USAPA/ALPA thread of the week 5/31-6/6

[CactusFlyr]

As other's have stated, there is nothing to negotiate in Section 22, it remains as written. The 'nic award was union generated and never accepted by the pilots. The next step will be to provide management the union generated seniority list that will be accepted by the pilots.

If you watched the PHX crew news video with Kirby you will see that management is NOT going to be getting involved with any seniority issues, they will abide by the law.

This issue is over - the new award is DOH, as it should be.

You agreed to it when you agreed to arbitration. LOL

 

[EastUS]

I think you answered your own question. DOH is not fair to the West. That is why fences and protections need to be worked out, so that it becomes fair. Not to mention in the TA there is a no bump no flush clause, that will also protect in the end.

Agreed. For myself; DOH, without protective fences for the west, isn't fair in the slightest. I'm not interested in voting in anything that'd make it "open season" on west pilot's seats and positions....regardless of their proven "Integrity" filled, and "Righteeous Position's" clearly expressed desire to have exactly that against the east ie: "I want the captain seat..and most of all, I want every single east pilot to pay for it"/etc. It's not a requirement to "like" anyone to strive for principled actions.

"INTEGRITY MATTERS"..Yes it does..at least to some of us anyway.

 

[EastUS]

You agreed to it when you agreed to arbitration. LOL

By that "logic": You "agreed" to establishing USAPA when our collective pilots voted last month. I've personally not signed off on, nor voted in favor of ANYTHING the previous "Association" did for fully 15 years plus...with the exception of favoring some assessments to help furloughed pilots. I'm willing to wager that you didn't actually vote for/"agree" with USAPA yourself..but..since your group's so fond of assigning universal, and personal "responsibility"........well..clearly, the collective pilot group "agreed" with USAPA..and that includes you...."lol" as you see fit.

As for your "integrity" laden 'signature" = "Haven't paid a dime to USAPA, and still flying."? Surprising..given that, per the NMB... "you agreed" to USAPA...Enjoy your "LOL" while you can.

Addendum: Just an observation on delusional group perspectives, by way of an individual example. It seems that the same individual who stated (PHX Crew News) "The east pilots have a new union that doesn't represent the west pilots", was also the one who, many months ago, claimed to have "Hard Data"/(Wilson Poll BS/etc), essentially "proving" that the east pilots would indeed, buy off on a combined contract that contained Nic. Said individual was answered by the obvious observation by Mr. Kirby that USAPA does indeed "legally represent the west pilots".

Whether individually or collectively as a group segment; You just can't fix stupid it seems.

 

[pilot]

Things certainly have gotten quiet since the lawsuit was filed.

 

[sharktooth]

This is not the case and from the CLT crew news DP specifically stated "We can't just ignore the Nic award".

When did DP "say" that?
CLT crew news, before or after 17 April?

 

[sharktooth]

This is my point, you can't reasonably say DOH with some modifications, because that opens up for the west to make a case for Nic plus some modification. You guys need to find something that isnt DOH or Nic.

Nic is dead.

 

[sharktooth]

Whether individually or collectively as a group segment; You just can't fix stupid it seems.

From a U-Turn, dated 30 May, 2008.

We are not sure what your Captain friend from ATA has to do with this. When we almost merged with ATA in 2004, ATA had three-year CAs and we had seven-year FOs. We all wanted DOH, not relative seniority, didn’t we? What did you tell your friend back then? That you wanted relative seniority? Some AWA pilots actually wanted to staple all the ATA pilots to the bottom of our list.

Seems AWA wanted DOH in 2004. I wonder if "Captain Staple" wanted to staple the ATA dudes. Integrity amongst the west seems to depend. Sorta. Kinda.

 

[eckoa6]

When did DP "say" that?
CLT crew news, before or after 17 April?

On the May 7th CLT right before Doug finish speaking about the seniority list he states "understanding that there is this award out there that you can't just ignore". If you watch on the flash version click on the Seniority List section. Doug made the previous statement then said we will take it all this into consideration and look forward to starting negotiations.

 

[CactusFlyr]

From a U-Turn, dated 30 May, 2008.



Seems AWA wanted DOH in 2004. I wonder if "Captain Staple" wanted to staple the ATA dudes. Integrity amongst the west seems to depend. Sorta. Kinda.

Whats this WE stuff. You weren't around and don't know what you are talking about. It never even got to any discussion of seniority.

 

[Freighterguynow]

What the east refuses to understand is there is a procedure to integration. Step 1 negotiation. Step 2 mediation. Step 3 arbitration. What the west refused to do was go back to step 1 after the award was announced.

I think the West refuses to understand is that the Nic award combined with even the ALPA 'ask' for pay rates was a non-starter for the East. That is when joint contract talks ended and where we stood as the votes were tallied at the NMB - an impasse on the negotiation of a joint contract.

While the circumstances are different, look at Polar/Atlas for the same situation. Merger announced 2001 yet to even have the first JNC meeting in 2008 because the merger benefits one pilot group to the overall detriment of the other.

 

[nic4us]

Section 22 - Seniority is easy. Just tell Doug no changes to the existing contract. In fact, tell him he can pick east Section 22, or west Section 22. His choice. Then invite him for a beer.

tell him use west section 22 especially that paragraph 3 or 4 I forget which, that says once established a pilots relative seniority cannot be altered.

thanks for the great idea busdriver!

 

[ChuckBewFarley]

Things certainly have gotten quiet since the lawsuit was filed.

Where was it filed and against whom? :blink:

Let's build some brotherhood with a law suit.

First the agency shop letter and now a law suit. Great way to make friends.

Don't you want the masses to be informed? After all it's an electronic union!!

 

[nycbusdriver]

tell him use west section 22 especially that paragraph 3 or 4 I forget which, that says once established a pilots relative seniority cannot be altered.

thanks for the great idea busdriver!

Not a problem. The Nic is an internal ALPA [sub](Okay, Richard, ya got me!)[/sub] list that has not been "established."

(I thought we went over this months ago. You have to pay better attention.)

 

[EastUS]

Where was it filed and against whom? :blink:

"Let's build some brotherhood with a law suit." Seems sadly, very reasonable to me, given that the stated purpose from the west has been/is to "destroy" USAPA with some fantasized, and devastatingly brilliant litigation......No doubt, done to enhance brotherly love amongst "fellow pilots"?. Then..There's this litle issue of non-compliance with federal law, gleefully celebrated by even the "signature" of one of "yours" = "Haven't paid a dime to USAPA, and still flying." Personally...I hate enriching lawyers myself, but such are the sad times we live in.....

"Don't you want the masses to be informed? After all it's an electronic union!!" Absolutely...I naturally assume that that you've signed up, and USAPA has your email addy?......No? = "Dohh!"

 

[sharktooth]

On the May 7th CLT right before Doug finish speaking about the seniority list he states "understanding that there is this award out there that you can't just ignore". If you watch on the flash version click on the Seniority List section. Doug made the previous statement then said we will take it all this into consideration and look forward to starting negotiations.

Thank you. After 30+ minutes of listening to that guy, then, so see some slob with unbuttoned shirt ask about seniority from someone who really cannot talk about it at all, I'd sooner stick needles in my eyeballs.

Your quote is a paraphrase of what Mr. Parker said, and only after proffering a ton of qualifications that basically negated anything he said about it. Listen to him around the 35 minute mark and see if he really said what you quoted. I think you took your misquote out of context. It would not be for Mr. Parker to comment one way or another about a union "award", even to say whether a union could ignore or not something.