2014 Pilot Discussion

[prechilill]

What difference does it make? Date of Hire gives you the exact same result regardless of how you parse words.

 

[A320 Driver]

Good morning east SCABs.

Yes, the West is very upset we do not have any direct representation on the Merger Committee. I believe that is a different committee than the NAC.

But, hey, when the SCAB president insist that you can be on a committee as along as you do not actually represent your constituents, well then the only option is to resign and let the SCABs play with themselves in their final hours.


Enjoy your fake union and pretend committees while they last. There is a "fair and equitable" seniority list, already accepted by the company and status quo at LCC coming to a SLI involving you in the near future!

That's a BS statement..."only option". They won't be part of the process because it takes away from the argument that the NIC is it and nothing else. You don't want a solution, because as far as you are concerned, you have one. We will see how this plays out, but you on the West are losing more every day...and it will stay lost regardless of how the SLI turns out.
 
Oh...Good Morning

 

[nic4us]

There's a difference between a 3 way negotiation and starting negotiations with 3 lists. If our MC submits the two lists currently in effect here and then begins to explore various possible integration formulas with the APA MC, then the process remains seniority neutral, similar to the MOU. Process precedes product. No proposed seniority list means no DFR. Develop and agree to a fair and equitable formula first, then only at the end apply the formula to the 3 lists. In the meantime, the MC can honestly claim that no proposed list exists. Only when the process is complete can the final product be judged on its merits as meeting the fair and equitable, wide range of reasonableness and LUP standards.
OTOH, if APA is stalling and does not really want a negotiated settlement and seeks to run the table, then that's a different problem. We should have a better picture this week.

I will say that the APA is not stalling, they are going full speed ahead at ridding the airline of uscaba.

That way, they do control the table, and ideas like your above can be entertained, but likely dismissed.

The reason, you ask? Who wants the final product challenged? If the Nic is not used, the process is challenged. If the Nic is used, who challenges once usapa is gone?


Oh, and I will task the "goat man" with his first priority in office. Ensure the refund of dues collected to the membership, or seek RICO charges against any uscaba officers retaining the membership's money for non contract enforcement related snipe hunts.

 

[nic4us]

That's a BS statement...only option. They won't be part of the process because it takes away from the argument that the NIC is it and nothing else. You don't want a solution, because as far as you are concerned, you have one. We will see how this plays out, but you on the West are losing more every day...and it will stay lost.

What's BS? The fact that Hummel and the east SCABs have unilaterally determined that a "fair and equitable" arbitrated seniority award is unfair?

You are way off on your opinion of me. I do want a solution. I offered many ideas, all dismissed because you SCAbs thought you could steal it all.

So, bottom line, the only solution is the one rendered out of the final and binding arbitration.

 

[A320 Driver]

What's BS? The fact that Hummel and the east SCABs have unilaterally determined that a "fair and equitable" arbitrated seniority award is unfair?

You are way off on your opinion of me. I do want a solution. I offered many ideas, all dismissed because you SCAbs thought you could steal it all.

So, bottom line, the only solution is the one rendered out of the final and binding arbitration.

No, hell no. NOTHING ever said the NIC was "fair and equitable". They said the process was followed. The specifics of the NIC have never been put on trial.

 

[electricjet98]

 
There's a difference between a 3 way negotiation and starting negotiations with 3 lists. If our MC submits the two lists currently in effect here and then begins to explore various possible integration formulas with the APA MC, then the process remains seniority neutral, similar to the MOU. Process precedes product. No proposed seniority list means no DFR. Develop and agree to a fair and equitable formula first, then only at the end apply the formula to the 3 lists. In the meantime, the MC can honestly claim that no proposed list exists. Only when the process is complete can the final product be judged on its merits as meeting the fair and equitable, wide range of reasonableness and LUP standards.

OTOH, if APA is stalling and does not really want a negotiated settlement and seeks to run the table, then that's a different problem. We should have a better picture this week.      

 
Keep reaching KV, something about reaching for straws must excite you!

 

[Piedmont1984]

nic

Your side keeps arguing that APA will avoid liability at all costs. Another possibility is that they will take a calculated risk if they feel confident that they can defeat a DFR challenge. If a formula is agreed to first, then it will apply to all 3 lists. No final list until all three parties are combined using one formula. So why would APA prefer the Nic model? Current and recent furloughs at AA constitutes a large number and until recently they were in bankruptcy. The Nic rewards financial condition and career expectations while stapling furloughees and depreciating longevity. A DOH/LOS biased model will protect senior APA pilots with the use of fences, give credit to furloughed/recently furloughed junior pilots, while the temporary pain to the rest will be mitigated by our turbocharged attrition rate. Other than possible DFR exposure, I don't see why APA would prefer to go with your model.

 

[electricjet98]

 
They said the process was followed.

 
Isn't the best that anyone can hope for?  Anything beyond that is subjective.
 
On the other-hand, what has the majority-controlled USAPA offered other than..."we will tell you what your seniority is worth"? 

 

[nevergiveup]

What's BS? The fact that Hummel and the east SCABs have unilaterally determined that a "fair and equitable" arbitrated seniority award is unfair?

You are way off on your opinion of me. I do want a solution. I offered many ideas, all dismissed because you SCAbs thought you could steal it all.

So, bottom line, the only solution is the one rendered out of the final and binding arbitration.

Junior still wants a free ride.

 

[traderjake]

 A DOH/LOS biased model will protect senior APA pilots with the use of fences, give credit to furloughed/recently furloughed junior pilots, while the temporary pain to the rest will be mitigated by our turbocharged attrition rate. Other than possible DFR exposure, I don't see why APA would prefer to go with your model.

 
DOH/LOS makes our Reserve NB Captains senior to their WB Blockholding Captains.
 
That  ain't going to happan no matter what type of fence we propose.

 

[electricjet98]

Another possibility is that they will take a calculated risk if they feel confident that they can defeat a DFR challenge. If a formula is agreed to first, then it will apply to all 3 lists. No final list until all three parties are combined using one formula.

Yeeeaaahh. Do you really believe that any negotiator won't be constantly calculating how each of the proposals affect his group...and him personally?

Another straw please!

 

[Claxon]

Isn't the best that anyone can hope for?  Anything beyond that is subjective.
 
On the other-hand, what has the majority-controlled USAPA offered other than..."we will tell you what your seniority is worth"?

The little west socialists feel the minority rules in this country.
Go goat boy. AWA hired the best!

 

[electricjet98]

nic

So why would APA prefer the Nic model?

DFR proof. East pilots may attempt to raise funds and file a DFR lawsuit...but how will they make a serious claim that the process used to develop the Nic wasn't approved by all parties and created by a neutral using extensive evidence and testimony?

 

[Claxon]

Good morning east SCABs.
Yes, the West is very upset we do not have any direct representation on the Merger Committee. I believe that is a different committee than the NAC.
But, hey, when the SCAB president insist that you can be on a committee as along as you do not actually represent your constituents, well then the only option is to resign and let the SCABs play with themselves in their final hours.
Enjoy your fake union and pretend committees while they last. There is a "fair and equitable" seniority list, already accepted by the company and status quo at LCC coming to a SLI involving you in the near future!

Kiwi, you are the oddest of the ones Franke selected by far.

 

[electricjet98]

Current and recent furloughs at AA constitutes a large number and until recently they were in bankruptcy. The Nic rewards financial condition and career expectations while stapling furloughees and depreciating longevity. A DOH/LOS biased model will protect senior APA pilots with the use of fences, give credit to furloughed/recently furloughed junior pilots, while the temporary pain to the rest will be mitigated by our turbocharged attrition rate. Other than possible DFR exposure, I don't see why APA would prefer to go with your model.

I believe that by the time AMR agreed to make the merger its official POR rather than Horton's "stand-alone" plan, the furloughees were all back. Nevertheless, the PID will determine who was actually furloughed at the time and what their career looked like without the merger. Previously furloughed APA pilots can easily point to an airline that was coming out of bankruptcy with plans of hiring...regardless of which POR the boards & judge approved. In comparison we can look at the AAA pilots and what their career looked like without the merger with AWA. One-third of the pilots furloughed, in Chapter 11 for the second time in less than a year, no other POR being contemplated by the board or judge (even the conversion to an all RJ fleet had been rejected as too grandiose) and LUV on-site looking at the assets they would be willing to bid for...sans pilots.

Two completely different scenarios KV, which even when using a "Nic model" of ratios will have far different results...and APA knows this.