US Pilots Labor Discussion

[No Land Green]

THAT IS ONE OF THE DUMBEST THINGS EVER WRITTEN ON THESE BOARDS. ESPECIALLY IF IT'S ON VIDEO.

NICDOA
NPJB

It may be true that Crew News Video's are not "case law", however, Parker/Kirby keep spouting to the contrary as to what some say here is a done deal......

 

[No Land Green]

Jetz, interesting facts provided by your ual mec. Great info on the trend of alpa lately.

Thank you for the info.

""UAL-MEC Membership Committee Report
October 2010
Statistics
As of September 29, 2010, ALPA International’s records show that there are 7,652 pilots on the
United Seniority List. These include 5,457 Active members, 269 on Military Leave, 76 on
Personal Leave, 160 Non-members, 1,417 Furloughed, and 33 Executive Inactive, and 60
Executive Active pilots.

I can't wait to see how the SLI goes down for UAL. Look at all those UAL Pilots who "don't bring a job to the table"......1,417 furloughed+269 on Military Leave+76 on personal leave.........Oh wait, ALPA changed the rules again for UAL......LOS......LMAO, that was a smart move ALPA.........

 

[aquagreen73s]

I can't wait to see how the SLI goes down for UAL.

It will look a lot like NWA/DAL which looked a lot like AAA/AWA.

 

[No Land Green]

It will look a lot like NWA/DAL which looked a lot like AAA/AWA.

I wouldn't bet any money on that assumption.....Can you tell us why ALPA changed the merger policy after the NWA/DAL but prior to the UAL/CAL?

 

[nic4us]

MDA was mainline. Another misconception. Another reason Nicolau blew it.

Okay, MDA was mainline, furloughed mainline, junior to furloughed mainline actually, but since your bankrupt company was in such dire straights and couldn't even get an operating cert together for the furloughed b scale operation, your arguement that MDA was mainline actually holds some water.

Problem is, Nic got it right, because your furloughed pilots now working MDA mainline were junior to your furloughed pilots who elected not to, and would not be allowed to leepfrog their positions on the AAA list.

So either way, MDA pilots were all junior to Monda, Monda was the junior pilot on the certified AAA list. DOH staples 85% of the West pilots below Monda.

 

[No Land Green]

Okay, MDA was mainline, furloughed mainline, junior to furloughed mainline actually, but since your bankrupt company was in such dire straights and couldn't even get an operating cert together for the furloughed b scale operation, your arguement that MDA was mainline actually holds some water.

Problem is, Nic got it right, because your furloughed pilots now working MDA mainline were junior to your furloughed pilots who elected not to, and would not be allowed to leepfrog their positions on the AAA list.

So either way, MDA pilots were all junior to Monda, Monda was the junior pilot on the certified AAA list. DOH staples 85% of the West pilots below Monda.

I believe MDA didn't meet the test for separate operating certificate per the FAA, hence mainline, another failed management attempt to screw pilots.

OK, here we go again with the fictitious 85% number.......1531 AWA Pilots of 1893 were hired after Joe Monda. That's just over 80% below Monda, but MIXED with other AAA Pilots whose DOH spans Monda to 8/30/2004. The "certified list" as you state is in dispute also. Now that ALPA has changed it's merger policy to include LOS, we will see how the UAL Furloughed Pilots make out in their merger with CAL..........Again, your beloved ALPA is NOT helping your cause by changing what you consider the "Gold Standard" of Merger Policies.....

 

[USA320Pilot]

Oil Prices Threaten Airline Profitability. Did USAPA/Pilots miss Our Opportunity to Negotiate a Pay Raise During Profitability?

See Story

 

[cleardirect]

Dude this ain't rocket science.

The court held that the case is not ripe for adjudication. Their reasoning is as follows

1. You have not been harmed because there is no CBA.
2. Once there is a CBA if you feel you have been harmed you may then file your lawsuit. No SOL problems.
3. You may have an unquestionably ripe lawsuit once you have a CBA.
4. Your fears may not be realized because you don't know what the final product may be and it may not be the NIC.
5. Once you have a CBA the test is then: Did the union proposal fit in a wide range of reasonableness.

Apply your logic to the MDA case.

How is that case ripe and not Addington? Could it be that they are wasting their time and money? BTW where is that case? The last thing filed was in July 2010. Could it be that case died and no one bother to tell the MDA pilots?

5. Is it reasonable to put furloughed pilots at the bottom of a seniority list? It has happened before, most of the time.

 

[cleardirect]

THAT IS ONE OF THE DUMBEST THINGS EVER WRITTEN ON THESE BOARDS. ESPECIALLY IF IT'S ON VIDEO AND THE PERSON MAKING THE STATEMENT IS A COPR REP.

NICDOA
NPJB

When Parker says on crew news video that the east had no plan to come out of BK and that US Airways was going to liquidate that is the truth and we could take that into court?

That any job the east had past about a month is a windfall for the east.

 

[doh nogo]

5. Once you have a CBA the test is then: Did the union proposal fit in a wide range of reasonableness.

USAPA was as free to abandon NIC as ALPA was.

This is where I disagree and think you got it completely wrong.

You are right in that it's not rocket science.

The test will be if the contract, that does not include the nic, harms the west as we fear. We fear a staple job. We fear the east taking 100% of the attrition when you do not own 100% of the attrition. We fear furloughed pilots taking jobs (captain or otherwise) from our non-furloughed pilots. We fear being furlough fodder for your furloughees. We fear you taking all growth claiming that until you are back to the "glory days" it is not growth but rather "replacement." We fear you taking a lions share of any contract improvements.

Cross any of those lines (which ANY DOH contract scheme will) and you will have the magic "harms the west as they fear" test covered in spades. And regardless of that you won't find any jury who would find any of that within a wide range of reasonableness. Either way you would lose. You can't formulate C&R's that would mitigate that. If you did it would look worse than the Nic for you anyway.

And they NEVER said you could abandon the Nic just like ALPA could. They said you are as free to do so as ALPA was. That little two letter qualifier changes the entire meaning from how you read it. Now read this carefully and try to understand... ALPA was not free to abandon the Nic WITHOUT consent of the west. They tried to broker a deal so as not to lose dues money. But they couldn't do it without our consent. In case you missed it... WE DO NOT CONSENT. Plus there is no more WE to negotiate with. You already took care of that, sealing your own fate. And the fact that ALPA tried and failed just proves our point. If they could have they would have. They couldn't so they didn't. Neither can USAPA.

I know many of you like to interpret things much differently and often read meaning into things that were not said. That's your prerogative. But me and the rest of the west are fine sitting here and waiting for the courts to tell us who is right and who is wrong. You are free to suffer unnecessarily on LOA93 as long as you like. But you are not going to convince anyone here that you are right. You are not going to bully anyone into capitulation. The courts will decide it, not you.

 

[CallawayGolf]

That any job the east had past about a month is a windfall for the east.

or about a month before since HP was making AAA payrolls back then to prop them up until the "merger" was completed.

 

[Barrister]

When Parker says on crew news video that the east had no plan to come out of BK and that US Airways was going to liquidate that is the truth and we could take that into court?

That any job the east had past about a month is a windfall for the east.

Of Course you can take it into court if you pass this simple 2 part test:

1. Is it relevant to the issues and
2. Does the probative value outweight the prejudical effect.

I say you don't even get pass the first one....but it depends on your compliaint. When you file DFR II
what will be your allegation in the complaint that makes that relevant.

You: Judge we want to introduce evidence that US had no plan.
Me: Objection: This isn't relevant!!
Judge: Well You, how is that relevant if your claim is that USAPA did not represent you?
You: ??????????????
Judge: Objection sustained......

See how that works now!!

NICDOA
NPJB

 

[Pi brat]

or about a month before since HP was making AAA payrolls back then to prop them up until the "merger" was completed.

Good thing they did, huh? Sure has softened the blow for you guys and kept most of you employed.

 

[No Land Green]

Good thing they did, huh? Sure has softened the blow for you guys and kept most of you employed.

Didn't US Airways pay off some of AWA ATSB loan? This is getting comical again.....

 

[CallawayGolf]

Good thing they did, huh? Sure has softened the blow for you guys and kept most of you employed.

Yes, the "merger" or technically a reverse acquisition of AAA by HP was a good move for the company, the shareholders, and the unsecured creditors of AAA. It would also be a good thing for the pilots of both pre-merger companies if only the east pilots would honor the TA/NIC arbitration and move to get a new JCBA. Keeping jobs that would have been lost through Chapter 7 has be a tremendous benefit to all AAA employees, no doubt.