August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[mrbreeze]

Just my opinion of course.

Which doesn't count.

 

[traderjake]

I just can't see how you can say it wasn't a windfall.

It wasn't a windfall.

Longevity is not seniority.

On an equipment basis everyone can hold the the same position after the merger as before.

The WB F/Os are the ones that got a windfall, they should be below the Group 2 Captains.

 

[CallawayGolf]

We had four arbitrators on our arbitration? Remember, Nicolau said that every merger turned on it's own facts, so a method used in another merger could produce a fair outcome there and not here.

I respect your opinion about the process even if I disagree. I just can't see how you can say it wasn't a windfall.

Under the NIC every east pilot would be able to retain the same position and status held at the time of the merger and in order to achieve pay parity the east would gain wage improvements in a JCBA at a significant advantage compared to any wage improvements for the west. The west also would be able to retain the same position held prior to the merger. However the west position on the combined list was generally at a lower percentile than what they held prior to the SLI, and the west would see only a small percentage of the total wage increases in a JCBA when the east had sizable gains by comparison. Where can you find a windfall for the west in that?

 

[cactusboy53]

To my knowledge, you have never answered my question: If in the next merger process you (with 17 years) are put behind a new hire, would you simply accept the result or fight it? This is a simple yes or no question. And again, would you just turn to your family and say too bad, we just have to suck it up?

And why is your opinion protected by a "right" and mine (according to some) only due to a lack of integrity?

Must be a slow meeting, since you have time to post here and do the business of the BPR. Unless you gave a proxy.

Greeter

YES. My collective bargaining agent having failed to come to an agreement with the other party (assuming), would then be forced to enter into mediation (assuming also failed) then goes to final & binding arbitration. It's not "kind-of-final & binding". It's not "final & binding unless I think it's not fair arbitration". It's not "final & binding arbitration, but I'm crossing my fingers behind my back". It's FINAL & BINDING ARBITRATION.

Lack of integrity stems from the following:

• Stepping away from the Joint CBA talks because the seniority award is deemed by the larger group to be unfair.
• Forming a new union for the primary purpose of evading said seniority award, AND having succeeded in forming that "union" then persecute for failed RICO, failed ID Theft, etc.
• Using the legal ability of termination as a means to extort dues, for which the DOH paper chase has been in part funded.

Don't worry about me. Lots of notes. Lots of updates from committees with pretty good info.

CB

 

[Pi brat]

Under the NIC every east pilot would be able to retain the same position and status held at the time of the merger and in order to achieve pay parity the east would gain wage improvements in a JCBA at a significant advantage compared to any wage improvements for the west. The west also would be able to retain the same position held prior to the merger. However the west position on the combined list was generally at a lower percentile than what they held prior to the SLI, and the west would see only a small percentage of the total wage increases in a JCBA when the east had sizable gains by comparison. Where can you find a windfall for the west in that?

If you can't find it then you aren't looking. The majority of the west would only have the same relative position for a very short time-maybe until the end of 2007. Then for the bottom 55% or so it increased at a much more rapid pace than stand alone-at the expense of the same slowing of the east. That is a fact. A much better relative position, at a much bigger airline, with much better opportunities. WINDFALL.

In the dispatchers arbitration Bloch used the fact of higher wages against the west. Thing is, the higher wages were a given as they came with their transition agreement. Our higher wages were yet to be seen when Nicolau proclaimed it so.

 

[Pi brat]

It wasn't a windfall.

Longevity is not seniority.

On an equipment basis everyone can hold the the same position after the merger as before.

The WB F/Os are the ones that got a windfall, they should be below the Group 2 Captains.

So it doesn't matte that one groups career opportunities were greatly improved at a cost to the other? That's what would have happened. Have you actually looked at any numbers for guys? I have some if you want them, they are quite eye opening.

 

[traderjake]

So it doesn't matte that one groups career opportunities were greatly improved at a cost to the other?

No it doesn't.

What was our most likely career opportunity without the merger?

I say it was liquidation.

 

[CallawayGolf]

If you can't find it then you aren't looking. The majority of the west would only have the same relative position for a very short time-maybe until the end of 2007. Then for the bottom 55% or so it increased at a much more rapid pace than stand alone-at the expense of the same slowing of the east. That is a fact. A much better relative position, at a much bigger airline, with much better opportunities. WINDFALL.

In the dispatchers arbitration Bloch used the fact of higher wages against the west. Thing is, the higher wages were a given as they came with their transition agreement. Our higher wages were yet to be seen when Nicolau proclaimed it so.

The west stand alone was seeing upgrades in seven years according to other posters on the forum. When, by your calculations would the junior west pilots have upgraded had the NIC been implemented in mid-2007? Was it 1,3 or 5 years? That doesn't meet the definition of a windfall which requires the gain to be sudden and unexpected. Now if you want to talk about east fuloughees being senior to west captains overnight, then you certainly would be talking about a classic definition of a windfall.

 

[Phoenix]

Absolutely. As a matter of fact, saying IMHO is redundant on a web board,...

Yes. And for someone to shout "that is your opinion" is redundantly saying "We are in dispute!" Yeah, try a rejoinder instead of restating the obvious!

 

[EastUS1]

Walmartgreeter, on 05 June 2013 - 02:25 PM, said: To my knowledge, you have never answered my question: If in the next merger process you (with 17 years) are put behind a new hire, would you simply accept the result or fight it? This is a simple yes or no question.

YES. My collective bargaining agent having failed to come to an agreement with the other party (assuming), would then be forced to enter into mediation (assuming also failed) then goes to final & binding arbitration. It's not "kind-of-final & binding". It's not "final & binding unless I think it's not fair arbitration". It's not "final & binding arbitration, but I'm crossing my fingers behind my back". It's FINAL & BINDING ARBITRATION.

Lack of integrity stems from the following:

• Stepping away from the Joint CBA talks because the seniority award is deemed by the larger group to be unfair.
• Forming a new union for the primary purpose of evading said seniority award, AND having succeeded in forming that "union" then persecute for failed RICO, failed ID Theft, etc.
• Using the legal ability of termination as a means to extort dues, for which the DOH paper chase has been in part funded.

Don't worry about me. Lots of notes. Lots of updates from committees with pretty good info.

CB

Incedible! Absolutely amazing! 😉 Seriously; I must ask through what malfunctioning mental mechanism you completely missed this part,"This is a simple yes or no question", and were instead, actually able to offer up that entire barnyard full of complete BS? 🙂

 

[EastUS1]

The west stand alone was seeing upgrades in seven years....

So then: The west was going to continually double in size every seven years...? Umm...Ever heard the term Ponzi scam? 🙂

 

[Freighterguynow]

Maybe the thrice furloughed pilot on the last position of a seniority list after 17 years should have their head examined for staying.

Why don't ask resident loser Fergouson about that. 2003 doh and 35 numbers from hitting the street where he should be if not for hubbing into and out of CLT every day - but I digress.

No East pilot sat at the bottom of the list for 10 years +. THAT, is strictly an America West situation.

 

[CallawayGolf]

So then: The west was going to continually double in size every seven years...? Umm...Ever heard the term Ponzi scam? 🙂

Are you suggesting AWA was still in the start up phase of its business life cycle?

Sure I've not only heard of them, I see evidence of them on each pay check. They go by the names of Social Security, Medicare, FUTA, SUTA and the like.

 

[Claxon]

The west stand alone was seeing upgrades in seven years according to other posters on the forum. When, by your calculations would the junior west pilots have upgraded had the NIC been implemented in mid-2007? Was it 1,3 or 5 years? That doesn't meet the definition of a windfall which requires the gain to be sudden and unexpected. Now if you want to talk about east fuloughees being senior to west captains overnight, then you certainly would be talking about a classic definition of a windfall.

Enjoy your conjecture fest everybody and excuse me for providing some reality to the situation. This has already been settled in a court of law. DFR 11 for the next ten years if you would like though, carry on.

The bottom line;

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
US Airways, Inc.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Don Addington, et al.,
Defendants.
))))))))))
No. CV-10-01570-PHX-ROS
AMENDED JUDGMENT
(to add description of class)
Pursuant to the Court’s resolution of the motions for summary judgment,
IT IS ORDERED Counts I and III of the complaint are dismissed and judgment is
entered in favor of US Airline Pilots Association on Count II of the complaint. US Airline
Pilots Association’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty of fair representation
provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose. This judgment is binding on the
following class: “All pilots employed by US Airways in September 2008 who were on the
America West seniority list on September 20, 2005.”
DATED this 4th day of December, 2012.

Judge Silver

 

[Phoenix]

Walmartgreeter, on 05 June 2013 - 02:25 PM, said: To my knowledge, you have never answered my question: If in the next merger process you (with 17 years) are put behind a new hire, would you simply accept the result or fight it? This is a simple yes or no question.



Incedible! Absolutely amazing! 😉 Seriously; I must ask through what malfunctioning mental mechanism you completely missed this part,"This is a simple yes or no question", and were instead, actually able to offer up that entire barnyard full of complete BS? 🙂

Bingo. Try as I might I am unable to think of anything other than, "Thou dost protest too much."