Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[EastUS1]

Curious as to why you have to validate yourself to others by stating your degree or challenging posters to dogfights.

That's easy = People like yourself are both wimps and essentially stupid. Why would/should I, or anyone else, ever willingly tolerate such as yourself without challenge? It has nothing to do with self-validation...Your sorry, spineless sort just disgusts me, and I've no reasons whatsoever, to tolerate any BS from the likes of you. 😉 If you can come up with even one reason...well..let me know....perhaps I've missed something? 😉

You're not a patient of mine....merely a mouthy and clueless adversary...however profoundly inept. Deal with it.

I suppose, in fairness...I could revert to military philosophy = People one protects with one's life versus those that are Targets...Which one would you believe yourself to be here?...and what reason could you possibly imagine for my wishing to protect you? 😉

Per: "challenging posters to dogfights"..? That's utter nonsense, and only serves to demonstrate your clearly civilian/never-served, "virginal purity". "dogfights" would be deadly serious, and long-ago, largely eclipsed by technology. Most of our kills in Desert Storm weren't even in visual range....and that was over 20 years ago now. All I've ever offered up is merely a challenged wager to some purely recreational flying....People don't die in that kind of lightweight-fun, and it's hardly serious. Given that; I would not expect the pathetic likes of yourself to be up for even that....Please prove me wrong there. 🙂 PM if interested.

 

[algflyr]

A joint contract with east, west and APA will finish that portion of the T/A.

I think this is something you still misunderstand...

Our transition agreement very clearly defined how the NIC would become the official list... There had to be a ratified agreement between the East and West... That never happened. If a merger occurs, it cannot ever happen.

Trying to say that a merger with American and a CJBA with American satisfies that requirement is a far stretch... I have posted this before, and will copy and paste once again...

-----------------------------
You skipped over the part just above what you quoted. I agree, the part you quoted says "the single agreement". If you look, "the single agreement" is defined. Here it is:

--------------
V. Negotiation of a Collective Bargaining Agreement

The Association and the Airline Parties will negotiate a single collective bargaining agreement applicable to the merged operations of America West and US Airways ("the single agreement") as follows:
---------------

So it does say it has to be an agreement between East and West. Also, if you look at the definition of the "Parties", you will notice AMR and the APA seem to be missing...
------------------------------

To try and say an agreement between the East and West AND the APA satisfies this requirement is like saying you can just add additional parties to any agreement and it's still binding.

Let's say I decide to buy a house. I negotiate a binding contract between just myself and the bank for a mortgage... We are the only two parties listed on the contract. It's approved, I just have to sign to make it official. Just before I sign and make it official, I decide to add a friend (third party) to the deal. Do you think that would be ok? Just add somebody else to an agreement that wasn't originally on there?? I think we both know that trying to add another party to an agreement like that couldn't happen and still have the original agreement become binding... Just sayin...

 

[flyingskier]

You cannot state that unequivocally. The Niclau is still the only list in the company's possession. We have passed nothing across the table and the courts have indicated we better have a darn good LUP to move off that list. The APA has also stated that integration will be slotted as well an to Niclau used. So for you to state what you stated is irresponsible.

The company does not supply the list used in an SLI, the union does. Ask your rep, your union's official list is DOH with C & R's. The Nic was part of an ALPA supported internal union process. Replace ALPA with USAPA everywhere in the TA, ALPA no longer exists on the property and the result of their process is no longer valid or supported. The SLI will be determined using USAPA's merger guidelines. The courts rulings support this. To state otherwise is irresponsible.

Skier

 

[cleardirect]

I think this is something you still misunderstand...

Our transition agreement very clearly defined how the NIC would become the official list... There had to be a ratified agreement between the East and West... That never happened. If a merger occurs, it cannot ever happen.

Trying to say that a merger with American and a CJBA with American satisfies that requirement is a far stretch... I have posted this before, and will copy and paste once again...

-----------------------------
You skipped over the part just above what you quoted. I agree, the part you quoted says "the single agreement". If you look, "the single agreement" is defined. Here it is:

--------------
V. Negotiation of a Collective Bargaining Agreement

The Association and the Airline Parties will negotiate a single collective bargaining agreement applicable to the merged operations of America West and US Airways ("the single agreement") as follows:
---------------

So it does say it has to be an agreement between East and West. Also, if you look at the definition of the "Parties", you will notice AMR and the APA seem to be missing...
------------------------------

To try and say an agreement between the East and West AND the APA satisfies this requirement is like saying you can just add additional parties to any agreement and it's still binding.

Let's say I decide to buy a house. I negotiate a binding contract between just myself and the bank for a mortgage... We are the only two parties listed on the contract. It's approved, I just have to sign to make it official. Just before I sign and make it official, I decide to add a friend (third party) to the deal. Do you think that would be ok? Just add somebody else to an agreement that wasn't originally on there?? I think we both know that trying to add another party to an agreement like that couldn't happen and still have the original agreement become binding... Just sayin...

By your logic and definition the MOU satisfies the single agreement requirement. The east and west are voting on a single argeement that modifies both of our current contracts. It will alter pay rates working conditions and work rules. This is a vote of only east and west that only effects east and west. Because if there is a signing bonus in this MOU the APA is not going to share in that because they already have their contract.

Either way no matter how you define "single agreement" either the MOU or joint contract will be the last step in the three required pieces. Implementing the Nicolau.

Do you think that the BPR knows this and that is why it took them three days to swallow what everyone all along knew? Because they know without it being in the MOU that it trigger the Nicolau list.

Rage all you want but final and binding really is final and binding.

 

[cleardirect]

The company does not supply the list used in an SLI, the union does. Ask your rep, your union's official list is DOH with C & R's. The Nic was part of an ALPA supported internal union process. Replace ALPA with USAPA everywhere in the TA, ALPA no longer exists on the property and the result of their process is no longer valid or supported. The SLI will be determined using USAPA's merger guidelines. The courts rulings support this. To state otherwise is irresponsible.

Skier

Is that the argument that you want to go with? The union supplies the list?

OK!

Within 6 months of the POR the APA will be the union for all the pilots. usapa will be nothing but a bad memory. Sometime after the APA become our union, that is when the seniority arbitration begins.

So we will have a union that represents 14,000 pilots. 3000 of which want to use a list that has not been accepted, would require long and expensive negotiations and would place the union and the company in legal liability.

On the other hand the company has accepted an arbitrated list, the new union does not care how east and west pilots are placed on the list and they have an arbitrated list with no C&R's unlike the TWA supp C.

Seham told the court that a new union does not have to do or use what the old union wanted. so no case for the east pilots.

What do you think our new union is going to do? What list do you think the union (the APA) will use during arbitration? I know maybe we could take a vote and let the majority of 14,000 pilots decide what list to use.

 

[dca319]

The company does not supply the list used in an SLI, the union does. Ask your rep, your union's official list is DOH with C & R's. The Nic was part of an ALPA supported internal union process. Replace ALPA with USAPA everywhere in the TA, ALPA no longer exists on the property and the result of their process is no longer valid or supported. The SLI will be determined using USAPA's merger guidelines. The courts rulings support this. To state otherwise is irresponsible.

Skier

"USAPA won't be there to supply the list. Replace USAPA with APA everywhere and the result of their process is no longer valid or supported."

See that? I used your same, incorrect logic. Each successor union inherits the previous union's baggage. Nicolau will continue to move from USAPA to the APA. Even I know this and no one in our union will argue against this. If your logic was correct, we would have had DoH a long time ago.

 

[dca319]

That's easy = People like yourself are both wimps and essentially stupid. Why would/should I, or anyone else, ever willingly tolerate such as yourself without challenge? It has nothing to do with self-validation...Your sorry, spineless sort just disgusts me, and I've no reasons whatsoever, to tolerate any BS from the likes of you. 😉 If you can come up with even one reason...well..let me know....perhaps I've missed something? 😉

You're not a patient of mine....merely a mouthy and clueless adversary...however profoundly inept. Deal with it.

I suppose, in fairness...I could revert to military philosophy = People one protects with one's life versus those that are Targets...Which one would you believe yourself to be here?...and what reason could you possibly imagine for my wishing to protect you? 😉

Per: "challenging posters to dogfights"..? That's utter nonsense, and only serves to demonstrate your clearly civilian/never-served, "virginal purity". "dogfights" would be deadly serious, and long-ago, largely eclipsed by technology. Most of our kills in Desert Storm weren't even in visual range....and that was over 20 years ago now. All I've ever offered up is merely a challenged wager to some purely recreational flying....People don't die in that kind of lightweight-fun, and it's hardly serious. Given that; I would not expect the pathetic likes of yourself to be up for even that....Please prove me wrong there. 🙂 PM if interested.

So accepting your challenge to a dogfight or allowing myself to be intimidated by your "degree" will cure me of my my "wimpyness " and stupidity? Is that what you got out of your degree?

 

[nevergiveup]

By your logic and definition the MOU satisfies the single agreement requirement. The east and west are voting on a single argeement that modifies both of our current contracts. It will alter pay rates working conditions and work rules. This is a vote of only east and west that only effects east and west. Because if there is a signing bonus in this MOU the APA is not going to share in that because they already have their contract.

Either way no matter how you define "single agreement" either the MOU or joint contract will be the last step in the three required pieces. Implementing the Nicolau.

Do you think that the BPR knows this and that is why it took them three days to swallow what everyone all along knew? Because they know without it being in the MOU that it trigger the Nicolau list.

Rage all you want but final and binding really is final and binding.

An MOU by definition is not always a contract. I believe NIC is gone for good. You can't merge a list that is not operationally usable. why again do you want the NIC so badly?

 

[cleardirect]

http://leonidas.cact...a_Affidavit.pdf

I am not really sure what point you are trying to make with this filing.

But you are proving yourself to be a liar and even more suspicious that you are really Mike Cleary.

You have admitted that you are not a pilot at US Airways so no chance of being a usapa member.

Now why would a none US airways pilot have access to all of the legal filings? Especially some minor deposition like this one? Why would a none usapa member even read a small filings like this first and remember it from 4 years ago? 99% of the east pilots did not read any of the filings let alone this minor stuff.

Why would a none US Airways pilot have instant access to AAA ALPA material from 5-8-10 years ago? (Cleary was a rep.)

How is it that you are constantly on this web board at all hours of the day? Oh right Cleary is on medical.

From the reports of people that have met you the rants and anger fit.

Finally anyone that thinks Mike Cleary is a genius would be a very small group of one.

 

[cleardirect]

An MOU by definition is not always a contract. I believe NIC is gone for good. You can't merge a list that is not operationally usable. why again do you want the NIC so badly?

The language is a single agreement. The T/A does not say single contract. An MOU is an agreement.

You can believe what you want but you would be wrong. The Nicolau is the list and it is here to stay. Have you not been paying attention? How long have you east pilots been demanding pay parity? What has Parkers answer always been? NO! The only pay raise you are going to get is with a contract. Do you think that Parker is going to give you a pay raise and let seniority hang out there unfinished and run separate ops for another 2 years? Think again.

The MOU is the method of integration for east west and APA. Do you seriously think that Parker is going to continue to run separate ops for another 2 years after an MOU then try and slam 3 airlines together at one time?

No Parker is going to integrate the east and west operation right away. Then integrate USA and AA as soon as possible after a single seniority arbitration is completed. There will be an implementation period for USA and AA none needed for east west.

Still no one will answer my question. What did the BPR learn that took them 3 days to pass the MOU? What is in that MOU that has them terrified? Yet there must be something in that MOU that made them accept it.

 

[dca319]

An MOU by definition is not always a contract. I believe NIC is gone for good. You can't merge a list that is not operationally usable. why again do you want the NIC so badly?

What does "operationally usable" mean?

 

[Ames]

How anyone decides to vote depends entirely on their own thoughts. It's a pity you clearly have none to offer, other than immediate and unconditional surrender to whatever's offered, and without so much as even looking at it first! All west posters who've written about it so far, would equally constitute "easy kills" from management's perspective. Small wonder to me anymore why AWA set the lowest possible bar for compensation for so many years...which, none can now doubt, was all the fault of the evil easties, whom you'd not yet even met....The west pilot contingent would be a true dream come true for any unscrupulous management to have at their easy beck and call.

Oh well. I give up here. Whatever comes of this won't much concern me for long. You'll be the ones having to live with your choices and decisions. If just accepting the "scraps" as one westie noted, suits you just fine in advance of even knowing what said scraps are...well...it's really not my problem.

I am willing to settle for scraps if it gets rid of ucrapa, the easthole entitlement mentality, and people like you. Once those things are gone we may actually achieve what we deserve down the line. Our current situation would most likely go on forever if not for this merger.

 

[3dtv]

By your logic and definition the MOU satisfies the single agreement requirement. The east and west are voting on a single argeement that modifies both of our current contracts. It will alter pay rates working conditions and work rules. This is a vote of only east and west that only effects east and west. Because if there is a signing bonus in this MOU the APA is not going to share in that because they already have their contract.

Either way no matter how you define "single agreement" either the MOU or joint contract will be the last step in the three required pieces. Implementing the Nicolau.

Do you think that the BPR knows this and that is why it took them three days to swallow what everyone all along knew? Because they know without it being in the MOU that it trigger the Nicolau list.

Rage all you want but final and binding really is final and binding.

Not true. An "agreement" is not a JCBA between east and west. An MOU is directions on how to obtain a JCBA between US and AA, not east west. Apples and oranges.

 

[Ames]

No, there is not.

The official list to be used in any SLI for the US Airways pilots is date of hire with conditions and restrictions. The Nic is a list that is no longer valid and will not be used in any future SLI.

The APA is not stupid, which is what they would be if they used the Nic. If the Nic were used in an SLI with American, In ten to fifteen years the top of the list would be made up almost entirely of former American West pilots. Not going to happen.

Skier

How's the weather on Fantasy Island?

 

[3dtv]

By your logic and definition the MOU satisfies the single agreement requirement. The east and west are voting on a single argeement that modifies both of our current contracts. It will alter pay rates working conditions and work rules. This is a vote of only east and west that only effects east and west. Because if there is a signing bonus in this MOU the APA is not going to share in that because they already have their contract.

Either way no matter how you define "single agreement" either the MOU or joint contract will be the last step in the three required pieces. Implementing the Nicolau.

Do you think that the BPR knows this and that is why it took them three days to swallow what everyone all along knew? Because they know without it being in the MOU that it trigger the Nicolau list.

Rage all you want but final and binding really is final and binding.

Also the MOU is not modifying east west contracts. It is a road map to a contract with AA. Not touching east west.