Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Claxon]

Wrong and wrong.

The company does not need usapa for anything. If usapa does not play nice with other Parker will simple wait until the APA is the bargaining agent and deal with them.

The west had a DC before the east came along.

Profit sharing. Thanks what did your reps get for you during that negotiation?

Retro! Right. a signing bonus of some sort maybe. Equally divided. Look at the MOU.

Why does the west have to back pay parity? The east has had the majority for the last 5 years. Why hasn't usapa gotten you pay parity? Parker told you how to get parity. With a new contract. Accept Nicolau and get parity. So it has been the east that have screwed your selves.

You are an embarrassment to society in general.

No US Airways pilots, no agreement, period. Ask the creditors. Tell parker to go on without the pilots agreeing. He may accomplish this 2 years from now, good luck.

You did not have any kind of DC plan, you had a match the same as every other franke employee. You lied.

Look up retroactive.

East only earned change of control, parker tells you he does not need it and what is the first thing he asks for all the time. You are sitting in PHX, the next regional airline hub you idiot, think accordingly when you expect anything.

 

[Phoenix]

...., evidence by today, ...

Link?

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Link?

Where is KIRBY? Good place to start! MM! Sorry!

 

[traderjake]

Had a couple of AMR pilots on to MIA today, they also hear on their end that the merge should be pretty soon, so I had to ask their thoughts on the seniority issue they were fine with DOH and a 5 to 7 yr fence, one had 29 yrs in and the other 20. Then asked if they were familar with the NIC and what they thought of it, needless to say it won't be used.

Maybe they read your rant yesterday and didn't want to be added to your "No Fly" list.

 

[traderjake]

And a union “may renegotiate seniority provisions of a collective bargaining agreement, even though the resulting changes are essentially retroactive or affect different employees unequally.” Id.

“[A] union may not juggle the seniority roster for no reason other than to advance one group of employees over another. The change must rationally promote the aggregate welfare of employees in the bargaining unit.”

 

[nevergiveup]

I have explained this. I should have known better than to think you would understand and not go whining like a little girl.

Make up whatever little story you want to try and justify your rants.

One more time for the slow ones. This was for ALL US Airways pilots, not just west pilots. Any east pilots hired after March 1998 does not have PBGC money. The resolution would have included them too.

You must be a democrat!

 

[end_of_alpa]

“[A] union may not juggle the seniority roster for no reason other than to advance one group of employees over another. The change must rationally promote the aggregate welfare of employees in the bargaining unit.”

There is NO case that supports your position.

"The two merging airlines and ALPA entered into a Transition Agreement (ªTA&ordm😉, which incorporated by reference ALPA's Merger Policy. Under the TA, the carriers agreed not to object to ALPA's seniority integration proposal, provided it did not result in certain additional costs. The seniority integration proposal could be implemented only as part of a single CBA. The single CBA would require approval by the East Master Executive Council, the West Master Executive Coun-cil, and a majority of each of the East and West pilot groups, effectively giving each side a veto. Until the single CBA was negotiated, with few exceptions, the TA placed a ªfenceº between East and West operations, such that each would con-tinue to operate under its respective CBA."

"Additionally, USAPA's final proposal may yet be one that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau Award."

The T/A memorialized a "proposal". That is a fact.

The next JCBA REQUIRES a majority ratification vote unlike ALPA. That is a fact.

The CONTRACT piece of the T/A requires the Airline parties to maintain an agreed to status quo up and until a new JCBA is agreed to and voted in. That is a fact.

No courts up to this point supports your contention. That is a FACT.

you are wrong, Dan.

 

[Beancounter]

You must be a democrat!

And... if you're a Republican and not in the top 1%, then I can see how you're so easily manipulated by management and the union.

Bean

 

[Beancounter]

You are an embarrassment to society in general.

No US Airways pilots, no agreement, period. Ask the creditors. Tell parker to go on without the pilots agreeing. He may accomplish this 2 years from now, good luck.

You did not have any kind of DC plan, you had a match the same as every other franke employee. You lied.

Look up retroactive.

East only earned change of control, parker tells you he does not need it and what is the first thing he asks for all the time. You are sitting in PHX, the next regional airline hub you idiot, think accordingly when you expect anything.

You need to look a little more closely at that hand you're holding, Parker knows you're overplaying. Go ahead and crack that attitude with him, after all we're already parked and slapped with an injunction, thanks to the real men of genius. Why do I get the feeling you're going to end up in the corner with a dunce hat, sitting on the LOA93 stool....for a few more years.

Bean

 

[mrbreeze]

I have explained this. I should have known better than to think you would understand and not go whining like a little girl.

Make up whatever little story you want to try and justify your rants.

One more time for the slow ones. This was for ALL US Airways pilots, not just west pilots. Any east pilots hired after March 1998 does not have PBGC money. The resolution would have included them too.

This reminds me of this short, true story.....

I have been close to one of my nieces all of her life....she is about 35 yrs old now. She lives in a small town in Texas and it's hard to find and keep a good job. I got an email from her Mom (my brother's ex wife) a few months ago, saying she is worried about Jennifer and was hoping I could help her....knowing that I am fond of her. She asked if it would be possible for me to take out a small business loan of $10k and help Jen invest in a local antique business to help secure her future. She carried on about how this was totally to help Jen get back on her feet. The kicker is that the antique business is owned by none other than her Mom, who would benefit much more in this transaction than Jen would.

1800 West pilots vs about 400 post 1998 East pilots. Sure, Dorothy.

Once again, Clear.....the PBGC has nothing to do with you.....so, again, piss off!

breeze

 

[cactusboy53]

See the west pilots were given by the East pilots a 10 percent defined contribution amount. They were also given profit sharing. Average west DNC amount 142,000 x 10 = 14,200 a year. 4000 per year profit sharing. 142000 wages minus 124 wages equal 18,000 per year.

Because the East lost per year from the west, because the west reneged on parity support, the east deserves most of the retro pay out.

This has no chance of an argument point from the west pilots, East will be made whole. Best of luck to you.

And that concludes today's session of Claxonian Revisionist History. Tomorrow's subject is the term "sacrifice" and how many times you can use it in an argument for what you think you deserve.

Class dismissed.

 

[traderjake]

There is NO case that supports your position.............................

No courts up to this point supports your contention. That is a FACT.

you are wrong, Dan.

Whatever you say, JJ.

Barton Brands holds that a union may not juggle the seniority roster for no reason other than to advance one group of employees over another. The change must rationally promote the aggregate welfare of employees in the bargaining unit. 529 F.2d at 800

 

[end_of_alpa]

Whatever you say, JJ.

Barton Brands holds that a union may not juggle the seniority roster for no reason other than to advance one group of employees over another. The change must rationally promote the aggregate welfare of employees in the bargaining unit. 529 F.2d at 800

You mean the case that wanted to EXCLUDE furloughed minority employees from voting on a contract where the majority that wanted to change from a date of hire seniority list to endtailing the minority? You mean that one?

I've briefed that until I'm blue in the face. That case supports OUR position, not your. Dan, reread the case. You can't pull the quotes out of the case unless you know what the case was about.

Just keep parroting what others say.

Still no case to support your position, Dan.

http://openjurist.org/529/f2d/793/barton-brands-ltd-v-national-labor-relations-board

 

[Phoenix]

Pilot seniority cooperation means integrating three lists.

 

[prechilill]

Pilot seniority cooperation means integrating three lists.

Your definition... We will revisit this statement in a few months (should be worth quite a laugh).