August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[traderjake]

No your not.

Yes, I am.

I work here to make money, everything else is secondary.

 

[Claxon]

.Er...um....I guess you all ready did that when you formed the scab union.

A real scab was your top pilot on the ill fated nic list, Randy McNerlin. He is a real scab. Your west airline started in 1983, nic wanted to put the real scab above an East early 1981 date of hire.

Also on the flawed nic list were west 757 pilots put in with East 757 pilots. Your west pilots were, and are paid to date, the same no matter what aircraft they fly, A320 and 757 pay the same for the west.

Katz & Ranzman, P.C. KATZ & RANZMAN
5028 Wisconsin Avenue, N.W., Suite 250 A t t o r n e y s a t L a w
Washington, D.C. 20016
Tel: (202) 659-4656
Fax: (202) 237-2487
Daniel M. Katz
(202) 659-1799
danielmkatz@comcast.net
May 3, 2007
VIA E-MAIL
Captain Philip Carey
Captain Robert Kirch
First Officer Kevin Barry
Re: US Airways-America West Seniority Integration Award

Dear Phil, Bob and Kevin:

As we discussed in our conference call this afternoon, I have enclosed the Award
I received today from George Nicolau. The combined list is composed of a series of
ratios, based on the number of positions each pilot group had in various categories as of
1/1/07. The combined list is built from the separate 1/1/07 seniority lists.
All US pilots on furlough as of 5/19/05 are junior to Dave Odell. Monda is
immediately senior to Odell. Dean Colello is immediately junior to Odell and is followed
by the 1,750 US pilots whose names appear below him on the 1/1/07 US seniority list.
The top 517 names are all US Airways pilots. This group includes 423 active
pilots plus 94 non-flying pilots (MGT, MED and LOA). The number 423 is derived from
the sum of the A330 and B767-I Captain and First Officer positions. The senior America
West pilot, Capt. McNerlin, appears on the combined list immediately senior to US pilot, DOH: x/xx//81.

The next group comprises the next most senior 167 US pilots and the top 90 AW
pilots who were flying on 1/1/07. These positions correspond to the B757 Captain jobs
as of 1/1/07. Forty-eight pilots in non-flying status (MGT, MED and LOA) are reinserted
into this group, as with the top group.

The next category corresponds to A320 and B737 Captains and consists of 873
US and 767 AW active pilots, plus 255 extracted and reinserted non-flying pilots.
Following these pilots, there are 176 US and 87 AW active pilots, corresponding to the
B757 First Officers, plus 56 extracted and reinserted non-fliers. The remaining pilots
through Monda and Odell were ratioed 840 to 718, based on the number of A320 and
B737 First Officers at the respective carriers on 1/1/07, with 224 non-fliers reinserted
after the application of the ratios to those who were active on 1/1/07.

The Award includes some Conditions and Restrictions. In addition to the
standard no-bump/no-flush provision and other stipulated Conditions and Restrictions,
Arbitrator Nicolau imposed two others of his own devising. The first is designed to
protect the access of the US pilots to the wide body, international flying they brought to
the merged carrier. It reserves 161 Captain and 262 First Officer positions on the A330
and B767 “for the top tier pre-merger US Airways pilots for a period of four years from
the date of this Award.” The condition “ceases to exist,” however, if the Age 60 rule is
changed to an Age 65 rule prior to May 1, 2011. Another condition deals with “new” and
“replacement” aircraft and gives the “replacement” positions on wide body, international
aircraft to the US pilots (up to the specified quotas) and allocates “new” jobs 2:1 on wide
bodies and 1:1 on narrow-bodies. The Award also continues the Conditions and
Restrictions of the Kagel Award (including those from the Piedmont-Empire seniority
integration), as well as the Eischen Award, which allocates EMB-190 positions.
Jim Brucia wrote a concurring and dissenting opinion, which accompanies
Arbitrator Nicolau’s Opinion and Award. Captain Brucia disagreed with the placement
of the US Airways pilots who were on furlough at the date of the announcement of the
merger. He said that most have been offered recall because of the enormous attrition at
US and that their extensive service prior to being furloughed justifies placing them higher
on the merged list.
A couple of points occur to me that may be worth mentioning. I’m sure these
observations won’t soften the devastating blow of losing the hard-fought battle with
respect to the pilots on furlough on the date of the announcement of the merger. But they
should be said now anyhow.
First, the top 517 pilots on the US list constitute a substantial number – 18% of
the pilots on the US list through Monda as of 1/1/07. The number is smaller than the
number who would occupy the top of the list on a date-of-hire list, as we proposed, but
the career choices available to these pilots will prove significant to them. Their
placement at the top of the list also improves the standing of those junior to them.
Secondly, the Arbitration Board’s use of 1/1/07 lists has allowed the junior US
pilots to benefit for seniority integration purposes from the attrition that occurred between
5/19/05 and 1/1/07 – more than 300 “attrits.” In addition, although the other side argued
that the Age 60 Rule was gone, the Board constructed the merged list on the assumption
that it would remain in effect. Also, the AW representatives argued for assumptions that
America West would have grown absent the merger and that US Airways would have
contracted further, but the Board rejected those arguments in favor of a static fleet
assumption.

We could have done worse. The other side asked the Panel to put Monda
and more than 750 other active US pilots junior to Odell. They lost on that issue.
The Conditions and Restrictions may provide some protection. For example,
condition number 5 covers the positions on “new” aircraft, such as a B777 flying to
China, which are to be allocated 2:1 in favor of the US pilots.
Finally, please accept my thanks for the opportunity to work with you on this
project. I appreciate the hard work, determination and cooperative spirit you displayed
throughout the long and exhausting process.

Very truly yours,
/s/ Daniel M. Katz
Daniel M. Katz

 

[Phoenix]

As humorous as I find the latest grievance effort from the West that demanded the company publish the Nic list... well the real question is whether or not it will impact Judge Silver's trial. Frankly I am not confident she won't just declare it is a red herring event and thus it may not prevent her from doing whatever it is she intends to do.

Yes it is quite a comedy, but Silver already dismissed the company for the very reason proved by the company denial of this grievance, i.e. Its a system board issue--not her jurisdiction (at least with respect to the company's responsibility). She has had no problem ignoring issues of jurisdiction before when it comes to USAPA's responsibility. Full steam ahead, just like the Titanic.

In addition to that, the harm raised in the latest grievance is not the same harm raised in the trial complaint (not that there is a direct and immediate harm in either case), but the absence of harm hasn't stopped Judge Silver yet.... She told Pat that the purpose of the trial was to find if there was or wasn't harm.

Since it appears she may not have followed the standards of ripeness that she already quoted, its kinda hard to guess how she might apply the "chimney pull challenge" WRT a test of ripeness, if she does so at all.

However, if she suddenly awakes to find herself far out from shore on a thin sheet of ice, then this new twist would be a wonderful opportunity to teleport herself back to solid ground.

 

[mrbreeze]

Well according to the letter I got signed by D. Parker, that would be the Nicolau Seniority Award, that is the only system seniority list at LCC.

How many times have I corrected you on this Nic4us? You continued lie doesn't hold water. breeze

 

[snapthis]

Hummel actually screwed you. Ask him.

I figured it out. Hummel screwed us....

USAPA is the Titanic and we need to abandon ship.

The water is cold.

Grab the lead life jacket and join us.

 

[Claxon]

nicisthenic website, catchy name. It reminds me of reform usapa website.

Whois Lookup For reformusapa.com:

Registration Service Provided By: Public Web Hosts


Domain Name: reformusapa.com

Registrant:

Ken Holmes (ken.hlms@gmail.com)
16225 S. 1st St

Phoenix, AZ 85048
US
Tel: +1.6027513697
Fax:


Creation Date: 2011-01-19 06:22:34
Expiration Date: 2014-01-19 06:22:34

 

[snapthis]

Did you westies not know this was coming? some of you seem suprised. Can't wait for the 24th, what will Silver say? we already know what the company will say. Total chaos at Leonidas tonight.

You'll be the fat guy sitting by yourself, correct?

Say hi to the dork, Davidson. He usually sits there with the dumb look on his face.

Near the isle, prostrate problem, most likely.

 

[snapthis]

How would I know? The only names I saw on the website were the two west merger committee members.

After RR's hints I searched for west seniority loss and up popped the website. It was discussed here a few weeks ago,

It's Claxon. He has a lot of time on his hands. He doesn't like to work.

 

[snapthis]

nicisthenic website, catchy name. It reminds me of reform usapa website.

Whois Lookup For reformusapa.com:

Registration Service Provided By: Public Web Hosts


Domain Name: reformusapa.com

Registrant:

Ken Holmes (ken.hlms@gmail.com)
16225 S. 1st St

Phoenix, AZ 85048
US
Tel: +1.6027513697
Fax:


Creation Date: 2011-01-19 06:22:34
Expiration Date: 2014-01-19 06:22:34

Nice work, Clax.

Inspector Clouseau

 

[snapthis]

As humorous as I find the latest grievance effort from the West that demanded the company publish the Nic list... well the real question is whether or not it will impact Judge Silver's trial. Frankly I am not confident she won't just declare it is a red herring event and thus it may not prevent her from doing whatever it is she intends to do.

Yes it is quite a comedy, but Silver already dismissed the company for the very reason proved by the company denial of this grievance, i.e. Its a system board issue--not her jurisdiction (at least with respect to the company's responsibility). She has had no problem ignoring issues of jurisdiction before when it comes to USAPA's responsibility. Full steam ahead, just like the Titanic.

In addition to that, the harm raised in the latest grievance is not the same harm raised in the trial complaint (not that there is a direct and immediate harm in either case), but the absence of harm hasn't stopped Judge Silver yet.... She told Pat that the purpose of the trial was to find if there was or wasn't harm.

Since it appears she may not have followed the standards of ripeness that she already quoted, its kinda hard to guess how she might apply the "chimney pull challenge" WRT a test of ripeness, if she does so at all.

However, if she suddenly awakes to find herself far out from shore on a thin sheet of ice, then this new twist would be a wonderful opportunity to teleport herself back to solid ground.

You got it all figured out. Binding is not binding.

Whatever you say.

Dolt

 

[Claxon]

Nice work, Clax.

Inspector Clouseau

Tip of the ice berg, just a tease. Ciao.

 

[snapthis]

Keep stepping on your cranks.

I'm enjoying this

Chow

 

[Phoenix]

You got it all figured out. Binding is not binding.

Whatever you say.

Dolt

You guys are incurable/incorrigible. I just told you that Silver will probably proceed with her trial and you insult me.

P.S. The issue is not "binding" ....the issue is ripeness. The 9th already told you this.. they did not deal with the thorny question of "binding" because it was not ripe.

P.P.S. Jude Silver did talk about "binding" before she found ripeness (even though the 9th thought better of Wading/Waking into that water...)

... being “bound” by the Transition Agreement has very little meaning in the context of the present case. It is undisputed that the Transition Agreement can be modified at any time “by written agreement of [USAPA] and the [US Airways].” (Doc. 156-3 at 38). Moreover, USAPA and US Airways are now engaged in negotiations for an entirely new collective bargaining agreement and there is no obvious impediment to USAPA and US Airways negotiating and agreeing upon any seniority regime they wish. As explained by the Ninth Circuit, “seniority rights are creations of the collective bargaining agreement, and so may be revised or abrogated by later negotiated changes in this agreement.” Hass v. Darigold Dairy Products Co., 751 F.2d 1096, 1099 (9th Cir. 1985). And a union “may renegotiate seniority provisions of a collective bargaining agreement, even though the resulting changes are essentially retroactive or affect different employees unequally.”

 

[Claxon]

Nice work, Clax.

Inspector Clouseau

Tell dca319 the nicisthenic.com is a desperate attempt.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Just in time for Sept 24. Leonidas hands USAPA a perfect gift. The company denial of a seniority list ordered per Nicolau in a grievance no less. The two of them look like monkeys banging a football. Nice.
Nic4US. What is the only seniority list accepted by USAirways?

Kirby summed up the entire situation with the MOU and Nic when he told Capt. G. on the Crew News video: "NO!"

Did all those who filed grievances not believe him when he said that? I'm not saying they had no reason (in their minds, not mine) to file grievances over the Nic, but they should have expected the result which evidently is a very long-winded repeat of: "NO!"

I'm sure that the company, after the minor appeals process, will place these grievances at the end of the lon, long list of those already pending. These should be heard by the system board sometime in 2030.