What's new

Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
ENTITLEMENT




/enˈtītlmənt/




  • The fact of having a right to something.
  • The amount to which a person has a right.
Pretty much sums you up Clear. You always want something for yourself. If you wanted a pension, you should have gone to work for a REAL airline, not that crap outfit based in Tempe. You guys just cannot get your heads straight with RISK, in your job selection, or WYE RIVER.

Real airline with pension? I don't know about Clear, but when I got hired at AWA, no one had pensions. Well, Alaska and American did, but American wasn't hiring and Alaska's senior greedys kept it for themselves, but gave it away for the new hires.

Risk? So says the guy who was riding the US train towards the edge of the cliff. If Parker hadn't pulled the switch your career would have been over. Risk, that cracks me up. Kind of like when we warned you about kicking out ALPA. Now either we merge with American and you get the NIC or we don't and you retire on LOA93. Risk, damn that's funny.

Bean
 
Unbelievable!!! Are you kidding me? One of these days you really should set aside some time to study for that GED.

Hey, here's one for you......please have your reps run this by the BPR at the next meeting:

WHEREAS many US Airways pilots are currently receiving, or will soon be receiving Military Retirement moneys, AND

WHEREAS not all US Airways pilots are receiving or will receive these retirement moneys,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT all US Airways pilots without Military retirement pensions, (or reduced pension benefits) shall earn retirement benefits similar to the maximum provided by the Military to many US Airways pilots, or an equivalent sum contributed to their 401K accounts.

Yeah, that's the ticket! Demand that your reps include this in their quest for true Retirement parity/equality!

Indeed sir! Hmm...but you did omit minor, but wholly "unfair" social considerations as well. I'd suggest the addition of the following, since we wouldn't wish these wunderkinder to feel at all "disadvantaged" or in any way treated without full equality here:

WHEREAS many US Airways pilots are currently receiving mail and correspondence addresed to them by titles of military rank, and

WHEREAS those same pilots "unfairly" acquired various Decorations over time, and

WHEREAS those AWA pilots now "serving" in the "Army of Leonidas" receive neither respect for their "Rank", nor have been appropriately recognized with any Decorations for their "service" in "heroically" pursuing "All Out Warfare" with their eastern counterparts;

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT all such AWA pilots henceforth be granted the respect due their "Rank" and the appropriate Decorations and Titles inherent to their heroic "Service" IE; "Sir Jerkov" for the "Knights", "ALPO" for the "Dire Wolves", "Duchess" for their already self-styled "Supreme Commander" Fergie and such Honors as the Board sees fit in general, with a suggested baseline of The Order of the Sand Flea being established as the highest recognition for "Valor".
 
That is all that resolution said. A contribution to the 401K over time.

That's hardly all that YOU said. Would you care to now expand a bit more on your bizarre notions that any without an earned PBGC income should magically receive more than those with the PBGC? I'm sure we'd all really love to hear the "logic" behind that, Kommissar Kleardirect....? 😉
 
If (when) this merger is finalized how much life is left in usapa? I say four months from the day of signing...
🙂
 
If (when) this merger is finalized how much life is left in usapa? I say four months from the day of signing...
🙂

With equal concern of course; I'll properly log that right alongside your brilliant prediction back in Dec of 2007..What does that make it now?, Oh yes, five full years ago: "Ho Ho Ho! Saint Nic is coming to town!" 😉 Who could forget such an amazing presentation of both astounding accuracy and eloquence? 🙂 It's almost as if you've a truly unique and unprecedented gift of clairvoyance, and daily drink deeply of the waters of the future....most impressive indeed!
 
With equal concern of course; I'll properly log that right alongside your brilliant prediction back in Dec of 2007..What does that make it now?, Oh yes, five full years ago: "Ho Ho Ho! Saint Nic is coming to town!" 😉 Who could forget such an amazing presentation of both astounding accuracy and eloquence? 🙂 It's almost as if you've a truly unique and unprecedented gift of clairvoyance, and daily drink deeply of the waters of the future....most impressive indeed!

St Nic is coming, December 25th. If you haven't seen him in five years you must have been a bad person.
 
Real airline with pension? I don't know about Clear, but when I got hired at AWA, no one had pensions. Well, Alaska and American did, but American wasn't hiring and Alaska's senior greedys kept it for themselves, but gave it away for the new hires.

Risk? So says the guy who was riding the US train towards the edge of the cliff. If Parker hadn't pulled the switch your career would have been over. Risk, that cracks me up. Kind of like when we warned you about kicking out ALPA. Now either we merge with American and you get the NIC or we don't and you retire on LOA93. Risk, damn that's funny.

Bean

Until the events of 9/11/01 changed the landscape, all the majors had defined benefit pension plans for their pilots. When I was hired at (old) Piedmont (even before it had "major status) there had been a long-instituted defined benefit plan. The only significant player that did not have a defined benefit plan for its pilots when AWA opened its doors was SWA.

I don't know what rock you were under when you were hired at AWA. But you certainly had no real knowledge of the industry.
 
USAPA
2007-2013

R.I.P.

You seem to think that USAPA being superseded by APA in the event of a merger is something the east pilots dread, and you relish in the thought.

No one on the east is naive enough to mourn the loss of USAPA when APA takes over. It's a non-event; that's the way things work in this industry.

I am not, nor even have been, active in USAPA beyond paying my dues and assessments, so this statement is purely a layman's opinion: USAPA has been effective in keeping you west a**holes at bay for the entire length of its existence. Well done, USAPA. I'm proud to be a MIGS.
 
You seem to think that USAPA being superseded by APA in the event of a merger is something the east pilots dread, and you relish in the thought.

No one on the east is naive enough to mourn the loss of USAPA when APA takes over. It's a non-event; that's the way things work in this industry.

I am not, nor even have been, active in USAPA beyond paying my dues and assessments, so this statement is purely a layman's opinion: USAPA has been effective in keeping you west a**holes at bay for the entire length of its existence. Well done, USAPA. I'm proud to be a MIGS.

I am glad you are happy with your bankruptcy contract, really, I am. I am quite impressed as well that you recognize delay as the only card usapa had to play. The inevitable awaits you, however, courtesy of the Allied Pilots Association.
 
"Phoenix, Arizona, on the other hand, might not be so fortunate. US Airways is only in "2nd place in the Phoenix market, and the hub is bracketed by Dallas-Fort Worth on the one end and Los Angeles on the other. Aspire Aviation thinks while Phoenix is unlikely to be de-hubbed, it would be a 225-250 daily flights hub for a new American, with the current 2:1 ratio of mainline flights to regional jet ones essentially being flipped."

http://www.aspireavi...e-for-american/
 
Land grabs are not meaningful things. You've never had a defined benefit plan. You've only had a defined contribution plan. By that mere fact, you don't get or have access to the PBGC. If you want equality for the 401k, by all means, you deserve that. Beyond that, you deserve nothing. You simply haven't been here long enough. Has nothing to do with Los, relative pos., DOH..........you simply have not been here long enough.........end of story

Okay, after hearing all opinions, my take is that the resolution in it's current form was a bad idea.

The obvious reason is it excludes those who have the PBGC benefit.

However, there is something of value in this resolution, if it were expanded to include everybody.

Let's say we try to get direct contributions to everyone, including PBCG recipients. Those near retirement would get their benefit and some supplement, those with time to go would get a larger direct contribution to build their accounts.


Now about the above post...two things..you have to define two words...here and long??

What do you mean by have not been here long enough..by here do you mean post merger LCC? Cuase everybody has been "here" the same amount of time. If you mean at one of the pre-merger companies, well here is the facts, approximately 1100 west pilot were hired prior to 1998, the PBGC cutoff year, and around 700 are pre-AWA bankruptcy 1990 or earlier hires. That means 700 West pilots have over 22 years, the government and most pensions pay after 20.

It is the same old problem. You east entitlement attitude a-holes look at the West as an inferior entity. Bottom line is AWA was a better place to be in the 2000-2005 time frame, and although the east fails to grasp that, Nicolau did not. I actually think the cutoff is around 1996 that AWA passed USair as a better place of employment, a full decade prior to NIC.

 
You skipped over the part just above what you quoted. I agree, the part you quoted say "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...

I cannot find a definition of "parties". I do however read "or the parties then in existence" a ncouple of times, showing that the TA made room for changes in who would be the "airline parties".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top