2014 Pilot Discussion

[Freighterguynow]

All the widebody jobs not in CLT.

 

[AAviator]

The biggest thing US Air had was 727's.  PHL wasn't even a hub

 

[nycbusdriver]

The biggest thing US Air had was 727's.  PHL wasn't even a hub

Wow!   A US Air expert!
 
PHL wasn't even a hub....really....and your point?
 
BOS wasn't even a hub, either!  So???
 
BWI was!   So what???
 
Kagel gave limited protections for the Piedmont pilots on the 767s that were already in place, and Colodny decided that some of the 767 deliveries would be better served being based in PIT and BOS.  WoW!   
 
And, if we are going to have this discussion with the "AA" US Air expert, and the much maligned (deservedly so) Traitor, praytell:  How did Kagel put that list US/PI together?   

 

[AAviator]

Wow!   A US Air expert!
 
PHL wasn't even a hub....really....and your point?
 
BOS wasn't even a hub, either!  So???
 
BWI was!   So what???
 
Kagel gave limited protections for the Piedmont pilots on the 767s that were already in place, and Colodny decided that some of the 767 deliveries would be better served being based in PIT and BOS.  WoW!   
 
And, if we are going to have this discussion with the "AA" US Air expert, and the much maligned (deservedly so) Traitor, praytell:  How did Kagel put that list US/PI together?   

I'm not answering you until luvthe9 and aglflyr discussions are complete.
 
It's true…  The original USAir only had 727's and PHL wasn't a hub.

 

[nycbusdriver]

I'm not answering you until luvthe9 and aglflyr discussions are complete.
 
It's true…  The original USAir only had 727's and PHL wasn't a hub.

 
No...US Airways (at the time) had DC-9s, MD-80s (but not nearly s "Super" as yours), BAe 146s, and BAC-111s (retired the year of the merger.)  They didn't ONLY have 727s, as you say.
 
CLE wasn't a hub, nor was ERI.  Same for ABE, ORD, STL, ATL, RDU, nor MEM.  
 
Obviously, you have no point.  Well, maybe on your head?

 

[AAviator]

re-read post 5627.
 
Seriously,  I'll play, but luvthe9 and aglflyr first.
 
Thanks

 

[AAviator]

Like in post 5419 made by luvthe9 (which I responded to)
can luvthe9 and algflyr please respond?

 

[Claxon]

I'm not answering you until luvthe9 and aglflyr discussions are complete.
 
It's true…  The original USAir only had 727's and PHL wasn't a hub.

http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/56571-2014-pilot-discussion/page-458#entry1070603
 
The poster above is not responding to posts until other posters respond to his. 
 
Previously, poster refused to respond to another poster until he asked them a question first. 

 

[algflyr]

I'm not answering you until luvthe9 and aglflyr discussions are complete.
 
 

 
Aww, you're waiting on me? That's cute... 🙂
 
But as Clax said, you are waiting on me to respond to a question that you asked in response to a direct question I asked to you. You didn't answer it, but instead asked something else, and now are awaiting an answer... Ok, I'll scroll back to the post you referenced for me and I will answer ... I just hope you can do the same and answer the question I asked you which was before you asked your... Hang on... Lol

 

[algflyr]

Fair enough..
Direct me to the conditions..
 
What page?
 
http://leonidas.cactuspilots.us/attachments/article/75/Nicolau%20Arbitration%20Award.pdf
 
Maybe these are fabricated conditions that needed verified or whatever buzz word EastUS1 is using today?

 
Ok, I finally found post 5497... It's amazing how many posts go by when I work a trip to Brasil... Anyway, here's your answer:
 
The link you provided just led to the actual Nic award. What you have to look at is the official document that led to it's creation and more importantly, HOW it would be implemented. And that document is LOA 96, commonly referred to as the Transition Agreement. http://www.usairlinepilots.org/index.php?option=com_jumi&fileid=5&F=3078&Itemid=522
 
I can send you a copy of that document if you can't access it, although it's probably available on the Leonidas site...
 
So, on page 6 of LOA 96 (paragraph IV.A), it says the East and West list will be combined according to ALPA merger policy. That was done. The product was the Nic award you posted a link to.
 
Then, also on page 6, Paragraph IV.C, says "The single Carrier may NOT use an integrated pilot seniority list prior to operational pilot integration as defined in section VI.A below". So let's go to that section (VI.A)...
 
Section VI.A (on page 8) says: "the airline operations of America West and US Airways, with respect to the pilots, shall be merged no later than twelve (12) months following the later of (i) completion of the integrated pilot seniority list and (ii) negotiation of the single agreement..."
 
So there you have it. (i) was done (you posted a link to it). However (ii) was never completed. And without that, the list could never be implemented. And now this document (LOA 96) since the MOU was passed and implemented on Dec. 9th, 2013,  doesn't even exist anymore from a legal standpoint.
 
So, let's recap: You asked "What page?"
 
My answer is page 6 of LOA 96, paragraph IV.C to be specific...
 
So, I have answered your question along with documentation and references... Would you now mind answering the question I posed to you just before this question of yours?

 

[algflyr]

Hmm... I wish I was as tech savvy as snapthis and could find a really cool animated picture of a cricket chirping... LOL  😛h34r: <--- That's the best I could do... 🙂

 

[Claxon]

Hmm... I wish I was as tech savvy as snapthis and could find a really cool animated picture of a cricket chirping... LOL  😛h34r: <--- That's the best I could do... 🙂

This is more appropriate.
 

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Hmm... I wish I was as tech savvy as snapthis and could find a really cool animated picture of a cricket chirping... LOL  😛h34r: <--- That's the best I could do... 🙂

I am shocked you even had to answer AA#ole how he knows everything about USAIR,  and all,since he is a moderator on another board, all that power and knowledge, imagine that, anyway maybe he could tell us who also operated the BAC111 back in the day?

 

[AAviator]

 
Aww, you're waiting on me? That's cute... 🙂
 
But as Clax said, you are waiting on me to respond to a question that you asked in response to a direct question I asked to you. You didn't answer it, but instead asked something else, and now are awaiting an answer... Ok, I'll scroll back to the post you referenced for me and I will answer ... I just hope you can do the same and answer the question I asked you which was before you asked your... Hang on... Lol

Maybe if you were paying attention, you would have seen your question was answered in my post 5509.  It wasn't specifically addressed to you, but it was answered.  Shall I see if I can have a notam put out to get your attention?

 

[AAviator]

 
It's all good AA... I thought for quite a while before I posted my last post. (This has been re-hashed on here for years) Of course it was a fictitious scenario regarding TWA and you wanna try to say that's not how the TWA deal went down? Well I said said that from the beginning. It was just to show that when an arbitration is awarded with conditions that MUST be met for it to take effect, and they are not met, then it isn't what happens. The Nic was awarded in an arbitration and would have had to be implemented provided certain conditions were met... Those conditions were never met. So it cannot be implemented as per the arbitrator Nicolau himself... No matter, the law will prevail... No more posts from me about this since you couldn't answer the hypothetical question in which we all know the answer... The (Nic) "award" can't become effective when the conditions that are laid out by the arbitrator himself that he says MUST happen for the award to become binding never happen. The conditions set my Nicolau himself were never realized... I think he woud agree...

Here's what you said..  Now just wait..  This was a reply to an earlier statement you made..
 
I'll go dig that one up.  I know why you are where you are..  No joint contract, so no combined ops.
 
Just a minute...