Move2CLT
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,048
- Reaction score
- 8,631
Said the old timer, desperate for one more dogfight.
LMAO.
What ever you say old dude.
AUG/SEPT 2012 US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
- Status
Said the old timer, desperate for one more dogfight.
LMAO.
What ever you say old dude.
cactusboy53
Veteran
- Joined
- May 9, 2007
- Messages
- 2,649
- Reaction score
- 7,407
PHX Domicile Update 09/07/2012
PHX Domicile Update
Dear Phoenix Pilots:
Your Phoenix Representatives believe that the fate of the MOU should be determined by the line pilots of US Airways. We strongly support the opportunity for line pilots to question the Negotiating Advisory Committee (NAC), the Professional Negotiator, and our attorneys directly. In other words, the PHX Reps strongly support a ROAD SHOW by the NAC.
Questions & Answers
Question:
If it is true that the MOU is pulled, then why push for road shows on the MOU by the rank and file?
Answer:
It was reported via USAPA Communications that: “the Company will not present the MOU to the LCC BOD because the BPR recommended to the pilots to disapprove it.” Paragraph 20 of the MOU is clear in stating, “This MOU shall be subject to ratification by USAPA’s membership, and approval by US Airways’ and APA’s respective Board of Directors.” USAPA has no control over what Doug Parker ultimately decides to do regarding sending the MOU to the LCC BOD. Nobody in USAPA has any control over what the CEO decides to do with the MOU, but what USAPA can do – and should do – is to proceed with the education process.
We feel the NAC road shows are critical to educating the pilot group on the facets of the MOU. We feel that the time to educate is NOW.
Question:
Why are the PHX Reps so adamant about getting the vote out? Didn't PHX vote against endorsing it?
Answer:
We feel that every pilot here has the right to have his or her voice heard. We voted the way we did, that day, because it was made clear to all of the BPR that there was time for questions and concerns to be addressed by the NAC and the Company. That was the whole purpose of scheduling a BPR meeting the following week. What we didn’t have control over is the resolution to vote on the MOU. The PHX Reps believed then and still do today that taking a vote on the MOU when there were questions and concerns coming from every BPR Rep, was premature and reeked of politics. There was no reason to vote yes or no on sending the MOU to the pilots when the NAC was actively scheduling further discussion on the MOU the following week!
Question:
Doesn't the MOU rewrite the TRANSITION agreement?
Answer:
SOME OF IT. The block hour/aircraft numbers from the Transition Agreement are eliminated by the MOU language, but it does include pay and furlough protections. The MOU addresses downsizing protection, but in a different manner than our current minimum block hour/aircraft number protections. This is an obvious change from the Transition Agreement, and there are many other pieces of the Transition Agreement that will also be modified. The best resource for answering your questions is to read the Term Sheet and MOU, and by the listening to the NAC members and the Professional Negotiator.
Question:
Why does the MOU not cover the entire contract?
Answer:
Again, this is a question best asked to the NAC, but what we will say is that the MOU and TERM Sheet are only a FOUNDATION from which the Company can COST OUT the new AA airline, sooner rather than later.
Question:
Why don't we just ride the coattails of the Change of Control (COC)?
Answer:
Assuming that the COC has legal teeth, our opinion is that our collective interest, East and West, are best served by making us an integral part of the merger process.
Question:
What about the so called JOINT UPDATE? Was it editorial differences?
Answer:
Be aware that if the PHX Reps’ names are not included in any supposed “joint update,” then we have NOTHING to do with that update. The LAST “joint update” claimed that there was a lack of “CONSENSES ON THE WORDING” of that update; therefore, PHX was not included. Not true. There was much more than a lack of "CONSENSES ON THE WORDING" between us and the remainder of the BPR. Again, if our names are not on it, then we HAVE NOTHING to do with it
There are changes made often to the NAC portion of the Web site, so please frequent it. When you sign onto the USAPA Web site, the first thing you see at the top of the Home Page is a Slider that directs you to the Merger Library, where you can see not only the latest updates and road show presentations, but the MOU, Term Sheet and APA’s Green Book (contract) as well. You may also go directly to the Libraries tab and select Merger Library, or go to the Committees tab and select Negotiation Advisory or Merger Committee.
For those of you that wish to contact other base representatives, you may do so by identifying them individually on the USAPA Website (under the Contact Tab>USAPA Directory). Addressing an email toBPR@usairlinepilots.org will reach ALL BPR representatives. An email addressed toOfficers@usairlinepilots.org will reach ALL USAPA elected officers.
Thank you all for your input, comments and support!
John, Roger & Dave
Dear Phoenix Pilots:
Your Phoenix Representatives believe that the fate of the MOU should be determined by the line pilots of US Airways. We strongly support the opportunity for line pilots to question the Negotiating Advisory Committee (NAC), the Professional Negotiator, and our attorneys directly. In other words, the PHX Reps strongly support a ROAD SHOW by the NAC.
Questions & Answers
Question:
If it is true that the MOU is pulled, then why push for road shows on the MOU by the rank and file?
Answer:
It was reported via USAPA Communications that: “the Company will not present the MOU to the LCC BOD because the BPR recommended to the pilots to disapprove it.” Paragraph 20 of the MOU is clear in stating, “This MOU shall be subject to ratification by USAPA’s membership, and approval by US Airways’ and APA’s respective Board of Directors.” USAPA has no control over what Doug Parker ultimately decides to do regarding sending the MOU to the LCC BOD. Nobody in USAPA has any control over what the CEO decides to do with the MOU, but what USAPA can do – and should do – is to proceed with the education process.
We feel the NAC road shows are critical to educating the pilot group on the facets of the MOU. We feel that the time to educate is NOW.
Question:
Why are the PHX Reps so adamant about getting the vote out? Didn't PHX vote against endorsing it?
Answer:
We feel that every pilot here has the right to have his or her voice heard. We voted the way we did, that day, because it was made clear to all of the BPR that there was time for questions and concerns to be addressed by the NAC and the Company. That was the whole purpose of scheduling a BPR meeting the following week. What we didn’t have control over is the resolution to vote on the MOU. The PHX Reps believed then and still do today that taking a vote on the MOU when there were questions and concerns coming from every BPR Rep, was premature and reeked of politics. There was no reason to vote yes or no on sending the MOU to the pilots when the NAC was actively scheduling further discussion on the MOU the following week!
Question:
Doesn't the MOU rewrite the TRANSITION agreement?
Answer:
SOME OF IT. The block hour/aircraft numbers from the Transition Agreement are eliminated by the MOU language, but it does include pay and furlough protections. The MOU addresses downsizing protection, but in a different manner than our current minimum block hour/aircraft number protections. This is an obvious change from the Transition Agreement, and there are many other pieces of the Transition Agreement that will also be modified. The best resource for answering your questions is to read the Term Sheet and MOU, and by the listening to the NAC members and the Professional Negotiator.
Question:
Why does the MOU not cover the entire contract?
Answer:
Again, this is a question best asked to the NAC, but what we will say is that the MOU and TERM Sheet are only a FOUNDATION from which the Company can COST OUT the new AA airline, sooner rather than later.
Question:
Why don't we just ride the coattails of the Change of Control (COC)?
Answer:
Assuming that the COC has legal teeth, our opinion is that our collective interest, East and West, are best served by making us an integral part of the merger process.
Question:
What about the so called JOINT UPDATE? Was it editorial differences?
Answer:
Be aware that if the PHX Reps’ names are not included in any supposed “joint update,” then we have NOTHING to do with that update. The LAST “joint update” claimed that there was a lack of “CONSENSES ON THE WORDING” of that update; therefore, PHX was not included. Not true. There was much more than a lack of "CONSENSES ON THE WORDING" between us and the remainder of the BPR. Again, if our names are not on it, then we HAVE NOTHING to do with it
There are changes made often to the NAC portion of the Web site, so please frequent it. When you sign onto the USAPA Web site, the first thing you see at the top of the Home Page is a Slider that directs you to the Merger Library, where you can see not only the latest updates and road show presentations, but the MOU, Term Sheet and APA’s Green Book (contract) as well. You may also go directly to the Libraries tab and select Merger Library, or go to the Committees tab and select Negotiation Advisory or Merger Committee.
For those of you that wish to contact other base representatives, you may do so by identifying them individually on the USAPA Website (under the Contact Tab>USAPA Directory). Addressing an email toBPR@usairlinepilots.org will reach ALL BPR representatives. An email addressed toOfficers@usairlinepilots.org will reach ALL USAPA elected officers.
Thank you all for your input, comments and support!
John, Roger & Dave
Move2CLT
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,048
- Reaction score
- 8,631
L
luvn737s
Guest
The angry F/O club has become extinct as a few members upgrade and the emotion that kept them going dissapates, so don't count your Li'l Generals until they've voted because very few are willing to forget their misplaced loyalty in Cleary/McKee and take one more for the team. So, likely the number of moderate progressive voters far exceeds the boogiemen club.
As for outgunned, you'll be disarmed in order to avoid hurting yourself or others.
John Scherff, the same one that leaked the eastern identities out of the chief pilot office. What a credible source. Imagine him working for the interests of the eastern group.......Who knows what he is doing in the USAPA offices at night. This is right out of the LET MY DADDY VOTE!!!! campaign your group so embarrassingly partook of in the 2003 era. Pathetic. Now the PHX reps are falling for it. I would give it a resounding NO, better yet, not even let it go out. Send Franke Air a message. The PHX reps actually think anyone gives them credence. The APA and Horton think they are a bunch of idiots.
L
luvn737s
Guest
Is he trumping up RICO charges to harass you and extorting money from you to pay for it?
So, how about an answere Claxhole? Ever worked at LCC? Can you explain how you know Parker said it would be a 3 way?
Parker did not say it would be a 3 way...Parker said many times he does not know exactly how it would work....but an east scab watching a couple of crew news sessions where the questions arose would definitely hear him saying 3 way no Nic....3 way no Nic...3 way no Nic.
The reality of the situation is you could be right and a merger may not happen. But, if one does, the only accepted system seniority list at LCC (i.e. the Nic) will be used during the SLI.
Oh, one more thing...the east does not have the West outgunned...and even if they did, they would be too stupid to actually take the advice of the guns and aim away from themselves.
"What ever you say old dude."....? 😉 Ok then: I say you're a pathetic little punk, sadly bereft of even the brains God gave an average artichoke. 😉
http://www.makeuseof...h-guy-syndrome/
Scherff and a dozen or so West pilots would own usapa right now if the scabs would have had the nuts to take them to a state court...which BTW the scabs promised to do....what happend to that promise..guess it went the way of the LOA93 3% annual raise, membership rule, legal elections, open communications, a cost neutral DOH contract in 90 days...etc..etc...etc..
I'm not sure what your personal experiences are there...but most weapons don't actually offer up any advice....just sayin' 😉 Ummm....in light of that; it "might" be appropriate for you to lighten up a bit on many more "too stupid" rantings..... 😉
hold on a second...was Scherff even a RICO defendant?
Manufactures do. Can't be getting sued every time your product is involved in a self inflicted incident.
"Manufactures do." = Manufacturers I assume? True enough, but the guns themselves certainly don't. I'm a bit curious as to what mysterious, mental mechanism clearly requires such instantly attempted spin to be predictably given....? 😉
No matter. Have fun kids...same old stuff here....just a different day.
Interesting.....This may be the first time I've seen stand up comedy performed while tap dancing. 😉
"Why don't we just ride the coattails of the Change of Control (COC)?" I'll take a wild guess here.....ummm....that would be because the west has nothing of the sort within their contract, and can't even pretend otherwise? Riding any coattails might prove a bit iffy under some conceivable future scenarios.
"Assuming that the COC has legal teeth, our opinion is that our collective interest, East and West, are best served by making us an integral part of the merger process." Whew!....While I'm rarely impressed at all with the west brain trust....I must fairly admit that THAT'S some truly impressive, world-class BS!!!! 😉
Let's examine the audience cue points for the laugh tracks here: "...our collective interest, East and West, are best served by.."....just plain giving away east COC contractual provisions...not to mention east scope/etc? I know, I know...if anyone's kept a straight face through that "collective interest, East and West" part, let's proceed to "Assuming that the COC has legal teeth," Have we not all been, loudly and obnoxiously assured by the vocal west that it absolutely, without possible doubt, has none whatsoever? Why even mention it then? This just kept getting even more hilarious though; "...making us an integral part of the merger process." Umm...What "us" is truly being spoken of there..?
So...Ummm...Seriously; can I even possibly have this right here?....The east should immediately and cheerfully give away CoC and all east scope provisions, nowhere existing within the weak, west contract, purely to serve our newly discovered, (no...brand-new/ just-born/dropped-on-the-doorstep-by-gypsies/etc) infant, mistakenly named "collective interest" ??? Sheesh! The poor, illegitimate kid must have been named in a last minute, feeble attempt to garner support from outraged family members...or at least in the hopes of impressing gullible and kindly strangers 😉 I certainly must admit that whatever duplicitous little prince that wrote that does indeed have a remarkable sense of humor. 😉
L
luvn737s
Guest
EastUS Van Winkle, it's not 2005 anymore, you can toss the old calendar. We're moving on without you and your "What 'us' is truly being spoken of there" attempts at perpetuating a schism that hasn't quite worked out as you had hoped.
Why not accept the loss of the SLI and PIC and snapbacks and 3% and RICO cases and Addington (my, you've been busy little beavers over there in Charlotte) and focus on defending some of what you do have left, like dignity and self respect (unless I'm assuming too much).
Why not accept the loss of the SLI and PIC and snapbacks and 3% and RICO cases and Addington (my, you've been busy little beavers over there in Charlotte) and focus on defending some of what you do have left, like dignity and self respect (unless I'm assuming too much).
- Status
Similar threads
