US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
Dont you understand you sound like a broken record,"fodase is a clown, fodase is a clown, fodase is a clown". Get it.... it was funny when I used it and it was funny the first time you did but that was it. Now reread the first sentence.
OH really Ed was hired in the spring of 1978, and your Cambell was hired when?
Damn seems like your old lady couldn't keep her mouth shut.
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #13,100
Did Mikey forget to tell you when the seniority list was passed? Timing!!!!
My question was about the FBI. Will they be arresting anyone over this alleged ID theft this week or will it be some later date?
luvthe9
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 9,464
- 14,119
Read the last line, the law is very slow, whether it was a theft or given away it is still a crime. I would say there is a good chance someone is going to wind up in deep trouble and yes there might be arrests at some time in the future. PS how is that passed list working for you all out west? thought so. We are pretty short on pilots these days I wonder what's going on. Have a good night all I can't play anymore.
Clowns exist to make others laugh, if being a clown is no longer funny to you, quit being one.
LUVTHE9 , correct according to JULY BID QUO Additional 52 pilots to support scheduleTE " MM! CLEAR leading the WEST to the UN-MERGER!
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
Yeah the lawman is slow but the company didn't take anytime in ponying up the dough to pay for all those LifeLock subscriptions. If this really was "much ado about nothing" then I can't imagine why the company was so quick to shell out money to aid in our protection of information that was never released.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #13,105
It's be nice if more people learned how to read the opening pages of the bid packet. There are ~ 40 captain openings. Start with 49 additional reserves minus 14 less blockholders for 35 (that's from the net gain/loss chart based on staffing needs). Next look at the headcount chart which shows a net loss of 5 captains. That takes you to the ~40 vacancies. I use the 'approximatley' symbol because the numbers in the head count, except age 65 retirements, terminations or deaths, were accurate when the bid packet was put together but the actual number won't be known till the bid is closed. Someone may go out on or come back from medical between the two events. Somebody may go to or return from supervisory. The 2 early retirements contractually can change their minds up until July 1, so theoretically result in overstaffing in their base/equpment till the next bid. Somebody else may decide to retire early. Hopefully not, but someone could die or be terminated. The bid packet is a snapshop at 1 particular time - when it was put together so the numbers can change before the bid closing. It's like taking a picture of your front yard and taking another 2 weeks later. There's a chance that there will be some difference between the two pictures.
Jim
Jim
If you are tied up with my old lady I really feel sorry for you....I have been divorced for 11 yrs now and wouldn't wish her on anyone. She is bi-polar and knows how to deal with punks like you. She will be in your money before you know it.
Apparently you were abused by the old cook and his ladel at the orphanage or spoiled rotten by a rich daddy. Both of those scenarios lead to an entitlement attitude with a big mouth.
I was brought up with the attitude that calling people names was terribly wrong, so I don't make a habit of it. It is obviously a lesson in life that you missed and should have had beaten into you. Of course, since you're still 23 yrs old ( and we all wish you would act more than 14 yrs old), we have to make exceptions. But you can give up on the idea that you are entitled to anything in life....you're gonna be very dissapointed, if you make it that long.
If you want to get a really good look at the pulse of the East pilots, regardless of USAPA, or anyone else in this world,.....all of you....rent the movie Cinderella Man and watch it again. We have been beat up from a lot of angles and are hoping for a fight. We have earned the right to protect ourselves.
BTW, fodass, that last comeback was the weak.
cleardirect
Veteran
- May 24, 2008
- 6,234
- 9,749
- Banned
- #13,107
Promises promises. Or should I say pro-misses, and more misses. Come on MM give us a time line. You have been threatening an un merger for months now. Where is it?????? Who is it?????
Ready to go back to ALPA????? Ready to be the minority????? The big boy legacy carriers are going to love you guys.
Metroyet
Veteran
- Nov 1, 2008
- 2,571
- 5,664
I'm not friends with pathological liars or those
Being crushed under the weight of narrcasistic personality disorder. Sorry to disappoint. Exactly WHEN is something going to happen with your fake, made up case of identity theft?
It's such a Cleary cut case right.? What's the hold up?
VIA EMAIL AND CERTIFIED MAIL
April 19, 2011
Tracy Parrella
Grievance Committee
U.S. Airline Pilots Association
5821 Fairview Road, Suite 400
Charlotte, NC 28209
Dear Tracy:
You contacted the three of us last week, asking for our assistance with a West pay training arbitration scheduled for next month. For the reasons that follow, we believe that you are pursuing this grievance in a manner that is deliberately contrary to the best interests of the West pilots, and that will subject USAPA to legal liability. Therefore, we must decline to participate.
1. Arbitrating this dispute is a direct and deliberate contract violation.
As you are aware, the grievance provisions in the West contract are detailed and regimented, providing for an orderly and expeditious adjudication of all disputes. These provisions were designed to prevent an untenable grievance backlog, such as the backlog that you currently deal with under the East contract. The language in these provisions are explicit in that any dispute not resolved through one of the three hearing procedures is to be docketed for arbitration as each case becomes unresolved. The provision does not give the company or the union any discretion to table, backlog, or hold in abeyance any dispute. This requirement exists so that no grievance becomes part of a back room horse-trade at the expense of the pilot(s) harmed by a grievance, and such that no political agenda can ever hamper the grievance process.
USAPA has not pursued a single West arbitration in the 3 years it has served as our bargaining agent. There were some disputes already on the books when USAPA succeeded as our bargaining agent, and there are several others that have accrued since then. It is our belief that at least some of these egregious contract violations by the company were only effected because of its assurance, by your deliberate inaction, that these disputes would never be arbitrated.
The point is that there are several other cases that require resolution prior to this one, and you have not provided us a single reason why USAPA seeks to end its 3-year moratorium on West arbitrations with this case.
Once you notified us of the upcoming arbitration, we immediately raised these contract concerns, and repeatedly asked you the purpose of pursuing this case out of the required order. In response to numerous queries, you either offered us false information, or skillfully avoided answering the simple question altogether.
At first, you informed us that the company - not USAPA - was requiring that this arbitration take place. However, we contacted the company and they informed us that USAPA unilaterally controls the grievance docket. You did not rebut this fact when we communicated it to you.
Second, you informed us that PHX Chairman David Braid was at least partially responsible for negotiating an agreement with the company to arbitrate this case. A quick phone call to him revealed that this statement was also completely false. You did not rebut David’s claim.
Third, you informed us that the company had threatened to begin unilaterally withdrawing pay from West pilot paychecks if we did not adhere to the May arbitration date. The company averred that they made no such threat. You did not disagree.
Given these facts, it is not unreasonable for us to assume that there is in fact no legitimate union purpose for violating the contract by arbitrating this case ahead of potentially dozens of others that have been awaiting resolution for 3 or more years. We have offered to assist you with properly docketing all pending West grievances in compliance with our contract, however you have refused to accept our assistance. Worse yet, you have unilaterally announced that USAPA will not postpone this arbitration, and you have still refused to provide a single reason to justify this decision.
2. We do not believe that you plan to arbitrate this case in good faith.
Given the current state of adverse litigation between the PHX based pilots and USAPA, we believe that USAPA has a conflict of interest in resolving this dispute. Since USAPA’s inception as a bargaining agent, it has been engaged in a concerted effort to financially hamper our legal efforts, beginning with the malicious RICO lawsuit that was filed against the 3 of us and 21 of our fellow pilots. The company claims that it intends to recover $2.6 million from the West pilots; an amount of money that we are certain that USAPA would be thrilled to see us pay. We also believe that your refusal to arbitrate other West grievances is motivated, at least in part, by USAPA’s concerted effort to financially impede West legal efforts. As we hope your legal counsel has informed you, federal law not only expressly provides for our right to sue our union, but that same law expressly also prohibits the union from attempting to limit that right in any way.
Your actions of the past few days support our contention. Apparently, this arbitration has been on the schedule for approximately one year, however, the West principals were only made aware of that fact this week, and you have made no effort to resolve other pending West cases in the interm. In addition, the covert planning of this arbitration and the obvious enthusiasm you share with the company for maintaining this arbitration date is evidence of collusion. Further, you have selected a Board member for this case that has a well-documented history of personal hatred of West pilots, and has apparently been the subject of company discipline for some of his spiteful communications to other pilots. Lastly, you have refused to comply with any of our repeated requests for information pertaining to this dispute; a clear indication that you plan to severely limit our ability to assist you properly resolve it.
In addition to your recent actions, we are also aware of a well documented history of arbitrary and hostile acts by you against West pilots. These acts include:
· Refusing all offers of assistance by the former AWA ALPA Grievance Chairman
· Removing two experienced and trusted West volunteers from their ability to assist West pilots with disciplinary issues
· Suspending two of our elected representatives from participating in their representational duties
· Seeking sanctions against a former AWA ALPA negotiator for allegedly refusing to assist with an arbitration, despite the fact that he did not participate in the negotiation of the disputed contract section
· Refusing to file individual West pilot grievances, despite the clear requirement of Section 20 and Ninth Circuit precedent to do so
· Refusing to arbitrate a single West grievance for 3 years (and counting)
· Advocating for an out-of-seniority recall of pilots from furlough in express contradiction to the USAPA Constitution and to the detriment of furloughed West pilots
· Refusing to arbitrate a case on behalf of a terminated West pilot
This list is not exhaustive, and we intend to make use of the disciplinary hearing you initiated against Capt. Doug Dotter as an opportunity to make a full and detailed record of these issues and others.
Our offer still stands to assist the USAPA Grievance Committee with the proper enforcement of our contract. However, for the reasons we have stated, we will not subject ourselves to legal liability from participating in the training pay grievance that you unilaterally scheduled in May.
Sincerely,
/s/ /s/ /s/
John McIlvenna Russ Payne Mitch Vasin
CC: USAPA Grievance Committee
USAPA Officers
USAPA Board of Pilot Representatives
Laura Backus, USAPA Contract Administrator
PHX Domicile
April 19, 2011
Tracy Parrella
Grievance Committee
U.S. Airline Pilots Association
5821 Fairview Road, Suite 400
Charlotte, NC 28209
Dear Tracy:
You contacted the three of us last week, asking for our assistance with a West pay training arbitration scheduled for next month. For the reasons that follow, we believe that you are pursuing this grievance in a manner that is deliberately contrary to the best interests of the West pilots, and that will subject USAPA to legal liability. Therefore, we must decline to participate.
1. Arbitrating this dispute is a direct and deliberate contract violation.
As you are aware, the grievance provisions in the West contract are detailed and regimented, providing for an orderly and expeditious adjudication of all disputes. These provisions were designed to prevent an untenable grievance backlog, such as the backlog that you currently deal with under the East contract. The language in these provisions are explicit in that any dispute not resolved through one of the three hearing procedures is to be docketed for arbitration as each case becomes unresolved. The provision does not give the company or the union any discretion to table, backlog, or hold in abeyance any dispute. This requirement exists so that no grievance becomes part of a back room horse-trade at the expense of the pilot(s) harmed by a grievance, and such that no political agenda can ever hamper the grievance process.
USAPA has not pursued a single West arbitration in the 3 years it has served as our bargaining agent. There were some disputes already on the books when USAPA succeeded as our bargaining agent, and there are several others that have accrued since then. It is our belief that at least some of these egregious contract violations by the company were only effected because of its assurance, by your deliberate inaction, that these disputes would never be arbitrated.
The point is that there are several other cases that require resolution prior to this one, and you have not provided us a single reason why USAPA seeks to end its 3-year moratorium on West arbitrations with this case.
Once you notified us of the upcoming arbitration, we immediately raised these contract concerns, and repeatedly asked you the purpose of pursuing this case out of the required order. In response to numerous queries, you either offered us false information, or skillfully avoided answering the simple question altogether.
At first, you informed us that the company - not USAPA - was requiring that this arbitration take place. However, we contacted the company and they informed us that USAPA unilaterally controls the grievance docket. You did not rebut this fact when we communicated it to you.
Second, you informed us that PHX Chairman David Braid was at least partially responsible for negotiating an agreement with the company to arbitrate this case. A quick phone call to him revealed that this statement was also completely false. You did not rebut David’s claim.
Third, you informed us that the company had threatened to begin unilaterally withdrawing pay from West pilot paychecks if we did not adhere to the May arbitration date. The company averred that they made no such threat. You did not disagree.
Given these facts, it is not unreasonable for us to assume that there is in fact no legitimate union purpose for violating the contract by arbitrating this case ahead of potentially dozens of others that have been awaiting resolution for 3 or more years. We have offered to assist you with properly docketing all pending West grievances in compliance with our contract, however you have refused to accept our assistance. Worse yet, you have unilaterally announced that USAPA will not postpone this arbitration, and you have still refused to provide a single reason to justify this decision.
2. We do not believe that you plan to arbitrate this case in good faith.
Given the current state of adverse litigation between the PHX based pilots and USAPA, we believe that USAPA has a conflict of interest in resolving this dispute. Since USAPA’s inception as a bargaining agent, it has been engaged in a concerted effort to financially hamper our legal efforts, beginning with the malicious RICO lawsuit that was filed against the 3 of us and 21 of our fellow pilots. The company claims that it intends to recover $2.6 million from the West pilots; an amount of money that we are certain that USAPA would be thrilled to see us pay. We also believe that your refusal to arbitrate other West grievances is motivated, at least in part, by USAPA’s concerted effort to financially impede West legal efforts. As we hope your legal counsel has informed you, federal law not only expressly provides for our right to sue our union, but that same law expressly also prohibits the union from attempting to limit that right in any way.
Your actions of the past few days support our contention. Apparently, this arbitration has been on the schedule for approximately one year, however, the West principals were only made aware of that fact this week, and you have made no effort to resolve other pending West cases in the interm. In addition, the covert planning of this arbitration and the obvious enthusiasm you share with the company for maintaining this arbitration date is evidence of collusion. Further, you have selected a Board member for this case that has a well-documented history of personal hatred of West pilots, and has apparently been the subject of company discipline for some of his spiteful communications to other pilots. Lastly, you have refused to comply with any of our repeated requests for information pertaining to this dispute; a clear indication that you plan to severely limit our ability to assist you properly resolve it.
In addition to your recent actions, we are also aware of a well documented history of arbitrary and hostile acts by you against West pilots. These acts include:
· Refusing all offers of assistance by the former AWA ALPA Grievance Chairman
· Removing two experienced and trusted West volunteers from their ability to assist West pilots with disciplinary issues
· Suspending two of our elected representatives from participating in their representational duties
· Seeking sanctions against a former AWA ALPA negotiator for allegedly refusing to assist with an arbitration, despite the fact that he did not participate in the negotiation of the disputed contract section
· Refusing to file individual West pilot grievances, despite the clear requirement of Section 20 and Ninth Circuit precedent to do so
· Refusing to arbitrate a single West grievance for 3 years (and counting)
· Advocating for an out-of-seniority recall of pilots from furlough in express contradiction to the USAPA Constitution and to the detriment of furloughed West pilots
· Refusing to arbitrate a case on behalf of a terminated West pilot
This list is not exhaustive, and we intend to make use of the disciplinary hearing you initiated against Capt. Doug Dotter as an opportunity to make a full and detailed record of these issues and others.
Our offer still stands to assist the USAPA Grievance Committee with the proper enforcement of our contract. However, for the reasons we have stated, we will not subject ourselves to legal liability from participating in the training pay grievance that you unilaterally scheduled in May.
Sincerely,
/s/ /s/ /s/
John McIlvenna Russ Payne Mitch Vasin
CC: USAPA Grievance Committee
USAPA Officers
USAPA Board of Pilot Representatives
Laura Backus, USAPA Contract Administrator
PHX Domicile
I didn't take it as such. Pilots on both sides are frustrated and I understand that. I'm not sure lobbing grenades gives anything more than a little instant gratification. In the long run, it just ends up pissing people off and irrational lashing out often create irrational responses. It's safe to say we are both interested in each other perspective but very comfortable in our own opinions. I think you and I could have this same discussion over a beer and still walk away with a hand shake.
I can't foresee what would have occurred if the "joint ratification" concept remained in play. Under the current representation, the West is going to be told what is in their best interests and provided for as East pilots see fit. I'm sure you can understand why the concept doesn't put west pilots at ease. We really are deadlocked by our own different experiences and as such, it's hard to see both sides coming to a mutually agreed on solution. Unfortunately, the provision of a "neutral" is gone. As far as the 500+ widebody protections, I still don't see it as unreasonable. The East had 500 pilots (CA + FO) needed to keep the existing fleet in the air. Had additional airframes been added, obviously additional positions would have been needed and any pilot, East or West could bid on them as their seniority holds. I didn't think fencing PHX was reasonable because the goal is to get these groups together, not to allow them to remain independent factions. PHX, PHL, CLT, etc...they're just bases. Bid what your seniority can hold. While many East pilots take the Nic as a complete insult, it's worth reading because it explains how he came up with 517 and no fences (besides the 5 yr wide body with an age 65 provision).
I disagree with your assessment of USAir being the same company. For better or worse, it isn't. But let me tell you, it isn't America West either. It's something in between and more often than not (in my opinion) they took the worst of each. The Trans-Atlantic, and many other East assets, have tremendous value and that's why the merger came about in the first place. If liquidated, the parts would have been worth far more than anyone was will to pay for the whole. Sadly, the company (*again, in my opinion) was so badly managed that even with the positives, the end was near. You can't argue the Merger brought a resurgence to the company. Say the East had 200 A/C and the West had 100. A furloughed pilot would be able to come back and enjoy the benefit of a company that had increased by 50% while being senior to what, more than 60% of the West pilots? So the negotiators came to Nic with DOH as an opener. He tried to work with both groups and the East softened to what? DOH. They didn't want to come to a middle ground. They CHOSE not to seek an alternative. If so, at Nic's request they could have come up with SOMETHING besides, "nope, we are only authorized to ask for DOH". Again, if you feel the decision more closely represented the West's position and thus the West "won", then I wish our negotiators would have said, "A staple for the East is all we are authorized". Maybe then people would see the Nic as the middle ground that it really is. And the furloughees...I wish someone could explain how what happened was anything but a transfer of furloughs from the East to the West. I spoke about my opinion of the value of what they brought to the merger in my last writing.
LOA 93 sucks, but that occurred when? So why should the West pilots have to make up for the issues that occurred the merger was even a gleam in Parker's eye? And yes, Nic used the list from '05 because that's when the merger was announced. How many west pilots were hired after the announcement in '05? Very few. Where THEY figured into Nic's plan? Below the active pilots at the announcement of the merger.
Ferris immediately bidding over to spend his final years as a senior 330 pilot isn't reasonable because doing so would have kept an senior East pilot from being able to do so. The immediate effects of integration are easier to see than the distant ones. Should a guy who expected to upgrade this month be able to exercise that expectation? Yes, I think that's reasonable. Should a pilot who expects to be a senior widebody Captain in 25 years be guaranteed the fruition of those expectations, I say no. You keep looking at pilots based on where they are TODAY versus their Nic equivalent. You need to look where they were at the time of the announcement of the merger. Very close to the guy on the other side who had the seniority bidding power within the respective company. Since then, the decision was made to stop growth on the West. We stopped hiring but the East didn't. And where was today's bottom 737 Captain at the time of the merger announcement? Probably in pretty poor bidding shape. Since the merger his career has been put back into gear and he has progressed forward up the list to a Captain's position. The West pilot next to him on the Nic is probably bidding a LOWER percentage than he/she was in '05 but that's because management CHOSE to stop movement on the West. I still suspect that was with the input of Bular and Hogge, two guys who would have been advantaged by that decision (PURELY speculation on my part).
I don't swallow the idea that while imperfect, people should just accept USAPA is what it is because it was started by guys who wanted DOH or death and now that's just the way it is. Pi, USAPA is YOUR union. It represents YOUR pilots. If as group you don't agree with what they are doing then force them to change. If you don't, then it means they represent the opinions of the (majority of) East pilots. While I may be forced to pay 1.95% of my pay to USAPA, in no way do they represent MY interests nor do they even try to pretend to. For example, they have refused to arbitrate a single West grievance for 3 years (and counting). The USAPA leadership comes to East crew rooms and seeks your input. When two members of the leadership choose to come to a West domicile meeting, they were forced by Cleary to leave before the meeting began. Why? No reason is acceptable. Would the same thing happen in PHL? A West vote for ALPA guaranteed someone would sit at the table and represent the East through this process. An East vote for USAPA guaranteed there would be no one representing the West. Truthfully, that is why I have no respect for USAPA and only consider it a Union in the most general sense of the word.
Way past bed time and I still need to proofread before shutting off the light. Like you, I recognize I'm not changing your opinion of the Nic or events that have or are occurring but I really do enjoy this exchanges and respect the fact your willing to discuss our differences.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
