US Pilots Labor Thread 6/2-6/9 STAY ON TOPIC

[nic4us]

There'd have to be vacancies for migration to occur, but make no mistake about it - PHX will go way senior with each vacancy. Over a few years PHX or LAS A320 Capt would be senior to A330 Capt. anywhere.

If the east gets a 40% pay raise jan 2010, there will be a flood of vacancies in PHX, as the company transfers flying at the rate of 10% per year (28 aircraft the first year) per the TA to PHX. Anyone else notice the fleet list is by N number, not serial number?

 

[wopr21]

I cannot point out the "me too" clause because I was mistaken, it only involves the granting of stock, stock options.

Any chance of USAPA asking for its $70 million in stock?

Or, how about this, you take the difference in loa93-loa84, payable in stock?

As the spokesman for the company at the time, I would expect Kirby to have said just what he did, "what is a number very close to zero chance", because I think he knows the reality of the situation. In his and the company's mind you have nothing more than an amendable date, not a snapback date.

It is an expiration date not an amendable date. There is a date 12/31/09 at which LOA 93 concessionary agreement expires. The east expects to return to previously agreed to pay rates, since LOA 93 is no longer in effect.

We saved the company during crisis. Its time for the company to acknowledge that and manage the company and stop blaming us for management's mistakes.

The longer the company waits , the more they will have to pay in retroactive pay.

wopr

 

[hp_fa]

Let's be honest. The whole contract and grievance system grossly favors the company. The contract only becomes amenable on a given date. Then there are a lot of meetings over a stretched out period to argue about small points as they do the bare minimum to continue the process over the longest possible period of time. Finally they get down to numbers and find that they can't agree so a mediator arrives and that is spread over time before a decision is reached or the mediator finally allows a job action. Unless the company wants something really badly there is no incentive for them to proceed quickly.

Grievances are just as bad. The company, which negotiated the past contract, all of a sudden gets creative in how they interpret the contract they co-wrote. Then the fly-it-and-grieve it thing occurs and then the steps all take their time before 12-18 months later arriving at an arbitration that probably could have been avoided without the company becoming creative in the first place.

Now, on top of all of this let's add that the pilots are fighting so much against each other that no one has time, energy or resources to keep after the company because they are too busy keeping federal judges busy.

Now, in order, let's look at the winners and losers in descending order:

1) The company

2) The USAPA lawyers (they get paid anyway both by being General Counsel and litigation counsel)

3) Plaintiffs' counsel

4) Plaintiffs and their class members

5) West USAPA members, agency fees members and West hold-outs (They probably won't be held responsible for respective shares of the Addington litiagtion.)

6) East USAPA members.

Once again, look at who wins and who loses. The company and all the attorneys win the most. The pilots overall lose, just in varying degrees. A win for West just really means they don't lose as badly.

 

[Captain Underpants]

As duly elected CBA, representing one combined group, USAPA could not negotiate a separate contract for the West. Even if we could, does anyone really believe the West would pass a 4% pay raise?

Snoop,

USAPA does not have the authority to impose Nic without pilot ratification and obviously no pilot would vote to give away 15 years of his seniority regardless of other contract improvements. Adjusting the contract to neutralize Nic and deny the Nic windfall would bring 100% no West votes and kill the joint contract as well.

The other problem is even if USAPA could negotiate a compromise contract to pass by 50% +1 it would put USAPA at risk of liability for damages as both East and West pilots would sue for damages. West pilots would claim damages from a compromised Nic and lost windfall and East pilots would re-file the lawsuit against USAPA for a bad faith DFR violation of its DOH constitution. A joint contract would guarantee continuous ruinous litigation.

As it stands now USAPA was found in violation of DFR for an unfair negotiating position presented to the company. Absent the disputed negotiating proposal USAPA is in full compliance with DFR and all contracts. There are no damages unless AOL can prove USAPA was required to unilaterally impose the Nic award during the period of separate operations and that it was USAPA that caused the economy to falter resulting in West furloughs and the alleged damages.

Regarding your comment above USAPA has a legal right and obligation to negotiate separate contracts through section 6 for East and West pilots if a single joint contract is not attainable. USAPA could simply assign an East or West only negotiating committee to negotiate improvements to the East/West contracts subject to BPR approval prior to pilot ratification. The ratification can also be separate East or West. The company is required by law to negotiate in good faith all contract sections with USAPA. The company can not refuse to negotiate section 6 contracts.

The negotiating committee is now discussing the scope and limits of single joint contract negotiations with the appointed mediator and the timeline for transitioning to separate section 6 negotiations if a court order makes the joint contract negotiations a waste of time and resources for the company and USAPA.

Section 6 for West can start immediately and section 6 negotiations for East can start July 1st (3 weeks). Separate contracts could be ratified well within 12 months or less if the company decides not to roll the dice on the pay freeze expiration. A joint contract could take decades if the company survives that long.

underpants

 

[john john]

Thank You
That all I’m saying

 

[BoeingBoy]

Regarding your comment above USAPA has a legal right and obligation to negotiate separate contracts through section 6 for East and West pilots if a single joint contract is not attainable.

Gosh, underpants, I don't know if congratulations or condolences are in order but you and I agree on the above.

Jim

 

[A320 Driver]

Driver,

What would happen if West pilots, in the spirit of how Nicolau was crafted, agreed to some kind of fence around the widebody flying?

As for narrowbody flying I don't think the Nicolau decision provided there was to be any breakout of East pilots vs. West pilots flying the narrowbody aircraft except for by the seniority list and bidding into a domicile. So I don't think there could be any "spirit of Nicolau" breakout there, but I do see where West could conceivably decide to provide some form of fence to the widebody flying.

The practical problem is what mechanism could be crafted so that West pilots could vote and East pilots could vote when as of now they are all represented by USAPA? Something needs to be crafted for such votes at some point and I am not expecting Judge Wake's remedy to solve that issue. However, I could be wrong on that.

There is no one voice that speaks for the West pilots and I don't think they are interested in anything except full and immediate application of the Nic...no buts.

It has been stated many times on this board...the time for negotiating is over. Gimee gimee gimee.

A320 Driver B)

 

[Phoenix]

There'd have to be vacancies for migration to occur, but make no mistake about it - PHX will go way senior with each vacancy. Over a few years PHX or LAS A320 Capt would be senior to A330 Capt. anywhere.

What are you smoking?

 

[Phoenix]

This ALPA-teat-suckler certainly has no clue, as he now tries desperately to rewrite history.

Did he somehow forget about all the failed attempts to get the west to budge even a smidgen off of Nicolau? Blue Ribbon Committee. Rice Committee. Wye River. Yes, THAT was your ALPA dues at work accomplishing nothing. Their ultimate solution? Send Rice to Tempe with his tail between his legs to deliver the Nicoloau abomination to the company.

Yet now, 18+ months later, we are somehow to believe that ALPA held the key to a modification of Nicolau. Yeah, right. Somebody is smoking something, and then trying to blow it up our collective keisters.

No, Mr. ALPA apologist, you can't rewrite history. It is all still too painfully present in the recent memories of those of us who are grateful to get rid of the "mother ship," no matter what the consequences. I repeat: NO MATTER WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES. We are still better off with those Herndon vampires.

Hear! Hear!

 

[hp_fa]

There is no one voice that speaks for the West pilots and I don't think they are interested in anything except full and immediate application of the Nic...no buts.

It has been stated many times on this board...the time for negotiating is over. Gimee gimee gimee.

A320 Driver B)

My point is that at some point in the future someone will need to speak for the West. It doesn't need to be for negotiation as you are using the term, it may be for discussing how a judicial order is implemented or other things besides traditional negotiation. It doesn't seem proper to default that position to whomever are the PHX and LAS USAPA reps since they would be then be automatically conflicted by representing those folks to the BPR and then representing them also in actions that likely would be contrary to USAPA's constitution.

So, I ask again and in a practical sense, who would speak for West in any future dealings where the opponents are the East members of USAPA?

 

[ableoneable]

There is no one voice that speaks for the West pilots and I don't think they are interested in anything except full and immediate application of the Nic...no buts.

It has been stated many times on this board...the time for negotiating is over. Gimee gimee gimee.

A320 Driver B)

I have never thought this an unreasonable position. (The wide body fence.) The problem is that, sans ALPA, there is no west entity with which to negotiate.

This may have even been possible post Nicolau if the east MEC had had any position at Wye River other than DOH/LOS with conditions and restrictions.

Opening Proposal: DOH no compromise.
During negotiations: DOH no compromise.
During mediation: DOH no compromise.
During Arbitration: DOH no compromise.
Last day of Arbitrtn: DOH no compromise.
Post Nicolau: DOH no compromise.
Blue Ribbon Panel: DOH no compromise.
Wye River: DOH no compromise.
Pre Addington: DOH no compromise.
Post Addington: DOH no compromise.

The east has been asking the west to negotiate with themselves the whole time. Never a good plan.

 

[KTM300]

If the east gets a 40% pay raise jan 2010, there will be a flood of vacancies in PHX, as the company transfers flying at the rate of 10% per year (28 aircraft the first year) per the TA to PHX. Anyone else notice the fleet list is by N number, not serial number?

If my numbers are right, your state is inaccurate for two reasons. The east is currently operating 203 aircraft( it was 204 minus the one in the Hudson). We have a minimum fleet count on the east of 202 aircraft. That of course does not include the E-190 which there are only 25. That's a total of 227.

Can you explain how you came up with your information.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Let's be honest. The whole contract and grievance system grossly favors the company. The contract only becomes amenable on a given date.

The contract, under RLA rules, does indeed only become amendable. However, that does NOT apply to letters of agreement. They can, and do, expire on the expiration date negotiated in the letter.

At some point, hopefully, that distinction will finally sink in to everyone here who thinks LOA 93 is only amendable at the end of this year. Portions of it, including the LOA 93 pay rates, have an EXPIRATION date of December 31, 2009.

 

[nycbusdriver]

I cannot point out the "me too" clause because I was mistaken, it only involves the granting of stock, stock options.

Any chance of USAPA asking for its $70 million in stock?

Or, how about this, you take the difference in loa93-loa84, payable in stock?

As the spokesman for the company at the time, I would expect Kirby to have said just what he did, "what is a number very close to zero chance", because I think he knows the reality of the situation. In his and the company's mind you have nothing more than an amendable date, not a snapback date.

Sure, nic.

You guys have been so kind and generous to us, we will certainly try to get our end-of-LOA pay raises in stock so that you can participate.

Let me get an email out to my reps right now.

 

[nic4us]

If my numbers are right, your state is inaccurate for two reasons. The east is currently operating 203 aircraft( it was 204 minus the one in the Hudson). We have a minimum fleet count on the east of 202 aircraft. That of course does not include the E-190 which there are only 25. That's a total of 227.

Can you explain how you came up with your information.

I thought the east had 279 aircraft at the TA. 10%rounded=28. If you are at fleet min of 202 then 20 per year. Actually I do not think this is a real probability, Because I think getting the 40% raise is very unlikely.