Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[767one]

Our advisors and the NAC ALL said the language is solid. That makes you another junior lawyer. If you are so unhappy with it, send the additional money and benefits back to the company. You can protest by staying on LOA93.

320,

At any of the road shows did you hear anything about the "Davey dollars? The answer I got from the one of the nac members yesterday is that they "think" the non-qualified money is ok but they are not sure. They are waiting on the company to give them answers to this and also some other items!!? I don't know why the vote on the MOU would be allowed while the nac is waiting on answers from the company. I'm pretty sure I know how the company will answer these questions once the MOU is passed.

All the best!

Bob

 

[767one]

Hey Bob,

I don't have any Davy Dollars so I have to say that never crossed my mind. Good question. Aren't they kind of at risk either way?

Hope retirement is serving you well!

Hi Pi brat,

The Davey dollars were somewhat at risk because they depended on a financially viable company. That being said since the time that Davey dollars have been in existence the company has had several periods of bad financial times and still paid out Davey dollars. I think that the MOU may put the non-qualified funds in limbo. Yesterday I got a response from one of the NAC members and he said he "thinks" that the non-qualified money will be ok but he is not sure. He said that they are still waiting on answers to this question and some other questions to come from the company. Why would there be a vote if there are still questions and what are the other questions? They could be pivotal or they could mean nothing but I think it best to find out before it is too late.

All the best!

Bob

 

[A320 Driver]

320,

At any of the road shows did you hear anything about the "Davey dollars? The answer I got from the one of the nac members yesterday is that they "think" the non-qualified money is ok but they are not sure. They are waiting on the company to give them answers to this and also some other items!!? I don't know why the vote on the MOU would be allowed while the nac is waiting on answers from the company. I'm pretty sure I know how the company will answer these questions once the MOU is passed.

All the best!

Bob

Hey Bob...I was in 1 1/2 of those CLT meetings and I never heard anything about "Davey Dollars". There were some issues they said had to be settled, but they were the kinds of things that could not be settled at this point in time because the merger, in whatever form, is not a reality yet. I heard Rowland Wilder and APA's chief negotiator speak to some of that and I didn't here any concern from the crowd nor did any alarm bells go off. Part of this is deferred to the negotiations for the JCBA. Our contract is in full force, except for those items specifically addressed in the MOU. That's my understanding Bob.

 

[nevergiveup]

Vote often!

 

[nycbusdriver]

My brother said the entire CLT Recall was run by Munn, and the vote down is total validation of the no cooperation with the PHX seniority thieves and Munn. Good job. Now get rid of that idiot Hummel and get the DOH handed to Parker as it should. I can't wait to see Cleardirect wet her pants when that goes down.

If the CLT pilots knew that CM was running the recall show, then it was a foregone conclusion that the recall effort would fail.

 

[767one]

Hey Bob...I was in 1 1/2 of those CLT meetings and I never heard anything about "Davey Dollars". There were some issues they said had to be settled, but they were the kinds of things that could not be settled at this point in time because the merger, in whatever form, is not a reality yet. I heard Rowland Wilder and APA's chief negotiator speak to some of that and I didn't here any concern from the crowd nor did any alarm bells go off. Part of this is deferred to the negotiations for the JCBA. Our contract is in full force, except for those items specifically addressed in the MOU. That's my understanding Bob.

320,

Thanks for your take on the issue.

Regards,

Bob

 

[A320 Driver]

If the CLT pilots knew that CM was running the recall show, then it was a foregone conclusion that the recall effort would fail.

CM was not running the recall effort. He might have jumped on the bandwagon, but that's all. They had a website for the recall and CM wasn't part of it to my knowledge. I was on his web board years ago, but I pulled out during the Shuttle/Empire lawsuit, never to return. Had he been the leader of that band, I would not have supported it.

 

[nycbusdriver]

CM was not running the recall effort. He might have jumped on the bandwagon, but that's all. They had a website for the recall and CM wasn't part of it to my knowledge. I was on his web board years ago, but I pulled out during the Shuttle/Empire lawsuit, never to return. Had he been the leader of that band, I would not have supported it.

His support for anything is the kiss of death for the topic he advocates.

 

[Piedmont1984]

As many have heard before, the difference between bacon and eggs is that the chicken is involved, but the pig is committed.

If the AMR BOD had voted before the MOU vote, as originally intended in Section 18-b of the MOU, then we would have known that AMR is committed. Further, we would also have had substantial insight into how the transaction would transpire. IOW, we would know if a CoC would be triggered. I think this would have had a material impact on the vote.

Unfortunately, we will instead learn today, as a result of the side letter amending the language of MOU Section 18-b, whether or not the USAirways pilots are committed. More importantly, AMR, UCC and LCC will learn the same.

After that I think it's all she wrote. I've made my decision. I figure I may be screwing myself, but at least it won't someone else doing it to me.

Best of luck to all.

 

[nevergiveup]

As many have heard before, the difference between bacon and eggs is that the chicken is involved, but the pig is committed.

If the AMR BOD had voted before the MOU vote, as originally intended in Section 18-b of the MOU, then we would have known that AMR is committed. Further, we would also have had substantial insight into how the transaction would transpire. IOW, we would know if a CoC would be triggered. I think this would have had a material impact on the vote.

Unfortunately, we will instead learn today, as a result of the side letter amending the language of MOU Section 18-b, whether or not the USAirways pilots are committed. More importantly, AMR, UCC and LCC will learn the same.

After that I think it's all she wrote. I've made my decision. I figure I may be screwing myself, but at least it won't someone else doing it to me.

Best of luck to all.

We would have had the advantage, but looks like Mr. Hummel went behind our backs and changed the MOU. Makes one wonder!

 

[Portly Dorman]

11th hour plea......

Charlotte Domicile Update


February 7, 2013



Urgent Charlotte Domicile Update


The Sales Job


We firmly believe that it is not the job of your union to sell the pilots any bargaining agreement. We advocate and believe that it is our job to provide you with accurate information, data, and educational material that allow you to make your own informed choice. Unfortunately when we saw that “fancy” sales brochure show up in our mailboxes titled “Flight Plan to a Merger,” we knew our concerns about swaying your vote were legitimate. The document contains many inaccuracies and unknowns. In this update we try to provide some of the other side of the story to provide more balance for your decision process.


Your Charlotte Representatives recognize that you all are seasoned contract warriors and know you can smell a con job a mile away – we all had years of schooling from ALPA in that regard.


That is precisely why we insisted prior to the first MOU road show, that the NAC and the Officers not ‘sell’ the MOU to you, but rather present you the unbiased facts and let you make up your own mind. Please don’t misunderstand; we have no problem with the materials or format that was used to discuss the MOU. Our complaint and warning to you is that of accuracy, completeness, and true meaning of our post merger lives with the MOU as presented.


“But you voted unanimously for it to be sent to us for a vote right?”


Yes we did. Here’s the problem. While the NAC updated us during the negotiating process, in the late afternoon of January 2, 2013, the BPR was shown the completed top secret MOU for the first time. We had a briefing from the NAC and then were given less than 12 hours (deadline written directly into the MOU itself) to try to understand the MOU and the intricate ways in which it binds to the APA Green Book Contract. There simply wasn’t time to evaluate everything. We were forced to rely a great deal on what the NAC had delivered, because there was – you guessed it – a deadline looming. At the eleventh hour, we forced the issue of one last improvement (retrospective pay), and then complied with the wishes of numerous pilots who wanted desperately to vote on something - so we sent it out to you with a recommendation you approve the MOU.


Almost every day since that “deadline” has passed one or more grave problems have been revealed in the MOU and the APA Green Book contract that the BPR had no prior knowledge of.


The list includes:


Pay rates originally published for 2016 and beyond were inaccurate, although the NAC subsequently sent out a correction with the accurate rates.
Health insurance premiums, while in line with United and Delta, nevertheless cost more and have high deductibles.
The loss of survivor benefits after 5 years.
Contract language throughout that, although approved and written by our Professional Negotiator and other counsels, our Grievance Chairman says would be difficult to enforce.
When you add all of these unknowns to all of the things we already knew about the MOU, the entire document becomes almost impossible to gauge. When we’ve asked for clarifications on many of these serious issues, often the response from the NAC is “We’re still waiting on the Company and APA to tell us what this means.”


We believe there was not enough due diligence being done on this document before January, and the weeks since have been nothing but one disappointment after another. You should not fear the consequences of yes or no ratification of this agreement as your CLT leadership stands ready to take either course your collective will selects. We are prepared to proceed accordingly. It is not our duty or job to attempt to swing or sway your opinion and we completely understand the reasons for whatever your choice; be it “YES” or be it “NO”. What we do ask is that your follow your own judgment and heart in the decision making process, ask the tough questions, remain informed and vote accordingly.


The MOU voting closes on Friday February 8, 2013 at 1400 hours ET. This is your opportunity to define the next steps in your career and our futures; regardless of your views or opinion of the process or the content; please VOTE!


Fly Safe; we are committed to keep you informed and we will never allow you to be lied to.


Captain Bill McKee Chairman (980) 875-7644
First Officer Steve Crimi Vice Chairman (980) 875-7645
First Officer DeWitt Ingram Vice Chairman (704) 497-7246

 

[nevergiveup]

11th hour plea......

Charlotte Domicile Update


February 7, 2013



Urgent Charlotte Domicile Update


The Sales Job


We firmly believe that it is not the job of your union to sell the pilots any bargaining agreement. We advocate and believe that it is our job to provide you with accurate information, data, and educational material that allow you to make your own informed choice. Unfortunately when we saw that "fancy" sales brochure show up in our mailboxes titled "Flight Plan to a Merger," we knew our concerns about swaying your vote were legitimate. The document contains many inaccuracies and unknowns. In this update we try to provide some of the other side of the story to provide more balance for your decision process.


Your Charlotte Representatives recognize that you all are seasoned contract warriors and know you can smell a con job a mile away – we all had years of schooling from ALPA in that regard.


That is precisely why we insisted prior to the first MOU road show, that the NAC and the Officers not 'sell' the MOU to you, but rather present you the unbiased facts and let you make up your own mind. Please don't misunderstand; we have no problem with the materials or format that was used to discuss the MOU. Our complaint and warning to you is that of accuracy, completeness, and true meaning of our post merger lives with the MOU as presented.


"But you voted unanimously for it to be sent to us for a vote right?"


Yes we did. Here's the problem. While the NAC updated us during the negotiating process, in the late afternoon of January 2, 2013, the BPR was shown the completed top secret MOU for the first time. We had a briefing from the NAC and then were given less than 12 hours (deadline written directly into the MOU itself) to try to understand the MOU and the intricate ways in which it binds to the APA Green Book Contract. There simply wasn't time to evaluate everything. We were forced to rely a great deal on what the NAC had delivered, because there was – you guessed it – a deadline looming. At the eleventh hour, we forced the issue of one last improvement (retrospective pay), and then complied with the wishes of numerous pilots who wanted desperately to vote on something - so we sent it out to you with a recommendation you approve the MOU.


Almost every day since that "deadline" has passed one or more grave problems have been revealed in the MOU and the APA Green Book contract that the BPR had no prior knowledge of.


The list includes:


Pay rates originally published for 2016 and beyond were inaccurate, although the NAC subsequently sent out a correction with the accurate rates.
Health insurance premiums, while in line with United and Delta, nevertheless cost more and have high deductibles.
The loss of survivor benefits after 5 years.
Contract language throughout that, although approved and written by our Professional Negotiator and other counsels, our Grievance Chairman says would be difficult to enforce.
When you add all of these unknowns to all of the things we already knew about the MOU, the entire document becomes almost impossible to gauge. When we've asked for clarifications on many of these serious issues, often the response from the NAC is "We're still waiting on the Company and APA to tell us what this means."


We believe there was not enough due diligence being done on this document before January, and the weeks since have been nothing but one disappointment after another. You should not fear the consequences of yes or no ratification of this agreement as your CLT leadership stands ready to take either course your collective will selects. We are prepared to proceed accordingly. It is not our duty or job to attempt to swing or sway your opinion and we completely understand the reasons for whatever your choice; be it "YES" or be it "NO". What we do ask is that your follow your own judgment and heart in the decision making process, ask the tough questions, remain informed and vote accordingly.


The MOU voting closes on Friday February 8, 2013 at 1400 hours ET. This is your opportunity to define the next steps in your career and our futures; regardless of your views or opinion of the process or the content; please VOTE!


Fly Safe; we are committed to keep you informed and we will never allow you to be lied to.


Captain Bill McKee Chairman (980) 875-7644
First Officer Steve Crimi Vice Chairman (980) 875-7645
First Officer DeWitt Ingram Vice Chairman (704) 497-7246

So if they voted "yes," you would vote "no." Brilliant!

 

[Pi brat]

As many have heard before, the difference between bacon and eggs is that the chicken is involved, but the pig is committed.

If the AMR BOD had voted before the MOU vote, as originally intended in Section 18-b of the MOU, then we would have known that AMR is committed. Further, we would also have had substantial insight into how the transaction would transpire. IOW, we would know if a CoC would be triggered. I think this would have had a material impact on the vote.

Unfortunately, we will instead learn today, as a result of the side letter amending the language of MOU Section 18-b, whether or not the USAirways pilots are committed. More importantly, AMR, UCC and LCC will learn the same.

After that I think it's all she wrote. I've made my decision. I figure I may be screwing myself, but at least it won't someone else doing it to me.

Best of luck to all.

I know you have taken the time to be informed and you have voted. I respect that.

I guess I see your point about the vote after the AMR boards decision made as it applies to the C of C, but that's it. Did you see the quote I put up from the C&BLs? The reps are required to put a yes or no recommendation out with anything that is voted on. Did they? Does their last minute(conveniently last minute enough to be after their recall closed) update change their recommendation? Where is their bullet point on this supposedly underhanded change. Did they have a part in it?

 

[Res Judicata]

So if they voted "yes," you would vote "no." Brilliant!

These CLT people are brain damaged lunatics. They REFUSE to take responsibility for anything. I hope this MOU fails. These idiots and their followers deserve another half million dollar paycut.

 

[Pi brat]

We would have had the advantage, but looks like Mr. Hummel went behind our backs and changed the MOU. Makes one wonder!

Did he? There is nothing in the CLT update that said he did is there? The letter that changes it is on the USAPA website and I haven't seen anything from anyone involved with the union about it. Do you have any further information?