Alpa - Us Airways Meeting

[USA320Pilot]

US Airways ALPA MEC chairman Bill Pollock, MEC vice-chairman Kim Snider and MEC secretary/treasurer Mike D'Angelo will meet with US Airways chief executive officer and president Dave Siegel for a briefing on the "State of the Airline" on Wednesday, November 19, in the afternoon.

Regards,

Chip

 

[AAviator]

Chip,
how much lower do you think the MEC will agree to lower the bar for total pilot compensation at a mainline carrier in support of a failed business plan?

 

[USA320Pilot]

AAviator:

AAviator asked: How much lower do you think the MEC will agree to lower the bar for total pilot compensation at a mainline carrier in support of a failed business plan?

Chip answers: None. The pilot group represented 10% of the employees, 30% of the labor expense, and provided greater than 60% of the concessions. The pilots were the only employees to meet 100% of their target concessions, the only employee group to lose their DB retirement plan (resulting in a 50% to 70% reduction in retirement benefits), and will see about a 9% reduction in pilot positions due to "Pref Bid".

Regards,

Chip

 

[A320 Driver]

I'm not Chip, but ALL that I have spoken with say they are done...period. Most are seeking other means of employment/sidelines/businesses. I spoke with a pilot last week that plans to leave next year regardless to pursue another line of work. I start school after the first of the year on a new career path myself. My wife is re-activating her real estate license. There will be others.

The employees of U took the biggest hits in all this and I think we deserve better than we've seen from our company leadership. The time for excuses is past.

We sink or swim on the decisions management will make over the next few months. Let's hope one of them is not a decision to fleece the employees again. IMHO, that would be a complete waste of time.


A320 Driver :blink:

 

[76200]

We've given above and beyond.


The first question from us needs to be :


What is your Mainline Business Plan to grow Mainline ???????


76200

 

[N628AU]

AAviator:

AAviator asked: How much lower do you think the MEC will agree to lower the bar for total pilot compensation at a mainline carrier in support of a failed business plan?

Chip answers: None. The pilot group represented 10% of the employees, 30% of the labor expense, and provided greater than 60% of the concessions. The pilots were the only employees to meet 100% of their target concessions, the only employee group to lose their DB retirement plan (resulting in a 50% to 70% reduction in retirement benefits), and will see about a 9% reduction in pilot positions due to "Pref Bid".

Regards,

Chip

More group infighting from Chip. If you think taking a no-furlough clause in exchange for farming out Heavy Maintenance on the Airbus would be appropriate for the IAM, what about the ALPA getting a no furlough clause and allowing Mesa to fly the CRJ900 there Captain?

 

[AOG-N-IT]

We've given above and beyond.


The first question from us needs to be :


What is your Mainline Business Plan to grow Mainline ???????


76200

I believe it's more than evident that no such plan is invisioned for the mainline.

All the talk is codesharing agreements and RJ flying...no actual or realized added contributions of the U mainline fleet itself. This bids poorly for us all in both the short term...and shakey at best long-term

Airtran is doing something right now that makes sense....it has an on-line survey asking its customers where they wuld like the airline to start flying next? I'm sure the results will be based demographics and yield analysis...but at least it shows that they are listening to those whom pay their way.

I feel certain that U (mainline) could be reaching into other market areas that we currently ignore...or refuse to compete in at all , lets not forget what we've allowed ourselves to run away from either.

 

[USA320Pilot]

N628AU:

N628AU said: "More group infighting from Chip. If you think taking a no-furlough clause in exchange for farming out Heavy Maintenance on the Airbus would be appropriate for the IAM, what about the ALPA getting a no furlough clause and allowing Mesa to fly the CRJ900 there Captain?"

Chip comments: N628AU, your points are valid. If the IAM permits the A320 outsourcing, I believe the CRJ900 comparison would be valid. One difference is that management agreed that the CRJ-900 (CRJ-705 Variant) was a contract violation and the company has taken a different position regarding A320 outsourcing. However, I take exception to your comment regarding "infighting" because my comments were simply the facts.

Regards,

Chip

 

[N628AU]

Chip, the company obviously saw it was not worth the fight to get the CRJ705. The must have figured they could do just as well giving the jets to Mesa as 70 seaters vs. keeping them within group and seeing more furloughed mainline guys have a flying option. Instead, ALPA once again ate it's own young. Do you really think the company honestly saw the error of violating the contract, and through the goodness of it's heart backed down from that fight, without realizing a similar bottom line benefit?

I am no big IAM fan, but they could very easily sell out the furoughed guys for a no furlough clause, and let the mechanics go out the door to retirement as the Boeings do. The IAM chose to stand and fight for what is right and I applaud them for that.

And don't give me that 100% target concession garbage. Talk to those that have been furloughed, they gave up 100% of everything. You are still in the left seat there big guy. Granted, you are not making what you were, but who is?

The very fact that you would seem open to letting a no furough clause allow 90 seat jets to be farmed out to the lowest bidder, forever cutting off a return to US for so many, shows the real ALPA loyalty to it's membership/

 

[AOG-N-IT]

...OK Chip...here's a fact for ya. The IAM is NOT going to lose it's work on the A320 family. ...and surveys say that U is going to be eating a real turd burger in light of the wasted expendatures of money fighting a losing battle....the backlog on work not being performed at present will only compound our troubles beyond what they are at present.

The other aspect is the continued alienation that U is causing between the executive ranks and the laboring end. You are probably the only person on earth that can sit behind your keyboard after having had your teeth knocked out figuratively speaking...and then tell others how they should willingly give more to people that have proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that they can't be trusted..or held accountable for signed contracts.

The fact that rounds 1 and 2 of concessions have netted us nothing toward actually changing things for the better should tell you and everyone else that we are in a doomed situation with the leadership we have at present.

Giving more on our part will only allow for another Eastern/TWA situation to un-fold again. The airline is collapsing like a wet paper bag in operational aspects...and management is acting in a progressive fashion likened to a slow death from cancer.

 

[N628AU]

And what do they do with cancer AOG? They cut it out and nuke it! Much of what needs to be done to the cancer that is bringing this airline down.

 

[PITbull]

N6,

You are so correct. ALPA should never take the position to allow 90 seat RJs to go elsewhere in exchange for a "no furlough" clause. The 90 seaters, if U purchased them were all to come to "mainline". Management made that perfectly clear in the Summer restruc. negotiations of 2002.

That was and is are only hope to grow "mainline" in the business plan. I will not believe ALPA would be inept enough to go down that road. At least, I hope their leadership isn't.

 

[airlineorphan]

Of course, we've all seen how effective "no furlough" clauses are....

-Airlineorphan

 

[AOG-N-IT]

And what do they do with cancer AOG? They cut it out and nuke it! Much of what needs to be done to the cancer that is bringing this airline down.

Absolutely right my friend !!!

People can dispute or ignore the facts all they want...the bottom line is a failed business plan is what we have...and the answer is not taking more from us and contining business as usual..2 years later we have achieved little too nothing in terms of actually repairing our business model....in many respects we have gone backwards

I do believe the point about our compensation levels being below that of our competition is clear in most departments. I know for fact that my compensation levels fall nearly 25% below that of my UA , AA or even WN counterparts.

I think the fact that we have heard many say here "I would gladly except WN's contract and compensation" says it all. Many including myself would be saying thank you for a rather hefty raise in that situation...so again, it's not us that is broken or failing at our jobs. The blame lies with those whom are grossly over-compensated and protected with golden parachute laced contracts. These are the ones responsible for any failures we have ...afterall , We don't pull down our market presence , we don't fail to market ourselves , we don't park potential revenue generating aircraft , ..and We are not the ones that have created a cultural rift that is very likely beyond repair.

As you pointed out...the cancer is identified and for now isolated. The time for a certain non-medical doctor to take the needed measures s now !!!

:rant: :censored:

 

[usfliboi]

all this talk is so entertaining but in the end as we all know if not given, it will be taken....