Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Buddy, this has to do with the west also. Are you happy with a 10k pat on the head? Haven't you given up contractual improvements over the last 8 years? Doesn't this bother you that you will be slapped into a BK contract? Doesn't it bother you that you will lose profit sharing in a company that will potentially make 2 billion in profits per year? And then you'll have to pay four times as much for a Rx in copays?
All I'm saying is that this contract stinks and that there is a better deal in the 11th hour.
I'm not dwelling the past, I'm considering it in the context of the future.
There is irony in any situation if you are inclined to look for it. However, I don't place a lot of blame on east or west, but management, who have profited from our plight every day since 2005. Don't you feel used and abused? I do, and I want to make sure Parker leaves some $$ on the nightstand before he leaves the room.
NO.

No I am not happy about any of this. No the MOU is not great. But the west was put in this position by the east pilots and management. The west understood that we were not going to get anything out of the contract because the east was so far behind. We accepted that. Then the east decided that getting 95% of the contract was not enough. You wanted 95% of the contract and all the seniority leaving nothing for the west.

Then the east demanded separate ops taking all of the benefits of the merger leaving the west with nothing.

Management has taken advantage because east pilots refused to live up to your agreement of arbitration.

So the west was not going to get much in a contract. Now this MOU the west is not going to get anything. So to see the east whine that you are in the same position that you have put the west in is funny.

East pilots made the argument that majority rules. Now that you are in the minority you don't like it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
MichaelBake.jpg
_space.gif

RECALL UPDATE #3​

The following are some questions that have been raised by the misinformation propagated by the recent mailing of our CLT Reps. Rather than campaign on their success and record of accomplishments, they instead choose to attack their constituents. Note the tone of their message. We do recognize their dedication and hard work but challenge our Reps in their next message to communicate a factual record of accomplishment and their vision for the future.

Are we diehard ALPA supporters?
No - We are USAPA supporters, since inception, who along with 400 of your USAPA peers, that include USAPA founders, decided to initiate a recall of our CLT Reps.

Is Chip Munn running this recall?
No, and neither is AOL or Obama.

What is our position on seniority integration?
We fully support the USAPA Constitution with DOH/C&R.

What is our position on the pension investigation?
We support the PIC and applaud their efforts.

Would we have given away our seniority?
A fact-less, meritless statement that can only be assumed to invoke fear. This is not a leadership quality.

Are the 400 pilots who signed the recall petitions to blame for the LOA 93 debacle?
The leadership style of our Reps was exactly the leadership style at work within ALPA that brought us LOA 93. Division and a lack of Unity with 5 reps using the Roll call vote over 50 times.

Was the catalyst for the recall the BPR vote on MOU1?
No - it was Steve Crimi's statement at the August 20th domicile meeting maintaining they are the "Firewall" of information to the line pilots and they would not let the line pilot vote unless they liked a particular agreement. That notion was overwhelmingly rejected by a show of hands from the line pilots present. Do they not trust their constituents, when educated with the facts, to make their own decision and let the majority prevail?

10-0-1 vote - MOU#1 and MOU#2?
Fact - The NAC and Roland Wilder, our professional negotiator, recommended MOU1 in order to “have a seat at the table” as it was a “fast moving and dynamic” time with Horton likely to pull the NDA card anytime. In light of a possible split, Roland also recommended that whatever their vote, it be unanimous for leverage. It was the opinion of Roland, the NAC, Merger and Lead Council that we would have been in a stronger negotiating position at the table working on MOU #2 if we had MOU #1 rather than LOA 93. It took a lawsuit to get back to the table. Just as APA leveraged the merger and new contract to improve their CLA/Term Sheet with Parker, we would have been working in concert with them. How much did we possibly leave at the table by not listening to our Professional Negotiators?

Is the retroactive pay due to the fortitude of the CLT and two PHL Reps?
While this has been propagated by our Reps, with possible violations of the NDA, the remaining 6 BPR members, PN, NAC and Officers unanimously differ with this 'recollection'. Pete Dugstad’s (DCA) letter 1/18/13. We choose to give credit to ALL parties involved and would expect our Reps to move forward in Unity.

Was the recall influential in shaping the outcome of negotiations?
We will not take any credit for the success of the negotiations and have already mentioned those who deserve the credit. We do not believe the CLT Reps would be influenced by a group allegedly led by ‘Chip’s army’ and leave money on the table, which they state is the unfortunate truth. If so, one would have to question their leadership.

We are facing a new future, one that should be not be viewed through the rear view mirror of the past, but the possibilities that the future holds. Change is inevitable. Your vote can steer the direction of that change and we hope you chose to do so. Vote Yes to recall the CLT Reps.https://www.BallotPoint.com/USAPA/

Tom McGuirk
CLT AB C/A
Michael Bake
CLT AB F/O​

The old grade school adage still applies. To all things that smell bad. This one fits the bill....
"He who denied it, supplied it." Munn is definitely all over this one.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
You actually believe that drivel? A multibillion dollar deal and they can't cough up a couple million more? Give me a break.
I stand by my assertion that whatever we give up in concessions (and there are MANY concessions here), we will never see again.
Your management is salivating over this forced capitulation of our contracts, pushing us into an inferior agreement that will make us work more for less.
NO.
You mean like compromising on the Nicolau? That any do session the west made would never be seen again. Usapa salivating over pushing us into an inferior agreement that would place all west pilot in a worse position.

See how karma is a ####?

 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Here's a scenario two years from now. JCBA negotiations, J. Glass in command for the new AA.
"Sorry guys, we really overestimated our revenue stream. You'll have to come up with concessions worth 1 billion, and take a 50% pay cut so the company can survive. We're sorry, but the finance people in NYC will cut off our credit lines if we don't do this."
Sound familiar?
What you give up today will not be there to recover tomorrow.
NO.
Exactly. These guys have no idea what is in store for them. If Glass is involved, it is going to be a scary ride. The grievance workload will increase exponentially for starters.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
The old grade school adage still applies. To all things that smell bad. This one fits the bill....
"He who denied it, supplied it." Munn is definitely all over this one.
Agreed. This ones smells bad....'unity' over all else? Give me a break. I want reps to represent my interests, not to provide a 'united' front. If they have to upset the applecart, so be it.
NO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
Exactly. These guys have no idea what is in store for them. If Glass is involved, it is going to be a scary ride. The grievance workload will increase exponentially for starters.
Why? Tracy parrella is not the grievance chair anymore and east pilots will not be in charge of the committee.

The APA will have reasonable adults running the committee. Unlike chasing un winnable grievances like LOA 93 and MDA.

Are you east pilots so arrogant that you think the APA is clueless about Jerry glass? That only the hardcore east pilots understand the industry?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
So what are your plans guys to get more. If you were on the NAC, what would you do? I've heard complaining but no plan of action. So lets hear it. Ciabattoni's plan didn't go over so well so I'd like to hear your ideas.
First, the membership has to vote it down. If that happens, it is a clear mandate to the NAC to get something better.
Second, bring back in the Pitbull, Paul DiOrio. He has perhaps the most indepth knowledge of our contract. He was negotiating for us for how long? The company negotiators hate him - so make them deal with him. They make us deal with J. Glass.
Third, think about this: has this agreement met your expectations for our next contract? Because we could be living with it for a long time, if history is a guide. Also, this could be the best contract you'll ever see, because the next one might have MORE concessions.
What if there is a BK 2 at AA to clean up the items that weren't taken care of in BK1 (sound familiar?)? You know, Jerry Glass is helping run the show at AA....we all know his tactics personally.
Run the scenarios - don't let the big $$ signs blind you to what is really happening here.
You all know how fast your payrates can be reduced (overnight).
Clear is right, payback is a b1tch. Let management in on that concept, too.
NO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
First, the membership has to vote it down. If that happens, it is a clear mandate to the NAC to get something better.
Second, bring back in the Pitbull, Paul DiOrio. He has perhaps the most indepth knowledge of our contract. He was negotiating for us for how long? The company negotiators hate him - so make them deal with him. They make us deal with J. Glass.
Third, think about this: has this agreement met your expectations for our next contract? Because we could be living with it for a long time, if history is a guide. Also, this could be the best contract you'll ever see, because the next one might have MORE concessions.
What if there is a BK 2 at AA to clean up the items that weren't taken care of in BK1 (sound familiar?)? You know, Jerry Glass is helping run the show at AA....we all know his tactics personally.
Run the scenarios - don't let the big $$ signs blind you to what is really happening here.
You all know how fast your payrates can be reduced (overnight).
Clear is right, payback is a b1tch. Let management in on that concept, too.
NO.
God you're an idiot. How about this scenario? The MOU gets voted down and the Company never even contacts the NAC? It's over. What on Earth makes you think the company entertain ANY further negotiations? They don't have to. They will move fwd. You'll be on LOA93 for a couple more years. APA takes over, USCABA dies an instant, quiet death and then you get to be on the APA contract. A few years from now.

Which scenario is more logical? It makes perfect sense why East Pilots/USAPA are continually the biggest financial losers in the industry...you have no ability to perceive reality. If the situation doesn't fit your world view...which is always preconditioned that YOU are the most important aspect of anything regarding Aviation....then you spin out of control. Here's a few sobering facts for you to ponder in your completely fked up entitiled world.

1. You are an employee. You trade your time for a specific amount of money and benefit that is delivered to you without interruption. You are taking no risk...you are compensated accordingly. You should thank your lucky stars Doug Parker saved your career so you could still collect your meager living every two weeks. Frankly, it's a hell of a lot more than you deserve.

2. You get a W2. That means you're an EMPLOYEE. A worker bee. Not a partner in anything.

3. You don't matter...not at all.

It's shocking how blind some of you are. Enjoy one of your last temper tantrums. It'll be over soon enough.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Naaah! Who'd want to be treated as anything even close to equals here? Why...the very nerve of even suggesting such a thing! ;)

I sure would like a new car for $20 but I don't think I'll be able to convince the guy selling it to me to take my offer.

It's never about what you want - its about what you can get.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
First, the membership has to vote it down. If that happens, it is a clear mandate to the NAC to get something better.
Second, bring back in the Pitbull, Paul DiOrio. He has perhaps the most indepth knowledge of our contract. He was negotiating for us for how long? The company negotiators hate him - so make them deal with him. They make us deal with J. Glass.
Third, think about this: has this agreement met your expectations for our next contract? Because we could be living with it for a long time, if history is a guide. Also, this could be the best contract you'll ever see, because the next one might have MORE concessions.
What if there is a BK 2 at AA to clean up the items that weren't taken care of in BK1 (sound familiar?)? You know, Jerry Glass is helping run the show at AA....we all know his tactics personally.
Run the scenarios - don't let the big $$ signs blind you to what is really happening here.
You all know how fast your payrates can be reduced (overnight).
Clear is right, payback is a b1tch. Let management in on that concept, too.
NO.

If we vote this down, the company walks. They won't even look in our direction until this merger is done and APA has negotiated everything for us. Recourse? Not much with an injunction hanging over us and the way the NMB treated the AFA, they'll be no help to us.

Diorio is not a pit bull. What has he accomplished? Nothing. Best thing we did was get rid of him.

This MOU will suffice until we get a new JCBA. I figure no more than a year. In fact, I'll say we'll have this whole process (SLI incl) wrapped up by this time next year if not before the end of the year. I'm still guessing by year end.

Your plan keeps us on LOA 93 that much longer and has our fingers crossed for a CoC that's been a failure and Diorio, another failure who hasn't produced anything.

Bottom line is your plan stinks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
What is it again you're thinking you have that'll get you more?

That question is more apropos to your assertion that unresolved issues can and will be adressed in the JCBA. If there is cause to get improvements, it won't happen after there is an agreement.
 
If we vote this down, the company walks. They won't even look in our direction until this merger is done and APA has negotiated everything for us. Recourse? Not much with an injunction hanging over us and the way the NMB treated the AFA, they'll be no help to us.

Diorio is not a pit bull. What has he accomplished? Nothing. Best thing we did was get rid of him.

This MOU will suffice until we get a new JCBA. I figure no more than a year. In fact, I'll say we'll have this whole process (SLI incl) wrapped up by this time next year if not before the end of the year. I'm still guessing by year end.

Your plan keeps us on LOA 93 that much longer and has our fingers crossed for a CoC that's been a failure and Diorio, another failure who hasn't produced anything.

Bottom line is your plan stinks.
If we turn this down, will the creditors be on our side or the company's?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.