AAA73Pilot
Veteran
- Jul 18, 2007
- 1,513
- 0
Uncalled for. I know and have worked with BB. He's an honorable man and a friend. We disagree on many things. But insults never got anyone anywhere.
NMB Speaks: We Have an Election! ALPA/USAPA Topic for 2/19-26
- Thread starter dariencc
- Start date
- Status
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #272
Actually, with the addition of the word "eventually", it's possibly accurate. In a merger, a pilot eventually gravitates to what his/her new seniority number can hold. That may be anything from on the street to advancement, depending on what happens at the airline over time. How long "over time" is also depends on what happens at the airline.
Jim
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #273
Thanks for sticking up for me, but I thought it was funny - possibly a little off-color for Aviation but funny anyway.
For the record, the answers are:
1 - no comment
2 - she's like me, prefers the 727 but that's not much of an option these days. So I guess it's whatever airplane is going where she wants to go and has empty seats (although we've bought tickets on OAL for our recent travel).
Jim
E
EastUS
Guest
Indeed. The future's always an unknown...which makes "relative" notions of ANYTHING...inclusive of seniority or otherwise...utterly absurd. "Expectations" are only proper indulgences for children at play...period.
"No plan ever survives initial contact with the enemy"
PS: I'll go with the 727 as being one of the finest aircraft ever produced myself
AAA73Pilot
Veteran
- Jul 18, 2007
- 1,513
- 0
I agree with the gravitate to what the seniority can hold. But as presented in the original post, I still disagree. The many non furloughed F/O's will have something to say about that progression or regression of the returned furloughee. I read the posters premise as being almost instantaneous. Which it can't.
ableoneable
Veteran
- May 6, 2007
- 711
- 0
No, it's quite accurate. All it would take is a down cycle twelve months after the last east pilot is recalled. I believe all the east's pilots are now back. (With the exception of the J4J pilots, but officially they are recalled and the twelve month clock would have already started ticking.)
On the west side I am in the bottom third of line holding captains. The proposed east DOH/LOS list showed eight pages worth of furloughed pilots senior to my number.
A modest downturn would result in my downgrade to FO. In this scenario when the airlines financial picture brightened I would not upgrade back into my seat. A lot of pilots who were on furlough while I was in the left seat, in fact eight pages worth, would have to upgrade before I had a chance. In addition to the furloughed pilots all of the east pilots who were employed FOs would have to upgrade before I could regain the seat I had held at the time of the merger. In this example only a modest downturn would result in a furloughed pilot occupying a left seat. The only difference is that the former west captain is not furloughed but merely downgraded while the former east furloughee is now in the left seat.
Keep in mind that as soon as I downgrade I become an FO junior to many east FOs who were on the street at the time of the merger. I will now go onto the street before they do.
It would take a stronger downturn to deliver the scenario where a former east furloughee is in the left seat and the west captain is on the street but it is certainly possible.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #277
Since virtually nothing in aviation is instantaneous, except possibly shredded aluminum, I guess that's supposed to make a difference. My view is that a merger offers two possibilities - everyone can keep what they had going in and move up/down from there based on what happens with the airline, or the two sides can exchange the opportunities or lack thereof that their respective airline's fortunes provided pre-merger.
Jim
E
EastUS
Guest
What's your suggestions as to how to work this mess out? The west's been utterly uninterested in fences, negotiations, or in fact ANYTHING short of: "Gimme my Nic NOW" thus far....?
I do the more even tempered gentlemen that are working so hard establishing USAPA some disservice by mentioning my own personal notions..but: your group's worked very hard to make itself into a rather poor semblance of anything to hold great empathy for.....
We'll have to work all this out. What are your thoughts on how best to proceed?
ableoneable
Veteran
- May 6, 2007
- 711
- 0
Are you sure the west has been uninterested in fences? I know that fences were on the west menu during pre-nicolau negotiations. The only reason discussions never included fences is that there was no need for a fence to protect the east pilots under the DOH/LOS scenario which was the only one acceptable to the east negotiating team.
As far as post Nic discussions; I can't say for sure if fences would have been a possibility during the steering committee talks. It never got that far. The east's opening position was again essentially DOH/LOS. This time they termed it "furlough [east only] protection" but essentially this was their opening position and the talks went no-where fast.
Every time talks are started the east opens with "in the event of a downturn you guys need to take the full brunt of the hit because you are junior." and guess what? The discussion stops.
E
EastUS
Guest
Understood. Again..we've got an enormous mess on our hands..Thanks Alpo/etc. What might the west consider as reasonable in the near future? The good news/bad news, depending on perspective..is that we'll likely soon be out from under Alpo, and truly in this as a group.whether by way of a shotgun marriage via west perspectives or not.
ableoneable
Veteran
- May 6, 2007
- 711
- 0
Good question.
On the boards the discussion always seems centered around the east being worried about losing the upgrade opportunities.
Fences for protecting opportunities due to growth and (eventually) attrition are probably doable. (One of the East side proposals would have granted all upgrades to the east for a five year period. They wanted the west to bear all of the stagnation brought on by the age 60 change. This is one of the reasons our MEC has little patience for the east MEC.)
What is not negotiable, from the west perspective, is what Jack Stephan terms "furlough protection". I can't imagine that there is anything out there that will make us willing to expose ourselves to furlough ahead of the east pilots just recalled.
Your side seems to think that we need to "pay our dues" and by doing so be willing to take a furlough before a former furloughee. We will never see eye to eye on this issue. This is what is going to provide the lawyers boats and bonanzas for the next five years.
E
EastUS
Guest
The time between Nic and now's certainly raised the animosity fences on both sides to heights suitable for high altitude chart depictions. I'm just one person..but I don't wish to see anyone hosed over this mess, nor see any west folks displaced/etc. I don't have any immediately "brilliant" thoughts on furlough protections..and we'll have to figure that out for certain. We needn't be a tender loving "family" at first, or ever..but; we do need to establish realistic dialog. The simple issue of our both tossing out conversational openers gives me some hope for the future....
Take care/etc. Got an early morning "go" for some business, and must bail for now.
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
Let him go. He's retired.
Hey.. Chill Out
Veteran
- Dec 16, 2007
- 501
- 3
I don't know how anybody could have possibly taken that as an insult. I wasn't knocking the moustache, trust me. You wear it well.
Lol, I was just saying she likes rides in a 737 because he is a... You guessed it, a 737 pilot.
ableoneable
Veteran
- May 6, 2007
- 711
- 0
February 26, 2008
This is MEC Chairman John McIlvenna with two important items:
Item 1: A330-200 China Flying
Last Friday, at the request of management, your MEC and JNC representatives met with management to discuss future A330-200 flying. Management discussed their vision that it was impractical to fly the new China routes with West crews for a number of reasons and that they did not view China A330-200 flying as "growth" flying under the terms of the Transition Agreement because both East and West fleets are below the fleet maximum numbers allowed. That is to say, management views China A330-200 flying as "replacement" flying.
Late yesterday afternoon, management sent over the attached A330-200 proposed LOA that they preferred to be discussed in JNC talks as they did not want to be perceived to be trying to "whipsaw" East and West pilots against one another.
Late this afternoon, I was informed by management that the East MEC had contacted management and requested that the talks NOT take place under the auspices of JNC talks and that they would instead prefer to speak separately to management to modify the East agreement on a stand alone basis.
At this time, management has indicated they will likely have to engage in these whipsawing talks requested by the East MEC, but they have also not ruled out stand alone talks with the West MEC on future A330-200 flying, with various management sources indicating that Phoenix-Heathrow, Phoenix-Frankfurt, and Phoenix-Tokyo may be started in the 2010 timeframe.
We will continue to keep you informed on this very important issue."
This is MEC Chairman John McIlvenna with two important items:
Item 1: A330-200 China Flying
Last Friday, at the request of management, your MEC and JNC representatives met with management to discuss future A330-200 flying. Management discussed their vision that it was impractical to fly the new China routes with West crews for a number of reasons and that they did not view China A330-200 flying as "growth" flying under the terms of the Transition Agreement because both East and West fleets are below the fleet maximum numbers allowed. That is to say, management views China A330-200 flying as "replacement" flying.
Late yesterday afternoon, management sent over the attached A330-200 proposed LOA that they preferred to be discussed in JNC talks as they did not want to be perceived to be trying to "whipsaw" East and West pilots against one another.
Late this afternoon, I was informed by management that the East MEC had contacted management and requested that the talks NOT take place under the auspices of JNC talks and that they would instead prefer to speak separately to management to modify the East agreement on a stand alone basis.
At this time, management has indicated they will likely have to engage in these whipsawing talks requested by the East MEC, but they have also not ruled out stand alone talks with the West MEC on future A330-200 flying, with various management sources indicating that Phoenix-Heathrow, Phoenix-Frankfurt, and Phoenix-Tokyo may be started in the 2010 timeframe.
We will continue to keep you informed on this very important issue."
- Status
