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

[Flyz4food]

No, only the West's minimum fleet count would go away. It's in the East's CBA which is still inforce and not amendable, except by TA, until 2009.

OOPS. There's no one there to defend it, by their own choice! That sucks!

So much for the "protect ALL USairways pilots"

 

[AAA73Pilot]

No problem = At least it's somewhat more subtle BS..... than "letters" literally stuffed with the same. I'd call this progress after a fashion 🙄

I love how these things get started. Besides the mentioned letters is VERY old news.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Why does ANYONE believe ANYTHING in these threads? I'd wait and see just what they come up with before I got all worked up over it. Remember, it STILL has to go to membership ratification!

It is the usual cast of characters having fun. When it's a slow day, lets just make something up and see what happens. Gotta love it though. If you think anything on this board is anywhere near reality, hhmmm Want to buy some beach front property?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

So much for the "protect ALL USairways pilots"

You know as well as I that you can't "protect ALL USairways pilots". Someone is gonna wind up unhappy. That's the way these things work. If folks ALL wind up equally unhappy, the system has worked.

First, let me say that my comment was only in response to a scenario which I thought was pretty poor in the first place. To intimate that USAPA wouldn't consider the ramifications of it's decision to negotiate is pretty silly. Then, the poster used nonsensical reasoning, which I had to point out.

I also have to point out that if you have these concerns, you should address them to your represetatives. Oh, that's right, you have none, but that is by YOUR CHOICE. The offer has been made and still stands for the West to provide some.

 

[ableoneable]

You know as well as I that you can't "protect ALL USairways pilots". Someone is gonna wind up unhappy. That's the way these things work. If folks ALL wind up equally unhappy, the system has worked.

First, let me say that my comment was only in response to a scenario which I thought was pretty poor in the first place. To intimate that USAPA wouldn't consider the ramifications of it's decision to negotiate is pretty silly. Then, the poster used nonsensical reasoning, which I had to point out.

I also have to point out that if you have these concerns, you should address them to your represetatives. Oh, that's right, you have none, but that is by YOUR CHOICE. The offer has been made and still stands for the West to provide some.

That's right we have no "representative."

A rep who will be apponted, not elected.

A rep whom we can not recall if we disagree with his/her positon.

"Participation" in a union where it has been pointed out time and time again that we will have no say regardles because the east has the votes and the west will have to live with whatever the east pilots decide anyway.

So again what is the difference between having a "rep" handpicked by the east and having to rep at all?

As far as "nonsensensical reasoning" please point that out.


COMMENT DELETED BY MODERATOR

 

[oldiebutgoody]

That's right we have no "representative."

A rep who will be apponted, not elected.

A rep whom we can not recall if we disagree with his/her positon.

"Participation" in a union where it has been pointed out time and time again that we will have no say regardles because the east has the votes and the west will have to live with whatever the east pilots decide anyway.

So again what is the difference between having a "rep" handpicked by the east and having to rep at all?

As far as "nonsensensical reasoning" please point that out.
DELETED BY MODERATOR

I am PRESENTLY employed at LCC, as well as elsewhere. I guess you haven't read the C&BLs on the USAPA website. It would answer your questions concerning the remainder of your post.

Whatever contract the NAC and negotiator come up with will have to pass by a MAJORITY of the USAPA members. Not having representation does not help your case at all. How can you argue with that?

DELETED BY MODERATOR

 

[AAA73Pilot]

I am very curious as to what USAPA's negotiating plan is.

If anyone knew the real answer, they certainly wouldn't post it here, 'ya think?

Currently the best thing we have going for us is the minimum fleet count mandated by the transition agreement.

The min fleet count doesn't mean diddly in the TA. In a way it doesn't mean anything in the east CBA either. What really matters is min block hours and how many pilots does it take to fly them. Maybe I'll get to draw reserve guarantee and stay home. Now that would be good.

If USAPA tries to disavow the T.A. the minimum fleet count goes away.

Only one side goes away. Hindsight being 20/20, I would say ALPA screwed the pooch again by not including min block hours in the TA.

Near the top of the company's wish list will be a requirement for a reduction or an elimination of the minimum fleet count.

It's going to get real ugly real soon. No doubt about it.

USAPA's timing is impeccable as always. The fact that they hope to realize gains in workrules and pay in this envoronment belies thier poor planning and execution.

The timing was handed to us. We'll be lucky to all have jobs if management continues on the the old path. It's now a game of chicken amongst all the carriers except SWA.

Eighteen to twenty-four months ago gains were probably achievable. With oil in the $120 to $130/bbl range and a crackspread of about $30 to $40/bbl. gains, without deep concessions elsewhere, are no longer possible.

The company is very likely to open with a concessionary proposal couched as an exchange for furloughing less rather than more.

USAPA would be well advised to steer clear of the negotiating table at this point in time. For that reason alone I expect that they are in a hurry to get to the table. The results should be interesting to say the least.

While you may be right about steering clear of negotiations, it's not going to happen. Remember, we're supposed to represent the west contract for their section 6. You thought you were going to gain advantage by it. Kinda takes the wind out of our divided pilot groups sails, don't you think? Can you spell concession again? Luckily management only wants to negotiate a joint contract. I have to say it again. either a west section 6 or a joint, either way it's going to be real real real ugly.

 

[Flyz4food]

You know as well as I that you can't "protect ALL USairways pilots". Someone is gonna wind up unhappy. That's the way these things work. If folks ALL wind up equally unhappy, the system has worked.

First, let me say that my comment was only in response to a scenario which I thought was pretty poor in the first place. To intimate that USAPA wouldn't consider the ramifications of it's decision to negotiate is pretty silly. Then, the poster used nonsensical reasoning, which I had to point out.

I also have to point out that if you have these concerns, you should address them to your represetatives. Oh, that's right, you have none, but that is by YOUR CHOICE. The offer has been made and still stands for the West to provide some.

Sir, as long as it's the East that isn't unhappy then it's fine. Right now your system works for you. It may be true we don't have a rep in place to date, that perhaps can one day change. What have you shown that would lead any of us to believe we will not constantly return to "do over" when you aren't happy again?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Sir, as long as it's the East that isn't unhappy then it's fine. Right now your system works for you. It may be true we don't have a rep in place to date, that perhaps can one day change. What have you shown that would lead any of us to believe we will not constantly return to "do over" when you aren't happy again?

This really isn't an East vs. West thing. We are ALL individuals. If one is treated unfairly, then we ALL are. The fact remains that nobody can make everything work for everybody, therefore negotiations have to work for the MAJORITY. Especially since the majority must vote for it. There are unhappy pilots on the East side too. By hiding behind this East vs. West thing we are getting NOTHING accomplished.

 

[nycbusdriver]

"Minimum fleet numbers" is just another way of saying "No Furlough Clause." We all know how well those have worked historically. The company will find a way to protect its existence despite any contract or transition agreement.

 

[CactusFlyr]

This really isn't an East vs. West thing. We are ALL individuals. If one is treated unfairly, then we ALL are. The fact remains that nobody can make everything work for everybody, therefore negotiations have to work for the MAJORITY. Especially since the majority must vote for it. There are unhappy pilots on the East side too. By hiding behind this East vs. West thing we are getting NOTHING accomplished.

Your USAPA bylaws scream East vs West. Taking away the anti-west stuff would be a good start. You know what I am referring to.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Your USAPA bylaws scream East vs West. Taking away the anti-west stuff would be a good start. You know what I am referring to.

Oh, you mean the part about fairness. That's what USAPA is all about. Why would we get rid of that?

Spare us the diatribe about Nicolau and how the West saved the East stuff.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Your USAPA bylaws scream East vs West. Taking away the anti-west stuff would be a good start. You know what I am referring to.

Actually, from my perspective, I don't see it. I do know what you're referring to, which is anti-east. Sorry, I'll pass.

 

[boeingtamer]

I am very curious as to what USAPA's negotiating plan is.

I spoke with a Neg Commtee Rep in ops recently as he was going home from CLT.

He said:

• Looking for a quick contract. Weeks not months.
• Very short duration due to current economic climate. Two years probable.
• Will have to use most of what ALPA already negotiated... due time available.
• Probably will be labor rates equal to current industry average... for example Group 2 (737,320) Captain top-of-scale about $150/hr
• Most of West contract is better and many features are in ALPA negotiated sections TA'ed.
• Holiday pay ( 150% ) is his personal "must have".
• Meetings and negotiations scheduled with company in next 3 weeks.

That's all I remember. We asked about innovative changes and he said that company is afraid of things they can't quantify costs for now so in the interests of getting a contract... in both USAPA and Company's interests... this will look like what ALPA was working on.

 

[CactusFlyr]

Oh, you mean the part about fairness. That's what USAPA is all about. Why would we get rid of that?

Spare us the diatribe about Nicolau and how the West saved the East stuff.

Never mind. You are like arguing with a Democrat; Double standards, spin on anything and character assassination are your MO. I said nothing about you being a week or so from the street but if you wish, I will.