AUG/SEPT 2012 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Phoenix]

The mandate for the NAC in securing this MOU should have been very specific and narrow in scope (no pun intended). Why were other sections of the contract even discussed and entertained by the committee? Those areas should have been non-starters. The NAC should have been tasked to improve our position ONLY and broader contract negotiations left for another day.

Compass Correction is urging patience and a no vote. Yet the leadership team they endorse urges us, I presume, to vote yes.

The leadership and the BPR need to get on the same page and present a united front on this issue, for the sake of the membership.

Better yet, Gary Hummel should postpone the vote until such time that the company can be re-engaged, MOU provisions clarified and/or modified.

He has the authority and responsibility to prevent this from being a rush job.

I urge him to do so.

KV

Woody Meener, Gary Hummel, and Steve Bradford own this.

John Prater and Duane Woerth will be remembered as choir boys if this MOU passes.

 

[Pi brat]

I think the last few posts sum up pretty well what Rakesh would call a conundrum. We have what Parker says, and we have lived what he has done. Add to that the most polarized, dysfunctional pilot group and union in the history of the airline business and this is what you get.

Parker has said that if we were the size of DL or UA then he could pay us that way. Yet he puts in an E190 rate that is below what DL has negotiated and jetBlue has. The MOU has us wait 3 years to do a parity review, but seems to have language that Rakesh wishes he had put in his. He says market share is important, but has many options on that. He has lived with the min fleet for 5 years while saving millions. Seems like he could live with it a few more for this valuable opportunity. Guess not if he doesn't have to.

What a mess.

Driver, thanks for attending the meeting and passing on your thoughts. I'm going to write down my questions and go to a road show and then make my decision.

 

[A320 Driver]

I agree, market share is central to the rationale behind this merger, which begs the question - why is management asking for the easy means with which to reduce market share?

I don't think they want to reduce anything, but they seem more than concerned about staffing 5 to 7 years down the road, especially if the legislation is put in place to restrict all regional hiring to a minimum of 1500 hours and an ATP. There are very few roads left to get a new pilot from 250 hrs to 1500. I think they see the 1600 furloughs that AA has now as a huge advantage over UA and DL. With the retirements starting, the only pool we have to pull from is our regionals and we could deplete them easily over the next few years. Maybe they want to bring much of that flying in house at a lower cost per seat mile as the contracts expire. In any case, it's not likely they will share their plans in the public. This is a competitive business, correct?

I think they are hedging their bets in case staffing becomes a real issue. Also, how do you maintain min fleet count for a whithering group of pilots as the retirements kick in. At some point, it makes no sense because a joint contract covers the whole pilot group and less and less pilots currently flying could possibly be affected by fleet reductions on any side.

Short term, Parker has said many times recently that capacity has been rightsized and there are no needs for a massive reduction. It wouldn't take much to lose the number 1 position in the east and middle of the country. Give up PHX for any reason and you lose the number 3 position in the west. That puts Parker the captain of a sinking ship and I don't think he has any intention of being anything but top dog.

Driver...

 

[A320 Driver]

I think the last few posts sum up pretty well what Rakesh would call a conundrum. We have what Parker says, and we have lived what he has done. Add to that the most polarized, dysfunctional pilot group and union in the history of the airline business and this is what you get.

Parker has said that if we were the size of DL or UA then he could pay us that way. Yet he puts in an E190 rate that is below what DL has negotiated and jetBlue has. The MOU has us wait 3 years to do a parity review, but seems to have language that Rakesh wishes he had put in his. He says market share is important, but has many options on that. He has lived with the min fleet for 5 years while saving millions. Seems like he could live with it a few more for this valuable opportunity. Guess not if he doesn't have to.

What a mess.

Driver, thanks for attending the meeting and passing on your thoughts. I'm going to write down my questions and go to a road show and then make my decision.

Perfect brat. That is what everyone should do.

 

[Claxon]

HA HA, there is no one who is looking to fire Doug Parker. There is no one on the horizon who brings any more success in the airline business for the board to choose. Do you think a revolving door of management who comes to take their millions and walk away would make this a better, more secure career? I didn't work at Braniff, Kiwi or PanAm and it almost scuttled Continental.

Do you hate Parker, or do you hate what your chosen career has become, in part due to petty in-fighting stoked by groups vying for influence and power?

Parker has no innovation or expertise in anything other than keeping his employees compensation at a substandard level a la Franke, and charging for bags. Take that from him and he can't measure up at all. All it takes is a spike in oil, and he is right back in trouble.
This is the perfect opportunity to hand Parker another merge fail, and he is setting himself up for it. He deserves it, so give it to him.
Now it appears the westerners are hell bent on merging with AMR so they are willing to give up scope. They will pay dearly if it comes true.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Ok, fine. DUI has to keep the same number of seats or more. How come he wants us to allow nearly unlimited code share, wants us to alow 15-20% reductions every year, and only provides furlough protection for less than 2 years?

Does he plan to grow exPress and code share, like he has in the past?

Yes he can shrink us and increase market share. And that would help him make a billion$ every year.

DUI plans to do just that, someone needs to explain to DRIVER, that those airplane orders are "REPLACEMENTS" for an ageing fleet, and that little word "consolidation" !

 

[Claxon]

The western crew doesn't have the PBGC or any fall back. The eastern division in their advanced age seem to care less if this flies. There are few years left, so who cares if the Franke Division goes away. There is just not much risk at all for them.

 

[Claxon]

Woody Meener, Gary Hummel, and Steve Bradford own this.

John Prater and Duane Woerth will be remembered as choir boys if this MOU passes.

Your Compass Correctors surely stepped on their cranks with this one. You are the laughing stock of the industry if you take this pig.

 

[Claxon]

Better line up the taxi for Parker when the vote tanks. Will this be the 6th or 7th failed merger?



[background=rgb(57, 173, 217)]
Cab Services[/background]

Discount Cab offers on-demand cab service
24 hours a day. With one of the largest taxicab dispatch centers in the nation, multilingual customer support and the largest hybrid Prius
taxicab
fleet in North America, you will get a cab when you need it. In addition, Discount Cab has driver requirements that go above and beyond industry standards. All drivers must pass a nine-panel drug screening test and a federal and state sex offender registry check, have no DUIs, and complete a three-day training course that includes classroom, on-the-road certification and sensitivity training.
Discount Cab
also certifies our drivers to provide
mobility/wheelchair-accommodating transportation
for those with disabilities.

 

[A320 Driver]

DUI plans to do just that, someone needs to explain to DRIVER, that those airplane orders are "REPLACEMENTS" for an ageing fleet, and that little word "consolidation" !

You can speak to me directly MM. I don't mind. I understand completely about the aircraft being replacements. And so will we be replaced as we retire.

You explain your concept of consolidation and what part of it with regard to this merger frightens you so.

I am all ears... I'll look for your reply tonight...got stuff to do.

Driver...

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

You can speak to me directly MM. I don't mind. I understand completely about the aircraft being replacements. And so will we be replaced as we retire.

You explain your concept of consolidation and what part of it with regard to this merger frightens you so.

I am all ears... I'll look for your reply tonight...got stuff to do.

Driver...

http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/0/9893fbf4-bf90-11e1-a476-00144feabdc0.html#axzz24wlxOEU6

 

[Phoenix]

I don't think they want to reduce anything,...

Driver...

DUI is asking us to give unlimited code share and 15-20% fleet reductions every year.

If he intends to no longer reduce mainline and replace it with a growing express fleet (like the last decade) then why did he pay his lawyers to draft an MOU that allows him to hit warp speed on that path?

Has anybody been paying attention?

 

[Crzipilot]

Ok, now to play the other side. Or looking at this from a different angle.

Voting in the MOU binds us to the APA term sheet and path already set forth to determine a JCBA.

Voting no on the MOU, leaves us as is.

Within the APA term sheet, it states that as soon (no later than 6 months of POR) after LCC has met the criteria for Single Carrier, APA will petition for such status.

At time of SCS determination ( and APA wins election), JCBA will be finilized within 90 days, containing all the matters in the Term sheet.

If APA is not the winner, the arbitration section will be offered to the surviving Collective Bargaining Unit.


So in one way, LCC has the US pilots in a check mate position. You will be assimilated at some point onto the AA green book. The MOU in some senses makes it a little better, but becomes effective immediately at POR.

Not having the MOU US pilots will sit in their current position, probaby 12-24 months. but the end result will be the same. Is a seat at the table really worth anything if the wording of the agreements have already pretty much defined the JCBA????



One little thing I just saw, is the gamble Parker is playing. His gamble is that APA is the surviving bargaining unit. He could get AMR, have us on the side, and go through the steps of getting a new APA CBA, get his single carrier determination, and POOF, if APA is NOT the surviving Agent, then there would be a stale mate of sorts I would think. We would essentially be sitting there with three different contracts and three different pilot groups. The question is, would the new CBA be bound by the processes withing the APA term sheet for a JCBA? It seems with the wording managment may at first blush think not.

Unfortunately, for all of that above scenerio to happen, there would have to be some great unity, planning, discussions and trust amongst all three leaders. Guess that blows that idea out the window.

 

[Walmartgreeter]

Czy said:
"One little thing I just saw, is the gamble Parker is playing. His gamble is that APA is the surviving bargaining unit. He could get AMR, have us on the side, and go through the steps of getting a new APA CBA, get his single carrier determination, and POOF, if APA is NOT the surviving Agent, then there would be a stale mate of sorts I would think. We would essentially be sitting there with three different contracts and three different pilot groups. The question is, would the new CBA be bound by the processes withing the APA term sheet for a JCBA? It seems with the wording managment may at first blush think not."

Crazy, there is no gamble for Parker here. It does not matter which AIRLINE is the survivor or even buyer. The key is APA will be the surviving union, most likely with no voting (we don't even have the 35% showing necessary) and the stroke of an NMB pen.

Separate contracts indeed, for a while. But once they get their single carrier status the APA guys will be happy to vote you into a new combined contract. All the while you sit on LOA 93 wages, waiting for your grievance on questionable snapbacks to work its way through years of arbitration. How has that been working out for us?

But you get it. Bottom line is we MAY be screwed anyway even with the MOU. But we WILL be screwed without it.

Greeter

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

United backs US airline consolidation

By Andrew Parker
United Continental Holdings, the largest US airline by revenue, is supporting more consolidation of the domestic market, saying it would not object to a merger between US Airways and American Airlines.
Jeff Smisek, chief executive of United, told the Financial Times he would not urge regulators to block a tie-up between American and US Airways, even though it could weaken the global airline alliance that his carrier belongs to.

• 
  

Although Mr Smisek complained about high aviation taxes and burdensome regulation, the US airline industry is starting to enjoy the benefits of consolidation.
As well as the 2010 merger between United and Continental Airlines, Delta Air Lines combined with Northwest Airlines in 2008 and Southwest Airlines bought AirTran last year. Major carriers are now seeking to improve their profitability by cutting seating capacity and raising fares.
However, AMR, parent of American, filed for bankruptcy in November in order to reduce its high operating costs and debt load and is now being pursued by US Airways, the fifth largest carrier by revenue.
“It would be a benefit to the US aviation business and its structure if there were to be a combination between American and another carrier – whether it is US Airways or someone else,” said Mr Smisek, whose airline markets itself under the United name.
He predicted that a combination between American and US Airways would be a member of the oneworld global alliance. American is a leading member of oneworld and has a lucrative transatlantic joint venture with British Airways.
Mr Smisek said it would be “regrettable” if US Airways left the Star global alliance that United also belonged to because of a tie-up with American but concluded that this setback was outweighed by the benefits of further consolidation.
He added United was not interested in trying to merge with American because it would probably be a “difficult transaction” on anti-trust grounds, but he stressed his airline was “always interested in assets”.
A combination between American and US Airways might have to divest assets to secure regulatory approval.
Mr Smisek declared this was the most exciting period of his 17 years in aviation, because, following consolidation, managements were “focused on making money as opposed to market share”.
He said much of the “heavy lifting” involved in his merger was done, although United has yet to conclude the important task of putting workers from its two predecessor companies on to the same pay and benefits.
Mr Smisek anticipated that “this year” the company would finalise some joint collective bargaining agreements with trade unions, adding that negotiations were most advanced with maintenance staff and pilots.
He is also looking to buy aircraft, with the current focus on narrowbody passenger jets to replace almost 100 ageing Boeing 757s.
In September, United is due to receive its first Boeing 787 Dreamliner aircraft and Mr Smisek said he would happily put this new widebody jet “head to head” with Emirates’ modern fleet.
He claimed the Gulf carriers benefited from strong government support, including the construction of “magnificent” hub airports.
“Emirates does benefit from a very enlightened aviation policy at the United Arab Emirates and we suffer from an unenlightened policy from the US government,” he said.
One issue Mr Smisek is counting on US politicians to assist him with is the European Union’s emissions trading scheme, under which all airlines flying into the EU airports must pay for their carbon dioxide pollution.
United was involved in mounting a legal challenge to the inclusion of non-EU airlines in the scheme but the case was rejected last December by the European court of justice.
Mr Smisek said the scheme had become a “political issue”, noting strong resistance from China, India and Russia. “I would hate to see a trade war,” he added, referring to how China was blocking Airbus, the European aircraft maker, from finalising jet orders with Chinese airlines.