US Pilot Labor Thread 10/19-10/26

[nic4us]

http://cf.alpa.org/mec/aaa/docs/newmectoda...2/merge1200.pdf

Capncockroach,

Thanks for the article. I particularlly enjoyed the TWA/Ozark portion, especially the quote from the Federal Appellate Court judge, that said "adult pilots, of sound mind and well aware of the consequences of their acts, must expect to keep their contracts,even when they wish they could have made better deals."

But I stand corrected, these were both DOH list so I owe Oldiebutgoodie six more mergers that were not, I better start looking at how the commuters consolidated, because there is not six in the last 40 years. I will add though, while they were DOH the C&Rs involved are so lengthy they hardly resemble such. Also, I would point out that as DOH they were uglier than a relative ( read fair imho) integration.


Piedmont1984

I agree there is a time value of work, or at least should be, but PHX is not protected by USAPAs conditions, if that is what you meant. DOH is DOA.


Phoenix

UAL is revisiting merger policy not because of Mesa but because of Continental, where until just recently 2 years got you a 737 captain seat.

 

[nic4us]

Since separate operations exist, then no one, by definition, has lost or gained a windfall (or even a zephyr) at the expense of the other pilot group.

I was refering to seats that were part of the 757 and 190 arbitration that are held as IOU to the west all of which was growth flying. But you are correct again with separate ops things stay pretty status quo for the time being. I was trying to say that with a joint contract and implementation of Nic the east junior pilots will not like the result when West pilots come to collect on the IOU. There are east pilots posting those airplanes where here prior. Total denial of reality, will make it appear to these same individuals that a windfall has occurred when West pilots staff those positions.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Seniority - according to ALPA's interpretation - is not credit for years worked, unless it is in-house. Then DOH is fine. In fact it is sacrosanct.

If not seniority, just exactly what does a pilot accrue for years worked - what is the time value of his/her work? Vacation? I'm sure that many of the West would love to merge the lists based on annual vacation time. Step on the pay scale of particular equipment held? The West would possibly go along with that.

DOH in most cases since deregulation is just a way of merging lists so that those who haven't been as lucky in their career at merger partner A can benefit at the expense of those who have been luckier at merger partner B.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

If not seniority, just exactly what does a pilot accrue for years worked - what is the time value of his/her work? Vacation? I'm sure that many of the West would love to merge the lists based on annual vacation time. Step on the pay scale of particular equipment held? The West would possibly go along with that.

DOH in most cases since deregulation is just a way of merging lists so that those who haven't been as lucky in their career at merger partner A can benefit at the expense of those who have been luckier at merger partner B.

You seem to answer your own question. There is no ABSOLUTELY 100% fair way to merge the list. Everyone has an opinion of what they think are the important issues. The traditional method, so traditional in fact that unions themselves were founded upon the idea, is DOH (or, in the case of trade and professional guilds, length of time in service). Unions themselves consider experience so important that they base pay and benefits on it. Now, they say it doesn't matter. Well, which is it? Does it matter or not? I think if you ask anyone in the travelling public you would hear that it is VERY important. To be truly a professional guild, credit would be given for ALL experience in aviation, military time, commuter time, time at prior airlines. The only problem with that is that it is not quantifiable. By that I mean it is not verifiable in many cases, and in others it is not accounted for in the same manner. Therefore, only credit for the current carrier can be used (and , of course, the immediate prior carrier in the event of a merger).

So which is it? Is experience important or not? If not, just come out with one pay scale for everyone, and one list of benefits for everyone, starting the day one gets hired. Then do that at all carriers, so that pilots, once qualified, can work anywhere they wish, without having to gain "experience" and seniority to qualify for better wages and conditions.

Either experience (aka seniority in the truest sense) is important or it isn't. I say it is. Apparently you and others think otherwise.

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

As we've seen with the past several posts, the problem of seniority list resolution is extreemely complicated. And the differences between relative groups could not have been more vast than in this AAA - AWA merge.

Given the background surrounding this situation, how incomprehensible is it that anybody truely believes such a simplistic solution as pure date of hire would be remotely fair to all or even fair, period?

Furthermore, it is obvious that if either side were given the power to impose its will upon another that the short side is going to get shafted. This is exactly what we see this happening now with the usapa experiment.

And these are the primary reasons for the arbitration which took place - the one that BOTH sides agreed to.

When this matter gets heard in court (and it will), these will be primary points of discussion. The east's attempt to justify their DOH stance will be difficult to justify when they face answering to a third party. When the time finally arrives for the east to sink or swim with DOH, I suspect there will be a mad rush to the lifeboats.

 

[BoeingBoy]

So which is it? Is experience important or not?

Obviously not since experience doesn't control one's place on the seniority list of even a specific company. A 3000 hour pilot gets hired this month and a 5000 hour pilot is hired next month at the same company - is their seniority based on their experience?

Either experience (aka seniority in the truest sense) is important or it isn't.

See above - experience and seniority can be, and often are, different in the same company. They are almost always different between companies. Even the same DOH across companies doesn't mean equal experience - a pilot at company A may only fly 75 hrs/month while a pilot at company B flies 95 hrs/month. The experience these two pilots accrue diverges over time. So your premise that experience is "seniority in the truest sense" is erroneous.

Even most of those who long for a national seniority list disregard experience to one degree or another - experience gained in the military, experience gained at such companies as charter operators, experience gained before joining ALPA, etc.

Jim

 

[traderjake]

You are discounting the time value of work. I submit it has value. Seniority in PHX is protected.

You don't understand that advancing to and holding a position means more than the time spent trying and failing to acquire that position.

If fences are the fix would be happy with fences around the Nic award?

 

[BottomFeeder]

Obviously not since experience doesn't control one's place on the seniority list of even a specific company. A 3000 hour pilot gets hired this month and a 5000 hour pilot is hired next month at the same company - is their seniority based on their experience?



See above - experience and seniority can be, and often are, different in the same company. They are almost always different between companies. Even the same DOH across companies doesn't mean equal experience - a pilot at company A may only fly 75 hrs/month while a pilot at company B flies 95 hrs/month. The experience these two pilots accrue diverges over time. So your premise that experience is "seniority in the truest sense" is erroneous.

Even most of those who long for a national seniority list disregard experience to one degree or another - experience gained in the military, experience gained at such companies as charter operators, experience gained before joining ALPA, etc.

Jim

Jim

Refresh my memory, I think you used the "experience/senior" tag to promote the age 60 change. Could you please explain why you thought it was different for 60.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Obviously not since experience doesn't control one's place on the seniority list of even a specific company. A 3000 hour pilot gets hired this month and a 5000 hour pilot is hired next month at the same company - is their seniority based on their experience?

So now you're advocating using flying time as the standard? Okay. still works for me. But nowhere have I advocated that, since it is, as I said earlier, much harder to quantify.

Flying time IS used by the companies to determine hiring eligibility. It's one measure they use to ensure that someone has met a certain level of competence. once hired, though, it's hard to compare experience in that way, i.e. which is more valuable, flying six legs a day in a 737, or 2 legs every three days in a 767?

See above - experience and seniority can be, and often are, different in the same company. They are almost always different between companies. Even the same DOH across companies doesn't mean equal experience - a pilot at company A may only fly 75 hrs/month while a pilot at company B flies 95 hrs/month. The experience these two pilots accrue diverges over time. So your premise that experience is "seniority in the truest sense" is erroneous.

Even most of those who long for a national seniority list disregard experience to one degree or another - experience gained in the military, experience gained at such companies as charter operators, experience gained before joining ALPA, etc.

Jim

There are reasons are why the ONLY number that is truly comparable is DOH. It doesn't change, yet is still of indicator of experience as measured by time on the job. Airlines aren't the only industry to use it, either. It's really the only non-arbitrary number that is comparable throughout the company. ALPA (and others) made it way too complicated with weird, confusing formulas, in an effort they say, to be fair. Reality is, it was an effort to screw someone out of something. They just came up with a way to make the numbers lie for them.

All the other labor groups at LCC use DOH for their mergers, and they have gone MUCH SMOOTHER. That's because it's simple, it makes sense, and everyone knows where they stand. Again, I'll repeat what I said in an earlier post. ONLY PILOTS ARE ARROGANT ENOUGH TO THINK THAT THEY CAN IMPROVE UPON THE PERFECT SYSTEM.

 

[Piedmont1984]

Also germane to this discussion should be the time value of dues paid to a union, which fits in nicely with the time value of work (length of service) on behalf of a particular company.

Also, let's not conflate experience with length of service to company. LOS is easily quantifiable, aviation experience - as Jim pointed out - is much more of a moving target.

I say again. If merger policy was clear and concise, cut and dried, we would never need to seek arbitration. This seniority list would have been done three years ago.

 

[tazz]

Furthermore, it is obvious that if either side were given the power to impose its will upon another that the short side is going to get shafted. This is exactly what we see this happening now with the usapa experiment.

I disagree, NLC. From the beginning the west has advocated relative seniority. As soon as the acquisition was consummated the east pushed DOH.

Stapling the east would be a shaft as would DOH be a shaft for the west. Relative seniority, the west's position, is fair. That's how Nicolau saw it. That's how the courts will see it.

So, if the west position is imposed the result will be much more fair than stapling and DOH.

Just my two cents worth which, in the current market is worth .75 cents.

 

[cubfan]

I was refering to seats that were part of the 757 and 190 arbitration that are held as IOU to the west all of which was growth flying. But you are correct again with separate ops things stay pretty status quo for the time being. I was trying to say that with a joint contract and implementation of Nic the east junior pilots will not like the result when West pilots come to collect on the IOU. There are east pilots posting those airplanes where here prior. Total denial of reality, will make it appear to these same individuals that a windfall has occurred when West pilots staff those positions.

one way or another this will all be settled in time. Both sides have strong feelings on what will happen, but one thing for sure no one really knows. All eyes are on this one. If for example the court rules the nic stands, I don't feel they can dicate how it has to be implemented. In most mergers when dealing with pilots on furlough, I don't think there has been pilots furloughed after 14 years of active service. In past mergers I think furloughed guys had a year or two of service, so being placed on the bottom wasn't a big hit. Alot has been said by the west that if you were 70% before you are still 70% now, so whats the big deal? The big deal for me is that if I was 60-70% before, I had all the opportunity to move up due to the large attritation on the east. With the NIC, all that has been stripped in most cases, and guys with alot less time in service will capture that attrition that didn't even exsist or them. I would remain not only in the right seat but be back on reserve for a long time. This is where the old man and ALPA dropped the ball. I also feel alot of the west f/o's think this that this would be ok. I wonder what their feelings would be if the nic stands, but east pilots capture all of their (east) attrition, and the west captures theirs.

 

[tazz]

There are reasons are why the ONLY number that is truly comparable is DOH. It doesn't change, yet is still of indicator of experience as measured by time on the job. Airlines aren't the only industry to use it, either. It's really the only non-arbitrary number that is comparable throughout the company. ALPA (and others) made it way too complicated with weird, confusing formulas, in an effort they say, to be fair. Reality is, it was an effort to screw someone out of something. They just came up with a way to make the numbers lie for them.

That said, oldie, and the rest of you guys saying how flawed the alpa merger policy is....

Why didn't you guys ever try to change the merger policy? Why didn't you protest prior to commencing the use of said policy with the west. Why didn't you ever even mention your opinions of merger policy prior to he Nicolau decision coming out? Why did your side rejoice when Nicolau was chosen as arbitrator then later call him a senior old man?

You had no problem with the process nor the arbitrator until you didn't get your way. Now you're crying like spoiled children and blaming everyone else for your troubles. You claim to be so much more mature and so much more professional than the west side but you accept no responsibility for your own actions, or lack thereof.

 

[tazz]

There are reasons are why the ONLY number that is truly comparable is DOH. It doesn't change, yet is still of indicator of experience as measured by time on the job. Airlines aren't the only industry to use it, either. It's really the only non-arbitrary number that is comparable throughout the company. ALPA (and others) made it way too complicated with weird, confusing formulas, in an effort they say, to be fair. Reality is, it was an effort to screw someone out of something. They just came up with a way to make the numbers lie for them.

That said, oldie, and the rest of you guys saying how flawed the alpa merger policy is....

Why didn't you guys ever try to change the merger policy? Why didn't you protest prior to commencing the use of said policy with the west. Why didn't you ever even mention your opinions of merger policy prior to he Nicolau decision coming out? Why did your side rejoice when Nicolau was chosen as arbitrator then later call him a senior old man?

You had no problem with the process nor the arbitrator until you didn't get your way. Now you're crying like spoiled children and blaming everyone else for your troubles. You claim to be so much more mature and so much more professional than the west side but you accept no responsibility for your own actions, or lack thereof.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

That said, oldie, and the rest of you guys saying how flawed the alpa merger policy is....

Why didn't you guys ever try to change the merger policy? Why didn't you protest prior to commencing the use of said policy with the west. Why didn't you ever even mention your opinions of merger policy prior to he Nicolau decision coming out? Why did your side rejoice when Nicolau was chosen as arbitrator then later call him a senior old man?

You had no problem with the process nor the arbitrator until you didn't get your way. Now you're crying like spoiled children and blaming everyone else for your troubles. You claim to be so much more mature and so much more professional than the west side but you accept no responsibility for your own actions, or lack thereof.

ALPA had no merger policy. It changed every merger. It STILL doesn't have one. Using outside arbitrators means you don't have a policy yourself.

The East guys, I guess, expected a reasonable, intelligent man. They got an old, senile man with some kind point to make.

They weren't MY actions, so you can just get over that statement.

Doesn't matter. Nic is dead.