2015 Pilot Discussion.

[Pi brat]

Trank is like Hillary, shifty as they come. He's did not vote for USAPA yet is the biggest crybaby on the C&R's pushing their agenda. Just wait, when the arbitration is settled and it doesn't go their way, he will back-pedal and retreat like the weasel he is.

The C&R posts bother you? But no westie can counter them.

You avoid the point with personal attacks. I know, binding is only binding when you think it should be.

 

[CactusPilot1]

The C&R posts bother you? But no westie can counter them.

You avoid the point with personal attacks. I know, binding is only binding when you think it should be.

 
 
Truth hurts bub, you were probably that brat who got his butt kicked at the bus stop and ran under mommy's skirt. You're a loudmouth running under USAPA's skirt when needed.
 

 

[cactusboy53]

ALPA agreed with final and binding. Is ALPA a party? Does ALPA present their case tomorrow?
The PA doesn't mention ALPA, does it?

No ALPA is not a party, BUT before the East pilots voted ALPA out as the CBA...ALPA delivered the seniority list to the company. The company ACCEPTED that list, and in a letter from Parker he states that the list comport with the company's objectives.

Pretty simple, Dorothy. Gee, I wonder how the BOA will rule? Convoluted & complicated so as to dismantle the arbitration process, or rely upon that foundation for the new list? Hmmmmmm.

 

[Phoenix]

No ALPA is not a party, BUT before the East pilots voted ALPA out as the CBA...ALPA delivered the seniority list to the company. The company ACCEPTED that list, and in a letter from Parker he states that the list comport with the company's objectives.
Pretty simple, Dorothy. Gee, I wonder how the BOA will rule? Convoluted & complicated so as to dismantle the arbitration process, or rely upon that foundation for the new list? Hmmmmmm.

Ok, the company accepted the list. Does the PA reference that list?

The company is a party to the PA, are they now changing their mind about being neutral in the PA, and wish the PA used the list they accepted?

 

[Monkee]

 
Yawn.....
 
Oh, puleeezz don't go. I'm mildly entertained. Would you tell me a war story Commander McBragg? You've earned my disrespect.
 
Ciao

 
He really has a princess fetish doesn't he?
 
Paging Dr. Freud!

 

[Phoenix]

No ALPA is not a party, BUT before the East pilots voted ALPA out as the CBA...ALPA delivered the seniority list to the company. The company ACCEPTED that list, and in a letter from Parker he states that the list comport with the company's objectives.

Pretty simple, Dorothy. Gee, I wonder how the BOA will rule? Convoluted & complicated so as to dismantle the arbitration process, or rely upon that foundation for the new list? Hmmmmmm.

 
The Nicolau arbitration process ran its course and was completed.  All contractual obligations relevant to that list were performed and completed.  A lawsuit regarding the DFR related to that list has been completed and the courts have awarded the appropriate remedy.  
 
Has anyone argued that there remains ANY obligation whatsoever upon anyone, by virtue of the contracts regarding that list (even USAPA isn't required to ever say a word about it)?   Your lawyers better come up with something.  Silence isn't persuasive.  
 
This is a great time to switch to using the premise of "fair and equitable". 

 

[snapthis]

ALPA agreed with final and binding. Is ALPA a party? Does ALPA present their case tomorrow?

The PA doesn't mention ALPA, does it?

THE AAPSIC is making their case and you can't escape your history. Much like the Nicolau decision, courtesy ALPA.
 
 
The AAPSIC has an exhibit called the Jalmer Report which includes:
 
US Air Pilots Vote to Take 18% Pay Cuts

By MICHELINE MAYNARD
OCT. 22, 2004



 


Pilots at US Airways have voted in favor of giving $300 million in annual wage and benefit concessions to the struggling airline, becoming the first major labor group to accept permanent cuts, the union representing pilots said yesterday.
 
US Airways made its second bankruptcy protection filing in two years on Sept. 12. Last week, a Federal Bankruptcy Court in Alexandria, Va., granted the airline's bid for emergency pay cuts of 21 percent, and other benefit reductions, for its union workers. Without the cuts, US Airways said, it could cease operating by mid-February.
Pilots at other airlines are facing similar efforts to reduce pay and benefits. Delta Air Lines, which is trying to avoid joining US Airways in reorganization, is pushing its pilots for $1 billion in wage and benefit cuts.
United Airlines, which has been in bankruptcy protection since December 2002, said last week that it would soon outline plans to nullify its labor contracts and replace them with less-expensive pacts. Last year, United's parent, the UAL Corporation, obtained concessions worth $2.5 billion a year from its unions.
US Airways pilots voted 58 percent in favor of the contract, a wider margin than some analysts had expected. The vote means members of the Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 3,200 active and laid-off US Airways pilots, are exempt from the emergency cuts.
Instead, their pay will be cut 18 percent a year, a total of $1.8 billion in savings for the airline through 2010. The new contract will also sharply reduce US Airways' contribution to the pilots' retirement plan, eliminate health care benefits for pilots after they retire, and increase the number of hours that pilots must fly each month.
Approval came despite the rejection of the contract by pilots in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, two of US Airways' three hubs, the other being Charlotte, N.C.
In both Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, 52 percent of the pilots voted against the contract. Leaders of those pilots had blocked an effort in September to send an earlier proposal to a vote.
They were especially angered by the reduction in retirement benefits, which had already been cut sharply in the airline's first bankruptcy filing.
In recent days, the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia pilot leaders stepped up efforts against the tentative contract, arguing that pilots could get a better deal if negotiations resumed.
But other officials of the union disagreed. They pointed out that US Airways had held back on starting the emergency pay cuts while the pilots voted.
Had the contract been rejected, the emergency cuts would have been applied immediately, retroactive to Oct. 15. And, these leaders maintained, it was likely that any subsequent contract would be worse than the one presented to pilots for a vote.
Pilots based in New York, Boston, Washington and Charlotte favored the contract, the union said, enough to win its approval.
"While the burden that the US Airways pilots have agreed to shoulder is immense, this vote signifies that our pilots acknowledge the pain and sacrifice that is required to address the reality of our situation," said Bill Pollock, a US Airways captain who is chairman of the union's master executive council.
In a statement, the airline said: "Our pilots have demonstrated their leadership in working with us as we transform US Airways into a successful and competitive airline. We appreciate their thoughtful and careful consideration of the very difficult issues that will soon confront virtually every one of our legacy competitors as well."
US Airways executives have repeatedly said they hope to reach agreements with other unions representing flight attendants, mechanics and reservations agents. Analysts said the approval by the pilots could lead to movement in contract negotiations.
But the urgency of getting new contracts was diminished by the judge's decision to impose emergency cuts for the next four months, said Robert W. Mann Jr., an industry consultant in Port Washington, N.Y.
"What's the company's incentive to deal?" Mr. Mann said. If the airline faced the prospect of getting less from unions than the emergency cuts generated, "what might be better for employees would be worse for the company."
 

 

[Phoenix]

 
THE AAPSIC is making their case and you can't escape your history. Much like the Nicolau decision, courtesy ALPA.
 
 
The AAPSIC has an exhibit called the Jalmer Report which includes:
 
US Air Pilots Vote to Take 18% Pay Cuts

By MICHELINE MAYNARD
OCT. 22, 2004



 


Pilots at US Airways have voted in favor of giving $300 million in annual wage and benefit concessions to the struggling airline, becoming the first major labor group to accept permanent cuts, the union representing pilots said yesterday.
 
US Airways made its second bankruptcy protection filing in two years on Sept. 12. Last week, a Federal Bankruptcy Court in Alexandria, Va., granted the airline's bid for emergency pay cuts of 21 percent, and other benefit reductions, for its union workers. Without the cuts, US Airways said, it could cease operating by mid-February.
Pilots at other airlines are facing similar efforts to reduce pay and benefits. Delta Air Lines, which is trying to avoid joining US Airways in reorganization, is pushing its pilots for $1 billion in wage and benefit cuts.
United Airlines, which has been in bankruptcy protection since December 2002, said last week that it would soon outline plans to nullify its labor contracts and replace them with less-expensive pacts. Last year, United's parent, the UAL Corporation, obtained concessions worth $2.5 billion a year from its unions.
US Airways pilots voted 58 percent in favor of the contract, a wider margin than some analysts had expected. The vote means members of the Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 3,200 active and laid-off US Airways pilots, are exempt from the emergency cuts.
Instead, their pay will be cut 18 percent a year, a total of $1.8 billion in savings for the airline through 2010. The new contract will also sharply reduce US Airways' contribution to the pilots' retirement plan, eliminate health care benefits for pilots after they retire, and increase the number of hours that pilots must fly each month.
Approval came despite the rejection of the contract by pilots in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, two of US Airways' three hubs, the other being Charlotte, N.C.
In both Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, 52 percent of the pilots voted against the contract. Leaders of those pilots had blocked an effort in September to send an earlier proposal to a vote.
They were especially angered by the reduction in retirement benefits, which had already been cut sharply in the airline's first bankruptcy filing.
In recent days, the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia pilot leaders stepped up efforts against the tentative contract, arguing that pilots could get a better deal if negotiations resumed.
But other officials of the union disagreed. They pointed out that US Airways had held back on starting the emergency pay cuts while the pilots voted.
Had the contract been rejected, the emergency cuts would have been applied immediately, retroactive to Oct. 15. And, these leaders maintained, it was likely that any subsequent contract would be worse than the one presented to pilots for a vote.
Pilots based in New York, Boston, Washington and Charlotte favored the contract, the union said, enough to win its approval.
"While the burden that the US Airways pilots have agreed to shoulder is immense, this vote signifies that our pilots acknowledge the pain and sacrifice that is required to address the reality of our situation," said Bill Pollock, a US Airways captain who is chairman of the union's master executive council.
In a statement, the airline said: "Our pilots have demonstrated their leadership in working with us as we transform US Airways into a successful and competitive airline. We appreciate their thoughtful and careful consideration of the very difficult issues that will soon confront virtually every one of our legacy competitors as well."
US Airways executives have repeatedly said they hope to reach agreements with other unions representing flight attendants, mechanics and reservations agents. Analysts said the approval by the pilots could lead to movement in contract negotiations.
But the urgency of getting new contracts was diminished by the judge's decision to impose emergency cuts for the next four months, said Robert W. Mann Jr., an industry consultant in Port Washington, N.Y.
"What's the company's incentive to deal?" Mr. Mann said. If the airline faced the prospect of getting less from unions than the emergency cuts generated, "what might be better for employees would be worse for the company."
 

 

 
Focus..
 
1) Final and Binding, or 2) Fair and Equitable.   Chose one path or the other.  Every bit of history is merely evidence to support one conclusion or the other, it matters not.  Chose which premise you want to prove, and stick with it!
 
If you can prove the first then then the second is superfluous.  If you can't prove the first, then the BOA must accept your implicit assumption, or you must persuade them of the second... Good luck!!
 
No circular arguments allowed, even though you swim in circles in the fish bowl. 

 

[traderjake]

1) Final and Binding, or 2) Fair and Equitable.   Chose one path or the other. 

 
USAPA supporters still think they dictate the terms of the process. 

 

[snapthis]

I'll make it simple for you Phoenix. You need to pay attention.
 
I know nothing about what you refer to as a fish bowl, what I do know is that we are not going to go through a process and let you decide whether or not the process was fair after the fact. The fairness starts with the process you agreed to abide by in the first place. I think they call that integrity.
 
Look it up.

 

[luvthe9]

USAPA supporters still think they dictate the terms of the process. 

No they don't, the AOL scabs think they are going to demand and dictate the NIC, that ship has sailed long time ago........ It's up to the BOA.

 

[Claxon]

I'll make it simple for you Phoenix. You need to pay attention.
 
I know nothing about what you refer to as a fish bowl, what I do know is that we are not going to go through a process and let you decide whether or not the process was fair after the fact. The fairness starts with the process you agreed to abide by in the first place. I think they call that integrity.
 
Look it up.

You know nothing about the fishbowl? Let me drive it home: bid PHL 330 capt next bid.
Clunk! You run into the glass sides of your FISHBOWL
So simple EVERY PHX pilot hits it!

 

[luvthe9]

I'll make it simple for you Phoenix. You need to pay attention.
 
I know nothing about what you refer to as a fish bowl, what I do know is that we are not going to go through a process and let you decide whether or not the process was fair after the fact. The fairness starts with the process you agreed to abide by in the first place. I think they call that integrity.
 
Look it up.

Kirby laid down the bad news for you all at the last PHX road show.........Wye would I change bases now...........because I can.


How bout you




Subject: Phoenix to lose it's work rules, and left to suffocate in the fishbowl.......


Should we post the letter from Scherff and Ferguson begging the company not to implement the new work rules..........that all of you voted overwhelmingly in favor of.. Even the AA guys were laughing at you!





"The response from our former AWA management team to the concerns of their former AWA pilots is now crystal-clear: NOTHING."

 

[Black Swan]

THE AAPSIC is making their case and you can't escape your history. Much like the Nicolau decision, courtesy ALPA.
 
 
The AAPSIC has an exhibit called the Jalmer Report which includes:
 
US Air Pilots Vote to Take 18% Pay Cuts

By MICHELINE MAYNARD
OCT. 22, 2004


 


Pilots at US Airways have voted in favor of giving $300 million in annual wage and benefit concessions to the struggling airline, becoming the first major labor group to accept permanent cuts, the union representing pilots said yesterday.
 
US Airways made its second bankruptcy protection filing in two years on Sept. 12. Last week, a Federal Bankruptcy Court in Alexandria, Va., granted the airline's bid for emergency pay cuts of 21 percent, and other benefit reductions, for its union workers. Without the cuts, US Airways said, it could cease operating by mid-February.
Pilots at other airlines are facing similar efforts to reduce pay and benefits. Delta Air Lines, which is trying to avoid joining US Airways in reorganization, is pushing its pilots for $1 billion in wage and benefit cuts.
United Airlines, which has been in bankruptcy protection since December 2002, said last week that it would soon outline plans to nullify its labor contracts and replace them with less-expensive pacts. Last year, United's parent, the UAL Corporation, obtained concessions worth $2.5 billion a year from its unions.
US Airways pilots voted 58 percent in favor of the contract, a wider margin than some analysts had expected. The vote means members of the Air Line Pilots Association, which represents 3,200 active and laid-off US Airways pilots, are exempt from the emergency cuts.
Instead, their pay will be cut 18 percent a year, a total of $1.8 billion in savings for the airline through 2010. The new contract will also sharply reduce US Airways' contribution to the pilots' retirement plan, eliminate health care benefits for pilots after they retire, and increase the number of hours that pilots must fly each month.
Approval came despite the rejection of the contract by pilots in Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, two of US Airways' three hubs, the other being Charlotte, N.C.
In both Pittsburgh and Philadelphia, 52 percent of the pilots voted against the contract. Leaders of those pilots had blocked an effort in September to send an earlier proposal to a vote.
They were especially angered by the reduction in retirement benefits, which had already been cut sharply in the airline's first bankruptcy filing.
In recent days, the Pittsburgh and Philadelphia pilot leaders stepped up efforts against the tentative contract, arguing that pilots could get a better deal if negotiations resumed.
But other officials of the union disagreed. They pointed out that US Airways had held back on starting the emergency pay cuts while the pilots voted.
Had the contract been rejected, the emergency cuts would have been applied immediately, retroactive to Oct. 15. And, these leaders maintained, it was likely that any subsequent contract would be worse than the one presented to pilots for a vote.
Pilots based in New York, Boston, Washington and Charlotte favored the contract, the union said, enough to win its approval.
"While the burden that the US Airways pilots have agreed to shoulder is immense, this vote signifies that our pilots acknowledge the pain and sacrifice that is required to address the reality of our situation," said Bill Pollock, a US Airways captain who is chairman of the union's master executive council.
In a statement, the airline said: "Our pilots have demonstrated their leadership in working with us as we transform US Airways into a successful and competitive airline. We appreciate their thoughtful and careful consideration of the very difficult issues that will soon confront virtually every one of our legacy competitors as well."
US Airways executives have repeatedly said they hope to reach agreements with other unions representing flight attendants, mechanics and reservations agents. Analysts said the approval by the pilots could lead to movement in contract negotiations.
But the urgency of getting new contracts was diminished by the judge's decision to impose emergency cuts for the next four months, said Robert W. Mann Jr., an industry consultant in Port Washington, N.Y.
"What's the company's incentive to deal?" Mr. Mann said. If the airline faced the prospect of getting less from unions than the emergency cuts generated, "what might be better for employees would be worse for the company."

2004 is now evidentiary material? Why not keep going back? Clue to AAPSIC/ Freund.
It is almost 2016.

 

[Black Swan]

I'll make it simple for you Phoenix. You need to pay attention.
 
I know nothing about what you refer to as a fish bowl, what I do know is that we are not going to go through a process and let you decide whether or not the process was fair after the fact. The fairness starts with the process you agreed to abide by in the first place. I think they call that integrity.
 
Look it up.

That Fishbowl term came from your very own Eric Ferguson. He was referring to PHX pilots being trapped. And have the integrity to acknowledge he included it in an update you got. It was a pretty stupid thing to say on the eve of arbitration, but say it he did. Guess you need to pay attention......