Pay Cut For Us Airways Pilots: 18%

[mwereplanes]

You didn't believe me did you 320?

mr

 

[EyeInTheSky]

I've talked to Brookman, believe me this is gonna be a "Groundhog Day" all over again with our fine PA delegation. The pilots have spoken. USA320pilot you do not have to go out of the way to attend meetings; call, write, email. Believe me the 69 goofballs in the room for ratifying the TA are the minority. You just don't get it, this piece of garbage WILL NOT go out to the pilot group.

 

[USA320Pilot]

At this point it may not matter if the deal goes out for vote or not.

In fact, if the deal does not go out the "imposition" will create even depper cuts and a stronger company.

Why does Mwereplanes refuse to identify him self, althoug he loves to insult people. I would not want to be on the B767 if the deal does not go out becuase I understand it is likely those piltos will be furloughed out of seniority.

Separately, I guarantee you the RC4 will be financially desimated and possibly thrown in jail. Just ask ALPA's legal advisors.

People cannot stop a lawsuit from being filed and regardless of what the court decides in crminal and civil penalties, legal fees can bankrupt a person.

Finally, "imposition" will create deeper cuts, which will make the company stronger, and ALPA's legal advisors state Judge Mitchell can strike the "self help" option.

Therefore, it does not matter to me any more if the RC4 play ball or not becuase it many be better for the Corporation to have "imposition" and the the RC4 can then receive their reward for not permitting the membership to vote.

Let's not forget the ALPA by-laws have a new section, which was passed by a 89% to 11% margin, that requires membership ratification.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

P.S. Mwereplanes, I told you the DC plan was toast and the RC4's hand picked GAG Negotiating Committee chairman gave it away. It's toast via the TA or via "imposition". How can that be?

 

[oldbscaler]

Gee,
I wonder if the 61-64 year old retirees are going to participate in the lawsuit to go after the RC4.
These guys have a some principles.
REspectfully

 

[Phoenix]

Questions for thought...

1. Why would the RC4 and their hand picked Negotiating Committee (NC) demand that the company pay for ALPA legal expenses if a member(s) sue the Association or a MEC member as a result of the new TA/contract?

The MEC in the last bankruptcy got that. Did you ask that question back then??

And in case you didn't notice, the RC4 do not need legal protection. Those who oppose the RC4 do not have the fortitude to go to court and make their case before a judge. They think judges are mean and would not give them a fair deal. They have been shouting that for months now. Have you not been reading the message boords?

Respectfully,

Phoenix

 

[USA320Pilot]

Phoenix:

You couldn’t be more wrong. I suggest you contact ALPA legal. By the way, who are you?

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[jbragg476]

I just hope the pilot group isn't stupid enough to vote for furloughs out of sienority.

 

[USA320Pilot]

The out of seniority furloughs will be "imposed" by aircraft and or domicile, if they occur. For example, Pittsburgh pilots and F/A's could be at risk.

I just learned that Pittsburgh will lose three of the four fleet types based there. The base will probably have A320 time, but that could change to B737, dependent on IAM negotiations and whether or not the maintenance facility closes. I will type more on this tonight.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[Freighterguynow]

However, the RC4 will be responsible to pay at least their own legal fees for the pending lawsuits, which will occur for fraud, Duke Spellancy - DFR, and even more important violations of the Landrum/Griffith act.


Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

[post="186856"][/post]​

[/quote]


Last time I checked Duke Spellacy was the transfer of assets (and jobs) by PanAm to United/ Delta based upon equipment type and not seniority. Could you please elaborate as to how it applies to US Airways, CH11 and TA voting?

(Not expecting a reply)

 

[Phoenix]

Phoenix:

You couldn’t be more wrong. I suggest you contact ALPA legal. By the way, who are you?

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

[post="186946"][/post]​

I don't mind if you tell me I am wrong when you don't answer the relevent questions.

I don't mind if you tell me I am wrong when you don't tell me what I am wrong about or provide any justifications for your claim.

As far as your encouragement to contact ALPA legal... why? Are they the ones who are telling you to talk about phantom criminal charges? If so it would be real helpful to the guys who are currently sueing ALPA for a failure of representation. Perhaps you should call the folks who are suing ALPA. By your assertions it seems they may be spreading lies in order to mislead and manipulate a contract matter. Why would APLA do that? You should get to the bottom of that!

And as for your question of "Who are you?" I am flattered, yet hurt. A month ago you asked me the same question in a PM. I sent you my name and number in a PM so we could chat. How come you have not called me yet?

Respectfully,

Phoenix

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Great info 320! Who said he posted the whole article? He provided alink.......

[post="186871"][/post]​

I said he did and he did. His original post was modified. I don't lie like others on here.

 

[oldbscaler]

How come no one will talk about the retiree issues? You will all be there one day.

 

[Bear96]

... I know a pilot, very well, who will hold the RC4/NC accountable, who fully understands the criminal and civil options available, and has the money to pursue such action in a court of law. Also noteworthy, this pilot has sought out the best legal counsel to pursue such a proceeding.

[post="186921"][/post]​

If there are still pilots around willing and financially able to piss money away on something as frivolous as that, sounds like ALPA can give ANOTHER 18 or 23% (at least) without too much pain.

320, if (WHEN) your salary gets down to around $15K/year, with no insurance or benefits, THEN would that be low enough for you? Or would you still be falling for the "Give us another XX% and we'll hope to increase flying to Timbuktu next month... trust us!" line.

Pathetic doesn't even begin to describe you.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Bear96:

An employee is only worth what the market will permit. It's not my fault people are willing to work at JetBlue and AirTran for wages and benefits less than the major carriers.

Do I like what is happening? No, of course not. But part of the pie is better than no pie, while you are looking for a new pie.

The cuts are coming. They will either be consensual or imposed and if not the company will be liquidated. I bet once this is done the same thing occurs at UA and DL.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[X-U]

Bear96:

An employee is only worth what the market will permit. It's not my fault people are willing to work at JetBlue and AirTran for wages and benefits less than the major carriers.

Do I like what is happening? No, of course not. But part of the pie is better than no pie, while you are looking for a new pie.

The cuts are coming. They will either be consensual or imposed and if not the company will be liquidated. I bet once this is done the same thing occurs at UA and DL.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

[post="187073"][/post]​

Ah, but it is your fault that pilots are willing to work for JetBlue, AirTran et. al., because you helped to put them out of a job at US a few years ago when you were pushing the LOA to weaken the scope clause and permit RJ flying at the contract carriers. Take a walk down the F concourse in PHL and read the destinations of the 'turboprop replacements". When will you, and your ilk, understand that selling out your fellow aviators does not protect you own career, but actually hastens its loss?