Temporary Injunction against USAPA filed today

[Keroseneuser]

With your logic, it's business as usual when a loaded gun is pointed at your head. No harm so long as the trigger isn't pulled and in that very very narrow and naive context, you're right.

Nah, looking at it from a realist point of view. The company is not fixing the maint issues like they used to, they are pushing them down the line, so we end up with the same write up over and over with many "resets"= delays. The company is short staffed in pilots, maint. gate and ramp= Delays. By their own admission in the injunction filing they say it....paraphrasing "injunction against not working overtime and not calling scheduling back" Well crap they have the vacation down to nothing and the days off pushed to the very minimum, what do they expect? They are in effect saying that their staffing is so bad that they cannot operate the schedule unless people pick up time on their off days.

The reserves are running 6 on 2 off or 6 on 3 off almost non stop with all nighters backed up by all day island trips then back to all night, yet they want an injunction against "fatigue calls" again, what do they expect? There are tons of valid data about body clock stress and fatigue and they run the guys in the exact opposite of what your body can do.

The weather is the weather, and the east coast gets hammered more than the west does=delays the list could go on and on.

DOH is bad for the west NIC is bad for the east, so much so that 90% of the east group I don't think cares if it ever gets worked out, most will be gone before the courtroom drama is done years down the road, and by then father time will have taken care of most of the issues due to retirements and <snicker> Growth <snicker>

Point is it does not matter if there is a "loaded gun" in form of an injunction or not pointed at them or not. the seniority issue is not getting worked out anytime soon, and only mgmt. can change the other issues listed. So why would I give one crappola about issues I cannot change? If its broke it gets written up as required by Regs. If I am too frigging tired to stay awake all night on a red eye due to going non stop for the previous 5 days I will call in instead of risk killing myself or my passengers. And with the reduced off time and vacation there is no way I am going to pick up time on off days and spend even more time away from my family.

So from a realist point of view, the injunction if it comes really does not matter one bit to me. I flew it legal before without intentionally slowing it down and will continue to do so. If they want to shoot me with the injunction gun, well so be it. I cannot control what mgmt. does to the schedule and staffing.

 

[Pi brat]

Another thing CG. We have a current culture of blame. The management bonus structure is set up with two big metrics being CASM and operational performance, right? Well, it just so happens that is where the pressure is. "Close the door, close the door, close the door! We're not waiting. Just MEL it!". When a scapegoat becomes available, everyone starts looking to push their failures onto the goat. I saw in on a recent trip, big time! I think it is a poor way to manage and ultimately will backfire, and already has, but we will see. What I see the injunction doing is really pissing off the remaining 80 to 90% of us that were already doing our jobs as we should. The other bunch was probably lost forever with LOA 93, the pension, etc.

 

[mrbreeze]

I think there was a grass roots movement of a certain number of pilots that were already not doing the most they could for the company that decided to use the safety concerns of USAPA to put the screws to the company. I have no idea how big that number of pilots was, but I don't think it was as big as the company said. I've seem too much screwed up in our operation that has nothing to do with pilots that I think the company decided to throw into the "it's pilots fault!" pot.

I have no problem with the company asking us to do our job as we are supposed to, but I believe the injunction request goes too far. The company has all the tools it needs to handle what was going on without running to the courts. They should have used those tools instead of blaming everything on the pilots, and publicly labeling the pilots with an "illegal job action". In doing so, I believe they are ignoring valid safety concerns. Not that anyone, management or pilots, is trying to be unsafe, but the current rift is reducing our safety margin. It's never good to not listen to one another, no matter who's fault the initial problem was. I suggested the company call a time out, acknowledge that our current relationship is not healthy,and reach out to the pilots to try and heal it. They are not interested. They would rather try to beat it into, or out of, us. We'll see how it turns out.

Agreed, Pi

On our flight to Europe last night, we actually had a flight that went fine...no MELs or maintanence problems....150 kt tail wind, with an arrival 1 hour early. During the flight, we were talking about how this kind of uneventful flight was not the norm these days. The thing is that it should be the norm.

All of this "rift" has the whole company, from management down to the cleaners, in the red, instead of staying in the green.

So, who can help get us back in the green? Better yet, who is RESPONSIBLE for getting us back in the green? East can blame the West....West can blame the East.....West and East can blame USAPA.....USAPA can blame management....management can blame lots of folks.

Bottom line, though, is that Doug has the power and the responsibility, just the same as the Cpt and FO are responsibile for getting back into the green through CRM. I wonder if Doug even has a clue as to what CRM stands for. However, CRM, in the arena of running an airline gets a little democratic (Southwest Airlines comes to mind), instead of being run by an over paid dictator.

breeze

 

[luvn737s]

I think there was a grass roots movement of a certain number of pilots that were already not doing the most they could for the company that decided to use the safety concerns of USAPA to put the screws to the company. I have no idea how big that number of pilots was, but I don't think it was as big as the company said.

How many yelllow lanyards were there? That should give you a good idea of the number of pilots engaged in or in support of such activities.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Another thing CG. We have a current culture of blame. The management bonus structure is set up with two big metrics being CASM and operational performance, right? Well, it just so happens that is where the pressure is. "Close the door, close the door, close the door! We're not waiting. Just MEL it!". When a scapegoat becomes available, everyone starts looking to push their failures onto the goat. I saw in on a recent trip, big time! I think it is a poor way to manage and ultimately will backfire, and already has, but we will see. What I see the injunction doing is really pissing off the remaining 80 to 90% of us that were already doing our jobs as we should. The other bunch was probably lost forever with LOA 93, the pension, etc.

So what changed on May 1st that caused all of this culture of blame? That's the date where an unmistakable and undeniable statistical deviation occurred. Did Management get a new bonus program on May 1st? Did the calls for closing the door change on May 1st? I don't think so.

The Management focus on on-time procedures and other DOT metrics changed way back in late 2007 when Robert Isom was brought in to specifically correct US' operating performance. His leadership produced results in a few months and they were sustained well into 2008 and beyond. Management and customers don't want unsafe aircraft, but they do want the airline to operate reliably. So Management bonuses naturally reflect that that focus. There is nothing wrong with running a safe airline that focuses on operational excellence.

So, were you complaining about the "culture of blame" back then, or were you just focused on the "unfairness" of the NIC? I've been reading these boards since that time and I don't recall any real safety issues being brought up back in 2008 or 2009. The east attention on safety began when USAPA stated its safety first campaign, released the safety survey, and then called for the firing of the VP of Safety. Suddenly there was a safety concern, but only among certain east pilots. That all seemed like smoke and mirrors to me until Management filed for injunctive relief with data that shows east operations reflecting a substantial change, mostly in CLT. Based on that it seems clear to me, and I presume to judge Conrad, that safety was being intentionally used as an illegal leverage ploy by USAPA. Management and their bonus pay didn't change; maintenance didn't change; gate procedures didn't change. The only change I am aware of originated with USAPA and that only to send Management a message about how far USAPA was willing to go to close out section 22 in their favor.

 

[Pi brat]

So what changed on May 1st that caused all of this culture of blame? That's the date where an unmistakable and undeniable statistical deviation occurred. Did Management get a new bonus program on May 1st? Did the calls for closing the door change on May 1st? I don't think so.

The Management focus on on-time procedures and other DOT metrics changed way back in late 2007 when Robert Isom was brought in to specifically correct US' operating performance. His leadership produced results in a few months and the were sustained well into 2008 and beyond. Management and customers don't want unsafe aircraft, but they do want the airline to operate reliably so Management bonuses naturally reflect that that focus. There is nothing wrong with running a safe airline that focuses on operational excellence.

So, were you complaining about the "culture of blame" back then, or were you just focused on the "unfairness" of the NIC? I've been reading these boards since that time and I don't recall any real issues being brought up back in 2008 or 2009. The east attention on safety began when USAPA stated its safety first campaign, released the safety survey, and then called for the firing of the VP of Safety. Suddenly there was a safety concern, but only among certain east pilots. That all seemed like smoke and mirros to me until Management filed for injunctive relief with data that shows east operations reflecting a substantial change, mostly in CLT. Based on that it seems clear to me, I and I presume to judge Conrad, that safety was being intentionally used as an illegal leverage ploy by USAPA. Management and their bonus pay didn't change; maintenance didn't change; gate procedures didn't change. The only change I am aware of originated with USAPA and that only to send Management a message about how far USAPA was willing to go to close out section 22 in their favor.

Why do you ask questions when you already have the all answers?

Yes, I was concerned about our safety culture back then. I met Mr.Isom at a crew news session and tried to talk to him about what I saw as a dangerous trend with the fuel school. To me, that's when it headed down and it has gotten worse since.

 

[Pi brat]

How many yelllow lanyards were there? That should give you a good idea of the number of pilots engaged in or in support of such activities.

I saw very little difference in operation between my F/Os that wore the lanyard and those that didn't. As a matter of fact, I had one F/O that did someone else's disgusting job without gloves, and he was wearing a yellow lanyard!

 

[aquagreen73s]

DOH is bad for the west NIC is bad for the east, so much so that 90% of the east group I don't think cares if it ever gets worked out, most will be gone before the courtroom drama is done years down the road, and by then father time will have taken care of most of the issues due to retirements and <snicker> Growth <snicker>

Retirements on an East only list means roughly the same as what Nicolau awarded.

Growth? Your head is obviously deep in the sand. All you're going to do is work under a BK contract for 5-10 years longer and get nothing better than what you'd get under the Nicolau.

Snicker all you want. The laugh is on you.

 

[Keroseneuser]

From my point of view, late 2010 is when I started seeing more MEL's and pressure to push on time no matter what the maint status was. First it was more single MEL's then it moved into several at a time. At least what I see the amount of MEL's and resets increased drastically from what we traditionally carried prior to then.

I agree with one poster above that the "normal" for us is now to be carrying MEL's. That is something I never saw here before now. I actually say to myself "WOW no MEL's" when I get a clean airplane anymore. It is actually a rare time when you can go all day with no MEL's.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Why do you ask questions when you already have the all answers?

I asked you questions because I genuinely don't know what you are thinking. I have little doubt that you personally are not involved in the intentional slowdown and I don't think you care all that much for USAPA's conduct as a CBA, though you clearly don't want the NIC anymore than a USAPA zealot. So, if my characterizations of you are correct, it makes me wonder why someone who hasn't participated in USAPA's "alleged" schemes would be so willing to turn a blind eye to the data presented by Management. Why are you so offended by the lawsuit if you didn't participate? if I were on your side I would want to see bad apples tossed if they engaged in an illegal action that tainted the reputation of my group in general and me in particular. I certainly wouldn't shoot the messenger (Management) who has an obligation to get operations and the related costs of the slowdown back to normal.

 

[mrbreeze]

I asked you questions because I genuinely don't know what you are thinking. I have little doubt that you personally are not involved in the intentional slowdown and I don't think you care all that much for USAPA's conduct as a CBA, though you clearly don't want the NIC anymore than a USAPA zealot. So, if my characterizations of you are correct, it makes me wonder why someone who hasn't participated in USAPA's "alleged" schemes would be so willing to turn a blind eye to the data presented by Management. Why are you so offended by the lawsuit if you didn't participate? if I were on your side I would want to see bad apples tossed if they engaged in an illegal action that tainted the reputation of my group in general and me in particular. I certainly wouldn't shoot the messenger (Management) who has an obligation to get operations and the related costs of the slowdown back to normal.

That is one of the most judgemental spins I have seen you post CG. If you were working in the East operation, you would understand. Easy to sit on the sidelines and judge, such as the Cpt Wells issue. If these things were a reality in PHX, you would be singing a different tune.

Try to open you mind as to what is really happening in the East.

breeze

 

[Pi brat]

Why are you so offended by the lawsuit if you didn't participate?

How many time do I have to tell you? If you really want to know, READ, ABSORB!

I was against the whole yellow lanyard thing because I felt it gave the company an excuse to write off legitimate safety concerns and I feel that is exactly what has happened. As I said, they had the tools to deal with any trouble makers, but I think they used the "job action" to cover up other screw ups. We became the scape goats and other groups took their frustrations out on us. I've caught it from agents and pax. Go look at US Daily for today. Look at our numbers. D0 and A14 are up system wide for the month, but not CLT. Why, the weather wasn't that much worse there until today. Why did the company use CLT for it's analysis? I have some ideas, do you?

You say the safety first program started May 1st. I believe it started earlier than that, it was around May 1st that the lanyards started showing up. Didn't someone on here say that they had the lanyards made and distributed and not the union? As I said, concern over our safety culture has been going on a lot longer for most of us over here.

You don't want answers, you want to preach. That is what you do, you do not listen.

 

[Keroseneuser]

Retirements on an East only list means roughly the same as what Nicolau awarded.

Growth? Your head is obviously deep in the sand. All you're going to do is work under a BK contract for 5-10 years longer and get nothing better than what you'd get under the Nicolau.

Snicker all you want. The laugh is on you.

Good grief, the snicker was about the growth comment...as in "It will be a cold day in hell when this mgmt. team utters the word growth"

On your other point, no after going over the list and my age as compared with the age of the guys above me as per NIC...I am indeed better off working on this BK contract for 5 -10 years longer than I would be otherwise. That takes into consideration monthly bidding power, vacation bidding, equipment I can reasonablely expect to hold using both methods etc. For much of the list NIC means retiring as an F/O on Kirby style rates, or retiring as Captain on BK rates. The Bk rates are better.

It really is as simple as that for the majority of the east group. I don't think anybody cares too much about which seat, just which payrate. Now if the company came up with rates that paid the permanant F/O's 125k a year (ie BK capt. rates) then I bet you could get a contract voted in with NIC included. But as you said above, growth is a non factor around here so the BK rates are the only way a huge number of the older guys on the east will ever see 6 figures in a paycheck.

 

[CallawayGolf]

BTW - if you want concerns taken seriously by Management then you need a new CBA not run by people who do not want to renege on their contractual agreements and binding arbitration. Until that changes I don't know how anyone would take anything USAPA says or does seriously. It is really a simple and black and white issue when it comes to credibility and trustworthiness. Why should Management hear anything from the east when they elect leaders with no moral standards or truthful conduct?

 

[Pi brat]

If these things were a reality in PHX, you would be singing a different tune.

Brings to mind a few months back when they weren't as happy and proud of our management team. The distance learning meltdown,where I heard an illegal job action brought Doug to the table. That info. from a westie, of course.