Alpa Mec Code-a-phone Update

[USA320Pilot]

ALPA MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - May 7, 2004

This is MEC Chairman Bill Pollock with a US Airways MEC update for Friday, May 7th, with two new items.

Item 1. As of yesterday, only 55 percent of eligible pilots had cast a vote on LOA 91. I want to remind each pilot of the importance of your vote and of the ease with which you can cast that vote using ALPA's Internet or telephone balloting system.

In the past two weeks, many pilots have asked me to share my analysis of LOA 91's provisions. The purpose of LOA 91 is to provide the Company additional flexibility in deploying small jets, and especially Large SJs, allowing Large SJs to be flown at US Airways affiliates in greater numbers in order to protect our company’s ability to obtain financing for and operate those aircraft under our code. I can tell you, unequivocally, that US Airways needs feed and revenue from the planned future deliveries of SJs, especially during these challenging times, as this feed supports our revenue and our mainline fleet size by placing passengers on our mainline aircraft.

Already, Standard and Poor's has cut US Airways' credit rating to CCC+. This action by S&P allows GE Capital to rescind and/or renegotiate its SJ financing agreement with US Airways at any time, which could greatly jeopardize our revenue stream. GE may now contractually choose to divert future deliveries of SJs to our competitors, leading to the loss of flying, the associated Jets For Jobs positions, revenue, and feed. The purpose of LOA 91 is to increase the likelihood of GE Capital providing financing for continued SJ deliveries under the US Airways code, because it increases the security of GE Capital’s investment with US Airways.

LOA 91, if ratified, does not change the minimum mainline fleet size of 279 aircraft, and it does not change the total number of Medium and Large SJs that can be operated as US Airways Express.

Please also consider that this LOA, as was stated by the Negotiating Committee during the road shows, poses no risk to mainline pilots.

I realize that many pilots were working or otherwise engaged and could not attend a road show. To keep all pilots fully informed, ALPA mailed education materials to all eligible pilots. These materials are also posted on the pilots only home page, along with a narrated Negotiating Committee Road Show PowerPoint. Additionally, answers to the Negotiating Committee LOA 91 Q&A will be posted on the website this evening to provide you with additional material with which to make your decision.

I am asking every active member to vote, and to vote responsibly. Please cast your vote based solely on the provisions of LOA 91. You voted overwhelmingly last year that any contract, letter of agreement, or letter of understanding between US Airways and ALPA to be sent to the membership for ratification. You now have the responsibility to make an informed vote, and those who do not vote are letting others decide the direction of your airline career.

If you did not receive balloting materials and believe you are eligible to vote, please call ALPA's Membership Services Department in Herndon at 703-689-4163 or 888-FLY-ALPA.

LOA 91 voting ends Monday, May 10th, at 10 a.m. EST. You may change your vote at any time, and your last vote before polling closes will be counted as your final vote.

Item 2. A US Airways PowerPoint presentation shown during this week’s Labor Advisory Council meeting on the Company’s Transformation Plan has been posted on the pilots only home page under “New Informationâ€￾ for your review.

Please remember we have 1,879 pilots on furlough.

Thank you for listening

 

[ClueByFour]

Please also consider that this LOA, as was stated by the Negotiating Committee during the road shows, poses no risk to mainline pilots.

Once again, ALPA eats it's young.

Makes one want to vomit, really.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Clue:

With all due respect, it's clear you do not understand who the real message is being sent to. It's GECAS and S&P...not the pilots.

Bill is an extremely bright man who knows exactly what he is doing, especially with thrid-party comments.

It is widely believed if LOA 91 dies, so will the airline in short order. Moreover, "wholly owned" employees, J4J people, and affiliate airline employees will be in trouble too, if the agreement does not pass membership ratification.

Respectfully,

USA320Pilot

 

[100above;DH]

Yes indeed Clue, this is more a feast than an eating. What's the deal though with this code a phone. I can't ever remember ALPA reminding the members of a voting deadline let alone so BLATANTLY "advising" the membership which way to vote. Also noteworthy, it was mentioned "only" 55 percent have voted thus far. I'm quite certain that is FAR greater an amount than typically vote. I'll never forget immediately following 9/11 the vote to pay for extended benefits for future furloughed pilots. Of the then 5800 or so members, the tally was 1500 for, 500 against. Keep in mind, 1100 of the "for" votes were cast by the soon to be furloughed pilots. Therefore, 500 6 figured pilots went out of their way to vote No, 400 had the decency to vote YES, and 3800 didn't have the 35 seconds required to cast their vote. The message was sent loud and clear right then. Back to the real topic, why the appearant full court press by the MEC, surely this LOA will pass OVERWHELMINGLY I thought, or are the first 55 percent tallied numbers a toss up?

 

[ClueByFour]

With all due respect, it's clear you do not understand who the real message is being sent to. It's GECAS and S&P...not the pilots.

Bill is an extremely bright man who knows exactly what he is doing, especially with thrid-party comments.

It is widely believed if LOA 91 dies, so will the airline in short order. Moreover, "wholly owned" employees, J4J people, and affiliate airline employees will be in trouble too, if the agreement does not pass membership ratification.

And if LOA 91 is shot down and the airline folds, the only folks to blame would apparently be the old negotiating committee for AAA ALPA who did not do an adequate job obtaining an agreement satisfactory to the majority of the membership.

Gee, if LOA 91 is a slam dunk, why bother sending out a feelgood "third party" message for GECAS and S&P?

I can tell you that what Pollack puts in a Code-A-Phone has absolutely, positively no bearing directly upon GECAS, S&P, or the tooth fairy. They only want to see the result.... Hmm....

What this does tell me is that perhaps the vote on LOA 91 is not going the way he (Pollack) wants, and he's using the code-a-phone as a bully pulpit. I find that odd, since I was under the (perhaps incorrect) impression that the MEC specifically sent it out without a recommendation one way or the other.

He could have reassured GECAS and S&P without resorting to the "eat your young to save your own @ss" line I quoted above.

And if LOA 91 is shot down and the airline folds, the only folks to blame would apparently be the old negotiating committee for AAA ALPA who did not do an adequate job obtaining an agreement satisfactory to the majority of the membership.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

It is suspicious. If it was passing by ANY amount, why would he say anything? Seems that the reduced credit situation makes MOST of LOA 91 moot anyway. It doesn't really make sense to loan the money to ANY airline which is connected to UAIR in any dependent way. I think that the scare tactics are just going to bite this company in the tush. We ALL know what they want and why they want it. Management had better be trying to sell the product, not scare the employees into being compliant rape victims.

 

[Phoenix]

Gee, if LOA 91 is a slam dunk, why bother sending out a feelgood "third party" message for GECAS and S&P?

I can tell you that what Pollack puts in a Code-A-Phone has absolutely, positively no bearing directly upon GECAS, S&P, or the tooth fairy. They only want to see the result.... Hmm....

What this does tell me is that perhaps the vote on LOA 91 is not going the way he (Pollack) wants, and he's using the code-a-phone as a bully pulpit. I find that odd, since I was under the (perhaps incorrect) impression that the MEC specifically sent it out without a recommendation one way or the other.

He could have reassured GECAS and S&P without resorting to the "eat your young to save your own @ss" line I quoted above.

And if LOA 91 is shot down and the airline folds, the only folks to blame would apparently be the old negotiating committee for AAA ALPA who did not do an adequate job obtaining an agreement satisfactory to the majority of the membership.

Clue,

What are your qualifications and position in the airline industry that substantiate your claims?!

Heh. Heh. Heh....

Oh never mind. Your cranial address seems to facilitate a lucid perception of the facts and a sound analysis. (Note: sound analysis does not indicate the residence of your pate.)

Seriously though... It is time for those hogging the revenue stream at the trough of slop to stop and think about how LOA 91 relegates fellow pigs to slave labor camps that pay for Cherrys Jubilee at the mahogony tables graced with fine china.

And by the way, a yes vote doesn't get you a seat at the mahogony table, you just get a "promise" to stay at the hog trough.

Respectfully,

Phoenix

 

[bluetoad]

I would have to believe that if LOA 91 did not pass the quick and loud cries of our most senior members would be screaming that they did not understand what was being voted on, or that they could not vote for some technical reason (perhaps a hanging chaff). ALPA would quickly organize a revote to correct all the injustices. Stop living in fear and vote No.

 

[Atlantic]

100 Above,
You're wellcome.
26 years next month, and I voted for, and been paying each month.
The only thing I eat young is scallions.
You know, or should have known, flying for an airline, ANY airline, is nothing more than a crap shoot. Back in the late 80's or early 90's, I went along with the contract that took money out of my pocket for a no furlough for the jr. pilots. I'm still working 3 more days a month for that dumb ass vote. There is no such thing as an iron clad no furlough, unless you're a mail man. I knew that at the time, but I thought, well, maybe ALPA can pull this off. And by the way, the F/A's got caught up in this too because of the "me too". And if they had have a brain they would drop that in a heart beat. The "me too" has long passed helping thier craft.
The first time the working pilots provided health for the laided off pilots, there was a great deal of fraud. Did you know that? Check it out if you think it's not so. Call the ALPA office in PIT. So who has the moral high ground here?
I voted FOR LOA 91.
For myself, for the FIRST time, and everyone else that wants to work for US Airways.

 

[Walmartgreeter]

It is suspicious. If it was passing by ANY amount, why would he say anything?

Oldie, I really do not know....does the MEC have access to the voting results as they come in, or is it done by a third party that reveals nothing until voting is finished? Thanks to you are anyone else who can clear this up for me. Best. Greeter.

 

[fatburger]

You guessed right...........ALPO is nervous that LOA 91 won't pass. Vote No Vote Now!!

-fatburger-

 

[ua767fo]

1) I can't ever remember ALPA reminding the members of a voting deadline let alone so BLATANTLY "advising" the membership which way to vote.

2) Also noteworthy, it was mentioned "only" 55 percent have voted thus far. I'm quite certain that is FAR greater an amount than typically vote.

3) I'll never forget immediately following 9/11.............., and 3800 didn't have the 35 seconds required to cast their vote.

In response to #1, neither can I....at USAir or UAL. There must be some real conviction behind this. Of course, the UAL MEC put on a full court press for us to approve POS2003.....and now I'm very sorry I voted for it.

Concerning #2&3, If people are so appethetic that they choose not to spend the time to show up for open council meetings and vote, then they are sheep, to the votes by people like myself who make decisions out of conviction. In short, what ever they get, to bad....they make their beds by not voting, and get to sleep in it.

On a personal note, I cant stand whining by people who choose not to participate, and blatantley tell them to shut up. And I like my vote counting all the more by them not voting.

ATLANTIC said "The first time the working pilots provided health for the laided off pilots, there was a great deal of fraud. Did you know that? "

No, I didnt know that. When offered in 1994, I was already reemployed. I did not participate. But again, a belated thank you for the generous benefit. Out and out fraud should be prosecuted. Pilots, Police, Politicians......whomever

DENVER, CO