Pilot labor thread 5/4-5/10

[elixir]

What are the delivery dates on those orders? There are none. What you are disingenuously (big surprise) trying to hide is that those orders are in a "deferred delivery" status. What this means is that these were orders that your struggling airline was in no position to close on, so they were given a pass. These orders exist in the same way that Mesa's A380 order exists. They don't.

As to the "potential" to convert these orders to widebodies, this differs in what way from the potential of any other company to show up in Toulouse tomorrow and order aircraft? You have to be able to pay for them, and your airline can't.

You are operating in Lala Land, my friend. :blink:


Cheers

Well, if this is wha we are talking about... I have an order in for a 18" %ick implant....I'm sure it will be great...and my career expectation is to have that 16" mamba....shag til I die....and be buried in a Ferrari...

Dos that count towards my "career expectations"....?

 

[prechilill]

And a mere 19 widebodies (if you want to consider the 767 a widebody....we pretty much don't at UAL which gives USAPA rookies NINE (9)!!!) is hardly a big card in your deck. I'll see those 9 and raise you 82! (777 + 400's).

Cheers,
Z B)

USAirways is a collection of regional airlines with high yields and even higher costs. They didn't even have a widebody (aircraft, that is) until Piedmont.

 

[fr8tmastr]

Does anyone really think UAL would ever buy an Airbus widebody (unless they were given to them) with our entire fleet composed of Boeings? Plus does anyone really think Boeing won't weigh in on any UAL decision to purchase more aircraft without a VERY VERY compelling bid to continue to have UAL operate it's widebodies? Of course they will.

That is a good thing

That's why any discussion of "aircraft on order" doesn't mean didley. Nice try from a negotiating standpoint but we at UAL/ALPA are a lot smarter than that. You bargain with what you bring to the table, nothing more. And a mere 19 widebodies (if you want to consider the 767 a widebody....we pretty much don't at UAL which gives USAPA rookies NINE (9)!!!) is hardly a big card in your deck. I'll see those 9 and raise you 82! (777 + 400's).

Good for you and your 82 widebodies, furthermore no Eastie or Westie should go anywhere near them until seniority would allow it. And even then, after fences and conditions designed to protect the United pilots that rightly deserve their own flying and retirements.
So why again are you P.O.ed at USAPA?
One should watch those that WOULD actually try to steal their jobs and not believe all the rhetoric.

 

[sharktooth]

USAirways is a collection of regional airlines with high yields and even higher costs. They didn't even have a widebody (aircraft, that is) until Piedmont.

PSA had L1011s.

What a sweet flying a/c, with real piano bars and Rolls engines, no less. What more could a pilot ask for?

Just to keep the history straight.

and, PSA had pretty low costs, FYI.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Yessir, I do...

The "correct target" is NOT the "other pilot group"...it never has been, and it never should be.

Did you have any real say in who hired you?

Did I...?

Did we not apply EVERYWHERE to get a job?....

So , tell me sir, exactly how did we become enemies...?

I didn't vote for this merger...

You didn't vote for this merger....

We have NO say in this merger..or any other merger.....

( You and I could easily get F'd in a merger....)

If I don't know you...and you don't know me.....why are we enemies?

Well, even today I consider east pilots my fellow airmen at the root level. I said before, and I meant it, that I sincerely hope the pilot fired for the gun discharge is reinstated, and I sincerely hope the crew that got the 737 stuck come out ok. The east pilots are not my enemy, even today. That being said, after they stepped away from joint negotiations and and spent their efforts playing a numbers game to beat the west into submission, my level of respect for them took a nosedive. Not than any of them care.

Personally, give me a 737 and the west coast, and I'm happy. Its just awfully hard to have alot of respect for a group that you can't count on. Prior to the nic, the east and west shook hands, and lo and behold it turns out the west is missing a finger. I'll still drink a beer with any of you, say hi when I walk by, and let any of you on my jumpseat. I can seperate things. This whole situation just sucks, oh well.

 

[elixir]

Well, even today I consider east pilots my fellow airman at the root level. I said before, and I meant it, that I sincerely hope the pilot fired for the gun discharge is reinstated, and I sincerely hope the crew that got the 737 stuck come out ok. The east pilots are not my enemy, even today. That being said, after they stepped away from joint negotiations and and spent their efforts playing a numbers game to beat the west into submission, my level of respect for them took a nosedive. Not than any of them care.

Personally, give me a 737 and the west coast, and I'm happy. Its just awfully hard to have alot of respect for a group that you can't count on. Prior to the nic, the east and west shook hands, and lo and behold it turns out the west is missing a finger. I'll still drink a beer with any of you, say hi when I walk by, and let any of you on my jumpseat. I can seperate things. This whole situation just sucks, oh well.

Oh well...?

Yes , I agree.

In my tenure as a furloghee flying for Express (on both coasts) I have had the privaledge of giving J/S rides to all sorts...from both sides of the fence.

I have NEVER...and will NEVER ...let this BS get in the way of a guy trying to do his job....and yet I read about his very thing.


I didn't ask for this....you didn't ask for this...

"we" didn't ask for this...

I'm really sorry that a group of employeees think that we should kill each other to "get ahead" of each other...

Fcucking sad.

(delete away, mods, but ...WTF....)

 

[tazz]

Any questions from the West?.....think about the West fleet for just a minute before you answer.....

The west may not like the way any future arbitrator may decide in this manner but, as a west pilot, I can honestly state that the west will accept said arbitrator's decision. The east pilots will never be able to make that claim. Hence, the battle we all find ourselves in.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Remember Vinnie Barbarino, "I'm sooooo confuuuuussed?" That's kind of what I feel like. Add in United, oh brother.....

 

[elixir]

I'm not trying to make a vote...

I just ask...does it make sense?

Who wins in this scenario?...

You?

Me?

Or Parker?

 

[EastUS]

Does anyone really think UAL would ever buy an Airbus widebody (unless they were given to them) with our entire fleet composed of Boeings? Plus does anyone really think Boeing won't weigh in on any UAL decision to purchase more aircraft without a VERY VERY compelling bid to continue to have UAL operate it's widebodies? Of course they will.

You bargain with what you bring to the table, nothing more. And a mere 19 widebodies (if you want to consider the 767 a widebody....we pretty much don't at UAL which gives USAPA rookies NINE (9)!!!) is hardly a big card in your deck. I'll see those 9 and raise you 82! (777 + 400's).

Cheers,
Z B)

"Aircraft orders are just that, orders, not rubber on the ramp! If you'll look at UAL SEC filings you'll see that UAL has 42 A320's on the books STILL that can be converted to widebodies should it choose. So, following that logic I suppose UAL pilots could argue we have the potential for 42 ADDITIONAL widebodies. Get real."

Yep...and so the bickering/pre-game show, over what constitutes any "career expectations" immediately surfaces. I don't, nor ever will, argue in favor of that sort of Alpoid "career expectations" insanity as being anything other than fully insane. Your observations well show how seperate groups will view and/or slant such. My belief is that using anything other than DOH for establishing seniority is a fool's game, and serves only to obliterate the basic foundations of craft unionism. Protective fences? = Fine by me, but any/all of us going hysterical in the future over "career expectations" serves only the lawyers, UA-Alpoid/Flight-Pay-Loss Lifers, and naturally; the interests of management, gained by having internecine pilot group struggles and the resulting lack of any unity.

"That's why any discussion of "aircraft on order" doesn't mean didley. Nice try from a negotiating standpoint but we at UAL/ALPA are a lot smarter than that." That remains to be seen, as you immediately rose to the bait of even someone just bringing up aircraft reductions/orders, and appear to embrace some fantasies concerning associated "career expectations", and getting "what you bring", as if ANY pilot in merger history "brings" anything but him/herself to the scenario...If/when/AS if EVER...any aspect of Alpa, whether your bunch or otherwise, EVER "gets that" ...I'll open up for considerations as to their being "smarter than that"....which is a notion entirely unsupported by any aspect of historical reality thus far. Imho.."we at UAL/ALPA are a lot smarter than that" is an oxymoron...since you're still IN alpa..but; that's another discussion entirely. Suffice it to note that airline managements couldn't have ever wanted, nor even dreamed of a better "gift" than contemporary Alpa, with it's insane, strife-inducing "policies" that have, so eagerly and cheerfully been provided to management teams...on a silver platter...with NOTHING gained in return. Spare me any "a lot smarter than that"......If there existed even an ounce of "smart" anywhere within Alpa..we would have neither needed, nor ever been involved in this discussion.

PS: I've always been a huge fan of Boeing products myself

 

[ClueByFour]

Yep...and so the bickering/pre-game show, over what constitutes any "career expectations" immediately surfaces. I don't, nor ever will, argue in favor of that sort of Alpoid "career expectations" insanity as being anything other than fully insane.

My belief is that using anything other than DOH for establishing seniority is a fool's game, and serves only to obliterate the basic foundations of craft unionism.

Well, part of that probably comes from being at a carrier that was stagnant forever. It's useful to look and see what year the junior 737 captain at somewhere like, say, CO. Then when the junior captain at US on the 737 was hired (the juniormost lineholder is probably a more useful metric). Or take a look at how long a guy at UA can realistically expect to spend on a widebody hired at a given point versus how long a guy at US will.

DOH does not take into account anything other than time passing. If you worked at a carrier that hired anyone from 1999 forward, you might feel differently.

 

[EastUS]

Well, part of that probably comes from being at a carrier that was stagnant forever. It's useful to look and see what year the junior 737 captain at somewhere like, say, CO. Then when the junior captain at US on the 737 was hired (the juniormost lineholder is probably a more useful metric). Or take a look at how long a guy at UA can realistically expect to spend on a widebody hired at a given point versus how long a guy at US will.

DOH does not take into account anything other than time passing. If you worked at a carrier that hired anyone from 1999 forward, you might feel differently.

"Well, part of that probably comes from being at a carrier that was stagnant forever." "If you worked at a carrier that hired anyone from 1999 forward, you might feel differently."

Nope...sorry...it's an issue of what I feel and hope are well thought-out actual principles. I've been at three distinctly different airlines already...and never "expected" even USAir in any way. By way of your projections as to how another presumably thinks, it's apparent that I don't share your notions on viewing things through "It's ALL about MEEE!!" glasses, and my beliefs on the value of DOH don't serve to benefit myself, in actual fact.

"Or take a look at how long a guy at UA can realistically expect to spend on a widebody hired at a given point versus how long a guy at US will." Fabulous idea!!...Umm....should we go directly to the ouija board?...or start with tarot cards?....perhaps astrological portents?.....Sorry..but I couldn't help but laugh after "how long a guy at UA can realistically expect to spend on a widebody hired at a given point versus how long a guy at US will."...I mean, seriously? = "realistically expect"???...in THIS industry??? Based on WHAT possible future-seeing, sooth-sayers?

Has it utterly escaped you that, until VERY recently, the folks at UA were "realistically expecting" a merger with Continental...Should those "expectations" have an effect now? Shall we delve again into the Tarot?

Imho: ANYONE who's selling "Career Expectations" and/or "Relative Seniority" only does so for a very few reasons:
1) They do NOT have much in the way of "Time in Grade", and feel selfishly compelled to seek other methods of advancing themselves over their "fellows" regardless.
2) They're, at best "unclear on the concept" as to what Unionism is actually all about, and are essentially, purely opportunistic...see #1 above...or..honestly "confused"...just my opinion.
3) They've, flat-out...just run outta' all their bottles filled with "Doctor Magical's Astounding Cure-All, Hair-Growing and Wealth Enhancing SNAKE OIL"

 

[prechilill]

PSA had L1011s.

What a sweet flying a/c, with real piano bars and Rolls engines, no less. What more could a pilot ask for?

Just to keep the history straight.

and, PSA had pretty low costs, FYI.

Have to say something, don't you, no matter how distorted it comes out. Yes, PSA had a couple L1011's flying for a few months in the mid 70's- over a decade before USAir came in and destroyed them. As stated in my post, the first widebodies the boys out east ever saw came from Piedmont.

 

[EastUS]

Have to say something, don't you, no matter how distorted it comes out. Yes, PSA had a couple L1011's flying for a few months in the mid 70's- over a decade before USAir came in and destroyed them.

Well heck..That's no problem then. All we need do is take a "snapshot", based on "Mother Grinning Bird" and her sister ship's time-frame then. After all...it's all "relative"...isn't it? Of course..you probably weren't even born then, so that'd place you at some disadvantage. Ummm..or, perhaps we should just go with the currently huge numbers of widebodies out west for permanently establishing your own "expectations"? I mean seriously; there are actually ZERO hard and fast rules where "relative seniority" is concerned....or are there?....Have I just missed them?....Where are they posted?...alongside of the diagnostic protocol sheets for determining who's "relatively" insane?

"Imho: ANYONE who's selling "Career Expectations" and/or "Relative Seniority" only does so for a very few reasons:
1) They do NOT have much in the way of "Time in Grade", and feel selfishly compelled to seek other methods of advancing themselves over their "fellows" regardless.
2) They're, at best "unclear on the concept" as to what Unionism is actually all about, and are essentially, purely opportunistic...see #1 above...or..honestly "confused"...just my opinion.
3) They've, flat-out...just run outta' all their bottles filled with "Doctor Magical's Astounding Cure-All, Hair-Growing and Wealth Enhancing SNAKE OIL"

 

[Junebug172]

AWAPPA update:



1. AAA MEC Lawsuit Dismissed
AWAPPA has been informed that the attorneys representing both the AAA and AWA MECs have filed a joint stipulation dismissing the case in DC Superior Court, as the parties (namely the AAA and AWA MECs) to the proceeding no longer exist. Thus ends one challenge to the Nicolau Award.

2. Parker Informs Labor - No Joint Negotiations Until After Any Merger
AWAPPA volunteers have learned that at last week's quarterly labor meeting with US Airways senior management, Doug Parker did NOT acknowledge any direct discussions regarding any party to a merger, but instead told the labor representatives there (including USAPA) that if a merger took place, there would be no joint labor negotiations until after a merger transaction is closed for financial purposes. This is not unexpected as this was management's stance in our AWA/AAA negotiations (with the exception of the completion of our Transition Agreement). In this case, it is even possible that no transition agreement negotiations would be completed as the UAL and LCC pilots are represented by different unions.

We continue to carefully observe both management's actions, and USAPA's actions very closely as we have informed both parties that they will be named as defendants in a law suit if they agree to modify the Nicolau Award.

3. Watch Your Back
AWAPPA has received several reports of USAPA members attempting to create a hostile work environment for former AWA pilots by engaging them in debate designed to entrap them and then filing reports against them with management. In their reports to management, the USAPA members have deliberately added "spin" to their version of the confrontation to appear that they are the victim.

Frankly, this vile act is inexcusable and the culture that has created this environment should be immediately stomped out by senior management. We hope that senior management is going to adopt a zero tolerance approach to this "baiting" activity by some USAPA members who file these frivolous reports.

AWA pilots need to be especially careful not to be entrapped by these activities and avoid any and all confrontations with East pilots. AWAPPA recommends that if you are confronted, you should immediate remove yourself from the situation and find witnesses to bear evidence to any events that may have transpired. Document everything. And please be careful out there.

4. USAPA Claims All Expenses Germane
In a recent report, USAPA has claimed that all expenses their expenses are "germane" to the representational activities. As a reminder, those who pay agency shop fees in lieu of union dues are entitled to a refund of all fees that were not used for "germane" representational expenses. We guess that this recent announcement means that USAPA plans to go ahead and collect dues from pilots even though they have not delivered any contractual products yet. Additionally, USAPA has yet to clarify whether they are charging 1.95% or 2.95% dues, even though they have worked out a non-member dues check-off arrangement.

Thanks USAPA, but on behalf of the dissenters, we will wait until you mail us the bill.

5. Follow the FOM
The new US Airways FOM is designed to be permissive in nature as a result of liability experience from US Air's six major accidents. Our former Safety Committee folks highly recommend all pilots carefully follow the rules. With a new and untested union, and now that we are outside ALPA's accident and safety umbrella, it is up to every pilot to protect themselves. Fly by the book. If in doubt, file an ASAP and NASA report immediately.

6. McCaskill or ALPA Merger Policy - You Decide.
USAPA put out a recent update that asserted that as a result of the McCaskill Bill, Allegheny-Mohawk procedures would be used if we merged with UAL. The McCaskill Bill was enacted at the end of 2007 as a stop gap to protect labor from mergers like AMR/TWA where one employee group did not get access to a "fair and equitable" standard in an arbitration to integrate seniority. Importantly, the provisions of the Bill do not apply if the employees are represented by the same labor organization. Specifically, the law says: "if the same collective bargaining agent represents the combining crafts or classes at each of the covered air carriers, that collective bargaining agent's internal policies regarding integration, if any, will not be affected by and will supersede the requirements of this section..."

Consider the following: Let's say LCC and UAL merge, the transaction closes this fall sometime, and subsequent to the closing there is an NMB single carrier determination and an election between the pilot groups. We are confident that ALPA would be reinstalled as the union for all UAL/LCC pilots after a relatively quick election (since no cards would have to be filed). Because the new law says that Allegheny/Mohawk arbitration only takes place if the employees are represented by different labor organizations, it is AWAPPA's view that ALPA's Merger Policy would be used because both LCC and UAL pilots would be in ALPA well before the merged seniority talks take place. (Remember how long it took our case to get through all the steps?) Here is the law's text for your review:

SEC. 117. LABOR INTEGRATION.

(a) LABOR INTEGRATION- With respect to any covered transaction involving two or more covered air carriers that results in the combination of crafts or classes that are subject to the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.), sections 3 and 13 of the labor protective provisions imposed by the Civil Aeronautics Board in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger (as published at 59 C.A.B. 45) shall apply to the integration of covered employees of the covered air carriers; except that-

(1) if the same collective bargaining agent represents the combining crafts or classes at each of the covered air carriers, that collective bargaining agent's internal policies regarding integration, if any, will not be affected by and will supersede the requirements of this section; and

(2) the requirements of any collective bargaining agreement that may be applicable to the terms of integration involving covered employees of a covered air carrier shall not be affected by the requirements of this section as to the employees covered by that agreement, so long as those provisions allow for the protections afforded by sections 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-Mohawk provisions.

(B) DEFINITIONS- In this section, the following definitions apply:

(1) AIR CARRIER- The term `air carrier' means an air carrier that holds a certificate issued under chapter 411 of title 49, United States Code.
(2) COVERED AIR CARRIER- The term `covered air carrier' means an air carrier that is involved in a covered transaction.
(3) COVERED EMPLOYEE- The term `covered employee' means an employee who--
(A) is not a temporary employee; and
(B) is a member of a craft or class that is subject to the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.).
(4) COVERED TRANSACTION- The term `covered transaction' means--
(A) a transaction for the combination of multiple air carriers into a single air carrier; and which
(B) involves the transfer of ownership or control of--
(i) 50 percent or more of the equity securities (as defined in section 101 of title 11, United States Code) of an air carrier; or
(ii) 50 percent or more (by value) of the assets of the air carrier.

© APPLICATION- This section shall not apply to any covered transaction involving a covered air carrier that took place before the date of enactment of this Act.

(d) EFFECTIVENESS OF PROVISION- This section shall become effective on the date of enactment of this Act and shall continue in effect in fiscal years after fiscal year 2008.

But even if we are wrong about that scenario, since ALPA Merger Policy works similarly to the way that Allegheny-Mohawk works (i.e. a fair and equitable integration resulting from binding arbitration), the same substantive standards would apply. While some continue to argue that Allegheny-Mohawk means date of hire, nothing could be further from the truth as has been previously pointed out in a letter by Jeff Freund which explained that integration under Allegheny-Mohawk has infrequently resulted in a DOH integration of pilot seniority lists [note that the letter was written prior to the existence of the McCaskill Bill]. In any event, one thing is clear - if ALPA becomes the bargaining agent for both UAL and LCC pilots, it is unlikely that any assertion from the soon-to-be-former USAPA demanding that they are a party to this integration would prevail, since they will have no statutory right to represent any pilots.