AAA ALPA Topic 8/24/07 - 8/31-07

[Junebug172]

There we were in BOS taking the van downtown when the topic of the east came up. The van driver told us a pretty interesting story about some east FA's she was taking to their RON. One FA started wondering about why the don't stay at their old layover hotel and the van driver asked her if she really wanted to know.

Turns out, the east was about to be kicked out because they owed the hotel $450,000. And to top it off, the east also owed the van company $46,000. The FA asked why she was still picking up crews if they were owed so much money and the van driver told her that "after America West bought you guys, they paid your bills and haven't missed a payment since."

We all had a good laugh.

 

[P51Pilot]

You are right... I am concerned about how this affects every ALPA member. ALPA merger policy was followed, and the vocal East minority is up in arms because the arbitration went against them.

This is the same exact argument we (UA) had with the East back in 1999/2000. You guys basically said there will be no negotiation. It's DOH or the highway. "We'll see you in arbitration." The only difference is that the West actually had the opportunity to take it to the arbitrator, and he ruled strongly against you. (Just as he would have back in 2000.) Back then we (UA) claimed that we "aren't stealing anybodies seniority but protecting the flying that <United> brought to the <acquisition>, for those flying it." And your response was some other lame justification about how we were trying to take your seniority. When we said "fences forever" you said "go to he11."

Your hypocrisy is obvious. Please spare me the lecture on your self-proclaimed righteousness.

If you were really interested in solutions and compromise, you would negotiate a Joint Contract and put it out for a vote. Anything short of that proves that you only have one agenda.

And FYI, I take great union pride in seeing a pilot group (THE WEST) sticking together against a group intent on theft.

Selective cut and paste and you claim integrity. We'll just see how this plays out but don't count on it happening any time soon. Look at your paycheck, calculate your pension, days off, value your ESOP shares and tell me again how great ALPA and it's "guidelines" have done for you or this profession.

 

[BottomFeeder]

Hey BottomFeeder, you also forgot:

East: LOA93 , only 10 days of vacations a year (30+ in the West) , C-Scale pay ie. no pay parity , Credit time begins at 3 kts (West is doors), etc, etc.

Pension, Pension, Pension

Have you hugged your pension lately there Sonny?


Correction 21 of vacation days but you continue with misinformation


LOA93 which keeps our attrition
LOA93 gets us a70 million payment
LOA93 gives us 2 years of waving our "we are number one finger at you"



LOA93 GAVE YOU Profitsharing :down:
LOA93 GOT YOU 10% 410K :down:

 

[Mr Furlough]

Now what USA320Pilot had to say about the status of the MDA pilots - after the PID:

"Thus, the only way a person can be a MDA pilot is to be furloughed from mainline, then hired to MDA from a wholly owned carrier via the CEL list, or hired off the street."

"The US Airways pilots flying at MDA are, by default, furloughed US Airways and not active mainline pilots."

And what did USA320Pilot think of the MDA lawsuit (and he even threw in another "their furloughed and not active" remark):

"While it's doubtful the MDA pilots will obtain relief, this lawsuit will probably wind up hurting everyone (especially the MDA pilots) and accomplish nothing positive, especially if the MDA pilots ever try to return to the mainline and work at US Airways after a recall. I would not want to be a co-pilot who sued the captain, which would not be a good experience for the newly recalled pilot."

Jim

Jim,

I'd like to comment on the PID assertion, as there appears to be much misunderstanding of it's intent. The PID is merely a starting point, a snapshot if you will. It does not prohibit Pilots on furlough, and then recalled, from being considered for the merged list. Many have asserted that since many of the east Pilots were furloughed at the time of the PID, well than they should be stapled because they weren't included in the list when the PID was striked. Thus, they did not bring a job. But as we now witness, hundreds of pilots were recalled-prior to Nicolaus ruling, thus did bring a job, and should not have been stapled.

Simply pointing out that they PID isn't the end all-although it was applied that way by Nicolau.

From the policy manual:


C. MERGER POLICY DEFINITIONS
1. "Merger" means any transaction to which this policy is determined to be applicable under Section B 1 of this policy. (SOURCE - Executive Board May 1998)
2. Policy Initiation Date (PID) means the date on which the respective MEC Chairmen and the Executive Council determine that a reasonable probability of a merger being consummated exists or the date on which the Executive Council determines that a reasonable probability of a merger being consummated exists, whichever is earlier. Seniority list integration procedures will commence on the Policy Initiation Date. (AMENDED - Executive Board May 1998)3. "ALPA airline" or "ALPA carrier" means an airline whose pilots are represented by ALPA. (SOURCE - Executive Board May 1998)

 

[Mr Furlough]

For a minute, let's assume Prater made those comments. If the MDA lawsuit is successful that would mean a legitimate dispute over the Nicola award would be forwarded to Nic for resolution since he still retains jurisdiction in the matter. (I believe the west already has a dispute over the Nic list for not addresseing the B757 LOA). Let's take it a step further and assume there is some legal long shot technicality that results in the award being thrown out. Do you honestly believe the results will be that much different with a new arbitrator? You guys will ride the DOH horse in the desert once again and die there. Relative seniority will prevail as the only FAIR solution!!

Source: ALPA National Policy manual:

SENIORITY GENERAL
SOURCE Board 1956; AMENDED ? Executive Board December 1971; Administrative January 1998 (Canada Reference Added); Executive Board September 1998
Seniority of a pilot shall be based upon the length of service as a pilot with the Company.
Seniority shall begin to accrue from the date upon which a pilot employed by the Company as a pilot begins initial operational training required to perform such duties in airline operations and shall continue to accrue during such period of employment except as otherwise provided in his agreement. The date upon which a pilot first appears upon the Company's payroll as a pilot and begins initial operational training required to perform such duties in airline operations shall establish such pilot's position on the System Seniority List. When two or more pilots are placed on the seniority list on the same date, they shall be placed on such list according to their age; i.e., the oldest pilot shall receive the lowest number, except where prohibited by law.
If through an illegal act of the employer, a pilot is prevented from attaining employment status in a piloting position and commencing initial operational training, said pilot shall, for the purposes of paragraph 3b. above, be considered as having attained such employment status and having commenced such initial operational training at that point in time when said pilot would have attained such employment status and commenced such initial operational training but for the illegal act of the employer. Additionally, if a pilot in fact is recognized by the employer as having attained employee status but said pilot is delayed in the commencement of his/her operational training as a result of honoring an ALPA-sanctioned picket line against said pilot’s employer, the pilot’s seniority date for purposes of paragraph 3b. above, shall be the date of his/her assignment to initial operational training when such assignment is not complied with as a result of honoring such ALPA-sanctioned picket line.
Seniority shall govern all pilots in case of promotion and demotion, their retention in case of reduction in force, their assignment or reassignment due to expansion or reduction in schedules, their reemployment after release due to reduction in schedules, their reemployment after release due to reduction in force, and their choice of vacancies, provided that the pilot's qualifications are sufficient for the operation to which he is to be assigned. In the event that a pilot is considered by the Company not to be sufficiently qualified, the Company shall immediately furnish such pilot written reasons therefore.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

So, looks like things are coming to a head here in the next month. Expect to see the company to start throwing a bit of coin eastward. At the same time ALPA National will not allow the east to set them up for legal action by the company. By pulling the JNC from the table, the east MEC exposes ALPA to breech of contract/bad faith negotiations and ALPA isn't going to allow itself to be put in that position. ALPA will put your MEC into trusteeship, bypass your MEC, and send a TA to the east for a vote.

The TA gets voted in, the Nicolau Award is put into play, and the east continues to retire in huge numbers.

Are you referring to the $122m (Parity plus 3%) that Doug and Scott thinks is fair? It would still be a substandard contract compared to the rest of the industry. I'm sure that would pass with no problem.....NOT! You have one assumption that I hope is reality and that is we get TO VOTE.

So are you suggesting the new forced TA through trusteeship will have more money and benefits in it? How about like last time, industry average plus 1%. I can't see Doug going for that either. But that kind of move will only guarantee the fence sitters will make a decision. That's good!!! Real good!!! Hope it happens.

So how much "coin" are we talking about? Just curious. Since it's not public, what do you think it will take?

As we retire in huge numbers, I wonder when the AWA original pilots have the majority? 4 years, 5 years? Actually I haven't looked it up.


Later Prater

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Source: ALPA National Policy manual:

SENIORITY GENERAL
SOURCE Board 1956; AMENDED ? Executive Board December 1971; Administrative January 1998 (Canada Reference Added); Executive Board September 1998
Seniority of a pilot shall be based upon the length of service as a pilot with the Company.
Seniority shall begin to accrue from the date upon which a pilot employed by the Company as a pilot begins initial operational training required to perform such duties in airline operations and shall continue to accrue during such period of employment except as otherwise provided in his agreement. The date upon which a pilot first appears upon the Company's payroll as a pilot and begins initial operational training required to perform such duties in airline operations shall establish such pilot's position on the System Seniority List. When two or more pilots are placed on the seniority list on the same date, they shall be placed on such list according to their age; i.e., the oldest pilot shall receive the lowest number, except where prohibited by law.
If through an illegal act of the employer, a pilot is prevented from attaining employment status in a piloting position and commencing initial operational training, said pilot shall, for the purposes of paragraph 3b. above, be considered as having attained such employment status and having commenced such initial operational training at that point in time when said pilot would have attained such employment status and commenced such initial operational training but for the illegal act of the employer. Additionally, if a pilot in fact is recognized by the employer as having attained employee status but said pilot is delayed in the commencement of his/her operational training as a result of honoring an ALPA-sanctioned picket line against said pilot’s employer, the pilot’s seniority date for purposes of paragraph 3b. above, shall be the date of his/her assignment to initial operational training when such assignment is not complied with as a result of honoring such ALPA-sanctioned picket line.
Seniority shall govern all pilots in case of promotion and demotion, their retention in case of reduction in force, their assignment or reassignment due to expansion or reduction in schedules, their reemployment after release due to reduction in schedules, their reemployment after release due to reduction in force, and their choice of vacancies, provided that the pilot's qualifications are sufficient for the operation to which he is to be assigned. In the event that a pilot is considered by the Company not to be sufficiently qualified, the Company shall immediately furnish such pilot written reasons therefore.

Need to be careful, this might be interpreted as a guideline. Maybe USAPA will have to bargain for a new CBA that recognizes longevity as a basis for pay. I can see it now, the 20 year FO makes more money than the 10 year CAP. This is good, real good.

 

[hp_fa]

I love to cut and paste to take things out of context.

This is the whole paragragh again.

Sorry, we are not the vocal minority. Just for different reasons. Every USAPA card is a no vote to the CBA. For some as long as Nic is around it's a No. For others it would be a statement against ALPA. Even more would say $122m is not enough. (Parity plus 3% is still a substandard contract) You really don't want us to negotiate a contract right now as divided as we are. Because the next time any other carrier goes into negotiations, expect Jerry Glass and company to come in on managements side.

So your assumption is that some USAPA supporters will vote yes to an ALPA negotiated CBA? The reply was to why doesn't ALPA negotiate a CBA and put it out for a vote by 767Jetz. What election are you talking about? A new CBA or a new union? And how would passing the new ALPA negotiated CBA be in the best interests of a USAPA supporter?

Unless of course you mean the cards coming from the west guys, who are sending them in for their own reasons. (However the question was directed to the East pilots.) In which case some of those card types might vote yes for an ALPA negotiated CBA. I personally haven't talked to anyone yet to find out why they are sending them in.

It will be easier to get USAPA elected as the new rep than to get an election.

Later Prater

I'm sorry, it was late and I was out of context. My apology.

 

[hp_fa]

BTW, I am respectfully waiting to see if USA320Pilot has any response to my response to his questions. He may be flying and if he reads this I would be interested in what his response is to that, although I suspect he won't agree.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

I'm sorry, it was late and I was out of context. My apology.

Accepted. I know all about late night postings.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

There we were in BOS taking the van downtown when the topic of the east came up. The van driver told us a pretty interesting story about some east FA's she was taking to their RON. One FA started wondering about why the don't stay at their old layover hotel and the van driver asked her if she really wanted to know.

Turns out, the east was about to be kicked out because they owed the hotel $450,000. And to top it off, the east also owed the van company $46,000. The FA asked why she was still picking up crews if they were owed so much money and the van driver told her that "after America West bought you guys, they paid your bills and haven't missed a payment since."

We all had a good laugh.

A lot of people got screwed in BK 1 and 2. I should hope we are paying our bills. With the kind of money we're making now.

That's why they call it Bankruptcy.


Later Prater

 

[ab320driver]

They're making those payments with the EAST profits. How much did AWA contribute? Nothing, they lost $25 million... Give them a raise!