US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
Is that what the "Kirby proposal" had? A320 North of $170? Got a link? I can't find it.
OTTER574
Veteran
- Jan 11, 2009
- 632
- 422
pi brat, you along with some east diehards are hard to follow..old us air pit hub is a perfect example of what some out east may think and what honestly doesn't exist anymore.
Don't fear what you don't have any control of.
How many times have you voted on a contract with lcc within the last 3-4 years under usapa?
Answer is none and under usapa will remain NONE.
Otter
nic4us,
I've had some respect for you and feel that you are one of the brightest west pilots on here(besides LS). Please, Please tell me you don't believe that if we put the Nic as section 22 tomorrow we would have a DL contract the next day, or a even year! Please! Don't let me down.
Well Duh! Has anyone ever doubted that?
OTTER574
Veteran
- Jan 11, 2009
- 632
- 422
kirby proposal is just that pi brat. Call your old alpa reps and come back to me with what they said. I communicated with mine monthly prior to this usapa union abortion and know that the company and alpa was very close to a JOINT CONTRACT that included pay rates I'VE STATED.
Otter
I'm hard to follow? I'm hard to follow? I'm thinking you boys post from the perpetual Happy Hour Bar in PHX!
Simple questions you guys won't/can't answer.
nevergiveup
Veteran
- Nov 30, 2010
- 2,125
- 2,148
You forget that the NIC harms a very large number of East Captains as well. These two groups will never get together, I'd bet my red mare on it!
The Kirby is what was, and is on the table. Oh, you mean the super secret, don't tell anybody, but do we have a deal for you rates? The ones Mr. Scott Kirby said didn't exist? Those rates? You are soooo gullable! What min. fleet and block hours went along with that? What kind of scope? How aobut your good old PBS? You crack me up. I've got some land you might be interested in. Send me a check for a million and I will mail the address. Trust me, it's primo Dude!
"Just weeks from a contract" and Other Urban Myths PDF Print E-mail
Monday, November 08, 2010
Recently, many US Airways East pilots received an unsolicited pamphlet from Leonidas/AOL mailed to their home address. USAPA is investigating separately how the entity responsible for the mailing obtained confidential address information and, perhaps more importantly, who supplied it to them and why. In this communication, we will address directly the rhetoric and fabrication this pamphlet represents as "facts."
You do not have to read much of the Leonidas/AOL pamphlet to find the first fabrication. We can start with the first page, first paragraph, first sentence -- the statement that the JNC was "within weeks of completing a labor contract." If that's the case then they must have had some miracles planned. Let's look at what sections were open and what some of the issues were when negotiations ceased in August 2007. You will see that out of 30 sections, only 11 were complete, and those remaining open contained many contentious issues. Given this, it's hard to believe that it would have been completed in 'weeks' -- but then again weeks can mean anything from 2 weeks to 200 weeks!!
Ignore the rhetoric; here are the facts -- the actual status of each section of the contract when negotiations were suspended. (Following some sections are descriptions of the main items that remained open.) You decide if it looks like a contract was just "weeks" away:
Section 1 - Scope -- Major issues remained -- not even close
Section 2 - Definitions -- Open
Section 3 - Pay -- Far apart from what ALPA proposed and the Kirby proposal
Section 4 - Minimum pay guarantees - Holiday pay, training pay, incentive pay
Section 5 - Expenses -- Per diem, flight pay loss for hotel committee
Section 6 - Moving Expenses -- Closed
Section 7 - Vacation -- Major issues
Section 9 - Misc Flying -- Open
Section 10 - Covered Pilots - Major issues
Section 11 - Training -- Closed
Section 12 - Hours of Service -- Pairing construction, flex, reduced rest
Section 13 - Leaves of absence -- Passes, retirement contributions, misc items
Section 14 - Sick -- Major issues to include payout at retirement
Section 15 - Physical Examinations -- Closed
Section 16 - Worker's Compensation Benefits -- Closed
Section 17 - Missing, Internment, Prisoner or Hostage of War Benefits -- Closed
Section 18 - International -- Duty Limitations
Section 19 - Investigation and Discipline -- Closed
Section 20 - Grievances -- Closed
Section 21 - System Board of Adjustment -- Closed
Section 22 - Seniority -- Closed (This was prior to the Nic award, so it was to be reopened)
Section 23 - Furlough and recall -- Furlough pay and force majeure
Section 24 - Filling of vacancies -- Staffing formula, lock-ons, E190 displacement
Section 25 - Scheduling -- Major issues
Section 26 - General -- Numerous issues
Section 27 - Health and Welfare -- STD, LTD, Retiree medical, numerous other issues
Section 28 - Retirement -- Major issues -- to include DC rate
Section 29 - Agency shop -- Closed
Section 30 - Duration -- Open
In May 2007, the Company presented the JNC with a comprehensive proposal. You may have heard of it -- the Kirby Proposal. As you may recall from previous NAC updates, the Kirby Proposal is essentially the West agreement with an illusory 3% pay increase. We say this because in aggregate the proposal represented an overall reduction in value for former America West pilots. That's right, back in May of 2007, after two years of negotiating, the Company had not moved off of their opening position by one dime. Does that sound strikingly familiar?
How could it be then that, according to the most recent Leonidas/AOL brochure, the JNC was "within weeks of completing a labor contract?" Look at the list of sections above; it's not as if the differences that remained between the parties were of low importance, unless you consider Scope, Rates of Pay, Vacation, Sick, Scheduling and Retirement to be of low importance. So is there some kind of evidence that the Company was prepared to concede on these issues? The short answer -- NO!
The claim that there was an imminent agreement is unsubstantiated in any event; however, the only possible way it could be true is if the JNC intended to capitulate and accept the Kirby Proposal. We have heard loud and clear from you what you think of that document. Proponents of the Kirby Proposal are fond of cherry-picking certain provisions contained in the proposal in an attempt to sell it, but as we have illustrated more than once, there are incredibly onerous elements to the Kirby that should be blatantly unacceptable to every US Airways pilot, and accepting it now will assure us a place at the bottom of our industry for the next eight years.
Last, the authors of the Leonidas/AOL brochure tout -- more of a taunt, actually -- the magnitude of the dollars that we will purportedly lose while we fight for a fair seniority integration. There are primarily three points to consider. First, the NAC has made it absolutely clear that retroactive parity is a ratification issue and that we will not back down on the matter. Second, the calculus that the brochure uses to measure the "lost" pay assumes that the JNC would have gotten their proposed rates rather than the Kirby rates, and the history of negotiations to date tells us that this is beyond unlikely. The difference between the Kirby and the West Agreement, incredibly narrow as it is, is all that would remain at stake. Third, when you consider what hangs in the balance with the seniority dispute and what that means to your paycheck under any contract, it makes the assertions of the Leonidas/AOL pamphlet all the more nonsensical. We are on the right path to an industry-standard contract that contains a fair seniority list based on date-of-hire principles with reasonable conditions and restrictions designed to protect the un-merged career expectations of both Pilot groups. The authors of the Leonidas/AOL brochure want us to change course. It really is that simple.
That said, let's examine the specifics of USAPA's bargaining proposal and compare those facts against the rhetoric and fiction contained in the Leonidas/AOL pamphlet.
First and foremost, the claims presented within the referenced pamphlet constitute a serious misrepresentation of USAPA's seniority proposal and completely ignore the central component of USAPA's proposal, the Conditions and Restrictions, which exist primarily to protect West pilot interests, thereby balancing the interests of the pilot group as a whole. The pamphlet fails to discuss the overwhelming windfall that the Nicolau proposal would provide for most of the West pilots at the expense of the East pilots. Nearly 400 West FOs would upgrade to Captain earlier than premerger -- an average of 4 years earlier -- while more than 800 East FOs would upgrade later than planned, not even including those retiring before they could upgrade. The effect of the Nicolau proposal on the majority of the East pilot group would be devastating. As a quick illustration, note that approximately 450, or close to 70% of all current active West First Officers, would be placed on the seniority list above the current most junior East narrowbody Captain. The most junior of these West First Officers -- hired in 2003 -- would be placed above an East Captain hired in 1987.
The pamphlet further distorts the USAPA proposal by suggesting that the creation of a date-of-hire seniority list will result in the displacement of West pilots from their existing positions. This insinuation is completely false. To the contrary, in fact, a primary feature of the currently proposed Conditions and Restrictions is the creation of a virtual one-way fence for the West that persists for a period of 10 years, as currently proposed. This one-way fence is created through the concept of Protected Positions, serving to preserve West jobs and attrition for West pilots. As time passes and attrition occurs, West pilots have the freedom to exercise their seniority to bid for positions throughout the entire system, whereas East pilots may only bid for existing West positions that West pilots have voluntarily vacated by bidding into East positions. (See the "West Protected Positions" chart below.)
One of the points contained within the pamphlet -- the idea that the Nicolau proposal would have minimal impact on East pilot careers -- is absurd on its face. As airline pilots, we all understand the importance of seniority, how it works and why it is unacceptable to step over your brother to advance your own interests. For example, it is simply wrong to think it is okay to place a young probationary pilot who had mere weeks of service ahead of a seasoned pilot with more than 16 years of seniority.
Strict date-of-hire, with no conditions or restrictions, would be an unbalanced method of integrating the two pilot groups involved in the US Airways/AWA merger due to the large disparity in seniority. That is precisely why the Conditions and Restrictions were developed as an integral component of USAPA's bargaining proposal. The Conditions and Restrictions serve to eliminate the negative impact of discrepancies in seniority until those discrepancies are alleviated with the passage of time through the mass retirements of East pilots.
One thing that will never change is that we will all get older and eventually must retire. By the year 2020, just under 2,500 pilots will have retired, with almost 2,000 (80%) of that number coming from the East pilot group. (This assumes an average age at retirement of 64, which, based upon available statistics, would tend to understate the rate and magnitude of pilot attrition.) By the year 2015, the number of age-64 retirements will be more than 900. The Leonidas/AOL pamphlet's minimization of attrition-related career opportunities cannot stand up to the plain realities of pilot demographics.
The East pilots do not blame the West pilots for the failed leadership of ALPA in the past and concur with the notion that we are not each other's enemy; we share the desire for all pilots to join together. However, the authors of the pamphlet, by continuing to push for a seniority proposal that, as recognized by the Ninth Circuit Court, was never and is not ratifiable, are clearly attempting to mislead the entire pilot group with misinformation that is purely self-serving and damaging to the entire pilot bargaining unit, East and West. We encourage all pilots to carefully examine what the actual USAPA seniority proposal contains. The USAPA proposal is balanced, representing the interests of the pilot group as a whole.
Finally, there is the question of delay, if any, caused by USAPA's pursuit of an equitable seniority integration solution. The most important point that must be recognized by all US Airways pilots is that the primary source of delay in reaching a single CBA is the non-seniority issue of economics and the intransigence of the Company in this regard. Until the recent disingenuous Leonidas mailer, there has never been any dispute that the Company's current economic proposal (the Kirby Proposal) is unacceptable throughout the pilot group. First, in a West MEC update dated July 23, 2007, West MEC Chairman John McIlvenna described the Kirby proposal as "woefully inadequate." Furthermore, in a draft letter from John McIlvenna to East MEC Chairman Jack Stephan dated February 22, 2008, the West MEC Chairman explained that "the May 2007 Kirby proposal ... was deemed unacceptable by both pilot groups." Now let's look at what the individual Addington plaintiffs (Leonidas members) said with respect to the Kirby proposal:
* Steve Wargocki testified* that he would "probably not" vote for a contract that incorporated the Kirby proposal;
* Mark Burman testified* that the Kirby proposal "seemed to fall short of what expectations were moving forward with the new contract."
* Afshin Iranpour testified* that "from his point of view ... [the pilots] could probably ask for more than just [the] 3 percent raise" contained in the Kirby proposal;
* Roger Velez (current PHX Domicile Representative) responded* with an emphatic "no" when asked if he would vote for a single CBA which incorporated the Kirby proposal as its economic package;
* John Bostic, testified* that he "wouldn't be satisfied" with the Kirby proposal and he "would like [something] better."
(*Comments come directly from court transcripts and sworn depositions)
Wholly apart from the realities of the negotiations over economics, any honest appraisal of recent history confirms that the primary cause for delay in this negotiation process was ALPA and ALPA Merger Policy, and it was only with the certification of USAPA that negotiations resumed. The East MEC and the East pilots refused to ratify any agreement that incorporated Nicolau. That was a stipulated fact during the Addington trial and accepted by the Ninth Circuit. Moreover, the Ninth Circuit has recognized, as did ALPA president John Prater, that this was a legitimate exercise of the pilots' democratic rights under ALPA merger policy. Let's not kid ourselves -- if the result of the Nicolau arbitration had been strict date-of-hire without any conditions and restrictions, does anyone really believe that the West MEC would not have exercised the same democratic veto provided to it by ALPA Merger Policy?
We all know what happened: from August 15, 2007, until the decertification of ALPA on April 18, 2008, there were no further negotiations toward a single CBA. Even US Airways President Scott Kirby recognized that ALPA's Nicolau-generated impasse had stalled bargaining since "May of 2007," and he specifically commented to investors in April 2008 that the change from ALPA to USAPA was "a good thing" because it meant the Company was finally "able to get back to talking to [its] pilots and having formal negotiations with them." The fact is that contract negotiations only resumed with USAPA. It is only with USAPA that the 8-month negotiating freeze was finally overcome. It was only with USAPA that a federally-appointed mediator now supervises negotiations. It is only with USAPA that a single ratification pool now prevents the eternal gridlock that was experienced under ALPA.
Pilots should recognize the recent Leonidas/AOL mailer for exactly what it is -- the very same tried-and-failed tactic ALPA attempted, to fabricate arguments that appeal to just enough pilots to try and get them to sell out their fellow pilot and accept a concessionary contract harmful to every US Airways pilot, East and West. USAPA was elected to oppose the efforts of these self-serving pilots, and we're not about to suspend our work in this regard. The Ninth Circuit Court has spoken. Soon the Phoenix District Court (which answers to the Ninth) will reject the Company's bold-faced attempt to create delay through its request for Declaratory Judgment, and finally the U.S. Supreme Court will reject the Addington appeal as well. One only has to read the opinion of the Ninth to determine that USAPA will prevail in our quest to bargain over the full terms of the contract, and further, to present for ratification an industry-standard contract that protects the un-merged career expectations of all US Airways pilots utilizing a tried-and-true methodology of seniority integration that recognizes the date a pilot began service to his/her employer -- the very same methodology used by every other labor group at US Airways.
USAPA Communications
Quick Links
ACCIDENT/INCIDENT HOTLINE
(800) 341-7176 or
(310) 854-5290
File ASAP Report
Search USAPA
Member Search
First name: Last name:
Add to Favorites
No Favorites yet
Custom title alias:
Custom description:
Membership
* Calendar of Events
* Constitution and Bylaws
* Contact / Yellow Pages
* Dues Collection
* E190 Benevolence
* Elections
* Library and Links
* Membership Discounts
* Membership Services
* USAPA Directory (A-Z)
* USAPA Gear
* Union Operating Manual
Health, Safety & Operations
* Accident Investigation
* Aeromedical Support
* Aviation Medical Bulletins
* Bereavement
* Critical Incident Response Program (CIRP)
* Human Intervention and Motivation Study (HIMS)
* Professional Standards
* Safety
* Scheduling
* Security
* Training
* Uniforms
* Violations
Labor Services & Benefits
* Block Time
* Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA)
* Furlough
* Grievance
* Hotel
* Jumpseat
* Legal
* Negotiating Advisory
* Scope Monitoring
Financial Services
* Lump Sum
* Pension Investigation
* Retirement and Insurance
* US Airways Pilots Emergency Assistance Fund (UPEAF)
News
* Board of Pilot Representatives (BPR)
* Business Intelligence
* Flight 1549
* Government Affairs
* In The News
* Legal Updates
* Merger
* President's Messages
* Press Releases
* USAPA Updates
* Weekly Wrap-ups
* What's Up On The Line
Domicile News
* Charlotte (CLT)
* Philadelphia (PHL)
* Phoenix (PHX)
* Washington (DCA)
OTTER574
Veteran
- Jan 11, 2009
- 632
- 422
I guess pi brat with your logic...We us airways pilots should forever live in usapa never a joint contract land because scooter scott kirby made a FK'N PROPOSAL?
In your mind set, what do hired cba's accomplish for payment of millions of dollars of dues?
Yes pi brat, you're hard to follow.
Otter
You Moron! You have always said you would do anything you could to bring about the failure of USAPA, you would do whatever it takes to bring home the Nic, and then you talk about the duty of the CBA to produce a contract. Stick to one issue!
Good God.
You said "the West will not join usapa in an effort to get a DL contract". My reply was intended to debunk that statement.
OTTER574
Veteran
- Jan 11, 2009
- 632
- 422
pi brat..what in your mind is a union for?
Did the company follow this saga brought by east pilots that formed usapa to renege on final and binding arbitration? Did lcc take advantage of this and save billions in the process?
Answer is YES.
kirby proposal is just that.
Sorry to say pb, doug parker and scott kirby will continue this until we have a true union.
Otter
luvthe9
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 9,464
- 14,119
Or until, or should I say if LOA 84 rates click in!!!!
OTTER574
Veteran
- Jan 11, 2009
- 632
- 422
good god pi brat....you call me names and make statements like these?
I've asked many questions of you, but you fail to answer one, nada, zilch of them.
Federal Judge Silver today was quite..how should I say...refreshing, in regards to usapa and lcc going forward and lee seham was so..... a usapa classic polished turd.
Otter
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
