US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Code Name V]

No V, you need to listen.

Would you consider this a threat?

I have a few buddies down at the dock I would like you to meet some dark night. Tell them that their

International Longshoremen's Association is merely an association and not a union, why dontcha?

And when they're done with their "discussion," we can have another group who merely have a "brotherhood," and not a union, cart what's left of you off in one of their semi- rigs.

Federal law may see this as a threat...

18 U.S.C. § 875(c) states: "Whoever transmits in interstate or foreign commerce any communication containing any threat to kidnap any person or any threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both." From the wording of § 875(c) it is clear that the legislator did not require the element of 'intent.' Thus, it is irrelevant if the accused claims he/she did not have the intent to produce any injury on the victim; the mere act of sending the e-mail with threatening messages typifies the criminal conduct.

By filing a report with the Feds, I have established a file which I can update if threats of violence continue. I'm also visiting with HR on the issue at US Airways.

How it is handled is up to the company and the FBI.

Again, no breech of national security; just a couple boys duking it out on line. Personally, I would love to go back to the meeting behing the gym or in the boxing arena. Take off the epelets and go at it. Whoever comes out with an intact medical wins....The rest is merely entertainment. The fact that you are taking it to yet another legal level just shows that you have never been in a real fight; never had you nose broken a couple times; don't know what it's like to take a hit or give one and don't know how to deal with it. Grow up....

V

 

[CactusPilot1]

Again, no breech of national security; just a couple boys duking it out on line. Personally, I would love to go back to the meeting behing the gym or in the boxing arena. Take off the epelets and go at it. Whoever comes out with an intact medical wins....The rest is merely entertainment. The fact that you are taking it to yet another legal level just shows that you have never been in a real fight; never had you nose broken a couple times; don't know what it's like to take a hit or give one and don't know how to deal with it. Grow up....

V

That is how I handled disputes about 30 years ago. I've cracked a few heads in my day growing up. I would be glad to take you up on the offer but the job I brought to the acquisition is mine. I'm not going to be baited and lose my job if I had to defend myself
and kick your rear.

You and your union are a disgrace to our pilot group. You have demonstrated to me that those who run your association are unstable.

All I have to do is point at a recent police report which is also a part of my file.

Y'all have fun today.

Gotta run.

 

[flypg]

That is how I handled disputes aboutb 30 years ago. I've cracked a few heads in my day growing up. I would be glad to take you up on the offer but the job I brought to the acquisition is mine. I'm not going to be baited and lose my job if I had to defend myself
and kick your rear.

You and your union are a disgrace to our pilot group. You have demonstrated to me that those who run your association are unstable.

All I have to do is point at a recent police report which is also a part of my file.

Y'all have fun today.

Gotta run.

Duphis 1....you are too funny ! No one wants nor needs your job... or your pink running panties.

 

[88 B.T.D.]

No V, you need to listen.

Would you consider this a threat?

I have a few ......... left of you off in one of their semi- rigs.

Federal law may see this as a threat...

18 U.S.C. § 875(c) states: "Whoever transmits ...threat to injure the person of another, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than five years, or both." From the wording of § 875(c) it is clear that the legislator did not require the element of 'intent.' Thus, it is irrelevant if the accused claims he/she did not have the intent to produce any injury on the victim; the mere act of sending the e-mail with threatening messages typifies the criminal conduct.

By filing a report with the Feds, I have established a file which I can update if threats of violence continue. I'm also visiting with HR on the issue at US Airways.

This sounds a lot like the cactus 18 guy who threatened to organize a blanket party, in an e-mail, against one of his own west brothers.

 

[Black Swan]

In a few days this letter to the US Airways east pilots from the President of ALPA will be 3 years old. Time flies when you are having fun!

Our boy the desert judge wouldn't let this document in his court room.

Hate

From: ALPA Communications for AAA MEC [[email protected]]
Sent: Friday, March 14, 2008 5:06 PM
To: alpacommunications-aaamec
Subject: Further Clarification of Separate Operations


March 14, 2008

Dear US Airways Pilot:

I want to respond quickly and in a definitive way to the positive
reactions and questions from many of you to my letter on separate
operations and separate ratification votes.

There should be no confusion on these important points, so I will be as
clear and precise as I can be.

The Transition Agreement requires that the parties maintain separate operations until the implementation of a new collective bargaining
agreement covering the entire airline. Both the Transition Agreement
and ALPA Merger Policy prohibit US Airways from utilizing the
single seniority list until we reach a single agreement.

Merger Policy does not contain a timetable for completing the single
agreement. Rather, Merger Policy calls on the two MECs to work
toward that ultimate goal. While they are doing that, it is not the
responsibility or prerogative of the Association to direct them to reach
agreement on specific contract issues or impose specific contract
solutions.

Some members have asked what will happen if pilots from one group
or the other sue the Association either to block implementation or to
force implementation of the Nicolau award. I repeat—there is no
required timetable for implementation of the award. That only
happens with a single collective bargaining agreement.

So, as required by Merger Policy, the Association will defend the
award but will also work tirelessly to help the two MECs forge
solutions and craft comprehensive proposals that resolve all seniority,
career advancement, and contract issues for all US Airways pilots.
That course of action is consistent with the resolutions of our
Executive Council. As long as the two MECs are working in this
direction, there is a solid defense against court intervention.

When the representation election is behind us, the two MECs can turn
their attention to resolving their differences and reaching an
agreement on contract and career progression issues that will benefit
all US Airways pilots. This will lead to a contract that is much better
than any contract that USAPA can obtain, as it will be a contract that
addresses all pilot concerns. On the other hand, USAPA will propose a
quick, cheap, cost‐neutral contract that addresses only seniority, that
will be tied up in endless litigation, and that is subject to being undone
in future negotiations or in future mergers.

When a tentative agreement is reached under the ALPA structure, each
MEC, followed by each pilot group, will have the right to a separate
ratification vote on that agreement. I want to assure you that
trusteeship will not be used to deprive you of your right to separate
membership ratification. That protection—for each MEC and each
pilot group to analyze, debate, and ratify a contract that meets its
needs—exists in ALPA Merger Policy and does not under USAPA
representation.

In Unity,

Captain John H. Prater
President
ALPA: The Pilots Union
3/14/2008

If you wish to unsubscribe from this list, please go to
https://crewroom.alpa.org/alpa/DesktopModules/ToPreferences.aspx to update your Standard Mailings
and/or E-Mail Distribution Lists preferences. Note: you may be prompted to logon to access this page.

Yes, IN UNITY. Brother Prater sinks the west claim of damages. This entire separate ops has the papal blessing. What takes place under it is entirely in the realm of INTERNAL UNION AFFAIRS. So much for Nic4us and Clearmisdirect constantly referring to damages and such. Wait till this gets let in for their DFR 2. Wake blocked it from the Addington fiasco. No wonder he was losing so much sleep! Remember how he and the west were all set to launch their DAMAGES Trial?? This would have been great had they wasted more time and money, and then had the 9th blow that away too! Leonidas and Koontz were stovepiping so much bad advice into their keisters all along. This and their fundamental lack of understanding of ripeness is laughable,

 

[Hate2fly]

Here is some interesting stuff!

Hate

Case 2:08-cv-01633-NVW Document 591 Filed 07/17/2009 Page 15 of 22
F) Excluding Defendant’s exhibits: No. 1003 (Notice of Removal, because this would
have shown the ALPA West MEC attorney Freund describing Nicolau as merely a
bargaining proposal), No. 1048 (AWA MEC message, because this would have
shown ALPA pressuring the West to compromise Nicolau), No. 1055 (ALPA
West MEC attorney Freund’s post-hearing brief, because this would have shown

- 10 -

Case 2:08-cv-01633-NVW Document 591 Filed 07/17/2009 Page 16 of 22
that ALPA Merger Policy had undergone a political process whereby
consideration of date of hire had been deliberately excised), No. 1068 (ALPA
West MEC attorney Freund’s email, because this would have shown that ALPA
considered East operations more profitable and thus a basis upon which East pilots
would reject voluntarily accepting the Nicolau award).

- 11 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice of Removal

Jeffrey Freund - Notice of Removal July 24, 2007

Thus, the “arbitration award” Plaintiffs purportedly seek to “vacate” is in actuality the proposed pilot seniority list developed through ALPA’s Merger policy that ALPA will adopt as its bargaining position to be presented to the Company, but which (like a union bargaining position in any matter) the Company is not required to accept. Application, Ex.1 at 2,9 (ALPA will present to the company the merged seniority list developed through ALPA’s Merger policy arbitration procedures, and “ALPA will use all reasonable means at its disposal to compel the company to accept and implement the merged seniority list”). Plaintiffs seek review of this ALPA bargaining position developed through ALPA Merger Policy, and, while couching it in the terms of “vacating” and “arbitration,” the relief they actually seek is a review of the product of ALPA’s Merger Policy, and, ultimately, alteration of ALPA’s bargaining proposal to the company…Plaintiff’s Application to “vacate” an “arbitration award” that does not establish any enforceable seniority rights in a collective bargaining agreement with the Company, but which merely sets out ALPA’s bargaining position to be presented to the company, is not a state law claim at all but rather an artfully pled Federal claim for breech of Duty of Fair Representation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Judge Emmet Sullivan - Memorandum Opinion November 30, 2007

“Ultimately, the ALPA Merger Policy generates a proposed seniority list, which ALPA promises to present to the merged airlines in an effort to persuade the merged airlines to adopt the list.” See Defs. Opp’n 3-4.

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

"I think the pressures and risks are all on your side of the transaction, not the US Airways side. Here are my thoughts....The judge who has been sheparding US Airways along for the last three years and two bankruptcies will not let it collapse."

“Second, I believe that the company can operate without a transition agreement, but you can’t. You have scope protections, but keep in mind that the new company will be US Airways and will be flying under its certificate. While the two companies remain separate, there will be little to restrict the company from shifting flying from AWA to AAA or from allowing all the new flying to AAA without a transition agreement keeping flying separate.”





E-mail text from West Merger Attorney Jeff Freund to the America West MEC circa late August 2005.

I’ve been thinking about the status of the Transition agreement and its implications for seniority integration and I wanted to pass these thoughts on to you before the MEC decides how to proceed. I believe that it is very important that you finalize an agreement and do it soon. I think the pressures and risks are all on your side of the transaction, not the US Airways side. Here are my thoughts.

First, whatever you may think about the transaction, I believe that it will be approved and approved promptly. The judge who has been sheparding US Airways along for the last three years and two bankruptcies will not let it collapse. In any event, it will not be ALPA’s objection (assuming you don’t reach a transition agreement and ALPA files an objection) that will kill it. So you should assume it will promptly be approved.

Second, I believe that the company can operate without a transition agreement, but you can’t. You have scope protections, but keep in mind that the new company will be US Airways and will be flying under its certificate. While the two companies remain separate, there will be little to restrict the company from shifting flying from AWA to AAA or from allowing all the new flying to AAA without a transition agreement keeping flying separate.

Third, the implications of that fact to seniority integration are not good. If flying tips to AAA during the transition period, even if we get a “good” integration, AAA pilots will be in seats and a “no bump/no flush” provision will keep them there until a system bid allows seniority to operate unrestricted. That is not a good result for AWA pilots.

Fourth, in an event, as I have explained, to the extent your objections are to the absence of a no furlough clause, I don’t think you will ever get one and I don’t think you want one. You should want AAA pilots furloughed…

Finally, while I know you are trying to capture some additional economics, in these negotiations, this is not the time to draw the line on those issues. You will have other points of leverage during subsequent negotiations to press for those items. I’m not suggesting that you abandon your attempts immediately, just don’t get yourselves in a negotiating position where the deal craters over those issues. In short, I think you should not come out of the next round with the company without a deal.

Dan Atkins and I are intending to be at the meeting by conference call on Wednesday. Please let us know how and when we should do that.

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

Project Zanzibar


At the May 9 session of the Joint Negotiating Committee, Scott Kirby, President of the Company, revealed to the assembled representatives of both pilot groups and ALPA National that he had headed a project code-named “Project Zanzibar” for AW in 2005 and that the legal papers for a Chapter 11 filing had been prepared and a plan developed for AW’s bankruptcy in the event that the merger failed to come to fruition. Project Zanzibar was AW’s only Plan B. It is now beyond dispute that the junior AW pilot, Dave Odell, and 300-400 other AW F/Os hired in 2002-05 would have been furloughed absent the US merger, as AW went into Chapter 11, perhaps never to emerge. In light of this new disclosure from the carrier’s President, there is clearly no support for the explicit premise of the Nicolau Award that these AW pilots had more job security and better promotional prospects than US pilots hired in 1988, including hundreds who had never been furloughed for a single day.

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

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, LOCAL 545’s POST HEARING BRIEF


According to the merged carrier’s own website, U.S. Air brought to the merger approximately twice the number of jet aircraft (280 - 139) as AWA and had more firm orders for additional aircraft than AWA (29 - 26). Tr. 101-03; Joint Ex. 1 (Merger News, “HP-US Comparison,” thehub.usairways.com). U.S. Air’s operating revenues were almost three times those of AWA ($7.1 billion - $2.25 billion), it served almost twice as many destinations (179-96) and carried approximately twice the number of passengers (41.3 million-21 million). Id. As of the end of the second quarter of 2005, approximately one month after the merger agreement was executed, U.S. Air had almost four times the amount of cash on hand as did AWA ($557 million - $116 million), had an $11 million advantage in net operating income for the quarter ($41 million - $30 million), had over twice the number of available seat miles (“ASMs”) (16.4 billion - 7.7 billion) and enjoyed significant advantages over AWA in Revenue/ASM (10.72¢ - 9.07¢) and Yield/Revenue Passenger Mile (14.11¢ - 10.25¢). Tr. 97-101; Local 545 Ex. 9 (Financial Condition Comparison, AWA and U.S. Air, June 30, 2005); see also Local 545 Exs. 1 and 10 (AWA’s SEC Form 10Q Report for Quarter Ending June 30, 2005).

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

Dispatcher Decision Arbitrator Richard Bloch Award April 26, 2007: “Much of West’s claimed superiority over East, in terms of what it brought to the merger, is speculative.”


However, West’s claim that U.S. Airways emerged from bankruptcy “only because it [was] acquired by a stronger enterprise”10 is reflected neither in the KPMG audit report (cited by West) nor in any other portion of the evidence. Instead, each carrier had something to contribute. Airways, for example, was much larger. It served almost twice as many destinations as AWA and carried twice the number of passengers. Airways has substantially more cash on hand, following the merger agreement.


West characterizes the merger decision on AWA’s part as a one-way economic bailout. But there is no support for this in the record; surely, the respective companies did not endorse that view. AWA concluded, according to the statements of its CEO, that “…when we looked out at our future, what we saw wasn’t good…. Assuming we couldn’t go out and restructure or raise cash, it is possible that AWA would have been facing its own Chapter 11 at some point. Employees may like to think we “saved” US but the fact is we saved each other…

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

US Airways MEC Presentation to ALPA Executive Council May 21, 2007


In view of the analysis set forth above, we believe the following quotation from Captain Jim Brucia’s Opinion at p. 3 is apt and accurate:

As a consequence of the Boards decision, America West pilot Odell, who was hired less than 2 months before the merger was announced, has been placed immediately senior to US Airways pilot Colello who was hired more than 16 years earlier and who had over 16 years of credited length of service. I disagree with this placement, which disregards Colello’s substantial service time.…


The Board did not adequately take into account the realities of the “new” airline, the return of furloughees that has already taken place and the much greater rate of age-based attrition at US Airways as compared to the rate at America West. The vast amount of agerelated attrition that has occurred within the US Airways pilot group caused the recall of over 300 US Airways pilots between March 2006 and the first week of January of this year. The pace of recalls is brisk and has continued. During the hearings we learned that additional recalls were taking place and there was testimony that stated at the current pace it was possible that all US Airways pilots would receive recall notices before the end of 2007.

 

[LSS]

This sounds a lot like the cactus 18 guy who threatened to organize a blanket party, in an e-mail, against one of his own west brothers.

Thank you... I was thinking the same thing!

 

[Black Swan]

So much for all the West hype over who saved who, who brought what, and especially, INTERNAL UNION AFFAIRS and the Nicolau. The west has grossly miscalculated with the Nicolau, and taking the stance the Nic is set in stone, is absolutely BASELESS. It is recognized by any legal authority for exactly what it is- a starting point in union negotiations. This constant rallying around the Nicolau, without any consideration for negotiations, will end up costing them dearly. This is solely a union position, nothing more. It can be easily discarded, which the 9th affirmed. It will be discarded. Freund was practically begging the West MEC to come off it, and they miscalculated and stuck with it.

 

[Metroyet]

So much for all the West hype over who saved who, who brought what, and especially, INTERNAL UNION AFFAIRS and the Nicolau. The west has grossly miscalculated with the Nicolau, and taking the stance the Nic is set in stone, is absolutely BASELESS. It is recognized by any legal authority for exactly what it is- a starting point in union negotiations. This constant rallying around the Nicolau, without any consideration for negotiations, will end up costing them dearly. This is solely a union position, nothing more. It can be easily discarded, which the 9th affirmed. It will be discarded. Freund was practically begging the West MEC to come off it, and they miscalculated and stuck with it.

BLAH, BLAH, BLAH

USAPA is a total failure. Scabford forgot to mention the fact that to obtain separate ops, East pilots would forever remain on LOA93....FOOD STAMPS ANYONE??

 

[Black Swan]

Here is some interesting stuff!

Hate

Case 2:08-cv-01633-NVW Document 591 Filed 07/17/2009 Page 15 of 22
F) Excluding Defendant’s exhibits: No. 1003 (Notice of Removal, because this would
have shown the ALPA West MEC attorney Freund describing Nicolau as merely a
bargaining proposal), No. 1048 (AWA MEC message, because this would have
shown ALPA pressuring the West to compromise Nicolau), No. 1055 (ALPA
West MEC attorney Freund’s post-hearing brief, because this would have shown

- 10 -

Case 2:08-cv-01633-NVW Document 591 Filed 07/17/2009 Page 16 of 22
that ALPA Merger Policy had undergone a political process whereby
consideration of date of hire had been deliberately excised), No. 1068 (ALPA
West MEC attorney Freund’s email, because this would have shown that ALPA
considered East operations more profitable and thus a basis upon which East pilots
would reject voluntarily accepting the Nicolau award).

- 11 -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Notice of Removal

Jeffrey Freund - Notice of Removal July 24, 2007

Thus, the “arbitration award” Plaintiffs purportedly seek to “vacate” is in actuality the proposed pilot seniority list developed through ALPA’s Merger policy that ALPA will adopt as its bargaining position to be presented to the Company, but which (like a union bargaining position in any matter) the Company is not required to accept. Application, Ex.1 at 2,9 (ALPA will present to the company the merged seniority list developed through ALPA’s Merger policy arbitration procedures, and “ALPA will use all reasonable means at its disposal to compel the company to accept and implement the merged seniority list”). Plaintiffs seek review of this ALPA bargaining position developed through ALPA Merger Policy, and, while couching it in the terms of “vacating” and “arbitration,” the relief they actually seek is a review of the product of ALPA’s Merger Policy, and, ultimately, alteration of ALPA’s bargaining proposal to the company…Plaintiff’s Application to “vacate” an “arbitration award” that does not establish any enforceable seniority rights in a collective bargaining agreement with the Company, but which merely sets out ALPA’s bargaining position to be presented to the company, is not a state law claim at all but rather an artfully pled Federal claim for breech of Duty of Fair Representation.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Judge Emmet Sullivan - Memorandum Opinion November 30, 2007

“Ultimately, the ALPA Merger Policy generates a proposed seniority list, which ALPA promises to present to the merged airlines in an effort to persuade the merged airlines to adopt the list.” See Defs. Opp’n 3-4.

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

"I think the pressures and risks are all on your side of the transaction, not the US Airways side. Here are my thoughts....The judge who has been sheparding US Airways along for the last three years and two bankruptcies will not let it collapse."

“Second, I believe that the company can operate without a transition agreement, but you can’t. You have scope protections, but keep in mind that the new company will be US Airways and will be flying under its certificate. While the two companies remain separate, there will be little to restrict the company from shifting flying from AWA to AAA or from allowing all the new flying to AAA without a transition agreement keeping flying separate.”





E-mail text from West Merger Attorney Jeff Freund to the America West MEC circa late August 2005.

I’ve been thinking about the status of the Transition agreement and its implications for seniority integration and I wanted to pass these thoughts on to you before the MEC decides how to proceed. I believe that it is very important that you finalize an agreement and do it soon. I think the pressures and risks are all on your side of the transaction, not the US Airways side. Here are my thoughts.

First, whatever you may think about the transaction, I believe that it will be approved and approved promptly. The judge who has been sheparding US Airways along for the last three years and two bankruptcies will not let it collapse. In any event, it will not be ALPA’s objection (assuming you don’t reach a transition agreement and ALPA files an objection) that will kill it. So you should assume it will promptly be approved.

Second, I believe that the company can operate without a transition agreement, but you can’t. You have scope protections, but keep in mind that the new company will be US Airways and will be flying under its certificate. While the two companies remain separate, there will be little to restrict the company from shifting flying from AWA to AAA or from allowing all the new flying to AAA without a transition agreement keeping flying separate.

Third, the implications of that fact to seniority integration are not good. If flying tips to AAA during the transition period, even if we get a “good” integration, AAA pilots will be in seats and a “no bump/no flush” provision will keep them there until a system bid allows seniority to operate unrestricted. That is not a good result for AWA pilots.

Fourth, in an event, as I have explained, to the extent your objections are to the absence of a no furlough clause, I don’t think you will ever get one and I don’t think you want one. You should want AAA pilots furloughed…

Finally, while I know you are trying to capture some additional economics, in these negotiations, this is not the time to draw the line on those issues. You will have other points of leverage during subsequent negotiations to press for those items. I’m not suggesting that you abandon your attempts immediately, just don’t get yourselves in a negotiating position where the deal craters over those issues. In short, I think you should not come out of the next round with the company without a deal.

Dan Atkins and I are intending to be at the meeting by conference call on Wednesday. Please let us know how and when we should do that.

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

Project Zanzibar


At the May 9 session of the Joint Negotiating Committee, Scott Kirby, President of the Company, revealed to the assembled representatives of both pilot groups and ALPA National that he had headed a project code-named “Project Zanzibar” for AW in 2005 and that the legal papers for a Chapter 11 filing had been prepared and a plan developed for AW’s bankruptcy in the event that the merger failed to come to fruition. Project Zanzibar was AW’s only Plan B. It is now beyond dispute that the junior AW pilot, Dave Odell, and 300-400 other AW F/Os hired in 2002-05 would have been furloughed absent the US merger, as AW went into Chapter 11, perhaps never to emerge. In light of this new disclosure from the carrier’s President, there is clearly no support for the explicit premise of the Nicolau Award that these AW pilots had more job security and better promotional prospects than US pilots hired in 1988, including hundreds who had never been furloughed for a single day.

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

TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION OF AMERICA, LOCAL 545’s POST HEARING BRIEF


According to the merged carrier’s own website, U.S. Air brought to the merger approximately twice the number of jet aircraft (280 - 139) as AWA and had more firm orders for additional aircraft than AWA (29 - 26). Tr. 101-03; Joint Ex. 1 (Merger News, “HP-US Comparison,” thehub.usairways.com). U.S. Air’s operating revenues were almost three times those of AWA ($7.1 billion - $2.25 billion), it served almost twice as many destinations (179-96) and carried approximately twice the number of passengers (41.3 million-21 million). Id. As of the end of the second quarter of 2005, approximately one month after the merger agreement was executed, U.S. Air had almost four times the amount of cash on hand as did AWA ($557 million - $116 million), had an $11 million advantage in net operating income for the quarter ($41 million - $30 million), had over twice the number of available seat miles (“ASMs”) (16.4 billion - 7.7 billion) and enjoyed significant advantages over AWA in Revenue/ASM (10.72¢ - 9.07¢) and Yield/Revenue Passenger Mile (14.11¢ - 10.25¢). Tr. 97-101; Local 545 Ex. 9 (Financial Condition Comparison, AWA and U.S. Air, June 30, 2005); see also Local 545 Exs. 1 and 10 (AWA’s SEC Form 10Q Report for Quarter Ending June 30, 2005).

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

Dispatcher Decision Arbitrator Richard Bloch Award April 26, 2007: “Much of West’s claimed superiority over East, in terms of what it brought to the merger, is speculative.”


However, West’s claim that U.S. Airways emerged from bankruptcy “only because it [was] acquired by a stronger enterprise”10 is reflected neither in the KPMG audit report (cited by West) nor in any other portion of the evidence. Instead, each carrier had something to contribute. Airways, for example, was much larger. It served almost twice as many destinations as AWA and carried twice the number of passengers. Airways has substantially more cash on hand, following the merger agreement.


West characterizes the merger decision on AWA’s part as a one-way economic bailout. But there is no support for this in the record; surely, the respective companies did not endorse that view. AWA concluded, according to the statements of its CEO, that “…when we looked out at our future, what we saw wasn’t good…. Assuming we couldn’t go out and restructure or raise cash, it is possible that AWA would have been facing its own Chapter 11 at some point. Employees may like to think we “saved” US but the fact is we saved each other…

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

US Airways MEC Presentation to ALPA Executive Council May 21, 2007


In view of the analysis set forth above, we believe the following quotation from Captain Jim Brucia’s Opinion at p. 3 is apt and accurate:

As a consequence of the Boards decision, America West pilot Odell, who was hired less than 2 months before the merger was announced, has been placed immediately senior to US Airways pilot Colello who was hired more than 16 years earlier and who had over 16 years of credited length of service. I disagree with this placement, which disregards Colello’s substantial service time.…


The Board did not adequately take into account the realities of the “new” airline, the return of furloughees that has already taken place and the much greater rate of age-based attrition at US Airways as compared to the rate at America West. The vast amount of agerelated attrition that has occurred within the US Airways pilot group caused the recall of over 300 US Airways pilots between March 2006 and the first week of January of this year. The pace of recalls is brisk and has continued. During the hearings we learned that additional recalls were taking place and there was testimony that stated at the current pace it was possible that all US Airways pilots would receive recall notices before the end of 2007.

Yoh Hate Let us not forget this stuff also, Parker told the West pilots to their faces that "believe me the standalone plan was not gonna work" and "That airline could not survive.”

PHX 02/06/07 / "We’d go file bankruptcy. We’d get ourselves a little stronger now the economy is back we’d be trying to come out like Delta is. But I swear to you that airline was going to file bankruptcy."

“We had an airline at America West that had 20% lower unit revenues than US Airways and now has the same unit costs. That airline could not survive.” We would try to make it better. We’d go file bankruptcy. We’d get ourselves a little stronger now the economy is back we’d be trying to come out like Delta is. But I swear to you that airline was going to file bankruptcy. When it filed bankruptcy we would have downsized at least 15% and you know while you feel bad about stagnation, you should feel better about that versus where you were headed. And that’s we were headed. So I feel very good about what we were able to do with the America West team through the merger because believe me the standalone plan was not gonna work. So again I mean that’s hard for you to appreciate because you never saw it but, you know, it was coming. So that’s point 1.”

Arbitrator Nicolau disregarded the words of Doug Parker, Chairman and CEO, who said repeatedly to pilots from both groups that both carriers needed the merger and benefited from it. As CEO Parker told a three-year AW pilot complaining about AWA's post-merger stagnation in a videotaped meeting in PHX on 2/06/07, "First off, as to the the stagnation of growth, for America West pilots since the merger , what I will tell you is, and this is a hard thing to communicate to people but I believe it with all my heart: If we didn't do the merger with US Airways, you'd be in a lot worse position. Frankly, I think as a 3 [year] F/O, you wouldn't have a job. We would have gone through a bankruptcy filing. We would have downsized. We had an airline at America West that had 20% lower unit revenues than US Airways and now has the same unit costs. That airline could not survive. We would have tried to make it better. We'd go file bankruptcy and get ourselves a little stronger and now the economy's back and we'd be trying to come out like Delta is. But I swear to you that [the] airline was going to file bankruptcy. When it filed bankruptcy, we would have downsized at least 15%, and, you know, while you feel bad about stagnation, you should feel better about that versus where you were headed. And that's where we were headed."

17



"At the May 9 session of the Joint Negotiating Committee, Scott Kirby, President of the Company, revealed to the assembled representatives of both pilot groups and ALPA National that he had headed a project code-named Project Zanzibar for AW in 2005 and that the legal papers for a Chapter 11 filing had been prepared and a plan developed for AWA,s bankruptcy in the event that the merger failed to come to fruition. Project Zanzibar was AWA's only Plan B. It is now beyond dispute that the junior AW pilot, Dave Odell, and 300-400 other AW F/Os hired in 2002-05 would have been furloughed absent the US merger, as AW went into Chapter 11, perhaps never to emerge. In light of this new disclosure from the carrier's President, there is clearly no support for the explicit premise of the Nicolau Award that these AW pilots had more job security and better promotional prospects than US pilots hired in 1988, including hundreds who had never been furloughed for a single day."

18



"At the other end of the AW list, the Nicolau Award integrates the junior AW pilot, hired on 4/4/05, senior to all of the US pilots who were actively flying EMB aircraft under the ALPA US Airways CBA on 5/19/05, the date of announcement of the merger. Arbitrator Nicolau's Opinion incorrectly states that the US Merger Committees Certified List shows these pilots as furloughed as of that date. In fact, our Certified List shows 326 of them, starting with Dean Colello, as flying at MDA on that date. Those pilots were paying dues to ALPA, flying EMB jet aircraft on the US certificate, pursuant to pay and other arrangements specified in the ALPA-US Airways CBA. First Officer Colello and several hundred of his colleagues are now actively flying Airbus and Boeing aircraft again, as they have for nearly twenty years of their piloting careers. Inserting AW pilots in initial ground school at the time of the merger ahead of them on the combined list would provide those AW pilots windfalls in accessing promotional opportunities and in job security that improperly come at the expense of these US pilots."

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

The Nicolau Award: "a proposed pilot seniority list" developed through ALPA’s Merger policy

an “arbitration award” that does not establish any enforceable seniority rights in a collective bargaining agreement with the Company.

Jeffrey Freund AWA Merger Attorney July 24, 2007

 

[CallawayGolf]

So much for all the West hype over who saved who, who brought what, and especially, INTERNAL UNION AFFAIRS and the Nicolau. The west has grossly miscalculated with the Nicolau, and taking the stance the Nic is set in stone, is absolutely BASELESS. It is recognized by any legal authority for exactly what it is- a starting point in union negotiations. This constant rallying around the Nicolau, without any consideration for negotiations, will end up costing them dearly. This is solely a union position, nothing more. It can be easily discarded, which the 9th affirmed. It will be discarded. Freund was practically begging the West MEC to come off it, and they miscalculated and stuck with it.

Yet another post completely detached from reality. The ninth circuit said no such thing and judge Silver has affirmed that point already in presiding over the DJ matter. However, I will play along in this delusional fantasy for just a moment…so exactly what has the west lost even if you are correct? By taking the actions it has, the west has maintained separate ops, higher comparative wages than the east, and better overall work rules and conditions. The alternative would have been to not engage the fight and let DOH prevail which would have resulted in wholesale downgrades of west captains to FO positions and perhaps west pilots having to commute to east bases if they wanted to stay employed while the east pilots came to PHX to take those positions previously held by west pilots under separate ops.

So, while the east fears shadows and unfounded propaganda regarding what the combined list would do to their careers when the NIC is implemented, the west has west has real and substantial losses to guard against in any DOH scenario. Keeping DOH from becoming a reality has even more benefits to the west than just seeing the NIC award implemented outright. Allowing the courts to sort out the SLI issues will ultimately result in a pay raise a JCBA is ratified if that ever happens. However, letting USAPA cram down DOH with the intent to harm the west pilots is what must be opposed with all possible force. Even under your misguided interpretation the west has lost nothing and gained substantial protections by thwarting the nefarious schemes of the east .

 

[mikey60]

Think about it...how could a guy be #4 on the AWA list but have DOH of '86? Costello was hired in August of '83. Four years later he was left seat in the 747. It's worked out pretty good for him. Plus as nic4 said, Rob is a great guy.

I'm sorry it was 1983 not 1986.

 

[flypg]

Yet another post completely detached from reality. The ninth circuit said no such thing and judge Silver has affirmed that point already in presiding over the DJ matter. However, I will play along in this delusional fantasy for just a moment…so exactly what has the west lost even if you are correct? By taking the actions it has, the west has maintained separate ops, higher comparative wages than the east, and better overall work rules and conditions. The alternative would have been to not engage the fight and let DOH prevail which would have resulted in wholesale downgrades of west captains to FO positions and perhaps west pilots having to commute to east bases if they wanted to stay employed while the east pilots came to PHX to take those positions previously held by west pilots under separate ops.

So, while the east fears shadows and unfounded propaganda regarding what the combined list would do to their careers when the NIC is implemented, the west has west has real and substantial losses to guard against in any DOH scenario. Keeping DOH from becoming a reality has even more benefits to the west than just seeing the NIC award implemented outright. Allowing the courts to sort out the SLI issues will ultimately result in a pay raise a JCBA is ratified if that ever happens. However, letting USAPA cram down DOH with the intent to harm the west pilots is what must be opposed with all possible force. Even under your misguided interpretation the west has lost nothing and gained substantial protections by thwarting the nefarious schemes of the east .

With DOH and a 10 year fence, you would be half way thru and looking at major attrition and a combined contract. So, either you are stupid and or very junior, Westicle.

Keep up the donations...

 

[traderjake]

With DOH and a 10 year fence, you would be half way thru and looking at major attrition and a combined contract. So, either you are stupid and or very junior, Westicle.

Keep up the donations...

Congratulations, you've done the impossible.

You make the other USAPA supporters here look rational.

 

[Hate2fly]

Some spanking going on today!

Hate