Edward
Veteran
Here is the new thread . Thanks in advance for staying on topic & not making it personal.
AAA Thread 10/26-11/1
- Thread starter Edward
- Start date
- Status
Cactus737
Advanced
- Jun 15, 2007
- 188
- 0
One of our pilots was so disgusted with the letter from Scott T. (the anti-labor USAPA supporter and step-son of an anti-labor union buster), that he wrote one of our retired pilots and C95 negotiator to find out the *real* story:
Hi Tony,
Thank you for the e-mail. Yes we are all fine, and we have fortunately dodged all the San Diego fires this time.
Regarding the e-mail -- while I certainly sympathize with all your current problems at former AWA, I no longer follow the issues and therefore can offer very little in the way of opinions. However, much of the information regarding C-95 is incorrect, and demands comment.
I assume Scott's information on our negotiations came from Herb (who was never involved), since the false points made by Scott are ones Herb has often passed on in the past. I'll withhold my opinions on the other issues, but I will give you what I know and experienced personally, here:
1…." Jerry Glass literally teaching AWA negotiators how to negotiate against him…."
Hardly. And I bristle at the insinuation, since I had studied negotiations previously, had read quite a number of books on the subject, and indeed had personally negotiated high-dollar contracts previously in the defense industry. That is not to say that there was not much to learn by observing Glass closely for over 18 months, for he was a talented, experienced, and shrewd negotiator of considerable success. But like an experienced pilot observing the techniques of another, it can never be said he taught you to fly! Glass taught me squat.
2. …." Jerry Glass taught courses at the George Meany Center for Labor Studies."
Bull. Glass didn't teach anything. He gave a single one-hour lecture during the 3-day course recounting mistakes he had witnessed in the past. (It was to me a short and weird, managing expectations lecture. Dale and I were upset about it and complained to National, to no avail.) But Glass taught nothing.
3…" Glass sized up the strengths and weaknesses of the four original AWA negotiators"
Well every negotiator (should) sizes up the opponent, learning everything they can. Information and preparation is power. Nothing new here. We researched Glass as much as he did us. We had some dirt on him.
4. "…. that made for very easy pickings for negotiations that lasted less than six months. "
Untrue! Formal negotiations lasted for 13 months; informal negotiations lasted even longer. There were a number of impasses; one deadlock on scope for over a month with no movement.
5. "… ALPA wanted your first negotiations concluded quickly."
Actually, ALPA always wants every negotiation concluded quickly. And so do pilots. But our problem wasn't with ALPA; it was with our own negotiating chairman who (as we found out later) had his own secret timetable and goal – a "contract within a year" – and he frustrated everyone in attempting to succeed in his timetable goal ahead and above a better contract.
6. "… ALPA was also concerned about the company threat of a merger with then non-union Continental."
Not to my knowledge, although our committee chairman certainly was. I never figured out if he was legitimately concerned, or if it was a ploy to coerce others.
7. "… To wrap things up quickly and secretly, ALPA convinced two of your negotiators to join them and the company in negotiating outside of Phoenix in a secret location that your MEC didn’t even know about."
Not true. Yes there were some parallel negotiations and sidebars with the company, but they were done without ALPA's instigation or concurrence. Nor were any done secretly "outside of Phoenix." In fact ALPA was extremely concerned if not upset by some of the "private negotiations" and private dinners in PHX without their representatives or attorneys. And our MEC was kept in the dark always, by order of our committee chairman.
8. " One of your negotiators, Dale Cook, refused to sign it or show up for the ceremony."
True. And with good reason. Dale was livid, as was I. But not at ALPA. We were livid at the company and Glass, and more especially, with our own committee chairman and his sidekick who went off and did their own thing making little deals with Glass without the rest of the committee, ALPA, or the MEC. We were all sold out. We also were upset with the final product – the contract – which we both voted against and told our friends to do also.
9. " What you ended up with was a contract that was hastily put together."
Not true. A lot of planning and effort 6 months before negotiations ever began produced a thick, thorough, and comprehensive complete contract with all the language at the commencement of negotiations. Unfortunately, after a year of formal negotiations, it was decimated, piece-by-piece.
10. " You voted on a five page summary and most of the snail-mail ballots were already mailed in before you even had a rough draft."
Not true. While the summary was misleading and full of errors, there were a number (a couple hundred?) of complete contract drafts available at the roadshows and passed around. But most pilots only looked at section 3, compensation and nothing else. And Bob Ewert (who was privately briefed on the TA's many flaws prior, and given advance copies) provided written critiques to all pilots who would listen. Few did.
11. " ALPA President Randy Babbitt declared it "the best first contract in ALPA history."
While he later said that publicly (and foolishly), he was mad as hell privately when he first learned of our TA. He threatened not to sign our contract if we put it out to a vote. But in the end, he did. He probably had to against his will.
12. " But even when you had a sure win, ALPA chose to negotiate rather than go to arbitration."
That is total BS. We attempted arbitration at the outset, even before negotiations personally with then CEO Maury Myers, but the company (naturally) adamantly refused. And never did we have "a sure win." I think Scott is confusing arbitration with mediation. Much later when we hit an impasse, the company said they were filing for mediation. ALPA and we were acceptable to that. But the committee chairman – fearing this would extend the timeframe and blow his personal deadline – pulled some cheap stunts to keep us out of mediation, and shut down negotiations prematurely. He sold us out, and everyone involved – the rest of the committee, ALPA, the MEC, and our contract administrator - were thoroughly [expletive deleted]…. But could do little to right the wrong he did.
I'll be the first to admit C-95 gained far less than what was available, was not negotiated well, pilots were sold a bill of goods, it was a big disappointment, and was illegally changed after signing. But that was directly attributable to two individuals at the local, not national level. National was nearly as angry as to what transpired as we were.
As you may also have experienced, I get a little angry when I read about things I have personally experienced from sources that have no idea what transpired, were not there and yet try to rewrite history. If Scott wants far more accurate information, I suggest he stop listening to Herb or whoever his source is on our negotiations and contact Dale Cook or myself directly.
ALPA is like a wise old horse. If you are an experienced rider and also know when to use a whip, you succeed. But if you are a novice or a fool, that old horse will throw you, kick you, and then give you a horselaugh. Whether ALPA, USAPA, or whatever, success or failure is most always determined at the local level by good riders and leaders, and rarely if ever at the national.
Maybe not all you wanted to hear, but that is how I saw and experienced it. Dale Cooke will back this up, as will Frank Shine, captain rep at the time. Maybe even Scott's stepmother, or McCoy if he is still around.
Take care, and good luck to all you guys. You will definitely need it.
John
Hi Tony,
Thank you for the e-mail. Yes we are all fine, and we have fortunately dodged all the San Diego fires this time.
Regarding the e-mail -- while I certainly sympathize with all your current problems at former AWA, I no longer follow the issues and therefore can offer very little in the way of opinions. However, much of the information regarding C-95 is incorrect, and demands comment.
I assume Scott's information on our negotiations came from Herb (who was never involved), since the false points made by Scott are ones Herb has often passed on in the past. I'll withhold my opinions on the other issues, but I will give you what I know and experienced personally, here:
1…." Jerry Glass literally teaching AWA negotiators how to negotiate against him…."
Hardly. And I bristle at the insinuation, since I had studied negotiations previously, had read quite a number of books on the subject, and indeed had personally negotiated high-dollar contracts previously in the defense industry. That is not to say that there was not much to learn by observing Glass closely for over 18 months, for he was a talented, experienced, and shrewd negotiator of considerable success. But like an experienced pilot observing the techniques of another, it can never be said he taught you to fly! Glass taught me squat.
2. …." Jerry Glass taught courses at the George Meany Center for Labor Studies."
Bull. Glass didn't teach anything. He gave a single one-hour lecture during the 3-day course recounting mistakes he had witnessed in the past. (It was to me a short and weird, managing expectations lecture. Dale and I were upset about it and complained to National, to no avail.) But Glass taught nothing.
3…" Glass sized up the strengths and weaknesses of the four original AWA negotiators"
Well every negotiator (should) sizes up the opponent, learning everything they can. Information and preparation is power. Nothing new here. We researched Glass as much as he did us. We had some dirt on him.
4. "…. that made for very easy pickings for negotiations that lasted less than six months. "
Untrue! Formal negotiations lasted for 13 months; informal negotiations lasted even longer. There were a number of impasses; one deadlock on scope for over a month with no movement.
5. "… ALPA wanted your first negotiations concluded quickly."
Actually, ALPA always wants every negotiation concluded quickly. And so do pilots. But our problem wasn't with ALPA; it was with our own negotiating chairman who (as we found out later) had his own secret timetable and goal – a "contract within a year" – and he frustrated everyone in attempting to succeed in his timetable goal ahead and above a better contract.
6. "… ALPA was also concerned about the company threat of a merger with then non-union Continental."
Not to my knowledge, although our committee chairman certainly was. I never figured out if he was legitimately concerned, or if it was a ploy to coerce others.
7. "… To wrap things up quickly and secretly, ALPA convinced two of your negotiators to join them and the company in negotiating outside of Phoenix in a secret location that your MEC didn’t even know about."
Not true. Yes there were some parallel negotiations and sidebars with the company, but they were done without ALPA's instigation or concurrence. Nor were any done secretly "outside of Phoenix." In fact ALPA was extremely concerned if not upset by some of the "private negotiations" and private dinners in PHX without their representatives or attorneys. And our MEC was kept in the dark always, by order of our committee chairman.
8. " One of your negotiators, Dale Cook, refused to sign it or show up for the ceremony."
True. And with good reason. Dale was livid, as was I. But not at ALPA. We were livid at the company and Glass, and more especially, with our own committee chairman and his sidekick who went off and did their own thing making little deals with Glass without the rest of the committee, ALPA, or the MEC. We were all sold out. We also were upset with the final product – the contract – which we both voted against and told our friends to do also.
9. " What you ended up with was a contract that was hastily put together."
Not true. A lot of planning and effort 6 months before negotiations ever began produced a thick, thorough, and comprehensive complete contract with all the language at the commencement of negotiations. Unfortunately, after a year of formal negotiations, it was decimated, piece-by-piece.
10. " You voted on a five page summary and most of the snail-mail ballots were already mailed in before you even had a rough draft."
Not true. While the summary was misleading and full of errors, there were a number (a couple hundred?) of complete contract drafts available at the roadshows and passed around. But most pilots only looked at section 3, compensation and nothing else. And Bob Ewert (who was privately briefed on the TA's many flaws prior, and given advance copies) provided written critiques to all pilots who would listen. Few did.
11. " ALPA President Randy Babbitt declared it "the best first contract in ALPA history."
While he later said that publicly (and foolishly), he was mad as hell privately when he first learned of our TA. He threatened not to sign our contract if we put it out to a vote. But in the end, he did. He probably had to against his will.
12. " But even when you had a sure win, ALPA chose to negotiate rather than go to arbitration."
That is total BS. We attempted arbitration at the outset, even before negotiations personally with then CEO Maury Myers, but the company (naturally) adamantly refused. And never did we have "a sure win." I think Scott is confusing arbitration with mediation. Much later when we hit an impasse, the company said they were filing for mediation. ALPA and we were acceptable to that. But the committee chairman – fearing this would extend the timeframe and blow his personal deadline – pulled some cheap stunts to keep us out of mediation, and shut down negotiations prematurely. He sold us out, and everyone involved – the rest of the committee, ALPA, the MEC, and our contract administrator - were thoroughly [expletive deleted]…. But could do little to right the wrong he did.
I'll be the first to admit C-95 gained far less than what was available, was not negotiated well, pilots were sold a bill of goods, it was a big disappointment, and was illegally changed after signing. But that was directly attributable to two individuals at the local, not national level. National was nearly as angry as to what transpired as we were.
As you may also have experienced, I get a little angry when I read about things I have personally experienced from sources that have no idea what transpired, were not there and yet try to rewrite history. If Scott wants far more accurate information, I suggest he stop listening to Herb or whoever his source is on our negotiations and contact Dale Cook or myself directly.
ALPA is like a wise old horse. If you are an experienced rider and also know when to use a whip, you succeed. But if you are a novice or a fool, that old horse will throw you, kick you, and then give you a horselaugh. Whether ALPA, USAPA, or whatever, success or failure is most always determined at the local level by good riders and leaders, and rarely if ever at the national.
Maybe not all you wanted to hear, but that is how I saw and experienced it. Dale Cooke will back this up, as will Frank Shine, captain rep at the time. Maybe even Scott's stepmother, or McCoy if he is still around.
Take care, and good luck to all you guys. You will definitely need it.
John
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
If anyone thinks they know how all the manipulation, corruption, and legalities will drive the outcome (or that there is any agreement about what corruption and manipulations exist) they are smokin crack.
While it is a good idea to consider what the conflicting laws say, it would also be a good bet that everyside is looking for ways to make progress along the laws that support them and tell the others to "Sue me." Its a fine ALPA tradition, but ALPA didn't invent it.
AAA73Pilot
Veteran
- Jul 18, 2007
- 1,513
- 0
I'm sure. I did, more than once. There is no time frame after June 2006. Interesting isn't it?
G. The duration clause of the Single Agreement negotiated under this Section V. will
replace the respective duration clauses of the America West and US Airways
ALPA collective bargaining agreements. In the event such Single Agreement is
not reached on or before June 30, 2006, then on June 30, 2006 either the
Association or the Airline Parties may decide to suspend negotiations for such
Single Agreement depending on the progress at that time,.................
exB717Flyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,106
- 599
If you're referring to Jack's letter dated October 17 then I've read it. Twice. And yes, I read the Code-a-phone about losing ALPA insurance, too. While he does state that trusteeship wouldn't be in anybody's interest he doesn't even suggest a resolution condemning support for USAPA. I can recall several times the AWA MEC verbally attacked the AWAPA's attempted raid, and they were less of a threat than USAPA. Need I tell you that Prater has demanded the AAA MEC vigorously fight USAPA?AAA73Pilot said:
Jack's strategy is obvious. He's trying to pressure Prater to back off. The East's leverage is that if the AAA MEC mutinies and throw's their support behind USAPA it stands a good chance of winning. I wouldn't be surprised if this scenario plays out. I understand your mentality: you feel you have nothing to lose. But since your actions are deliberately harmful to another pilot group I predict things will not turn out as favorably as you hope.
The theft you are attempting with ALPA's tacit support since they are the architect and are in defense mode, is no worse than what a scab attempts. You are trying to devalue one's service to a company and time contributed to his job and ride in front of someone out of selfish, self centered interest. Talk about harmful.
nycbusdriver
Veteran
Well, BB, here's how the "Parties" are defined in the first paragraph of the transition agreement quoted below:
THIS LETTER OF AGREEMENT is made and entered into in accordance with the provisions of
the Railway Labor Act, as amended (the “Actâ€), by and between AMERICA WEST
HOLDINGS CORPORATION (“AWHCâ€), AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC. (“AMERICA
WESTâ€), US AIRWAYS GROUP, INC. (“US AIRWAYS GROUPâ€), US AIRWAYS, INC.
(“US AIRWAYSâ€), and the AIR LINE PILOTS in the service of AMERICA WEST and US
AIRWAYS, respectively, as represented by the AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION (hereinafter
referred to as “the Associationâ€) by and through the Master Executive Councils of the America
West and US Airways pilots (“America West MEC†and “US Airways MEC†respectively)
(collectively referred to as the “Partiesâ€).
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
or the Airline Parties may decide to suspend negotiations for such
Single Agreement...
Looks like the MECs are included in that. :huh:
You are confusing "Parties" with "Airline Parties."
My reading is that "Airline Parties" = well, "airlines." I.e., AMERICA WEST
HOLDINGS CORPORATION (“AWHCâ€), AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC. (“AMERICA
WESTâ€), US AIRWAYS GROUP, INC. (“US AIRWAYS GROUPâ€), US AIRWAYS, INC.
(“US AIRWAYSâ€).
Unless ALPA is somehow an "airline"?
(Forgive the caps; I was cutting and pasting from the previous post.)
My reading is that "Airline Parties" = well, "airlines." I.e., AMERICA WEST
HOLDINGS CORPORATION (“AWHCâ€), AMERICA WEST AIRLINES, INC. (“AMERICA
WESTâ€), US AIRWAYS GROUP, INC. (“US AIRWAYS GROUPâ€), US AIRWAYS, INC.
(“US AIRWAYSâ€).
Unless ALPA is somehow an "airline"?
(Forgive the caps; I was cutting and pasting from the previous post.)
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
We can keep arguing what is, is, but it looks pretty clear.
“the Association”) by and through the Master Executive Councils of the America
West and US Airways pilots (“America West MEC” and “US Airways MEC” respectively)
(collectively referred to as the “Parties”).
The ALPA EC wouldn't be a party because they are esceedingly careful to remain neutral. Thats why when they signed this document they made sure it said "by and through the MECs". It appears to have been brilliant foresight to "remain neutral throughout the process."
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Nov 9, 2003
- 16,512
- 5,865
- Banned
- #13
Effectively, "the company" = "airline parties". That term is not applicable to anyone on the union side.
Seems like you left out the part that defined who "the Association" refers to while including the last part (which "the Association doesn't refer to), Phoenix. ALPA is "the association", not the East and/or West MEC. This is further illustrated by the rest of the transition agreement - where either/both MEC's have a say they are refered to as MEC's.
Also notice that "the Parties" refers to everyone that signed the transition agreement - AW Holdings, AWA, US Group, US Inc, ALPA, East MEC, and West MEC. It does not mean just the East and West MEC.
As I told USA320Pilot several times on a different issue - read what the transition agreement actually says, don't read into it what you want it to say......
Jim
I agree.
Phoenix
Veteran
- Apr 16, 2003
- 8,584
- 7,430
320
“the Associationâ€) by and through the Master Executive Councils
Looks like the document makes it clear that the "the Association" is the MECs. And I have every confidence that the EC will maintain its neutrality in the process as earnestly as any other process, to do otherwise would be... well prejudiced instead of neutral.
ALPA is always above board and neutral. Count on it. Right? 
- Status
