Then have it moved out of the MOU. You idiots know it is issue one, and Parker wants it. That is why I would vote NO, just for that reason alone. It is your ticket to $$$ This POS will be American, and that is change of control.
AUG/SEPT 2012 US Pilots Labor Discussion
- Thread starter Admin
- Start date
- Status
Then have it moved out of the MOU. You idiots know it is issue one, and Parker wants it. That is why I would vote NO, just for that reason alone. It is your ticket to $$$ This POS will be American, and that is change of control.
Move2CLT
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,048
- Reaction score
- 8,631
Hey luv, can you add this to your list of quotes?
Gents,
Seems to me the real question is "how badly does Doug Parker need this MOU?"
Not being in the room, it's hard for us to tell. But one thing is for sure...if he doesn't need it to merge with American, then his patience with USAPA embarrassing him is going to be pretty damn thin.
Long ago, when we just couldn't get the MEC Roll Call majority to understand that an agreement before going into bankruptcy would be better than one after, I asked Mike Abram what has historically happened to unions who are unable to make a deal. His answer was that..."they are left behind as management goes around them."
Deja vu, all over again. The Darkside has never voted "yes" for a contract, and never will, and they pride themselves on this fact. As they have explained it, to vote "yes" would mean that they were agreeing with management, who they hate and despise to the very core of their being, and so this they will never do.
Why such hatred? Because management represents capitalism, and the Darksiders hate capitalists. Indeed, they are radical socialists in their hearts, and thus any agreement with management is incomprehensible to them.
Thus logic and reason goes nowhere with them. They are on a jihad of forcibly making management buckle to their demands, and if it doesn't then they'll do their best to destroy it.
Which was why we fought the Darkside so hard in the days of ALPA. If they win, you will lose. It's that simple.
Garland
Gents,
For the BPR to reject the work of their negotiating advisory cmte and their professional negotiator with a resolution that recommends a "No" vote demonstrates severe dysfunctionalism within the USAPA leadership.
What the BPR is really saying is that they have no confidence in either their NAC or their professional negotiator, or any other advisor who endorses the MOU.
Further, they are also saying that from here on out, they, the BPR, will become the de facto negotiating cmte, and that they will personally, and individually, determine what the future MOU TA will look like.
If the BPR has so little confidence in their own NAC and professional negotiator, what confidence can Parker and Kirby now have that these negotiators can in fact speak for this pilot group?
The answer is...none. USAPA's negotiating team's credibility has been destroyed, and everybody, on both sides, knows it. Moreover, the BPR's credibility has been destroyed, because this was their team that they sent in to represent them and this pilot group, with the authority to reach a TA!
Eventually Parker will tire of dealing with this perpetual dysfunctionalism, and just quit trying. He's got much bigger issues, and a much bigger pilot group, over on American, and whatever the majority decides becomes law, right?
After all, "majority rules", according to Lee Seham and USAPA, doesn't it?
Looks like payback is going to be a b_tch.
Garland
Gents,
Seems to me the real question is "how badly does Doug Parker need this MOU?"
Not being in the room, it's hard for us to tell. But one thing is for sure...if he doesn't need it to merge with American, then his patience with USAPA embarrassing him is going to be pretty damn thin.
Long ago, when we just couldn't get the MEC Roll Call majority to understand that an agreement before going into bankruptcy would be better than one after, I asked Mike Abram what has historically happened to unions who are unable to make a deal. His answer was that..."they are left behind as management goes around them."
Deja vu, all over again. The Darkside has never voted "yes" for a contract, and never will, and they pride themselves on this fact. As they have explained it, to vote "yes" would mean that they were agreeing with management, who they hate and despise to the very core of their being, and so this they will never do.
Why such hatred? Because management represents capitalism, and the Darksiders hate capitalists. Indeed, they are radical socialists in their hearts, and thus any agreement with management is incomprehensible to them.
Thus logic and reason goes nowhere with them. They are on a jihad of forcibly making management buckle to their demands, and if it doesn't then they'll do their best to destroy it.
Which was why we fought the Darkside so hard in the days of ALPA. If they win, you will lose. It's that simple.
Garland
Gents,
For the BPR to reject the work of their negotiating advisory cmte and their professional negotiator with a resolution that recommends a "No" vote demonstrates severe dysfunctionalism within the USAPA leadership.
What the BPR is really saying is that they have no confidence in either their NAC or their professional negotiator, or any other advisor who endorses the MOU.
Further, they are also saying that from here on out, they, the BPR, will become the de facto negotiating cmte, and that they will personally, and individually, determine what the future MOU TA will look like.
If the BPR has so little confidence in their own NAC and professional negotiator, what confidence can Parker and Kirby now have that these negotiators can in fact speak for this pilot group?
The answer is...none. USAPA's negotiating team's credibility has been destroyed, and everybody, on both sides, knows it. Moreover, the BPR's credibility has been destroyed, because this was their team that they sent in to represent them and this pilot group, with the authority to reach a TA!
Eventually Parker will tire of dealing with this perpetual dysfunctionalism, and just quit trying. He's got much bigger issues, and a much bigger pilot group, over on American, and whatever the majority decides becomes law, right?
After all, "majority rules", according to Lee Seham and USAPA, doesn't it?
Looks like payback is going to be a b_tch.
Garland
L
luvn737s
Guest
Do you really think USAPA will be the only other choice? Maybe ALPA would come in and split the vote so no one have over 50% and you end up with no representation for a while.
Move2CLT
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2011
- Messages
- 6,048
- Reaction score
- 8,631
I forgot that you still think Parker needs this MOU.
And didn't you guys say that same thing about this merger? How'd that CoC go for you then?
Hate2fly
Veteran
Res,
One more time! You work for AWA! Your wonderful airline has never paid a decent wage. You will get your money when there is a major transaction. Even then you will be the lowest paid in the industry. Dougie has your number.
Hate
One more time! You work for AWA! Your wonderful airline has never paid a decent wage. You will get your money when there is a major transaction. Even then you will be the lowest paid in the industry. Dougie has your number.
Hate
luvthe9
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 9,464
- Reaction score
- 14,119
Ask the poor 190 F/O s about flying with Captain Garland. He is a tool of the highest order, nobody listens to him. Quoting him is akin to quoting yourself or Nic4us, nobody listens.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
A sample of one, who may not even see "the slightest improvements" before leaving since those improvements come only with a merger, is hardly convincing proof of anything. But I guess in your "It's all about ME" world that's to be expected...
Jim
So...it "isn't worth a cent" yet the company would "like it removed to prevent having to spend a dime fighting it?" I see. That makes perfect sense 😉
Piedmont1984
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2004
- Messages
- 1,737
- Reaction score
- 897
I happen to know and respect some of the men on the CC list. Others I just don't know enough about. The same went for the Cleary camp.
Mike Cleary brought us to where we were 6 months ago. While he was president, even though his detractors worked to undermine his agenda, the more aggregious failures must be borne by him alone - the buck stopped at his desk.
Today, Hummel's detractors do the same thing. And in the meantime the membership suffers from a union lacking cohesiveness. The interests of the rank and file seem to take a back seat to the personal politics and infighting of the leadership and BPR.
Mike Cleary brought us to where we were 6 months ago. While he was president, even though his detractors worked to undermine his agenda, the more aggregious failures must be borne by him alone - the buck stopped at his desk.
Today, Hummel's detractors do the same thing. And in the meantime the membership suffers from a union lacking cohesiveness. The interests of the rank and file seem to take a back seat to the personal politics and infighting of the leadership and BPR.
L
luvn737s
Guest
No Cleary would have crawled from the slime and read in the paper that APA now represents the US pilots and they just signed a side letter doing away with membership ratification.
Yeah, old Honest Mike he was a real advocate. For Mike Cleary.
Crzipilot
Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2004
- Messages
- 906
- Reaction score
- 254
Jim,
the theoritical situation i was talking about was, in the Single Carrier status, there is a run off election to determine who is going to be the bargaining unit. What would happen to all of this if neither USAPA or APA, (or just NOT APA) becomes the bargaining agent. Is the new agent tied to terms of the Term sheet. A little paragraph in there seems to think management doesn't think it does.
Crzipilot
Veteran
- Joined
- Mar 23, 2004
- Messages
- 906
- Reaction score
- 254
Wouldn't say it's worthless, Parker has said it would be cheaper to do the deal without it. It's not that he needs it, but he saves money. Anyone know how much?! so it's worth something, but maybe not enough for him to care.
BoeingBoy
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 9, 2003
- Messages
- 16,512
- Reaction score
- 5,865
In context, which the "No" crowd always conveniently leaves out, it does. Parker didn't ask for this MOU, USAPA did. If somebody comes to you and says "I've just got to have your house no matter what. What's the price?" do you give them the minimum you'll accept? Or do you ask top dollar? Parker did the same - if USAPA wants a MOU so bad he might as well ask for whatever he wants.
The question is whether Parker will come off his top "ask" if the MOU is voted down and the answer to that is contained in his interest in one prior to USAPA coming begging - he couldn't care less. He's got the APA and their MOU will put them in charge of everything that affects you. Their scope will become your scope, their CoC will become your CoC, etc. Only fools don't see that...which makes you a fool...
Jim
This is the bottom line. They can blame Cleary all day. The truth is Franke Air had the AWA wages down for years, and used them to destroy the good airlines. You can thank AWA and their pilots for your pension loss. Their disgusting model became the norm after their pilots were used world wide to destroy the piloting profession. This AA mess is the final Franke impact. The last to have a pension. Now the Franke minions will try to lever up a deal for their idiot plans. Unbelievable. I would vote no to Franke and Parker. You really have no choice. To say yes to their plans is surrender. Your scope is the prize, and they want it for a big reason. Make them take it.
- Status
Similar threads
