Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Freighterguynow]

We know you're stuck in PHX. All the more uncertain for your careers.

Which we knew the whole time .....

 

[Piedmont1984]

I find the Grievance Committee analysis both sobering and troubling. This is something that should have been made available to the rank and file long before now. I've written the NAC and leadership asking them to respond to the concerns in the report to all pilots in the short time remaining or delay the voting deadline.

I'd like to see this merger happen and get off LOA93, but I won't consent to taking a subordinate position vis a vis the AA pilots from the get go.

 

[Phoenix]

You may want to think again about the vote. This MOU is way to open ended in favor of the New company / APA. How about the grievance committee report that just came out.

Subject: “Grievance Committee Analysis.” BLOCKED BY HUMMEL


From: Gary Hummel
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 4:57 PM
To: Board of Pilot Representatives
Cc: Officers (Officers@usairlinepilots.org); Grievance Committee; 'NAC@usairlinepilots.org' (NAC@usairlinepilots.org)
Subject: FW: yesterday's meeting

BPR Members,

Today you received an email from Dave Ciabattoni titled “Grievance Committee Analysis.” I ask that you keep this email confidential until we are able to discuss this issue with the attorneys who were present. Below is an email from General Counsel indicating that this analysis should not have been distributed.

Gary

The lawyer warning is basically nothing more than an admission that there are indeed portions of the MOU, as written, that do in fact disadvantage, and maybe even harm USAir pilots. And prior knowledge of such, and specific identification of the terms in the MOU that provide advantage to managent.... Well the lawyer thinks it hurts our case in future grievances if we effectively admit the advantages management has if we vote in the MOU....

Perhaps the lawyer would do better to warn the officers to hide their knowledge of the likely harm to union members as a result of the MOU, otherwise they will no longer be able to claim ignorance if a DFR is pursued when we find ourselves to be the new American Eagle.

 

[end_of_alpa]

I find the Grievance Committee analysis both sobering and troubling. This is something that should have been made available to the rank and file long before now. I've written the NAC and leadership asking them to respond to the concerns in the report to all pilots in the short time remaining or delay the voting deadline.

I'd like to see this merger happen and get off LOA93, but I won't consent to taking a subordinate position vis a vis the AA pilots from the get go.

This is why I resigned from USAPA. Gary, Steve Bradford, and Rob Streble have done more damage to what could have been accomplished if their "closed door" policy had more inclusiveness, not less. I certainly understand the "wish" to extend an olive branch to the West but the FACT is that the WEST has a WE interest and not an US. Period.

The letter writing between Syzanski and Harper is self evident.

I am in the process of rejoining USAPA and get the momentum going to recall Hummel, Bradford and Streble.

This MOU is so weak that it has been presented to alternative legal sources revealing the holes in it are big enough to drive a A330 through it to AMR/APA.

Why don't you compare the MOU to a company prospectus and let me know why it SHOULDN'T read like a 10-K?

Gary and Steve, the weak leading the meek.

 

[kubotapilot]

Portly, CactusBoy and others...

I am very interested in your opinions regarding the actual analysis of the MOU by the Grievance committee and why does Gary want to keep it cloaked.

Please avoid any political, East VS. West crap, who released this "confidential email" or semantics in your reply as I only want your personal opinion as to how this new information works into your validation of the MOU.

Thank You,

Kubota

How is it that you have a confidential email from Hummel to the BPR?

It's nice that Ciabata excluded the Vice Chair of the Grievance committee, guess its business a usual at the east union.

There is no 'we' in usapa.

 

[end_of_alpa]

The lawyer warning is basically nothing more than an admission that there are indeed portions of the MOU, as written, that do in fact disadvantage, and maybe even harm USAir pilots. And prior knowledge of such, and specific identification of the terms in the MOU that provide advantage to managent.... Well the lawyer thinks it hurts our case in future grievances if we effectively admit the advantages management has if we vote in the MOU....

Perhaps the lawyer would do better to warn the officers to hide their knowledge of the likely harm to union members as a result of the MOU, otherwise they will no longer be able to claim ignorance if a DFR is pursued when we find ourselves to be the new American Eagle.

There are those who dislike Dave Ciabattoni for a number of reasons. I certainly had my issues with him when he was the EVP. The problem with the EVP position and why it needs to be eliminated is that the Constitution simply empowers a glorified office manager that the rank and file votes in. This is the same as if the populace voted for, say, Treasury Secretary or Department of Defence. I NEVER SUPPORTED THIS ADDITION.

However, having said that, the one thing Dave is good at is his attention to detail. I actually liked both Dave and Tracy as Grievance Chairmen, they just have a different way of looking at things...which is good. But the one thing BOTH have in common is CONTRACT INTERPRETATION LANGUAGE.

While Gary and Steve are selling the company line, pay and 13.5% contribution, the rest is what dooms us to indentured servitute. Pay no attention to the MAN behind the curtain.

There are a few here who believe the elections yesterday and tommorrow will have no bearing on fridays vote. I disagree.

I have no inside knowledge, but if it were me, I'd put out a joint PHL/CLT message along with the Compass Coalition members endorsing the reality of the MOU and where the variables becoume the risk and the mask of uncertainty is removed.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Portly, CactusBoy and others...

I am very interested in your opinions regarding the actual analysis of the MOU by the Grievance committee and why does Gary want to keep it cloaked.

Please avoid any political, East VS. West crap, who released this "confidential email" or semantics in your reply as I only want your personal opinion as to how this new information works into your validation of the MOU.

Thank You,

Kubota

There are TWO tactics that take away from a proper discourse regarding the MOU.

The first is the CM, "he who shall not be named" tactic of what I coin as a forum "drive by fruiting". He throws something out there to see who looks when it hits them. I simply call him out on it and he runs away.

The second is the West tactic of name calling. This one is self-evident. We hate you if you don't see it our way.

The "sub" second is the minority East pilots like traitorjake who just plain hate his own. Oedipus complex with a gay twist if I were a psychiatrist.

Then there is the rational discussion.

HERE IT COMES! FIRE TORPEDOES!

 

[end_of_alpa]

Oh, and one more thing. The pilots like TraitorJake, the guys who tried to recall the CLT reps, will vote for the MOU out of spite and not a reasoned well thought out approach to a merger.

Sound familiar???

 

[Res Judicata]

Oh, and one more thing. The pilots like TraitorJake, the guys who tried to recall the CLT reps, will vote for the MOU out of spite and not a reasoned well thought out approach to a merger.

Sound familiar???

What was that about the West and name calling? Something about we hate you if you disagree... Traitor? Against what exactly?

Exhibit #6754 of typical, hypocritical Easthole.

 

[cleardirect]

Hey, whatever happened to the NMB meetings? Didn't the company meet with them months ago to discuss a way fwd in section 6 negotiations? Did the NMB have NOTHING to say?
I find that hard to believe...something tells me a certain fake union isn't too keen to share the truth. How shocking.

There is a pattern with usapa. Good news goes out before the ink is dry. Bad news gets delayed until everyone forgets about it.

NMB meeting.
LOA 93 grievance results.
Court filings and transcripts.

 

[kubotapilot]

EOA,

As my number of posts indicates, I am mainly a lurker.

I have emailed my reps, the officers and the NAC for their response to this information. I think a time bomb has gone off and they will be in damage control mode very shortly.

I was a YES voter until this information came to me yesterday after getting in from a rare trip. (Got to love international!)

I immediately changed that YES to a solid NO.

Looking forward to hearing other's interpretation of this bombshell of new information.

Thanks for your take.

Kubota

There are TWO tactics that take away from a proper discourse regarding the MOU.

The first is the CM, "he who shall not be named" tactic of what I coin as a forum "drive by fruiting". He throws something out there to see who looks when it hits them. I simply call him out on it and he runs away.

The second is the West tactic of name calling. This one is self-evident. We hate you if you don't see it our way.

The "sub" second is the minority East pilots like traitorjake who just plain hate his own. Oedipus complex with a gay twist if I were a psychiatrist.

Then there is the rational discussion.

HERE IT COMES! FIRE TORPEDOES!

 

[cleardirect]

You may want to think again about the vote. This MOU is way to open ended in favor of the New company / APA. How about the grievance committee report that just came out.

Subject: “Grievance Committee Analysis.” BLOCKED BY HUMMEL


From: Gary Hummel
Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2013 4:57 PM
To: Board of Pilot Representatives
Cc: Officers (Officers@usairlinepilots.org); Grievance Committee; 'NAC@usairlinepilots.org' (NAC@usairlinepilots.org)
Subject: FW: yesterday's meeting

BPR Members,

Today you received an email from Dave Ciabattoni titled “Grievance Committee Analysis.” I ask that you keep this email confidential until we are able to discuss this issue with the attorneys who were present. Below is an email from General Counsel indicating that this analysis should not have been distributed.

Gary

From: Bjodwyer@aol.com [mailto:Bjodwyer@aol.com]
Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2013 6:35 AM
To: Dave Ciabattoni
Cc: Gary Hummel
Subject: yesterday's meeting

Dave: I was most appreciative of the opportunity to participate in yesterday's meeting with the officers ,your committee, and the committee's assigned lawyers. It was most valuable and will provide a strong basis for the ongoing work of your committee. I look forward to further meetings of the committee. It has given me a renewed appreciation of the valuable efforts that you, your committee and the assigned lawyers perform for the Association and its members.

On the way to the airport, Laura Sue and I discussed the meeting and their role in the ongoing work of the committee. During the meeting the committee and the officers were given valuable insights by the assigned lawyers as to the provisions of the memorandum of understanding and its future administration in the context of the grievance and arbitration procedures therein. As such, the the meeting and the interchange between the attorneys and the participants were covered by lawyer client privilege. The three of us are the unanimous opinion that the breaking of the privilege would be enormously detrimental to both the Association and the individual grievants going forward. It would also severely compromise Matt, Sue and Laura in their ongoing work of representing the Association in grievances, mediations, and arbitrations.

Accordingly. I ask that you caution your committee that the discussions yesterday were confidential and should not be released or discussed with anyone other than the participants involved. I will similarly caution the three officers present.

I look forward to working with you and your committee on these and other matters in the future

Once again in typical fashion one or more of the east pilot "leaders" a member of the BPR being ethically challenged violated confidentiality. How do you east pilots ever expect anyone to trust you when you guys can't follow simple rules or keep your word?

The president and the lawyer asked that this be kept confidential. But someone on the BPR thinks they know better and released it against legal advice.

This makes me sick that a "leader" of this union because of personal opinion after voting yes to recommend the MOU, now reverses that obligation and would try and gain no votes and kill the MOU by violating their responsibility.

Whoever released this confidential memo has no honor, ethics or integrity. If it is a CLT reps they should have been recalled. My guess that it is because they did not and now think they can do whatever they want.

 

[cleardirect]

I have my sources.

Yeah, I was wondering that, too. Where is Koontz? MIA is where most of the West pilots are.

You're right, there is no "we" in USAPA. It's US. However, there is a "WE" in WEST.

The more the EAST pilots on here figure out that WEST pilots hate everything about who you are and what you do will these issues get resolved.

Your sources are untrustworthy and have no honor for releasing confidential information for their own political games.

The other answer would be the Koontz was intentionally left out of the discussion that is why his name is not on that letter.

 

[Piedmont1984]

Once again in typical fashion one or more of the east pilot "leaders" a member of the BPR being ethically challenged violated confidentiality. How do you east pilots ever expect anyone to trust you when you guys can't follow simple rules or keep your word?

The president and the lawyer asked that this be kept confidential. But someone on the BPR thinks they know better and released it against legal advice.

This makes me sick that a "leader" of this union because of personal opinion after voting yes to recommend the MOU, now reverses that obligation and would try and gain no votes and kill the MOU by violating their responsibility.

Whoever released this confidential memo has no honor, ethics or integrity. If it is a CLT reps they should have been recalled. My guess that it is because they did not and now think they can do whatever they want.

I make a distinction between confidentiality and secrecy. I understand the need to use confidentiality, but its use should be judicial and only when absolutely necessary. Furthermore, this revelation underscores the fact that this MOU was not properly vetted. We have been kept in the dark.

It's another example of the few thinking they are smarter than the many. They are not smarter, they simply have access to information which has been denied to the rank and file.

 

[cleardirect]

You may want to think again about the vote. This MOU is way to open ended in favor of the New company / APA. How about the grievance committee report that just came out.


¶ 28 This makes USAPA pilots liable for lawsuit against APA - need indemnity.

I did not bother reading the entire rambling report. Just this last line caught my attention.

This is paragraph 28.

28. US Airways and USAPA agree to be bound and abide by the arbitration decision contemplated by
Letter of Agreement 12-05 of the 2012 CBA. Nothing in the MTA shall modify the decision of the
arbitration panel thereunder.

How or why would usapa be liable for anything if you agree and ABIDE by arbitration? Only when you DON'T ABIDE by arbitration do you find liability? Once again usapa (east pilots) not living up to your agreements and ignore arbitration if you don't like the results.

Letter 12-05 has to do with the TWA arbitration. Again what does that have to do with usapa? NOTHING.

It is a red herring thrown in to scare the mindless followers and create no voters.

Unless the grievance committee thinks that that TWA can win a DFR lawsuit against the APA for not abiding by final and binding arbitration. But why would the grievance committee worry about the APA losing a DFR but have complete confidence that usapa will win a DFR?