Us Airways Pilots Sharply Divided

[UseYourHead]

Jim,

A rep., once elected does in fact represent every single pilot. We all deserve 100% of there service, it is in fact thier job. It is also thier fudiciary responsibility to study the situation, take all valid information under consideration, and make the best choice for the pilot group...not just for a pocket (388 out of 1000+) of pissed off emotion driven pilots. When they disregard all legal and professional advice that is simply not okay.

Funny thing is, two of these current reps are parties to a lawsuit against former MEC members who followed the advice of professionals along with the bankruptcy judgement, and so on.

If the fall out of these guys actions, a direct result of negligence, lack of having spine enough to make tough decsions, and failure to represent ends adversely affecting the 26000 employees here, we will have our way with them.

The lawsuits will be awesome and they are in fact pathetic sitting ducks, acting not on any legal advice...rather directly opposed to it. They have bankrupted ALPA with legal fees, it will be very interesting to watch them defend themselves.

Lastly, it is not hysterics that drives the sane reps, it is called having the cahoonas to make tough decsions and stand by them...as opposed to promising things you cannot keep and repeating them until you and others believe them. The timeline, the severity of cuts, most everything is driven by the ATSB, GE Capital, American Express, and aircraft manufactures. We will be a viable enterprise, or we will not be.

What is happening is bigger than US Airways, the RC4 cannot stop it, they will only help you and I to get an even worse deal, or find out about how nice the unemployment vacation will be so many look forward to on this board.

Good luck to you (and all of us).

AP Tech,

I think once elected, the reps are supposed to represent all their constituents (that spelling doesn't look anywhere near right). The problem now is that there are two pretty sharply divided camps - the "any agreement at any cost and now" and the "not just no but Hell No" - and representing both is somewhat difficult. Throw in the fact that many of the more vocal critics of the "RC4" are not based in PIT or PHL, and hence carry no leverage with those reps, and you get the picture - use hysterics to try to accomplish what you can't achieve legitimately.

Jim

[post="174359"][/post]​

 

[BoeingBoy]

UseYourHead,

Much food for thought....

"not just for a pocket (388 out of 1000+) of pissed off emotion driven pilots"

I assume that this is the number of pilots (the majority of votes cast) against recall of the PHL reps. The fallacy is that this assumes that everyone (EVERY ONE) that didn't bother to cast a vote disagrees with the actions of the reps in question. That's quite an assumption, especially in light of the very vocal and wide-spread campaign to unseat them.

I also assume that "pissed off emotion[ly] driven pilots" refers to anyone who don't see the "truth" as spoken by the "calm logical pilots". Like the critical need for a TA to get a 1113 letter (never mind that it will be void in as little as 60 days and the last one didn't stop concession #2 and loss of the DB pension - oh, I forgot, those were given up by the calm logical pilots). Like the critical need to meet deadlines (yes, imposed from without the company) when the management of this company has barely started to do their part to meet those same deadlines.

The lawsuits matter not one iota to me. First, because we are fortunate to live in a country where legal attempts to right a perceived wrong are allowed (would you have it differently?), and second, because I doubt that they will ever get a dime (no matter whether they deserve it or not).

Many pilots over the course of decades "made the tough decisions" to give you and I a decent career. They were willing to risk it all at times, so you and I could have a contract that provided decent compensation and decent working conditions. What must they think now, at least those still alive to witness the last 2+ years. A handful of "sane" pilots have singlehandedly undone decades of hard work and sacrifice by thousands, with the likely result (if you have your way) that thousands more will be the lowest compensated of the larger carriers.

Apparently, you believe it takes "cahoonas" to just say yes to every demand by management, to "live to fight another day" as long as that day never comes. Did not the company's August 28 proposal contain some less onerous provisions than their earlier proposal? The "sane" reps with "cahoonas" wouldn't even have gotten to that proposal in their zeal to pass the previous proposal.

Let's talk about "making the tough decisions and sticking by them". Wasn't it the "sane" reps who said that "the concession stand was closed"? A tough decision, certainly, but how long did they stand by it? Weeks? Wasn't it the "sane" reps who said that a "changed corporate culture" was a requirement before any progress could be made? Yet with pilots being docked a days pay at managements whim, contrary to the contract, it back to business as usual. Another tough decision dropped by the wayside. Wasn't it the "sane" reps who promised the returns from LOA 91 - including implementation of the CASS system and a commuter policy? The CASS is nowhere in sight and the commuter policy is being held hostage to current talks. Maybe the "sane" reps can trumpet these as valuable "returns" for the current concessions - nothing like not getting the same items over and over as showing how "tough" they are.

A "sane" person learns from history. Repeating the same actions over and over expecting a different result says little about one's learning ability. Yes, this company will become a viable enterprise or it will disappear. But history should have taught any "sane" person that the actions of this pilot group will have no effect on the outcome, one way or the other.

Jim

 

[hp_fa]

Jim,

A rep., once elected does in fact represent every single pilot.

[post="174381"][/post]​

I think that should read as follows:

A rep., once elected does in fact represent every single pilot in the applicable district.

I live in Arizona. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl represent me whether, or not, I voted for them. Senators Hillary Clinton, Bill Frist, Elizabeth Dole or Orrin Hatch do not represent me. They are from other voting districts and they represent other people.

From what I am reading here, the PA-based pilots are seemingly representing the wishes of the PA-based pilots they represent.

 

[UseYourHead]

I agree, everyone of the pilots in the base, not just the angry ones....

I think that should read as follows:

A rep., once elected does in fact represent every single pilot in the applicable district.

I live in Arizona. Senators John McCain and Jon Kyl represent me whether, or not, I voted for them. Senators Hillary Clinton, Bill Frist, Elizabeth Dole or Orrin Hatch do not represent me. They are from other voting districts and they represent other people.

From what I am reading here, the PA-based pilots are seemingly representing the wishes of the PA-based pilots they represent.

[post="174403"][/post]​

 

[BoeingBoy]

Likewise, hp.

I omitted a critical element.

As to whether or not the PHL reps represent the PHL pilots, I've seen no data that suggest one way or the other. The closest would be the recall effort, which failed.

It's all to easy to say "they don't represent me, so obviously they don't represent everyone", but when the issue is as contentious as this one is the reps simply cannot represent both diametrically opposed factions.

Jim

 

[mlt]

Question....
There has been much written concerning the lawsuit filed over the loss of the defined benefit plan. If I remember correctly, didn't ALPA and the company sign a letter of agreement that any financial costs incurred as a result of legal activity concerning the restructuring agreement #2 and the loss of the pensions would be the responsibility of the company?

 

[BoeingBoy]

mlt,

Do you mean this:

"The Company agrees to indemnify the Association from any and all liability, loss, damages, fines, penalties, excise taxes and costs, including expenses and reasonable attorneys’ fees, which the Association sustains arising out of or in connection with this termination of the old non-qualified plan as described above. The Association agrees that it will not settle a matter covered by this indemnity at the Company’s cost without the Company’s approval, and that the Association will provide assistance as reasonably required or requested by the Company in any matter for which such indemnity is being provided."

From the "Combined Restructuring Agreement" on the MEC website.

Jim

 

[UseYourHead]

UseYourHead,

Much food for thought....

"not just for a pocket (388 out of 1000+) of pissed off emotion driven pilots"

Jim wrote:
I assume that this is the number of pilots (the majority of votes cast) against recall of the PHL reps. The fallacy is that this assumes that everyone (EVERY ONE) that didn't bother to cast a vote disagrees with the actions of the reps in question. That's quite an assumption, especially in light of the very vocal and wide-spread campaign to unseat them.

UYH wrote:
This was a wide spread campain on both sides indeed. It is interesting that there were 330+ pilots in favor of the recall (I know that for a fact, it was not doctored numbers), and only 188 in favor on the vote day.

Why? Well when confidential information was leaked (twice) by these reps (which is a publicly documented fact, as they were twice repremanded by the MEC Comm Committee)...one little tidbit was that the company had approached ALPA about consessions including changes to the DC plan.

After these reps assured everyone that they would not let that happen, there following was enhanced rather smartly.

Problem is, these reps cannot keep that promise, they will fail having these choices: 1) no income or DC plan, 2) losing DC plan in BK, or 3) sending out changes to the DC plan that they have already exchanged with the company.

Jim wrote:
I also assume that "pissed off emotion[ly] driven pilots" refers to anyone who don't see the "truth" as spoken by the "calm logical pilots". Like the critical need for a TA to get a 1113 letter (never mind that it will be void in as little as 60 days and the last one didn't stop concession #2 and loss of the DB pension - oh, I forgot, those were given up by the calm logical pilots). Like the critical need to meet deadlines (yes, imposed from without the company) when the management of this company has barely started to do their part to meet those same deadlines.

UYH wrote:
I would define "pissed off emotion[ly] driven pilots" as pilots who cannot process information, and weigh all factors of input, including legal advice from layers and the Financial and Economic Analysis dept. Now I understand that line pilots (like you and I) may not have the time, desire, or motivation to do so, as being angry and just saying no is the easy way out.

OTOH, that id negligence by reps, in a BIG way. Are you saying, with the benefit of time and history now on your side that the DB plan could have been saved by your statement above? They tried to do so, and negotiated a rich DC plan as a replacement while still in somewhat of a position to do so with some bargining power.

OTOH, are you saying 1113 letters are no good...let me break some news to you. If not for that letter, we would have a hell-of-a-lot less than 283 active aircraft right now...something that would be nice to continue to have I might add.


Jim wrote:
The lawsuits matter not one iota to me. First, because we are fortunate to live in a country where legal attempts to right a perceived wrong are allowed (would you have it differently?), and second, because I doubt that they will ever get a dime (no matter whether they deserve it or not).


UYH wrote:
This is the USA, so I respect the right for anyone to sue...however, sue your fellow pilot for damages reeks of GREED to me, and that I think is very sad.

Jim wrote:
Many pilots over the course of decades "made the tough decisions" to give you and I a decent career. They were willing to risk it all at times, so you and I could have a contract that provided decent compensation and decent working conditions. What must they think now, at least those still alive to witness the last 2+ years. A handful of "sane" pilots have singlehandedly undone decades of hard work and sacrifice by thousands, with the likely result (if you have your way) that thousands more will be the lowest compensated of the larger carriers.

UYH wrote:
Jim, there are cycles in the industry, you are a smart guy, you know that. What we at US Airways are faced with is much bigger than ourselves...in fact bigger than UAL, AMR, DAL, NWA, etc.

Are you saying that we here at Airways should just "shut it down" and therefore stop the attack on the legacy carriers pay and working conditions? If you really believe that would make any significant impact, well, I would be surprised.

My father was was of the origional ALPA founding fathers, he fought the battles you refered to...I learned about them not through reading "flying the line" but rather through him. We are not talking about anything in the same universe here.

At this point, the legacy airlines will morph, or cease to exist...that is our choice. Yes this does imply to "fight another day" as that is our choice here or at a different airline (If your lucky enough to even get hired).

Jim wrote:
Apparently, you believe it takes "cahoonas" to just say yes to every demand by management, to "live to fight another day" as long as that day never comes. Did not the company's August 28 proposal contain some less onerous provisions than their earlier proposal? The "sane" reps with "cahoonas" wouldn't even have gotten to that proposal in their zeal to pass the previous proposal.

UYH wrote:
Of course I thought the 28th offer sucks! Jim, just saying no is a cowards way out. The last group of reps would have been long done negotiating while we were in a position to do so rather than having the scenario we are faced with now happen.


Jim wrote:
A "sane" person learns from history. Repeating the same actions over and over expecting a different result says little about one's learning ability. Yes, this company will become a viable enterprise or it will disappear. But history should have taught any "sane" person that the actions of this pilot group will have no effect on the outcome, one way or the other.

UYH Wrote:
"Repeating the same actions over and over expecting a different result" is this not the defintion of insanity?

Having said that Jim, it is equally insane to believe even for a second that what we do will have no effect on the outcome.

Even the RC4 have admitted that is a not true. Fact is, collectively we have some tough choices ahead, and those choices will dramatically affect us all for the rest of our lives.

 

[BoeingBoy]

As far as I'm concerned, we've wasted enough space on this.

You will continue to believe we pilots can make a difference in the outcome. That somehow giving and giving is equivalent to morphing to meet "the new reality"

I will continue to believe we don't have that power, only management can take the actions necessary to truly morph this airline and they have been found to be sorely lacking.

We face deadlines not just next month, but every quarter for a while going forward. I'm awaiting with dread the next "save the airline" call....

Jim

 

[mlt]

Jim,
Thanks for finding the language. In other words, the misinformation (FUD) US A320 is writing that ALPA members will be assessed to pay the pensions of the pilots who are attempting to right a wrong is incorrect. A rational person might wish the litigants well. If they win wouldn't it stand to reason that all U pilots would win?

 

[BoeingBoy]

mlt,

I guess time will certainly tell. On the other hand, what happens to this language with a new TA? I've also heard rumors that the individual MEC members were dropped in the suit - don't have any idea if that's true.

As I said somewhere above, the whole lawsuit thing is a non-issue with me. If the pilots bringing the suit win, good for them. If not, so be it.

Jim

 

[UseYourHead]

Good morning Jim,

Just waking-up in Europe...

Well said, and I respect your viewpoint, as well as your ability to debate this in a civil way.

You are correct, we do hold opposing views and that is okay, in fact, it is healthy for the union, the pilot group, and the company.

Good luck to you, and thank you for the professional behavior in this electronic community.

UYH

As far as I'm concerned, we've wasted enough space on this.

You will continue to believe we pilots can make a difference in the outcome. That somehow giving and giving is equivalent to morphing to meet "the new reality"

I will continue to believe we don't have that power, only management can take the actions necessary to truly morph this airline and they have been found to be sorely lacking.

We face deadlines not just next month, but every quarter for a while going forward. I'm awaiting with dread the next "save the airline" call....

Jim

[post="174440"][/post]​

 

[BoeingBoy]

UseYourHead,

Have a good layover. Hope the flight back goes well.

Jim

 

[UseYourHead]

Thanks Jim,

Your up late...night owl?

UseYourHead,

Have a good layover. Hope the flight back goes well.

Jim

[post="174688"][/post]​

 

[BoeingBoy]

Yep, tend to be. Those short layovers with an 0 dark thirty wakeup are rough - especially at my age.

Jim