Feb / Mar 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Pi brat]

Exactly! The APA doesn't care how our list is ordered, they have two objectives:

Really? Seems to me that they would rather have the, on average, older US pilots ahead of them. But I don't know anyone involved with the APA. Did have one AA jumpseat rider tell me that. So now you know how the APA thinks on everything?

Which is it? Did we gain crew meals with our new JCBA or did you lose them?

 

[Pi brat]

Morr lije it makes USAPA irrelevant to the SLI.

How so? Won't they still be the CBA when the SLI process begins? Do you agree with this from the AOL update? "The MOU places all US Airways pilots under a single contract"

 

[3dtv]

That letter wasn't even sent to USAPA. Looks like only APAs and the company's lawyer got it. USAPA was completely ignored.

Keep making stuff up. USAPA got a nice letter too. Similar to that football player and his Internet girlfriend though.

 

[dca319]

1. Under MB, the NIC may survive. Any principal or party relevant to the process may present opinion as a part of such.

2. It's no flaw for that the company accepted a list under the pre- MB process.

3. The flaw that nullifies the list, as the 9th pointed out, is an unratifiable list under the former process. MB extracts this from the JCBA process, and thus ratification has no veto power over a perceived undesirable SLI.

4. Under the old process, the ultimate remedy is in the court process. That is where it is now and where it will remain absent a merger. This in answer to your other points in the discussion above.

1. Agree

2. ?

3. That argument seems moot now as we ratified the MoU. It seems that not being able to come to a contract agreement is no longer a defense as this is now set with defined events. We won't be able to hold up the process.

4. But we are not absent a merger.

 

[dca319]

Keep making stuff up. USAPA got a nice letter too. Similar to that football player and his Internet girlfriend though.

I saw only two lawyers addressed in the two-page letter he wrote. One was the company lawyer and the other one was to the APAs lawyer. Where did you see USAPAs lawyer?

 

[dca319]

How so? Won't they still be the CBA when the SLI process begins? Do you agree with this from the AOL update? "The MOU places all US Airways pilots under a single contract"

You would think they would be included in this sort of traffic, wouldn't you? I would. And I honestly don't know about the single contract question. Does an MoU constitue a contract? I guess he's going to have that question answered. So my answer is I do f know. I guess it depends on the courts. Do you agree with it?

 

[Pi brat]

4. But we are not absent a merger.

Maybe. Don't count your chickens, we were much further along with the UA merger when it fell through, remember? Oh yeah, sorry.

 

[dca319]

Maybe. Don't count your chickens, we were much further along with the UA merger when it fell through, remember? Oh yeah, sorry.

So you're worried jetBlue might come in and rain on Doug's parade? Oh yeah, should have seen that. Sorry.

 

[Pi brat]

You would think they would be included in this sort of traffic, wouldn't you? I would. And I honestly don't know about the single contract question. Does an MoU constitue a contract? I guess he's going to have that question answered. So my answer is I do f know. I guess it depends on the courts. Do you agree with it?

It is clear to me that the MOU is not a JCBA.

 

[Pi brat]

So you're worried jetBlue might come in and rain on Doug's parade? Oh yeah, should have seen that. Sorry.

No, really didn't even think about jetBlue. I was thinking more of the DOJ, DOT, US stockholders and our economy that has one foot on the banana peel. I was around for the failed UA mergers, remember?

 

[nevergiveup]

You would think they would be included in this sort of traffic, wouldn't you? I would. And I honestly don't know about the single contract question. Does an MoU constitue a contract? I guess he's going to have that question answered. So my answer is I do f know. I guess it depends on the courts. Do you agree with it?

It depends on how the MOU is worded as to whether or not it constitutes a contract. I believe the wording in our MOU makes it very clear that it is not a contract, and that was the intent.

 

[nic4us]

It is clear to me that the MOU is not a JCBA.

Yet!

However, the MOU is a predetermined pathway to a joint contract that has no uscaba self-hostage taking allowed.

Under the TA the choice was LOA93 work rules and pay
scales. The MOU takes everybody off the prior pay scales, was not part of the TA agreement and makes the DFr "unquestionably ripe" at POR.

So, the West is not about to sit around and let the 6 month SOL pass waiting for the POR.

There will be a lot going on behind the scenes, then uscaba will come out with the Nic as the LCC pilots list, or they will bide their time, stick with their DOH BS, but it will be obvious to all just how full of doo doo they are on the
next LCC equipment bid!


BTW....how did you like my prediction of the exact date of the merger announcement?

 

[Res Judicata]

It is clear to me that the MOU is not a JCBA.

Reading comprehension problem? From an eastie? I can't believe it!

 

[dca319]

No, really didn't even think about jetBlue. I was thinking more of the DOJ, DOT, US stockholders and our economy that has one foot on the banana peel. I was around for the failed UA mergers, remember?

It seems those entities are not going to be an issue - that is if you believe all the pundits. And the way the previous mergers went through and the lack of overlap. I don't see any hold ups.

 

[nic4us]

Correct. MB is the process going forward. But the current ratifired, and thus accepted, list is as yet undefined because of the past, flawed process. MB will seperate the processes of SLI from JCBA ratification. Point is, we have no current predefined LCC list. We are at step 1 - negotiating - with MB as the new and improved final step.

Wrong.

What we have is the Nic as the only accepted system seniority list at LCC.

We are not at step 1...we are at step 2..that is where a scab union tries to RE-negotiate an already accepted list in direct violation of the TA contract it had inherited and as a failure of it's DFr to 1/3rd of the pilots it has an obligation to represent.