US Airways Pilots' Labor Thread 7/14-7/21 NO PERSONAL REMARKS

[88 B.T.D.]

The pilots will again face the choice of voting in a new concessionary contract or allowing a BK judge to do it for them.

Actions (like pulling out of joint negotiations like children) have consequences- dire ones.

Are you saying that higher wages, if previously achieved, would be immune from bankruptcy?

 

[Ogee]

crazy huh, i am a 190 fo and if nic is in i am on the street. thx for your concern but if you are truly looking out for me good buddy, then no to any contract for as long as we can hold it off.

AWE Shucks:

I don't want you to loose your job at all. Having said that, let me ask you this: what were you doing at the time of the merger? That's where you should be going forward, no more no less.

All kidding aside, I don't know a single west pilot that wants to staple any east pilot. We didn't go into this process seeking nor litigating that position. All we wanted is what was fair & what we both we agreed to.

The hyperbole of immaterial minutiae offered by USAPA & SSMP is old news now. It's time to move on and learn to work together.

Please explain your position if you will.

Thanks,

Ogee

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim,
There is no third list. That was determined by an arbitration months ago.

Actually, I think you'll find that the arbitrator said that there should be a third list as specified by the transition agreement. The question he raised is "to what end?" does that third list apply and there he ruled that it didn't apply to furloughs. They were to be accomplished as though there were two lists - East and West, either or both potentially containing new hires.

However, recalls are covered by other language in the transition agreement. Language that gives furloughees from either side the option to accept recall to the other side ahead of new hires. Just as East furloughees accepted recall to the West after the merger, so likewise do West furloughees have a specified right to accept recall to the East operation if there are openings. The question, as I've said, is whether that right supercedes the right of recall of a new hire furloughee from the East side? The new hires that were furloughed from both sides aren't "new hires' any longer, but they should be on the "New Hire List" that the arbitrator said should exist.

Jim

 

[john john]

The question, as I've said, is whether that right supercedes the right of recall of a new hire furloughee from the East side? The new hires that were furloughed from both sides aren't "new hires' any longer, but they should be on the "New Hire List" that the arbitrator said should exist.

Jim

Don’t worry Bob the judge in Arizona will let every body know the remedy. He is supposedly the person that has to bestow all things nic

 

[BoeingBoy]

He is supposedly the person that has to bestow all things nic

No need to bother "Bob" - this is transition agreement and not Nic...

Now if USAPA had to grieve this issue and lost, after the company gave the East furloughees their specified rights after the merger, I'd have to question how hard USAPA tried to win.

Jim

 

[hp_fa]

No need to bother "Bob" - this is transition agreement and not Nic...

Now if USAPA had to grieve this issue and lost, after the company gave the East furloughees their specified rights after the merger, I'd have to question how hard USAPA tried to win.

Jim

They have lost a lot when they have tried to win, so how does one establish they didn't try? Arguably you can't use results-based criteria since there haven't been many positive results.

 

[Phoenix]

Oh the hypocrisy.

I guess USAPA censoring the west reps is OK, right?

If you are accusing members of USAPA of violating the constitution and bylaws (which you haven't) then there are various venues to seek remedy.

 

[Phoenix]

No need to bother "Bob" - this is transition agreement and not Nic...

Now if USAPA had to grieve this issue and lost, after the company gave the East furloughees their specified rights after the merger, I'd have to question how hard USAPA tried to win.

Jim

If USAPA can't persuade the company they didn't try...

I like the premise if we can apply the same standard to ALPA and its decades of failed "efforts". I suppose its true, they never really tried. LOL!

 

[N924PS]

If USAPA can't persuade the company they didn't try...

I like the premise if we can apply the same standard to ALPA and its decades of failed "efforts". I suppose its true, they never really tried. LOL!

If there were so many decades of failed "efforts" under ALPA, why was ALPA on the property since the All American Airways days? When you were making your "parity plus 1%" wages you didn't "throw ALPA under the bus "(an oft used metaphor by some on this forum).

Even after the pension was given away, there was no effort to remove ALPA as the CBA. No, it wasn't until the Nicolau Award was rendered that a new CBA was even considered.

For many years, under ALPA, USAir enjoyed one of the best contracts in the industry in every respect. Let's see what kind of contract USAPA can deliver. Industry Standard perhaps?

 

[Phoenix]

If there were so many decades of failed "efforts" under ALPA, why was ALPA on the property since the All American Airways days? When you were making your "parity plus 1%" wages you didn't "throw ALPA under the bus "(an oft used metaphor by some on this forum).

Even after the pension was given away, there was no effort to remove ALPA as the CBA. No, it wasn't until the Nicolau Award was rendered that a new CBA was even considered.

For many years, under ALPA, USAir enjoyed one of the best contracts in the industry in every respect. Let's see what kind of contract USAPA can deliver. Industry Standard perhaps?

Nice characterization of ALPA overseeing a "best contracts in the industry" to the absolute worst...
The fact that pilots tried to change it from within is proof enough.

Let's just see who actually allows voting.

 

[HPDriver]

If you are accusing members of USAPA of violating the constitution and bylaws (which you haven't) then there are various venues to seek remedy.

Of course there are.

 

[AWE_SHUCKS]

AWE Shucks:

I don't want you to loose your job at all. Having said that, let me ask you this: what were you doing at the time of the merger? That's where you should be going forward, no more no less.

All kidding aside, I don't know a single west pilot that wants to staple any east pilot. We didn't go into this process seeking nor litigating that position. All we wanted is what was fair & what we both we agreed to.

The hyperbole of immaterial minutiae offered by USAPA & SSMP is old news now. It's time to move on and learn to work together.

Please explain your position if you will.

Thanks,

Ogee

This line of thinking, that a furloughed pilot brings nothing to the merger, is repeated so often and never challenged, I challenge it. What did you bring to the merger? Widebody flying? no, yet you will get widebody flying. Its not a matter of no more no less, i wish it were because the west would stay west and east would stay east. As it is with nic, you will gain alot of furlough protection at my expense because the west flying which you brought will draw down and I will be furloughed so a west pilot can have my job on the east. You brought expectations to the merger, so did I. Alot of guys took pay cuts to keep this company alive, well so did I, mine was 100%. You say you wanted what was fair and what was agreed to? Well we dont think the binding arbitration results were fair or more importantly, we don't think they conformed to policies that defined their creation. We are being told otherwise, but we have not exhausted all avenues to right what we perceive as wrong. Im not asking you to agree, just stop challenging our right to seek a remedy. You guys think your jobs are more valuable than our jobs? We were going to liquidate, i know, i know. Well guess what, we didn't liquidate and it has nothing to do with anything you did. If someone saw value in saving the east, that perceived value is not yours to parlay into career advancement over my furloughed body. Neither Airliine would exist today if not for the merger, so in a sense, the job you brought to the merger is about as worthless as the job I brought to the merger, in terms of realistic career expectaions.
I don't advocate DOH, maybe works in some cases but not here, but if DOH had prevailed, I certainly think you guys would challenge that as a windfall not conforming to merger policy and fight it to the end because I don't think you guys are much different than us. I don't begrudge your position fighting for NIC implementation, I'd do the same, but please, to deny it as a huge windfall and triumph over the east is disingenuous. You guys could back off, Wake says so, but you won't (nor would I) But I wouldn't pretend it was a just or righteous position. It is what it is. Yor greed is beating our greed (for now) Fly safe.

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

If you are accusing members of USAPA of violating the constitution and bylaws (which you haven't) then there are various venues to seek remedy.

Isn't the constitution essentially discriminatory towards one group and was found to be so, by extension, by a federal court?

 

[cleardirect]

If you are accusing members of USAPA of violating the constitution and bylaws (which you haven't) then there are various venues to seek remedy.

Not members, leaders of usapa. Proven fact.

They have and are continuing to censure the west comm.

 

[A320 Driver]

If there were so many decades of failed "efforts" under ALPA, why was ALPA on the property since the All American Airways days? When you were making your "parity plus 1%" wages you didn't "throw ALPA under the bus "(an oft used metaphor by some on this forum).

Even after the pension was given away, there was no effort to remove ALPA as the CBA. No, it wasn't until the Nicolau Award was rendered that a new CBA was even considered.

For many years, under ALPA, USAir enjoyed one of the best contracts in the industry in every respect. Let's see what kind of contract USAPA can deliver. Industry Standard perhaps?

Parity +1 was concessionary. United got a big raise and we rode that to our own raises. No one, the pilot group or Wolfe knew it was going to happen. It didn't last long.

Why did the "best contracts in the industry" give us raises that didn't keep up with inflation and were always at the expense of others (B scale). What is so good about the loss of meaningful trip rigs and scope that protected our jobs. We had scope at one time that said we flew the jets...ALL OF THEM. Under ALPA we went from working 12 days a month to roughly 18 for less money.

If this was the best in the industry, then the industry truly sucks. I'm no USAPA fan, but ALPA was no peach either.


A320 Driver <_<