US Pilots Labor Discussion 3/19- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[CallawayGolf]

I also see the West going for almost any deal to trigger what they want. Calloway especially. What the west has really missed is the fact they helped build a lower cost entity within the airline by not attempting or requiring any pay parity as part of a combination. This really allows Parker to drag his feet as long as he can. From a management standpoint, who can blame him? He has created a beautiful labor divide, which can be used against each side in contract talks, future flying, and the big ace- the ability to have an excuse and means to divide the place up cleanly should the opportunity arise.

Well I’m certainly not a hopeless, eternal optimist if that’s what you mean by “especially Callaway”. I’m not saying I’m right, but in my opinion there are at least three major obstacles to your position on “industry standard” wages (whatever that specifically is):

1) The company is in no financial position to offer (or agree to) such a substantial increase in wages​

2)Without the support of an extensive segment of the pilots, USAPA lacks the bona fide negotiating leverage required to pressure management into giving anything they don’t already desire to give in a new CBA​

3)Even if USAPA , miraculously had the support of a super majority of pilots, USAPA has nothing to offer management in return for these higher wages. Negotiations require give and take and I fail to see what USAPA has to give in exchange for management offering higher wages. They do want a single CBA and they offered Kirby to try and get it. To get more than Kirby, USAPA must give management something it desires beyond a single CBA. What exactly is that offer going to be?​

Change these conditions and I would gladly advocate for wages higher than Kirby’s offer. If not, then all this talk about industry standard wages is just more pep rally antics than it is reality.

Here’s a conundrum for your USAPA supporters: suppose USAPA negotiates a better than industry standard contract (with none of the give aways described by BB), but is unable to avoid the NIC as the new seniority list. Would you consider USAPA to be successful or a failure at that point? I’m not asking if you would vote for or against such a CBA, I’m asking if you would consider losing DOH but gaining higher wages to be more of a success than a failure, or would it be more of a failure than a success?

 

[redheadtempe33]

Whoa! Just got off the phone with a friend in AZ. What the (&)&(*^ was going on with that pilot and F/A beating up some guy out there????Was it an Airways guy?

Yes, they both work (worked?) for US Airways. The pilot and FA were having an affair. The FA's ex-husband threatened to tell the pilot's wife and kids (up in Utah) about the affair. The pilot and FA conspired to beat up the ex-husband, which the pilot did and then attempted to leave the state. I'm sure it will be a movie of the week on Lifetime or something at some point. Go to azcentral.com and use the search function if you want the whole story.

 

[Black Swan]

Well I’m certainly not a hopeless, eternal optimist if that’s what you mean by “especially Callaway”. I’m not saying I’m right, but in my opinion there are at least three major obstacles to your position on “industry standard” wages (whatever that specifically is):

1) The company is in no financial position to offer (or agree to) such a substantial increase in wages​

2)Without the support of an extensive segment of the pilots, USAPA lacks the bona fide negotiating leverage required to pressure management into giving anything they don’t already desire to give in a new CBA​

3)Even if USAPA , miraculously had the support of a super majority of pilots, USAPA has nothing to offer management in return for these higher wages. Negotiations require give and take and I fail to see what USAPA has to give in exchange for management offering higher wages. They do want a single CBA and they offered Kirby to try and get it. To get more than Kirby, USAPA must give management something it desires beyond a single CBA. What exactly is that offer going to be?​

Change these conditions and I would gladly advocate for wages higher than Kirby’s offer. If not, then all this talk about industry standard wages is just more pep rally antics than it is reality.

Here’s a conundrum for your USAPA supporters: suppose USAPA negotiates a better than industry standard contract (with none of the give aways described by BB), but is unable to avoid the NIC as the new seniority list. Would you consider USAPA to be successful or a failure at that point? I’m not asking if you would vote for or against such a CBA, I’m asking if you would consider losing DOH but gaining higher wages to be more of a success than a failure, or would it be more of a failure than a success?

I love the part about the company not being able to afford substantial increases in wages. The west maintaining their support, and I mean FULL support of LOA 93 is duly noted. We are coming for our increase in wages. Especially the part which supports the west pilots in their low yield markets. Maybe you guys should take pay cuts for a while, because I see where this thread is going, from your viewpoint. Let's hope LOA 84 wages which are owed come to fruition. I would be happy to see your end support the bottom line for a good long time after what you have helped take place. You would never have had profit share or a DC Plan if it were not for east pilots.

 

[CallawayGolf]

I love the part about the company not being able to afford substantial increases in wages ...You would never have had profit share or a DC Plan if it were not for east pilots.

How much did you receive in profit sharing in 2008 and 2009? Does that answer your question about the company's Operating Income and ability to pay substantially higher wages to its most expensive employee group?

 

[cactusboy53]

You guys got handed the silver football Parker fumbled. Instead of doing the right thing, you turned around and ran a touchdown for the opposition. Now you expect team bonding when it really counts. Good luck.

I looked & smelled more like a nearly dry cow pie, IMHO....

The court system will force compliance & damages. I don't see bonding out of that, but most certainly forced capitulation.

 

[Black Swan]

How much did you receive in profit sharing in 2008 and 2009? Does that answer your question about the company's Operating Income and ability to pay substantially higher wages to its most expensive employee group?

Zero. How much would you have received from the company had it not for us SHARING ours? I think I know the answer.

 

[Black Swan]

I looked & smelled more like a nearly dry cow pie, IMHO....

The court system will force compliance & damages. I don't see bonding out of that, but most certainly forced capitulation.

The legal threats just keep me laughing. Just like all the promises you guys make every time you pass the hat for Addington and the Martyred Cactus 18. How many times are they going to get the next level of badge backer, only to meet more disappointment at the payout?

 

[Tiger 1050]

What the west has really missed is the fact they helped build a lower cost entity within the airline by not attempting or requiring any pay parity as part of a combination. This really allows Parker to drag his feet as long as he can. From a management standpoint, who can blame him? He has created a beautiful labor divide, which can be used against each side in contract talks, future flying, and the big ace- the ability to have an excuse and means to divide the place up cleanly should the opportunity arise.

I agree but then I do remember that the west was totally in favor of the east receiving pay parity. What caused the change of heart was the refusal by the east to continue negotiations for a joint contract thereby blocking the west's chance at getting a contract. Keep in mind that the west contract has been amendable since 2007. But I do agree with the basic gist of your post... Darned if you do, darned if you don't I suppose.

 

[nic4us]

......N4US what pay rate will cause you to vote NO to a contract thus, no to NIC ...how about you 924PS....Calloway.......even you JIM......

My gut tells me ANY number gets a YES vote out West.

NPJB

Well ain't the new board fancy?

To answere your question, and open up a whole new can of worms, ( maybe you can sit back and watch the West argue amongst ourselves).

I am not a member, so I do not get a vote.

I think you gut is both right and wrong. Remember, there are West pilots who actually support your seperate ops desires. The top of the West list does not want to open PHX up to the Nic, and not only the top 517 more like the top 700-800 east pilots. If you are say number 70 in PHX, your Nic number is around 710. That is 640 east pilots senior to you, odds are at least 3-4 of them live in PHX, and at least 50 live West of Colorado and over 100 live West of the Mississippi. So there are probably more than just a few West pilots ( I would guess more than a few hundred), who are not about to vote in a status quo pay package just so the company can shrink PHX another 20% and let 100 senior east folks ease their commute.

You are also right though. I would guess the bottom 100 or so West pilots would vote yes on minimal improvement for the same reason the east bottom wants to keep seperate ops. They could get their raise by advancement, and gain furlough protection.

Unless the 9th remands Wake, the Nic will be part of any future CBA. I think there are pretty many West pilots that will not just vote yes for Nic's sake.

 

[HPDriver]

What the west has really missed is the fact they helped build a lower cost entity within the airline by not attempting or requiring any pay parity as part of a combination.

I did a spit-take after I read this. This goes into my top ten posts for sure.

So now you're mad that the west didn't negotiate for you? I remember when the east MC committee met up with us and told us to sit back and watch how it was done.

Guess they showed us.

Oh wait, no they didn't.

Anyway, glad to see you project that failure westbound as well. Guess absolutely nothing is your fault.

 

[HPDriver]

We had LOA 93 going into the so called merger, which has yet to be fully consummated. We helped get you a DC Plan, which you did not have. Then we gave you the profit sharing. Also, you did not have. All we ever got back from the west was "we want it all...." You NEVER attempted to get pay parity for the east. This is why if we get the LOA 84 rates, you guys are totally out in the cold with regard to getting a deal. Another gamble you are taking. A big one. The first was WYE RIVER. That reach for the stars could end up costing you all a huge amount in the end. For nothing. Two very dangerous plays. Time will tell.

DC Plan? Hmmm, interesting.

Anyway. You gave us NOTHING! Everything we got was negotiated by us - period. I find it amazing that you think you could get all those things for us and yet not get yourself parity.

You need to step back for a minute, rethink your posts, and come at this again from another angle.

 

[HPDriver]

Uh oh, looks like some of the easties might not be seeing the other half of their payouts. Cleary has other ideas for that $35M.

• Discussion item: Should the BPR use the second LOA 93 Lump Sum disbursement
as a cash distribution or for other purposes, such as to fund an Early Retirement Program
or in other ways

 

[BoeingBoy]

The idea of using the 2nd $35 million for an early out program came up on another forum. It's a good thought, but how much is USAPA willing to give up to attain it. The company saves not one dime and possibly incurs some additional cost for COBRA so would be sure to want something in exchange.

Jim

 

[nic4us]

Uh oh, looks like some of the easties might not be seeing the other half of their payouts. Cleary has other ideas for that $35M.

• Discussion item: Should the BPR use the second LOA 93 Lump Sum disbursement
as a cash distribution or for other purposes, such as to fund an Early Retirement Program
or in other ways

Discussion item: If the 9th rules to uphold Wake, put it in an escrow for a downpayment on the damages award.

 

[hp_fa]

Discussion item: If the 9th rules to uphold Wake, put it in an escrow for a downpayment on the damages award.

I predict not. They will, if anything, up their spending to try and make themselves seem as judgment proof as possible. At that point, under this scenario, I would expect Marty Harper to take some sort of action designed to assure that whatever assets are not squandered.