US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hate which seniority list will be used for the next transaction?

Since there will not be a joint CBA in place, there are still two separate seniority lists which are active. The next transaction will be unique (get that, Chip? The UCT....you were right) in that THREE seniority lists will be merged under a McCaskill-Bond federally mandated arbitration. There will be no recourse on that since it will NOT be an intra-union bargaining position.
 
Since there will not be a joint CBA in place, there are still two separate seniority lists which are active. The next transaction will be unique (get that, Chip? The UCT....you were right) in that THREE seniority lists will be merged under a McCaskill-Bond federally mandated arbitration. There will be no recourse on that since it will NOT be an intra-union bargaining position.
Really, there are still two airlines or are we a single carrier? You need to read the legislation.
the process to derive a single usair list was complete with the company acceptance as required by the ta. A single system seniority list exists today and will be implemented when there is a single contract as per the ta, regardless of how it is achieved (bk,merge,vote) Why do you think usapa wants to renegotiate seniority? because management already has a single list.
 
Really, there are still two airlines or are we a single carrier? You need to read the legislation.
the process to derive a single usair list was complete with the company acceptance as required by the ta. A single system seniority list exists today and will be implemented when there is a single contract as per the ta, regardless of how it is achieved (bk,merge,vote) Why do you think usapa wants to renegotiate seniority? because management already has a single list.

Having a single list, and using it are two different things. Of course, we've been through this argument, what now, 6,453 times and you disagree with me. I disagree with you.

If you knew the answer (that you think is correct, I don't) before you started typing, why did you ask it?

Should we argue this 6,454 times now? Is that all you want to do? If so, you are just SO, SO tiresome and I, for one, find you insipid.
 
You're sick.

Get some help, and while your at it address that Nazi admiration issue.

You know; for a second there, I might have believed that the antagonists were on to something. Now that you stuck your two cents in, I am assured that I am right on track. Thanks for the renewed confidence there Traitor.

I do however, find it quite amusing that when the relationship of safety to integration is verbalized, the result is an attack of sanity. To make it clear, putting these two diversely disfunctional groups together is unsafe. It has been referenced time and again. This has not changed and these boards clearly confirm that diagnosis. To try to now trivialize this safety issue is tatamount to the company ignoring the safety culture survey. The result is the same. They know there are serious safety issues involved in the integration just as they know they have a culture that ignores other safety issues. If you don't think this is important, good for you. I suspect you are in the minority.

V
 
Having a single list, and using it are two different things. Of course, we've been through this argument, what now, 6,453 times and you disagree with me. I disagree with you.

If you knew the answer (that you think is correct, I don't) before you started typing, why did you ask it?

Should we argue this 6,454 times now? Is that all you want to do? If so, you are just SO, SO tiresome and I, for one, find you insipid.
That is because you have no legal argument to back up your position, typical of the clown college.
 
They know there are serious safety issues involved in the integration just as they know they have a culture that ignores other safety issues. If you don't think this is important, good for you. I suspect you are in the minority.

Personally, I think the handful of hardcore DOH diehards here are in the minority. Look at what PI Brat and Kabota have said. Also, very few if any of the West posters seem to feel as you do. I'm wondering if this "it's unsafe to merge the pilot groups" is just a realization that the DOH battle is lost and a last gasp way to try to keep DOH on the East...

Jim
 
Personally, I think the handful of hardcore DOH diehards here are in the minority. Look at what PI Brat and Kabota have said. Also, very few if any of the West posters seem to feel as you do. I'm wondering if this "it's unsafe to merge the pilot groups" is just a realization that the DOH battle is lost and a last gasp way to try to keep DOH on the East...

Jim
That was the entire intent of the "Safety Survey". Everybody saw it as the farce it was. The company simply laughed at it and dismissed USAPA with a flippant wave of the hand. USAPA is an ever increasing embarrassment
/blight upon the profession.
 
You know; for a second there, I might have believed that the antagonists were on to something. Now that you stuck your two cents in, I am assured that I am right on track. Thanks for the renewed confidence there Traitor.

I suspect you are in the minority.

V

So let me get this right, Trader is traitor for speaking his mind? Is that an Usapian tactic to silence objectors? I applaud this East pilot for having the integrity to speak his mind. He has a right and an obligation to be heard by his 'union". If he is not satisfied with his so-called bargaining agent for doing a lousy job, he should rattle chains.

I count maybe a dozen UHL's here.

You are in the minority, considering 5000 pilots are on the property.
 
Personally, I think the handful of hardcore DOH diehards here are in the minority. Look at what PI Brat and Kabota have said. Also, very few if any of the West posters seem to feel as you do. I'm wondering if this "it's unsafe to merge the pilot groups" is just a realization that the DOH battle is lost and a last gasp way to try to keep DOH on the East...

Jim

Actually, I don't see why in the world you would think even for a second that any viewpoint on the 'DOH battle' would be even remotely lost, much less a 'last gasp' effort to keep it alive. That is a very misguided perception and I think you might be the one grasping at straws when you use this 'ghost' as the backdrop for every post made. You are way off track on this one, I suspect. If anything, there really is no 'DOH battle' at all. That decision has already been made with the new union bylaws and foundation. If there is any battle, it is for those that want to continue to persue the failed Nic. The only ones that continue to try to revive that dead and buried issue are on this board. Everone else knows it is a dead issue, at least until a joint contract is ratified; and then again, if and when it is brought up as DFRII.

V
 
Since there will not be a joint CBA in place, there are still two separate seniority lists which are active. The next transaction will be unique (get that, Chip? The UCT....you were right) in that THREE seniority lists will be merged under a McCaskill-Bond federally mandated arbitration. There will be no recourse on that since it will NOT be an intra-union bargaining position.

No, sir. Quite wrong. Although the Nic list cannot be implemented without a contract it is the accepted and recognized seniority list per the letter signed by Doug Parker on Dec 20, 2007. If we merge with another carrier today that is the only list that may be used. Parker is trying like hell to placate the unstable east pilot group by requesting a declatatory judgement only because he wants to blame the court when the hammer comes down on those who will surely melt down. He's hoping to minimize the disruption to the operation. The list, however, is the list and does not need to be implemented in order to be utilized in a subsequent merger.
 
Having a single list, and using it are two different things. Of course, we've been through this argument, what now, 6,453 times and you disagree with me. I disagree with you.

If you knew the answer (that you think is correct, I don't) before you started typing, why did you ask it?

Should we argue this 6,454 times now? Is that all you want to do? If so, you are just SO, SO tiresome and I, for one, find you insipid.

Tiresome or not, he's right. Get over it. Looking forward to your little meltdown.
 
There will be no combined list to use, everyone knows this place will be parted out and those WEST valuable assets will take those WEST pilots with them! MM!
 
You know; for a second there, I might have believed that the antagonists were on to something. Now that you stuck your two cents in, I am assured that I am right on track. Thanks for the renewed confidence there Traitor.

I do however, find it quite amusing that when the relationship of safety to integration is verbalized, the result is an attack of sanity. To make it clear, putting these two diversely disfunctional groups together is unsafe. It has been referenced time and again. This has not changed and these boards clearly confirm that diagnosis. To try to now trivialize this safety issue is tatamount to the company ignoring the safety culture survey. The result is the same. They know there are serious safety issues involved in the integration just as they know they have a culture that ignores other safety issues. If you don't think this is important, good for you. I suspect you are in the minority.

V

When the time comes to fly together the only threat to safety will be the unprofessionalism and instability of those that cannot stand it when they don't get their way. I would expect that those who are just so childish to be terminated without discretion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top