US Pilot Labor Thread for the week 6/6 to 6/13

[oldiebutgoody]

I'm not a pilot for the East or the West. I'm not cheering for either side.

Nevertheless, it's obvious that a group of represented employees can't avoid a decision rendered in binding arbitration with which they disagree simply by replacing their union. When it's all over, the East pilots will have spent a lot of money for nothin. And they'll still be stuck with the Nic award.

It's too bad that the Seeham firm has led these East pilots so astray. But it's not the first pied piper firm to fleece its clients and give them bad advice.

What I still can't believe is that some West pilots would engage in such outrageous behaviour (alleged in the lawsuit filed by the USAPA) even though the West pilots were gonna prevail as to seniority. By doing so, they may have snatched a partial defeat from the jaws of complete victory. They'll still get the Nic award, but they'll likely be out some money to pay the bills of the East pilots.

I'd bet you'll be wrong on the Nic stuff. It'll all be over soon!

 

[FWAAA]

I'd bet you'll be wrong on the Nic stuff. It'll all be over soon!

Hope springs eternal.

I may be wrong. If I am, I'll be here with the apolgies.

My strong suspicion, however, is that instead, I'll be attempting to resist the compelling urge to post "I told you so" in really large font.

 

[Phoenix]

"Keep on posting smiley faces, it suits you." Thanks...I will. What else could one properly do with a post that ties "The proof that they are delusional"....to... "reading the ALPA merger policy"!?. I can honestly begin to see where the roots of delusion might grow from now.

Delusional is:

1. USAPA thinking they would get 200 cards?
2. Prater thinking he would wake up to find it was just a nightmare?
3. Demanding to be heard while refusing to speak/vote?
4. A west pilot calling the USAPA hotline 3,000 times in one month to announce they still don't want to vote (It makes them feel at home)?
5. Calling ALPA 3,000 times to see if they still don't care?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Merger Guidelines?

Sounds like "Pirates of the Carribean" and the Pirate Code. Not really rules,more like guidelines.

Hey theres and idea why not have Johnny Depp be the arbitrator??? I mean could it be worse?

The last one was more like Captain Queeg. Johnny Depp seems like a reasonable choice in comparison.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Delusional is:

1. USAPA thinking they would get 200 cards?
2. Prater thinking he would wake up to find it was just a nightmare?
3. Demanding to be heard while refusing to speak/vote?
4. A west pilot calling the USAPA hotline 3,000 times in one month to announce they still don't want to vote (It makes them feel at home)?
5. Calling ALPA 3,000 times to see if they still don't care?

You forgot to mention another:
6. Thinking that sending feces in the mail would help your position.

 

[EastUS]

Merger Guidelines?

Sounds like "Pirates of the Carribean" and the Pirate Code. Not really rules,more like guidelines.

Hey theres and idea why not have Johnny Depp be the arbitrator??? I mean could it be worse?

"Merger Guidelines" and "the Pirate Code"?...Hmmm...I'm thinking that's an entirely unfair comparison sir..in that, (as I'm sure you and most already know) traditional pirates actually DID have a functional Code I'll note that said codes provided far more than "guidelines" as well. I'll further guess that there was little room, nor concern for any "arbitration" Last but not least= I've ZERO doubts as to how "I want the captain seat...and most of all, I want every single east pilot to pay for it" would have been quickly, and properly handled

An example =

The Articles of John Philips:
1. Every man shall obey civil Command; the Captain shall have one full share and a half in all Prizes; the Master, Carpenter, Boatswain and Gunner shall have one Share and quarter.
2. If any man shall offer to run away, or keep any Secret from the Company, he shall be marroon'd with one Bottle of Powder, one Bottle of Water, one small Arm and shot.
3. If any Many shall steel any Thing in the Company, or game, to the Value of a Piece of Eight, he shall be marroon'd or shot.
If at any Time we should meet another Marrooner (that is Pyrate) that Man that shall sign his Articles without the Consent of our Company, shall suffer such Punishment as the Captain and Company shall think fit.
4. That Man that shall strike another whilst these Articles are in force, shall receive Mose's Law (that is 40 stripes lacking one) on the bare Back.
5. That Man that shall snap his Arms, or smoak Tobacco in the Hold, without a cap to his Pipe, or carry a Candle lighted without a Lanthorn, shall suffer the same Punishment as in the former Article.
6. That Man that shall not keep his Arms clean, fit for an Engagement, or neglect his Business, shall be cut off from his Share, and suffer such other Punishment as the Captain and the Company shall think fit.
7. If any Man shall lose a Joint in time of an Engagement he shall have 400 pieces of Eight; if a limb 800.
8. If at any time you meet with a prudent Woman, that Man that offers to meddle with her, without her Consent, shall suffer present Death.

PS: If/when any insane arbitration's to be involved?..I'm good with Johhny Depp as well....Couldn't be any worse, or more irrational, and would be far more entertaining.

 

[peasant]

Wow. Just wow.

I'm not an American, so way out of the loop on all this stuff.

But what would happen if (say) 40% of pilots refused to pay agency/ union fees? Would a court force USAIR to downsize that much - basically shutting the airline down? Would USAPA have to take USAIR management to court to force them to reduce the size of the airline by firing the 40%?

The mind boggles at the cluster**** that looks to have happened.

 

[checksix]

USAPA Update
June 11, 2008



The USAPA Board of Pilot Representatives (BPR) re-convened its Meeting at 9:00 am today at the Ramada Airport South and Conference Center in Charlotte.

The meeting convened in Executive session as the Merger Committee presented a methodology for the development of a comprehensive Date of Hire seniority list that included a set of conditions and restrictions that would be appropriate for the implementation of the list. The BPR passed a resolution approving the creation of a Date of Hire list with conditions and restrictions as presented by the Merger Committee.

Whereas the BPR accepted the conditions and restrictions that were constructed to ensure a fair and equitable implementation of a Date of Hire list, the BPR also passed a resolution that directs the Merger Committee, working in concert with the Negotiating Advisory Committee, to create contract language necessary to ensure implementation of a Date of Hire list that includes the conditions and restrictions approved by the BPR.

The BPR passed a resolution that acknowledges the requirement that the US Airways pilots begin wearing the new uniform by July 1, and also passed a resolution that references FAA Advisory Circular 8900.1, Section B which recommends the use of the company name or a pronounceable abbreviation of the company name as the call sign.

The BPR also received a briefing from the Communications Committee and along with the Pilot-4-Pilot Committee Chairman, discussed a Communications strategy as we prepare to enter into direct contract negotiations. The BPR fully recognizes that pilot support is paramount to any successful contract negotiations.

All BPR Resolutions will be posted in the Members Only section of the USAPA web site. Business was completed and the meeting adjourned at 3:30 pm EDT.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Merger Guidelines?

Sounds like "Pirates of the Carribean" and the Pirate Code. Not really rules,more like guidelines.

Don't get fooled by the verbal tricks, Bob. ALPA has a merger policy that defines the process - the two merger committees attempt to negotiate a "fair and equitable" combined list. If both MC's agree that negotiation is at a stalemate, it goes to "final and binding" arbitration. That policy has been subjected to legal challenge and been upheld.

Contained within the policy are guidelines for the MC's - no windfalls, etc. These are the goals that the MC's should keep in mind and strive to meet as they perform their duties under the merger policy.

Apparently some get confused when guidelines/goals are included within the policy.

Jim

 

[Megasnoop]

I thought you were more concerned with representing the west, but I see it's all about dues/money. It's similar to your C&Bs where your quest for DOH is higher on the list than promoting airline safety. You said we broke the law, you broke an agreement. You subverted the process of arbitration. You'll do it again when it suits your needs. The west can't trust you. I trust when you vote on a contract, you'll be including the west's interests as well. You promised you are for "all Airways pilots." How about sending out some reps to discuss the "error" of our ways? Perhaps we can be enlightened. Perhaps you can tell us how much you are going to "help" us.

What agreement did we break, Food? It wasn't USAPA that agreed to arbitration. It was ALPA that subverted the process of arbitration, Food. Why did it take ALPA 8 months to give the list to Parker? They didn't want to lose the property. They lost it anyway. So I guess you refuse to be a member, so I guess you don't get to vote. Read the USAPA C&BLs. You could have your own Rep if you didn't threaten anyone who applied for the position. Hint, read the lawsuit. It spells it out. You want to be enlightened, then send a Rep back to make your case.

For those of you who watch "RED EYE" at 2AM on FNC, there's a guy on named Andy Levy. He does a half time and rap up report on the show, pointing out all the errors the panel and guests make. Here's my version of Andy for this thread:

1. USAPA DOES have the funding to follow through.
2. That matter about the person from Nevada on fraudulent mortgages. He's in deep doo-doo, whoever he is, if it's true.
3. CLEARDIRECT: Sorry, guy. Breaking postal machines with rocks sent through the mail and sending HAZ-MAT (feces) through the mail probably IS against the law.
4. OLDCROW: there aren't enough former Trump (AKA EAL) and Empire pilots alive to have much chance of changing the current list, even if it were legal to modify a 20-year old list, which it isn't. But at least the Trump and Empire pilots get a forum. The West guys refuse to even be represented.
5. FOOD: in the end, we ALL get terminated. And the way this airline is headed, it could be sooner, not later.
6. Westies: ALPA and Prater are the ones that screwed you. Why no DFR against them?
7. Lvn737s: No one was threatened? YHGTBKM! Read the lawsuit, if your attention span is long enough.
8. OLDIE: I think it's about time to give it up with these west guys. They're never going to get it.
9. EASTUS: You're right. No DUES=No membership=No good standing=No input=No Representation=No vote. And if you refuse to be represented, it's hard to sue for DFR.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Don't get fooled by the verbal tricks, Bob. ALPA has a merger policy that defines the process - the two merger committees attempt to negotiate a "fair and equitable" combined list. If both MC's agree that negotiation is at a stalemate, it goes to "final and binding" arbitration. That policy has been subjected to legal challenge and been upheld.

Contained within the policy are guidelines for the MC's - no windfalls, etc. These are the goals that the MC's should keep in mind and strive to meet as they perform their duties under the merger policy.

Apparently some get confused when guidelines/goals are included within the policy.

Jim

ALPA calls it a merger "policy". but it's not. It works differently each time, but ALWAYS goes to arbitration. The methods SHOULD be spelled out, with only minor issues requiring outside interpretation.

We know, Jim, that you are a BIG ALPA fan, but in this instance it was the lawyers that said the policy was "more like guidelines".

ALPA should add three initials to their name, IGM, for "I've Got Mine"

No windfalls, huh?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Wow. Just wow.

I'm not an American, so way out of the loop on all this stuff.

But what would happen if (say) 40% of pilots refused to pay agency/ union fees? Would a court force USAIR to downsize that much - basically shutting the airline down? Would USAPA have to take USAIR management to court to force them to reduce the size of the airline by firing the 40%?

The mind boggles at the cluster**** that looks to have happened.

nowhere does it say that it would have to be all ay once. As soon as the heads start to roll, the payments will roll in.

 

[Pi brat]

ALPA calls it a merger "policy". but it's not. It works differently each time, but ALWAYS goes to arbitration. The methods SHOULD be spelled out, with only minor issues requiring outside interpretation.

We know, Jim, that you are a BIG ALPA fan, but in this instance it was the lawyers that said the policy was "more like guidelines".

ALPA should add three initials to their name, IGM, for "I've Got Mine"

No windfalls, huh?

Jim can tell us if he a big ALPA fan or not, but from his ALPA web postings I never thought he was. He took on many in US ALPA, especially around the time of LOA 93 and the pension give away, if my memory serves correctly.

I think he just likes being the devil's advocate.

I agree with a lot things you say Jim, but funny the thing is that you only seem to come down on your fellow co-workers, and remain quiet about the west antics.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Jim can tell us if he a big ALPA fan or not, but from his ALPA web postings I never thought he was. He took on many in US ALPA, especially around the time of LOA 93 and the pension give away, if my memory serves correctly.

I think he just likes being the devil's advocate.

I agree with a lot things you say Jim, but funny the thing is that you only seem to come down on your fellow co-workers, and remain quiet about the west antics.

He was an ALPA committee member in CLT, working alongside one of the "trustees" chosen by the MEC to oversee PHL. I'd pretty much consider him an ALPA "insider". There ARE a lot of disgruntled ALPA insiders, though.

He DOES present some thoughtful arguments, sometimes even backed up by numbers, which is very informative.


But, I digress....

 

[nic4us]

I call 'em like I see 'em.

When anyone, with far less work experience and years of service, seeks to replace another with much more of both.....I have to credit the former with a full abundance of "It's all about MEEEEEEE....." To my mind?....How anyone could try and 'spin" such otherwise speaks little for having "principles" of any kind. I will never understand theslightest moral basis for "relative seniority", which to me, is as unprincipled a notion as I've ever seen. We all have our different opinions. I don't equate opinions with "principles"....of course..that's just my "opinion"

You are so correct, but you have no understanding of the west demographic. I am a 20 year west a320 captain. I have been captain almost 12 years. DOH puts over 250 pilots furloughed at the time of the merger with far less LOS ahead of me. The proposed conditions and restrictions only make matters worse for my situation. This is no "spin" look it up. I lost with relative senority, but will be devasted by DOH. Those lacking "Principles" are the USAPA reps who who wish to take from me and my co-workers. The "Moral basis"I have for relative senority is derived from my conviction to honor my agreements.