US Pilots Labor Discussion 6/10- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[bigbusdrvr]

Correct as far as I know about CO. I don't think Avis was ever involved with TPG. But working for a company which TPG owns a chunk of (stock) is not the same as working at TPG. To the best of my knowledge Siegel never worked at TPG so didn't come from there.



Isn't that basically what the Spirit pilots are saying - "taking care of our passengers" is not struck work. Yet, if 1 or 2% of those passengers decide to take US ABC-CLT-(Caribbean) next trip after riding US during a Spirit strike how is that not "damaging their franchise"? Just ironic to be so dead set against doing struck work, even against the wishes of the striking pilots, yet happily carry those passengers so one's own company can get more revenue at the expense of the struck franchise - revenue that could be used to get more in contract negotiations with one's own company.

If you're serious about not doing struck work, refuse to carry anyone using a Spirit ticket - isn't that the work of the striking pilots?

Jim

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

AS usual Jim, your long in the tooth with your rants , short on the truth......

Davey was in bed with TPG as much as I draw a check from Usairways, Work there or get Paid from there....to me no different, to you I dont know.....

As far as struck work goes, your alpa sent a letter saying to fly it. so save your bravado for another venu.......

 

[BoeingBoy]

Davey was in bed with TPG...

Depends on how you defing "in bed with" I guess - he certainly worked for a company that TPG owned a big chunk of (CO, not Avis). However, everything I said was true - Siegel went from NW to CO, where he was President of Express Ops when he went to Avis, then came to US. Oldie said he "came" from TPG and I merely pointed out that as far as I know he never was a TPG employee and came from Avis to US. As CO Express President, he took orders from mainline management, just like the Express management at US. Or is Flannery (US President of Express Operations) "in bed" with Fidelity.

Unless, of course, you have some documented proof that Siegel was "in bed" with TPG while at CO and Avis. Otherwise I guess we know who's short on truth....

Jim

 

[nic4us]

Speaking of this I had a BIG thought. Lets say Parker puts at least some decent money on the table.
I don't have the exact numbers but lets say that we have 4000 pilots. 1700+- out West and 2300 +-
out East. Lets say a TA passes with 4000 voting and 3000 OR MORE VOTE FOR THE TA........in other
words, half of the WEST votes for something that does NOT contain the NIC. How does that affect your
DFR suit. Is the angry FO club out West gonna have all of the Captains on board when they know that at MOST
20-30 guys want PHX and the rest of us will never go West. Better take a poll in your own backyard!!!!!
Scary stuff man!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHO YA GONNA CALL!!!!!!!!!!

NPJB

First mistake you are making is that all pilots are usapa members and even get to vote.

There are some 500+ West pilots who never joined the fake union. In fact they are registered objectors who still retain their rights to the arbitrated award, and the contracts they had as "pilots represented by the West Mec" who entered into contracts with "the company" and the "pilots represented by the East Mec". Ironic part is the fake union still has to represent them.

Break your contracts, pass anything other than the Nic, get sued, waste money, lose "unquestionably ripe" DFR (or breach of contract lawsuit if you happen to be the company).

Does not matter if you convince some West pilots to go along with your scheme. You would have to convince all West pilots to buy off, or any remaining can still sue.

Get it yet, you are not getting DOH, DOH +C&Rs, Nic + fences, or any other usapa contrived scheme.

The Nic, unaltered, unmodified, to its terms. Anything less, I know of a federal judge, who has seen usapa in action, who might be willing to issue an injunction stopping the implementation of any ratified CBA that does not contain the Nic. Cleary, Seeham et al, did not disrespect any federal judges in recent history did they?

 

[Barrister]

First mistake you are making is that all pilots are usapa members and even get to vote.

There are some 500+ West pilots who never joined the fake union. In fact they are registered objectors who still retain their rights to the arbitrated award, and the contracts they had as "pilots represented by the West Mec" who entered into contracts with "the company" and the "pilots represented by the East Mec". Ironic part is the fake union still has to represent them.

Break your contracts, pass anything other than the Nic, get sued, waste money, lose "unquestionably ripe" DFR (or breach of contract lawsuit if you happen to be the company).

Does not matter if you convince some West pilots to go along with your scheme. You would have to convince all West pilots to buy off, or any remaining can still sue.

Get it yet, you are not getting DOH, DOH +C&Rs, Nic + fences, or any other usapa contrived scheme.

The Nic, unaltered, unmodified, to its terms. Anything less, I know of a federal judge, who has seen usapa in action, who might be willing to issue an injunction stopping the implementation of any ratified CBA that does not contain the Nic. Cleary, Seeham et al, did not disrespect any federal judges in recent history did they?

I'm sure the next court will be REALLY impressed with the fact that 500+ did not even
join the union and COULD NOT VOTE OF THEIR CHOOSING!!!!!!!! You are in deeper CaCa
that you know!! So if 800 Westies vote for a contract.....500+ can't even vote and the rest
vote no .....DUDE...your job is going to get MUCH harder not easier....as predicted!!

NPJB

 

[Barrister]

The Nicolau and no money for the west will not pass.

A contract that give 90% of the money to the east and no Nicolau will not pass.

A fair contract means the Nicolau and money. A total package.

My guess is about 10% from each side will move. 170 go east 270 come west. Now tell us who gets hurt in that deal? Most of those 270 will already be captains. The 170 will come from all levels of senority.

I'm just curious......if you guys have already been making 20 bucks an hour more
than U for the last 5 years....you know that old pay parity thing....then by definition
most of the money will flow East in the new contract...as it should!!! And we don't
even have close to 270 Western or mid western commuters now. Where do you get this stuff.
And when PHX closes then 1700 of you migrate East. Been there done that!!

NPJB

 

[A320 Driver]

The Nicolau and no money for the west will not pass.

A contract that give 90% of the money to the east and no Nicolau will not pass.

A fair contract means the Nicolau and money. A total package.

My guess is about 10% from each side will move. 170 go east 270 come west. Now tell us who gets hurt in that deal? Most of those 270 will already be captains. The 170 will come from all levels of senority.

One of the first things to happen in the PI/US merger was pay parity. We didn't get it this time..West pilots supported the company's decision NOT to give it to us and it sounds to me like you want all the benefits of the Nic PLUS equal increases in pay with the East in any future contract. That keeps the East pilot group as "second class citizens" for the remainder of our careers. I don't see how we can EVER have a joint contract that will meet your idea of "fair".

Also, you have NO idea how much movement there would be East/West...NONE. You are right when you say you are guessing with absolutly NOTHING to base it on.

It is doubtful we will ever be able to agree even on the smallest of things, much less a joint contract.

Driver B)

 

[oldiebutgoody]

One of the first things to happen in the PI/US merger was pay parity. We didn't get it this time..West pilots supported the company's decision NOT to give it to us and it sounds to me like you want all the benefits of the Nic PLUS equal increases in pay with the East in any future contract. That keeps the East pilot group as "second class citizens" for the remainder of our careers. I don't see how we can EVER have a joint contract that will meet your idea of "fair".

Also, you have NO idea how much movement there would be East/West...NONE. You are right when you say you are guessing with absolutly NOTHING to base it on.

It is doubtful we will ever be able to agree even on the smallest of things, much less a joint contract.

Driver B)

The good thing is now there is one CBA. I would bet that the whole east/ west veto vote thing is done. They even talked about it in the opinion from the 9th circuit. USAPA has to negotiate a fair contract for ALL pilots.

 

[luvthe9]

One of the first things to happen in the PI/US merger was pay parity. We didn't get it this time..West pilots supported the company's decision NOT to give it to us and it sounds to me like you want all the benefits of the Nic PLUS equal increases in pay with the East in any future contract. That keeps the East pilot group as "second class citizens" for the remainder of our careers. I don't see how we can EVER have a joint contract that will meet your idea of "fair".

Also, you have NO idea how much movement there would be East/West...NONE. You are right when you say you are guessing with absolutly NOTHING to base it on.

It is doubtful we will ever be able to agree even on the smallest of things, much less a joint contract.

Driver B)

We told the West it would come to bite them. And that time is NOW. They will see not much of any W-2 raise, and certainly not the Nic. They lowered the bar on the pay, and laughed. They have gotten poor advice all along, from the shores of the fabled WYE RIVER, to the Nic. Now the pay parity. Their day in the sun has come and GONE........

 

[Phoenix]

...

Does not matter if you convince some West pilots to go along with your scheme. You would have to convince all West pilots to buy off, or any remaining can still sue.
....

I used to think you would be the last one to get it, but now I am leaning toward viewing you as a member of the group that willfully will never get it. Under ALPA, only 50% + 1 of the West pilots had to agree to the ALPA scheme, but now somehow after the NMB certified, and 9th verified real union (notwithstanding your ancient claims of "you won't even get 200 cards), the West now has to agree 100% (to a fake union proposal no less). :blink:

 

[Barrister]

Depends on how you defing "in bed with" I guess - he certainly worked for a company that TPG owned a big chunk of (CO, not Avis). However, everything I said was true - Siegel went from NW to CO, where he was President of Express Ops when he went to Avis, then came to US. Oldie said he "came" from TPG and I merely pointed out that as far as I know he never was a TPG employee and came from Avis to US. As CO Express President, he took orders from mainline management, just like the Express management at US. Or is Flannery (US President of Express Operations) "in bed" with Fidelity.

Unless, of course, you have some documented proof that Siegel was "in bed" with TPG while at CO and Avis. Otherwise I guess we know who's short on truth....

Jim

OK oh wise one....lets define it OK...it's called sitting in the G-V with David Bonderman
plotting on how and when TPG can screw labor....or anyone else for that matter out of
hundreds of millions if not billions of dollars....does that definition work for ya!!!!!!!!!!!

NPJB

 

[pjirish317]

Just a quick question for all (East & West).

This is hypothetical of course

If roughly 1/3 of "West" USAirways pilots are objectors and do not get to vote on a joint contract, and say 1/3 vote yes on a joint contract (if/when one is put out for a vote), and lets say 1/4 "East" USAirways pilots vote no, the other 3/4 vote yes, how would USAPA be liable for DFR, when at least half of "West" MIG's voted for the joint contract? One would think that the objector's have to deal with what the group as a whole decides, along with the remaining "West" USAirways pilots, since roughly 2/3 either didn't care about their future's or voted in favor of a joint contract. How is that harming the group as a whole, and not just about 1/3 that voted yes?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Just a quick question for all (East & West).

This is hypothetical of course

If roughly 1/3 of "West" USAirways pilots are objectors and do not get to vote on a joint contract, and say 1/3 vote yes on a joint contract (if/when one is put out for a vote), and lets say 1/4 "East" USAirways pilots vote no, the other 3/4 vote yes, how would USAPA be liable for DFR, when at least half of "West" MIG's voted for the joint contract? One would think that the objector's have to deal with what the group as a whole decides, along with the remaining "West" USAirways pilots, since roughly 2/3 either didn't care about their future's or voted in favor of a joint contract. How is that harming the group as a whole, and not just about 1/3 that voted yes?

There'll be no DFR. USAPA has to negotiate a FAIR contract for ALL, not just what the west thinks is fair for them. If there's one thing that is obvious, the NIC is NOT fair. If it were even close, we wouldn't be where we are today.

That's the reality.

 

[Phoenix]

There'll be no DFR. USAPA has to negotiate a FAIR contract for ALL, not just what the west thinks is fair for them. If there's one thing that is obvious, the NIC is NOT fair. If it were even close, we wouldn't be where we are today.

That's the reality.

Nic is not fair???!!! (Screams the Nic fan)

Fair is just a concept in the mind of the beholder....(You have no integrity, blah, blah, blah)

Sure, fair is in the mind of the beholder... and of course every milestone that has occurred since Nic has happened because a majority of beholders voted to accomplish what they thought was fair. A majority.. muh-jawr-i-tee

And there is no shortage of dissenters... well actually, by definition, there is a shortage.

 

[cleardirect]

Just a quick question for all (East & West).

This is hypothetical of course

If roughly 1/3 of "West" USAirways pilots are objectors and do not get to vote on a joint contract, and say 1/3 vote yes on a joint contract (if/when one is put out for a vote), and lets say 1/4 "East" USAirways pilots vote no, the other 3/4 vote yes, how would USAPA be liable for DFR, when at least half of "West" MIG's voted for the joint contract? One would think that the objector's have to deal with what the group as a whole decides, along with the remaining "West" USAirways pilots, since roughly 2/3 either didn't care about their future's or voted in favor of a joint contract. How is that harming the group as a whole, and not just about 1/3 that voted yes?

The majority can not decide what the minority thinks is fair. Even if some west pilots vote for a contract. all it takes one west pilot to decide that he was not represented fairly to file a DFR. Read some of the cases. It was not 1/3 of the members hurt. some cases were just a few.

 

[Phoenix]

The majority can not decide what the minority thinks is fair. Even if some west pilots vote for a contract. all it takes one west pilot to decide that he was not represented fairly to file a DFR. Read some of the cases. It was not 1/3 of the members hurt. some cases were just a few.

You are absolutely correct. If you are the only one left who votes against the contract and feels the need to sue for DFR then by all means do it. Set up a website for donations to help with your court costs and retainer for the lawyers. John P., and Lance will be sure to donate. I'll even promise to match every dollar they donate, up to $20