding me. But I understand, NOTHING will ever please you." Hmm...perhaps I'm missing something here, but that hardly seems a proper argument for any "rational and thinking" individual to offer. The issue you reference is but ONE of a host of problems I see contained in this MOU.

 

[dca319]

He'll get back after a nice buffet lunch. He can consult with his mentor, mike cleary.

PD!!!!

Mike is too busy running a gym he bought with inheritance money.

 

[Pi brat]

Just because DUI has repeatedly said he wants a merger, and has repeatedly said he can't have a merger if CoC remains, and has repeatedly asked for CoC to be relinquished, and has once again made it more clear than anything else in the MOU ...

... Oh my wow.. wow! Have you seen this beautiful glossy brochure!

Now this might change things. Can you quote for me where Doug says he can't have an AA merger with the CofC? I remember a crew news where he said just the opposite. If you know for sure that he can't do it without getting rid of CofC, despite what the NAC and our attorneys say, then maybe we do have more power than I thought. Looking forward to the facts, you left me hanging on my other requests.

You berate the "glossy brochure" but you know our pilot group. Many of them won't even read that unless someone delivers it from the mailbox and places it in their hands. It was a highlight, and many other resources have been provided if one is interested in looking at them or attending the roadshows.

 

[Black Swan]

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

I know the hand: A CEO who has tried to merge numerous times, and has been beaten. He has a real problem with his reputation in a merger attempt. He wants to win. You have the underwriters who stand to make millions. They want this deal. You have a CEO at AA who also wants the deal, and he also wants to run this thing. You have a CoC language issue that is hazy, yet poses a threat nonetheless. That is why they ask for it. It is a potential dealbreaker. That is USAPA s ace in the hole. You have a company that just posted record profits. There is absolutely no reason to take a substandard offer. The language is hazy. The money is not enough. Tell them to come back with another offer. Have some stones for once. You already let your family down by taking the substandard offer. I would be ashamed to tell my wife. Watch the F/A group. They know how to negotiate.
I am prepared to watch another shameful vote by a pilot group that is the weakest in the industry. Better have your yes ballot for proof when we get turned on our heads by Jerry Glass again when the rubber hits the road. A lot of us are not going to be happy with the outcome. I am printing mine. This thing could go so far as to have all the widebody flying go to AA. You better be prepared for that outcome. The raise you think you have could easily be taken.

 

[dca319]

LOA93, whatever else is true, was pushed in under the duress of bankruptcy. Do those conditions currently apply here? Why even bring it up then, unless you're some strange fan of ALWAYS waving a White Flag at the very first opportunity?

Was the first offered MOU better than what's now being put forth?....Didn't think so either. Didn't the APA folks properly improve on their situation by not only rejecting their initially offered BS, but also replacing those that were cheerleaders for it's acceptance? Didn't said cheerleaders (that were subsequently replaced) not also unequivocally tell them that it was the "last, best offer"? OK then....Next argument....? Note: The replaced observation for the APA isn't any suggestion of endorsement for the CLT recall, which, if successful, I'd expect to see result in even more cheerleaders for easy surrender brought on board.

True, there was duress. But was not the initial offer proffered by the company better than when we ended up with because we thought there was more? Full pay to the last day - remember that one?

 

[Phoenix]

Yes we will all have the consolation that the majority prevailed and got exactly what we chose. No one can deny even the lemmings that much. PS. Don't be offended. Your hair and suit look sharp. You look fabulous. It's a wonderful ocassion and the time of our life!