"fiction Vs. Fact"

USA320Pilot

Veteran
May 18, 2003
8,175
1,539
Mwereplanes:

Mwereplanes said: And there COULD be a "unique corporate transaction." And we COULD file for C7. And we COULD sell all the 320's. And we COULD put MDA pilots in the cockpits of the 767's. But 1852 pilots, represented by the 4 brave men we elected, have not allowed yet another wholesale giveback without bringing the needed attention to the MORONS running this company. It is amazing how the bedwetters forget who the MORONS are. The Stockholm Syndrome is alive and well.

USA320pilot comments: Thanks for your comments, but what useful purpose does it serve to insult people? My kids do not do that they are in grade school, but grown men like your self feel the need to insult people?

Regardless, the RC4 disregarded the recommendations of the ALPA president, ALPA professional negotiator, ALPA legal counsel, the ALPA contract administrator (also an attorney), ALPA financial advisor, ALPA E&FA, all of the MEC officers, and the majority of the MEC.

Furthermore, NC member Don Hollerback a CPA and fraud examiner, who has access to every confidential US Airways financial record, wrote a scathing report on the actions of the RC4 and NC, which was published on this website.

Furthermore, at Friday's MEC meetings about 2/3 of the pilot's in the room did not support the RC4, where the meeting was held with home field advantage.

Of the 36 pilot's who spoke to the MEC, 26 spoke on the right to vote on the company's September 6 proposal. 15 wanted to vote and 11 supported the RC4.

Clearly, the RC4 does not speak for virtually all of ALPA's leaders and the majority of the rank-and-file. We are now at the point of imposition where last time the Bankruptcy Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, under the rule of Judge Wedoff, approved virtually every US Airways motion.

Do you honestly expect anything different this time? You and our colleagues are about to lose their near-and-dear DC pension and there is nothing you can do about. If you want to watch the show, I suggest you do what I did last time and make trips to 200 S. Washington St., Alexandria, Virginia, to watch the upcoming show and "imposition", which will begin today.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

P.S. Friday’s roll call resolution, to reduce ALPA's new business plan contribution from 20.25% to 16.25% in pay and from 40% to 10% in DC Plan contributions is expected to strengthen the company's case against ALPA for bad faith bargaining, according to ALPA's bankruptcy counsel Richard Seltzer.
 
USA320,

Again I will post it here...

There were approx 150 folks in the room, unless you polled the pilots, you wouldn't know what the majority position is.

Wives were there, as well.

C'mon USA320, just ponder this...

Where is the protection from a 1113 filing in the company's proposal that was rejected by the RC4? They gave ALPA 60 days of protection in that proposal...then what?

Can you explain your take on that? Do you think the pilots would have been safe with that proposal and no more gives while in BK...?

Really now, your an intelligent man, explain the co. thinking and why should the pilots sign on when it could get worse with or without ratified agreements.

FYI...the company is asking for 15% from AFA in addition to all the smap backs. That would place the top-out f/as BELOW Am West by $4.00 per hour, and our 10-year f/a and below....close to MAA wages.

This is unacceptable for us to concede to. If the company takes it into BK and continues to be unreasonable with negotiations, we will have a judge that will determine "good faith" or not.

If abrogation is the ticket for this managment......we will be released to "self help" and their won't be enough pax booking flights to pay the light bill.

Is this what managment wants? What would anyone gain here? Are they willing to risk this, is the question?
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #4
PITbull asked: Where is the protection from a 1113 filing in the company's proposal that was rejected? They gave you 60 days...then what?

USA320Pilot comments: According to NC chairman Dog Mowrey that’s because US Airways currently has below market value lease rates and a lessor has a customer who is interested in acquiring those assets and paying a higher rate.

PitBull asked: Really now, your an intelligent man, explain the co. thinking and why should the pilots sign on when it could get worse with or without ratified agreements.

USA320Pilot comments: According to the advisors, it’s all about the story for the financial community,

PitBull said: ‘If abrogation is the ticket for this managment......we will be released to "self help" and their won't be enough pax booking flights to pay the light bill. Is this what managment wants? Are they willing to risk this is the question?

USA320Pilot comments: pay is only a part of labor expense. Management wants a cost structure between America West and JetBlue. ALPA’s advisors told the MEC that early on the union could have obtained a contract worth about 85% of the ask, e.g. America West, but as time went on the company’s proposals would get worse. Guess what? The advisors were right. As tie goes on the company will need even more cost cuts because bankruptcy is so expensive, which the RC4 was briefed on too.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

P.S. I sat at the MEC table as a representative last Friday and I know exactly what happened. Furthermore, my bride was there too.
 
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread starter
  • #5
PitBull:

I'm going to church, then play with my kids, watch some football, and then wait for the petition to be filed later today. By the way, who first said on this website that the company would file Chapter 11 today without DIP financing?

Regards,

USA320Pilot
 
I know you were there, did you see me? ;)

Basically, each proposal in Summer 2002 and winter 2002 got worse, never better no matter what the unions countered. So you admit that in BK the co. may need more, so why concede to abrogating agreements outside of BK, that's my point.

Your point is moot.

What I have witnessed since these agreements have been in place is employees who now have lived these agreements and are angry, apathetic, and can't out- right quit because of the debts they have acquired these past two years just trying to stay off the poverty line for many.

I can't speak for the pilots, as their wage is above standards, but rightfully so, as they are licensed, skilled professionals.

However, the rest of the unionized ranks are struggling WITH JOBS. Point being, we can find other jobs out there that will put us in the same place we are now.

Folks stayed on with this airline hoping that their sacrifices would prove worthy. Presently here we sit, smack in the face of yet another restructuring.

Unless managment agrees to negotiate in "good faith" as they promised from the onset, the airline will be doomed, even in BK.

Along with the precarious state with Labor, management will lose control of the company the longer they stay in BK.
 
USA320Pilot comments: pay is only a part of labor expense. Management wants a cost structure between America West and JetBlue.

Most of us are simply not willing to go there. I and many I have spoken with were fully willing to take cuts to mirror that of America West, but the company wants the cost per seat mile costs of that carrier. They can't have it! Not because we are unwilling to take cuts, but because our "other" expenses and associated costs are so high, they make it impossible. I'm willing to reduce to AW's pay structure, but I will not go below it just to finance a lousy, outdated and inefficient operation. They had their chance to fix it, but the same talking heads that inhabited those offices pre-bankruptsy are still there.

So here we are.

A320 Driver
 
USA320pilot comments: Thanks for your comments, but what useful purpose does it serve to insult people? My kids do not do that they are in grade school, but grown men like your self feel the need to insult people?


Funny, aren't you the one that called the RC4 "morons" ????

I sit and listen and you never fail to amaze me with your nonesense....
 
For him things change. It just depends on whether you agree or disagree with him. He calls them morons, but if his credibility his question its an insult. Go figure. Savy
 
FYI...the company is asking for 15% from AFA in addition to all the smap backs. That would place the top-out f/as BELOW Am West by $4.00 per hour, and our 10-year f/a and below....close to MAA wages.

This is unacceptable for us to concede to. If the company takes it into BK and continues to be unreasonable with negotiations, we will have a judge that will determine "good faith" or not.

I love the part where you claim it is unacceptable for "us" to concede to such. You mean it is unacceptable for YOU to concede to it. Those of "the us" too junior, those already at MDA, have been dealing with what you consider "beneath you" for sometime.

The other part that kills me, is this dogged attitude that the judge will "save the day" for "us" (read = you). Is it only because you consider something unreasonable, that surely the judge must feel the sameway... :blink:

Wake up, the fact of the matter is, fellow mainline employees, including Flight Attendants no different from you (other than hire date) have been working for the pay/rules you call unreasonable already. Pay/rules that your union (and the others) agreed to so as to "remain competitive" at the 70 seat level...

What makes you think a judge is going to think differently between what is "reasonable" with 70 seats vs. what you say is unreasonable for larger equipment...?



Oh, FYI, Monday, Independence Air is holding a event to show off their brand new A319 that arrived at IAD a few days ago. The first of 28 coming at a rate of around 2 a month... So add another LCC competitor into the domestic market we fly in.
 
Back
Top