luvthe9
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 9,464
- 14,119
JCBA UPDATE
Dear PHL Pilots,
The APA board met last week to address the company’s Dec. 23, 2014, JCBA proposal. After two days of debate, the BOD voted 18-4 (PHL voted yes) to approve in principle the company’s Dec. 23 proposal and to ballot the membership after an agreement on final language.
Day 1 was mostly spent working on strategy for how to approach management’s latest “take it or leave it” offer. While there are several things less than satisfactory in the proposal, the BOD was unanimous in their focus on improving the pitiful 11-hour three-day pairings, and we will acknowledge we were extremely pleased with the tenor of the meeting and the way the board came together in an attempt to address this important issue. The result was a vote (18-4) that we were willing to forego membership ratification, with an immediate board approval (contingent upon acceptance of final contract language), if the company agreed to address the 11-hour three-day problem.
And it wouldn’t have required much on their part. What the BOD proposed was based on the West’s “long-rate rig,” something that not only has been used in PHX for the entire duration of their current contract but also was already agreed to by this same management team in joint East-West negotiations. As such, we had every expectation that this would be acceptable to management. Furthermore, we believed that by proposing one very important QOL issue in return for immediate BOD ratification, we were not only being reasonable but also providing the company with an opportunity to finally put their oft-touted “new corporate culture” on display.
Unfortunately, and true to their history, the company just said no and refused to offer any alternate solution to remedy this significant QOL problem. They said their analysis showed the additional rig to be too costly and completely disregarded our own cost analysis as well as the fact that we showed them where they lacked understanding of their own West contract language. Scott Kirby also accused APA of changing the West language in our proposal, and while we’re not sure who is advising him, our proposed language was a direct lift from the West contract posted on Wings. The only thing altered was the 24-hour minimum duty break threshold that we lowered to 22 hours. This was done to capture certain pairings that would not have been covered by the new rig. However, this difference was not what Scott Kirby was referring to, and it was clearly explained to him by APA President Keith Wilson so he understood there was a change (24 hour break to 22 hour break) and, more importantly, why it was necessary. The bottom line was simple and abundantly reasonable: Pay us for three days when we are on a three-day trip.
But they refused, and to justify it, the company misleadingly “costed” our proposal based only on how the current pairings would trigger the new rig. Even more troubling, they acknowledge that the pairing optimizer would have “optimized around” the rig, resulting in different looking parings (more four-days, for example) — which would lower the cost of this QOL benefit — but they wouldn’t take that cost out of the analysis they cited in their refusal. It’s all very typical, very predictable behavior from this management and is sadly familiar to LUS pilots. On one hand, they are proud to tell everyone they run the largest, most profitable airline on the globe, and on the other, they refuse to compensate their pilots for their extended down time spent at hotels like they did for America West pilots in 2004 and continue to do today. Same management, unspeakably huge profits, but insistent on making you spend time away from family uncompensated.
Unlike Delta management, which apparently understands the benefit of addressing pilot concerns even if it has an adverse effect on the bottom line (last week, Delta management agreed to not outsource pilot jobs to partner Virgin), US Airways management just doesn’t have it in them to address our issues if it costs the company any amount of money. While we don’t know how much this recently negotiated job guarantee at Delta costs, we are willing to bet it is significantly greater than the cost of the rig to pay us three days for three days on the job.
It would have gone a long way in building a better relationship if Scott Kirby contacted APA and said something like, “I understand this is an important issue to pilots, and it’s just plain wrong for management to require pilots to work three days and get paid for only two. I know it’s going to result in higher costs, but I’m the president of the largest, most profitable airline in the world, and I’m going to do the right thing treat my pilots as such, value the time they spend away from their families, and agree to this new rig.” Instead, Scott Kirby chose to simply say no.
Scott, please reconsider your decision, it will go a long way in building a better relationship.
So, back in the real world, faced with management’s familiar “just say no” mentality, as well as an arbitrary deadline, the BOD had to decide whether to accept the original company offer and send it out for a membership vote after reviewing the final language or to say no thanks.
As you know, the company put two conditions on retro pay back to Dec. 2. One was acceptance by the board before Jan. 3, and the other was to have the unrealistic Jan. 19 pilot vote deadline. We were advised by APA President Keith Wilson that these dates were selected by management to ensure the voting will be completed before both the American and Delta 2014 annual financial results, which are expected to be extremely positive. In the end, the board did agree in principle to accept the Dec. 23 proposal. It will be sent to the pilots for a vote after BOD approval of the final language, which will be completed this week.
We believe Management still has an opportunity for a much improved culture. During a recent update we asked whether the company wanted 15,000 problem solvers or 15,000 pilots saying “solve your own problems.” We believe if management reconsidering its decision and adopts the proposed long rate rig it will go a long way in attaining 15,000 problem solvers and truly position American Airlines much closer to “Great”.
Road shows are tentatively scheduled during the weeks of Jan. 12 and 19. Look for details later this week.
As you can imagine, the last several weeks have been time-consuming and demanding. Please understand that we read/listen to all of your emails, Sound Offs and VM’s. Just because we haven’t responded to all of them doesn’t mean we don’t take your opinions seriously because we certainly do.
Thanks for the continued support.
In unity,
Paul DiOrio and Paul Music
[email protected]
To view this email on the APA Website, please go here:
https://public.alliedpilots.org/apa/Home/APAMemberNews/tabid/842/articleType/CategoryView/categoryId/78/Philadelphia.aspx
Dear PHL Pilots,
The APA board met last week to address the company’s Dec. 23, 2014, JCBA proposal. After two days of debate, the BOD voted 18-4 (PHL voted yes) to approve in principle the company’s Dec. 23 proposal and to ballot the membership after an agreement on final language.
Day 1 was mostly spent working on strategy for how to approach management’s latest “take it or leave it” offer. While there are several things less than satisfactory in the proposal, the BOD was unanimous in their focus on improving the pitiful 11-hour three-day pairings, and we will acknowledge we were extremely pleased with the tenor of the meeting and the way the board came together in an attempt to address this important issue. The result was a vote (18-4) that we were willing to forego membership ratification, with an immediate board approval (contingent upon acceptance of final contract language), if the company agreed to address the 11-hour three-day problem.
And it wouldn’t have required much on their part. What the BOD proposed was based on the West’s “long-rate rig,” something that not only has been used in PHX for the entire duration of their current contract but also was already agreed to by this same management team in joint East-West negotiations. As such, we had every expectation that this would be acceptable to management. Furthermore, we believed that by proposing one very important QOL issue in return for immediate BOD ratification, we were not only being reasonable but also providing the company with an opportunity to finally put their oft-touted “new corporate culture” on display.
Unfortunately, and true to their history, the company just said no and refused to offer any alternate solution to remedy this significant QOL problem. They said their analysis showed the additional rig to be too costly and completely disregarded our own cost analysis as well as the fact that we showed them where they lacked understanding of their own West contract language. Scott Kirby also accused APA of changing the West language in our proposal, and while we’re not sure who is advising him, our proposed language was a direct lift from the West contract posted on Wings. The only thing altered was the 24-hour minimum duty break threshold that we lowered to 22 hours. This was done to capture certain pairings that would not have been covered by the new rig. However, this difference was not what Scott Kirby was referring to, and it was clearly explained to him by APA President Keith Wilson so he understood there was a change (24 hour break to 22 hour break) and, more importantly, why it was necessary. The bottom line was simple and abundantly reasonable: Pay us for three days when we are on a three-day trip.
But they refused, and to justify it, the company misleadingly “costed” our proposal based only on how the current pairings would trigger the new rig. Even more troubling, they acknowledge that the pairing optimizer would have “optimized around” the rig, resulting in different looking parings (more four-days, for example) — which would lower the cost of this QOL benefit — but they wouldn’t take that cost out of the analysis they cited in their refusal. It’s all very typical, very predictable behavior from this management and is sadly familiar to LUS pilots. On one hand, they are proud to tell everyone they run the largest, most profitable airline on the globe, and on the other, they refuse to compensate their pilots for their extended down time spent at hotels like they did for America West pilots in 2004 and continue to do today. Same management, unspeakably huge profits, but insistent on making you spend time away from family uncompensated.
Unlike Delta management, which apparently understands the benefit of addressing pilot concerns even if it has an adverse effect on the bottom line (last week, Delta management agreed to not outsource pilot jobs to partner Virgin), US Airways management just doesn’t have it in them to address our issues if it costs the company any amount of money. While we don’t know how much this recently negotiated job guarantee at Delta costs, we are willing to bet it is significantly greater than the cost of the rig to pay us three days for three days on the job.
It would have gone a long way in building a better relationship if Scott Kirby contacted APA and said something like, “I understand this is an important issue to pilots, and it’s just plain wrong for management to require pilots to work three days and get paid for only two. I know it’s going to result in higher costs, but I’m the president of the largest, most profitable airline in the world, and I’m going to do the right thing treat my pilots as such, value the time they spend away from their families, and agree to this new rig.” Instead, Scott Kirby chose to simply say no.
Scott, please reconsider your decision, it will go a long way in building a better relationship.
So, back in the real world, faced with management’s familiar “just say no” mentality, as well as an arbitrary deadline, the BOD had to decide whether to accept the original company offer and send it out for a membership vote after reviewing the final language or to say no thanks.
As you know, the company put two conditions on retro pay back to Dec. 2. One was acceptance by the board before Jan. 3, and the other was to have the unrealistic Jan. 19 pilot vote deadline. We were advised by APA President Keith Wilson that these dates were selected by management to ensure the voting will be completed before both the American and Delta 2014 annual financial results, which are expected to be extremely positive. In the end, the board did agree in principle to accept the Dec. 23 proposal. It will be sent to the pilots for a vote after BOD approval of the final language, which will be completed this week.
We believe Management still has an opportunity for a much improved culture. During a recent update we asked whether the company wanted 15,000 problem solvers or 15,000 pilots saying “solve your own problems.” We believe if management reconsidering its decision and adopts the proposed long rate rig it will go a long way in attaining 15,000 problem solvers and truly position American Airlines much closer to “Great”.
Road shows are tentatively scheduled during the weeks of Jan. 12 and 19. Look for details later this week.
As you can imagine, the last several weeks have been time-consuming and demanding. Please understand that we read/listen to all of your emails, Sound Offs and VM’s. Just because we haven’t responded to all of them doesn’t mean we don’t take your opinions seriously because we certainly do.
Thanks for the continued support.
In unity,
Paul DiOrio and Paul Music
[email protected]
To view this email on the APA Website, please go here:
https://public.alliedpilots.org/apa/Home/APAMemberNews/tabid/842/articleType/CategoryView/categoryId/78/Philadelphia.aspx
