Awa Pilots Throw 1st Merger Molotav Cocktail

markkus757 said:
I personally think that they have enough cash to offer early outs for anybody over 15 years seniority for any group. I think they need to start fresh and this would be the most effective way for several reasons.

1.) They would be able to cut costs in the long-term.
2.) They would have a much easier time integrating the rest of labor that is still employed.
3.) They would change the attitude and direction of the company. This is going to be the most challenging for Mr. Parker.

When I mean giving early outs, I mean making it worth while to even consider it. A lot of people have been burnt out by the previous 10 years at US. They want somthing to grasp that will give them hope after US. I think if HP's pilots could go along with this, they could look forward to some widebody flying that is currently being done by the most senior pilots of the combined labor group. Integration could become very easy, knowing that there is a chance to grow into a greater position at a company on the rise. Doug Parker has some very important decisions to make regarding his new company going forward. I believe that there will be break even for most of the other groups due to the fact there is little overlap. Maybe some HP mechanics come east, and maybe some US mechanics go west.

Early-outs are very cash-draining. Why would they offer early-outs when they can either make things so rough that people leave for free (as they have been doing); or just furlough on one side of the fence (assuming that the two operations are fenced), and shift the flying to the other, favored side?

Your greatest enemy is that people HAVE been leaving for free.

For AFA it doesn't matter who bought who with's DOH period. See the bylaws:
"The fundamental scope and purpose of this policy is to provide protection for the employment rights of flight attendants. This policy shall be applicable when two or more AFA-CWA-represented carriers engage in any merger, consolidation, acquisition of control, purchase, sale, lease or other similar transactions or arrangement between or among them, involving their previously separate airline operations or services previously performed by them as separate airlines, in a manner that may affect the seniority rights of the flight attendants (all hereafter referred to as "merger" for purposes of this policy)."

a. The merger representatives shall be responsible for determining the seniority number, the date from which each flight attendant accrues competitive (bidding) seniority as a flight attendant on her/his current seniority list (hereafter "seniority date"), the initial date on which each flight attendant commenced operational training attendant to commencing duties as a flight attendant (hereafter "initial training date"), the number of days after initial training date spent by each flight attendant in initial operational training prior to qualification as a flight attendant (hereafter "training days"), whether the flight attendant accrued seniority for any or all such training days and, if so, the number of days accrued. Such data shall be compiled as of the date of the merger agreement between the affected airlines, unless the merger representatives agree to a later date, provided that use of such later date shall not delay the process for compilation of data. (See note)

Note: It is the intent of this policy that the "seniority date" of a flight attendant shall be the date from which each flight attendant accrues competitive (bidding) seniority as a flight attendant as of the date of the merger agreement between the affected airlines. It is recognized that this seniority date may be different than the flight attendant's initial training date or may have been adjusted for various reasons since the original date on which the flight attendant began to accrue seniority on or after initial training date; in such cases, the "seniority date" is not to be changed back to the original date on which the flight attendant began to accrue seniority.
dcaflyer baloney! AWA has six board seats, US has four in the new airline.

Without the buyout HP flies on. US goes home to 'Bama.

Bankrupt companies are acquired, not buyers.

Staple staple staple.


Luckily, for the employees of U, there has been a long-running precedent set with regard to seniority integration: First with Allegheny-Mohawk and later with PSA-Piedmont.

The union bylaws are there for a make integration of seniority the most equitable for its members and by that, honoring each member's years of service. You people are forgetting that a significant amount of flying COMES with the employees, hence it balances out.

I would venture to guess that an arbitrator would look at past precedent with regard to seniority integration. As I have mentioned previously, for all of USAirways' faults, the ONE thing they got right was seniority integration by Date-of-Hire.

It matters NOT whom acquired whom. Years of service COUNT, whether it is the company being acquired or the company making the acquisition. It is the most FAIR way to integrate. I lived through two mergers...PSA and Piedmont...and like I said, it BALANCES out.

I don't even work for US, but I whole heartedly support D.O.H. and hopefully that precedent will prevail. It is the most successful way to merge seniority.

Enough said...
As we can see from the above posts, there will be no honeymoon between the two labor groups. I suggest arbitration right off the bat and save the special assessement that is sure to be in the works by your union leadership. I forsee many many hours spent at lavish hotels (camelback spa's) etc to ensure that there will be no agreement that works and it will come down to aribitration in the end. You heard it here first Thank our lucky stars we have ALPA looking after us
Kum Ba Ya...Kum Ba hug. Feel the love. Spread the aura. :afro: It DOES count WHOM acquired whom. The acquiring company may impose integration or scrap the deal. Good luck to both groups. Get this over with, solved, and spend this energy on surviving the onslaught from the industry. A long fight over sen. could send the whole company to the grave yard. Then senority won't be an issue.
You do realize that AFA never completes any wording without leaving a loophole, right?

Notice the word FENCE is missing.

Just like the fence that was to be put into place for the UAL/US deal. I could be wrong but I doubt it on this one.
I'm pasting my reply from the other board:

Twicebaked, there's no use in arguing. AA and UA F/As know all and are obsessed with stapling people. They troll around the US Airways boards passing out the indepth knowlege they must have from being a flight attendant for a competing airline.

If you look through the posts on both boards- US and HP- any topic and most debate questioning AFA Merger Policy is from the same few people who work for either American or United.

If America West is unhappy with the AFA's merger policy, perhaps they should have had a different union before consolidation began. They could try to decertify AFA (UA didn't have much luck there), but I think it would be much more risky to be 2500 people with no union as opposed to 10000 AFA members come merger time.

US Airways is trading out the top half of thier seniority list for thier vast reserve of furloughees, who are more in line with America West's junior people. They are losing nearly 1000 senior people by the end of the year- that's almost equal to half of the HP F/As right there.

Although aircraft will be parked, there is growth in the next few years in not only narrowbodies but widebodies. A330s and A350s require alot more F/As than a 320 or 737 does. It's also up in the air who will fly the E170/190 fleet in the merged entity- right now it's US F/As but in a seperate division. If that flying is maintained there will be more than enough room for everyone.

The combination of US Airways and America West flight attendants, two professional, resilient groups will be a great one. HP and US crews have been very friendly to each other in airports, vans etc since the announcment, showing class and maturity that other airlines seem to lack when it comes to business transactions.

I think walmartgreeter is correct, let's keep our plans and business to ourselves. I've always felt it's not ladylike to discuss one's dirty laundry in front of others. Let the competition bash us since nothing goes on in thier forums, and wish bad things on our companies and our employees. It really shows who the real enemy is, doesn't it?

I look forward to working with my new brothers and sisters and developing a new culture and contract all our own. A nicer one than our bitter counterparts at other, larger airlines...


Just on this page alone, we have an American, Northwest, and American employee speculating on AFA by-laws and a merger of thier competition. Give me a break.... :rolleyes:

I'll stick with updates from the company and the union, thank you.
JAMAKE1 said:
Light Years:

I am one of those United people...and I'm YOUR side.  :rolleyes:

And you are right! ;) That doesn't change the fact that most of the doomsday prophesizers are not from US or HP.

And aren't you a former US or PS employee?
The rules are NOT stacked in US Airways favor for pilot integration, that is a FALSE statement.

Relax, read past awards, read the current merger policy and you will see that there will be indeed something for everyone in this!

As I have said over and over, it will be a fair & equitible list. Either agreed to by both groups, or decided by and arbitrator....


It doesn't matter what each of us debate here, there is a process to arrive at an end result, the merged list.

Having been through 4 of these, trust me, the process is NOT stacked in anyones favor.

This is not rocket science, give the process and the merger committee's time to do their job.


bwipilot said:
As a outside observer I forsee a lot of problems with the seniority integration between US and HP. U employees trying to take the high road by stating that it should be done according to union rules are just hiding behind the fact they'd be very happy to staple the HP employees to the bottom of their seniority lists (because almost all of HP employees has a latter date of higher). It's easy to follow the rules when they're stacked totally in your favor.

I totally understand HP's fears. If my airline were to be merged with U, I and most of my cohorts would be junior to U employees. I'd be damned if I would have taken less pay, worked harder, etc. to make my airline successful, use my sacrifices to make a merger work (the merger wouldn't happen if HP wasn't bringing cash/assets to the table), and then I ended up junior to those who (or at least the management) choked the golden goose until it was just short of death.

Why should an HP employee be furloughed as part of the merger? No merger, no HP employee would be fearing for their job--at least short term. U employees expect HP employees to be happy on the bottom--even with fences. But we all know who gets furloughed according to union rules. Those on the bottom. 50 of the 60 airplanes to be returned to lessors are from U. Would U union employees be willing to accept 50 of every 60 furloughs come from their ranks? Would at least seem fair to an outsider--but from previous posts I'd gather U employees would shat WHHAAATTTT????

I don't think the HP ALPA Chairman was out of line--he's to represent his members. I think U employees' reaction would be more in line with, "Darn it, we hoped they wouldn't realize their going to get screwed if we do it by the book." My close friends are U employees and I hope they do well. However, I think they're future is brighter today--even if they were the ones getting stapled. When they state, "Do it by the rules" I agree with the comment that they're the ones who want their cake and to eat it too.
Light Years said:
And aren't you a former US or PS employee?

Whayh, yes ah am...and proud of it. The term you used, "prophesizers" is a good one. I find that most of those "prophesizers" are coming from a place of FEAR, rather than EXPERIENCE. Having been through it myself, I thought it appropriate to chime in. I am a proponent and advocate for D.O.H....even during the days when UA and US were flirtin' with eachother. Needless-to-say, my views were not so popular with my UA peers. -_-
JAMAKE1 said:
Whayh, yes ah am...and proud of it. The term you used, "prophesizers" is a good one. I find that most of those "prophesizers" are coming from a place of FEAR, rather than EXPERIENCE. Having been through it myself, I thought it appropriate to chime in. I am a proponent and advocate for D.O.H....even during the days when UA and US were flirtin' with eachother. Needless-to-say, my views were not so popular with my UA peers. -_-

I'm with you, I'm for date of hire even if it gets me furloughed (which it has!). Thankfully the union representing US Airways and America West flight attendants feels the same way.
Call it whatever you want -- a merger, buyout, or group hug.

But anything US brings to the deal is something that could have been bought at a liquidation sale. You can't buy a management team, and Doug Parker's management team is what got people to believe enough to invest in Dumbell.