Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[end_of_alpa]

Let the fun begin. DiOrio and Music along with the CLT radicals. This is going to be good entertainment. How much crazy can you pack in one room?

Funny, I was thinking the exact same thing: the three PHX revolving door reps come to my mind. Actually, Velez seems to be portray some modicum of sanity. Not so, the other two radicalized jihadists.

 

[end_of_alpa]

So we need out union reps to go to Congress in an attempt to torpedo the merger? Now I've seen it all. The angry F/O club is back in force.

OK. Let me rephrase it. Our Government Affairs committee is NOT and SHOULD NOT be attempting to "torpedo" the merger and I am not advocating THAT. However, it IS important to all of us that this merger CAN be a good thing, but several labor-managment issues need to be addressed if a merger between US Airways-AMR happens. It IS in the public interest.

Does that sound more reasonable? Sorry for the confusion.

 

[end_of_alpa]

You are a funny guy. So full of your self importance.

This country is about to go bankrupt, gun control, a war and you think congress is going to take even a second to worry about 3500 east pilots and how unfair you think a multi billion dollar merger is to you.

Again, shoe on other foot.....you think the Congress/the Courts are going to care how UNFAIR the PHX plight of seniority/furloughs is being handled???

So far, Courts say NO!

 

[nevergiveup]

You are a funny guy. So full of your self importance.

This country is about to go bankrupt, gun control, a war and you think congress is going to take even a second to worry about 3500 east pilots and how unfair you think a multi billion dollar merger is to you.

Stand up, and be proud of what you do. Do vote yes and go hide under the rug!

 

[Res Judicata]

Again, shoe on other foot.....you think the Congress/the Courts are going to care how UNFAIR the PHX plight of seniority/furloughs is being handled???

So far, Courts say NO!

No idiot. They've said "not yet". That is coming to an end very soon.

 

[nevergiveup]

No idiot. They've said "not yet". That is coming to an end very soon.

I read it on the internet! It was in an article by Harold Camping!

 

[A320 Driver]

OK. Let me rephrase it. Our Government Affairs committee is NOT and SHOULD NOT be attempting to "torpedo" the merger and I am not advocating THAT. However, it IS important to all of us that this merger CAN be a good thing, but several labor-managment issues need to be addressed if a merger between US Airways-AMR happens. It IS in the public interest.

Does that sound more reasonable? Sorry for the confusion.

Yep...thanks

 

[Pi brat]

This letter explains it. The letter was signed in secret by Gary Hummel and the company and kept a secret until recently when it was given to the BPR and told to keep it confidential.

The author is an idiot. That double secret letter is the 8th item on the USAPA website under the merger section describing the MOU. How did it get past the BPR that recommended a yes vote? I wonder if the evil one has stopped beating his wife yet.....

 

[Pi brat]

Well, there is less than 24 hours until the MOU vote closes. I'm really concerned about the language, but nobody had been able to show me how my reps, the BPR and lawyers are wrong. PHX never showed me where Parker said "he had to have Cof C relief." LUV has been pretty much mute when I respond to him, and despite some saying the CLT reps are personally voting against it, none of them told me that when I asked. The C&BLS require a yes or no recommendation when things go out for a vote and even though I don't remember see it, I know the CLT reps have balls and they wouldn't send out something for a vote they don't agree with. Also, I asked on the mechanic thread about whether the company was begging for their C of C. I got one response that said not that he heard of.

Oh well.

 

[Phoenix]

Well, there is less than 24 hours until the MOU vote closes. I'm really concerned about the language, but nobody had been able to show me how my reps, the BPR and lawyers are wrong. PHX never showed me where Parker said "he had to have Cof C relief." LUV has been pretty much mute when I respond to him, and despite some saying the CLT reps are personally voting against it, none of them told me that when I asked. The C&BLS require a yes or no recommendation when things go out for a vote and even though I don't remember see it, I know the CLT reps have balls and they wouldn't send out something for a vote they don't agree with. Also, I asked on the mechanic thread about whether the company was begging for their C of C. I got one response that said not that he heard of.

Oh well.

If Parker never specifically asked us to give him CoC then I would believe he doesn't need. Other than that, I trust him implicitly and would let him watch my bags anytime. Really. No, really.

 

[Pi brat]

If Parker never specifically asked us to give him CoC then I would believe he doesn't need. Other than that, I trust him implicitly and would let him watch my bags anytime. Really. No, really.

Didn't you say that he said that he NEEDED relief from C of C? That's different than saying you don't trust him.

 

[Pi brat]

Actually, I'm going to vote No on the MOU, but I recommend that all of you vote yes. That way, it will pass and if it goes well I'll never hear about it again. But if it goes poorly, I can say "I didn't vote for it!" Yeah, that's the ticket.

 

[A320 Driver]

Actually, I'm going to vote No on the MOU, but I recommend that all of you vote yes. That way, it will pass and if it goes well I'll never hear about it again. But if it goes poorly, I can say "I didn't vote for it!" Yeah, that's the ticket.

You are now eligible to be elected to Congress...

 

[Walmartgreeter]

If Parker never specifically asked us to give him CoC then I would believe he doesn't need. Other than that, I trust him implicitly and would let him watch my bags anytime. Really. No, really.

Of course they "asked." It is in their best interest to remove any (including potential) obstacles to the creation of the world's largest airline. And we used our little bit of leverage to get EVERYONE paid, not just East Group II and above. If a pilot does not feel enough was obtained for that transition, then simply vote no. Our professional negotiators have listened to Ciabattoni's alternate path (grieve and sue) and determined it simply does not pay enough, does not pay everyone, and is not worth the risks (note the plural, and note seniority integration with us at LOA 93 rates.) And oh yes, the entire BPR, our governing body gave their bond and word in a vote supporting the MOU. Our pilots have actually had enough time to be engaged in this MOU, some more than others. But what is crystal clear, we are choosing a path more than an interim agreement. Yes is one path, No is another. Really. Greeter

 

[cleardirect]

OK. Let me rephrase it. Our Government Affairs committee is NOT and SHOULD NOT be attempting to "torpedo" the merger and I am not advocating THAT. However, it IS important to all of us that this merger CAN be a good thing, but several labor-managment issues need to be addressed if a merger between US Airways-AMR happens. It IS in the public interest.

Does that sound more reasonable? Sorry for the confusion.

Let's see how this could go. Usapa representing 3500 known angry pilots once again think that they have been treated unfairly. Congress has heard this song before. East pilots demanding better treatment in a multi billion dollar deal.

The APA walks in representing 10,000 pilots and tells the same congressman or senator that the deal looks good to them.

The company lobbyist walks in and tells the same story that this is a good deal and these usapa guys are just whining about what they think they are owed from the last 20 years. All you have to do is look how they have acted over arbitration and the PBGC.

What do you think the answer from the legislator is going to be? If you even get a return phone call?

Might I suggest you start with the Texas representatives first.