Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[fatherabraham]

I kind of get the "feeling" that some of the no vote sentiment has somehow become an almost subconscious effort to "stick it" to Doug Parker by "raining" on his parade.

If anyone is "harboring" such thoughts, I hope you realize that if the MOU were in fact voted down, "Team Tempe" would be "high-fiving" that news, big time! Think about it, they try to do the "right thing" and gosh darn it, those pilots refuse to take the money, oh well, I guess we have to just "soldier on" without them!

This merger is going to happen, with or without us. Would management prefer to have everybody "on-board"? Yes, I think so. Do they really NEED us on-board? I think not.

If they have to drag us "kicking and screaming" along, they will and it won't hurt them as much as it will us. Just ask the unsecured creditors how they feel about paying the LCC pilots a lot less over the next few years, while this thing is being put together, without our input!


seajay

Seajay & like minded ,

I sure don't have a perfect crystal ball .
But I do try to learn from recent history.
We had a contract that plainly showed an end date for our current pos pay rates.
Arb lost over lack of intent notes. Just 1 glaring example that any signed agreement by us that is not plainly stated in 16 different ways and signed in blood with every conceivable loophole filled is foolish on our part.
The folks dangling that carrot have done their homework and have a damn good idea the results and backup plans. If they truly didn't need our corporation then why
1- have the carrot
2-hire Crandall to talk up or right size our expectations

Me thinks Parker is not the final or sole decider of this take it or leave it offer and treating this group in a fair manor will be the rational business decision by the ultimate authorities .
You obviously disagree and and then in an anti union behavioral way classify us as malcontent / haters / uninformed etc etc.

Again you may be right on the potential negative outcomes of a no vote.
But I think it worth the fight.
As a reserve 330 FO & a July 1, 2013 ED/POR I calculate a potential take home ( after tax ) loss of 14 G minus any offsets mgt can misinterpret the mou to their benefit . That includes sign bonus and retro pay.

The APA has to allow our group representation in ongoing bargaining just as we are with the west " class " of USAPA membership . Recall the dfr lawsuits? Think perhaps USAPA counsel is tasked with precluding leadership creating dfr issues?
I may be out to lunch as I don't hear this reasoning elsewhere but read scores of warnings about not having a seat at table. That said.......at this point I think I would rather have APA negotiate a contract for myself than GH and his hand picked " yes " men. Have you forgotten he enthusiastically tried to sell me mou 1 & 2 < improvement .
Hopefully after today GH will get the clear message that HE and all his appointed followers answer to the BPR and not the other way around per our constitution .

So for me to risk 14G or so vs holding out for industry type treatment that I believe will far exceed the 14G in the Cba duration timeframe is a winner in my risk / reward analysis.

It's been said many times many ways but I will repeat. The COC leverage can and should take care of the many ugly disparities starting with our 190 pilots pay . I don't think for a minute that the COC eventual pay restoration is the ultimate goal that will right all the wrongs. It's the price the UCC will pay NOW to avoid the uncertainties is the goal IMO.

WE played a huge part in enabling LCC to financially be able to pursue this wedding with a 28% take in a $10B merged company. Your willing to settle for substandard pay and very crappy language as a payoff for that involuntary investment we've all made.

I AM NOT.

FA
NO

 

[prechilill]

The premise we need this MOU to have a seat at the SLI table with APA is complete crap. An mou is just a memorandum of understanding to give management what they want: relief from COC and to kick the seniority can down the road in an attempt to keep it from interfering with Parker's precious merger.
Next to the money increase there really is no value in having the MOU. None.

 

[prechilill]

Recently did some phone tree volunteer work.
Here is my random ( small ) sample results:
Phl for Diorio/Music/ Daugherty 40%
Phl against above team 20%
Undecided/not telling 40%

Unsolicited mou comments:

No- 50%
Yes-25%
Undecided -25%

FA
NO

With those numbers the MOU will probably pass.

 

[nevergiveup]

Any CCR....maybe Janis....Chicago.... I will take them....thanks!

Oh, you can keep the Sonny and Cher and Three Dog Night.

How about BS&T?

 

[nevergiveup]

I kind of get the "feeling" that some of the no vote sentiment has somehow become an almost subconscious effort to "stick it" to Doug Parker by "raining" on his parade.

If anyone is "harboring" such thoughts, I hope you realize that if the MOU were in fact voted down, "Team Tempe" would be "high-fiving" that news, big time! Think about it, they try to do the "right thing" and gosh darn it, those pilots refuse to take the money, oh well, I guess we have to just "soldier on" without them!

This merger is going to happen, with or without us. Would management prefer to have everybody "on-board"? Yes, I think so. Do they really NEED us on-board? I think not.

If they have to drag us "kicking and screaming" along, they will and it won't hurt them as much as it will us. Just ask the unsecured creditors how they feel about paying the LCC pilots a lot less over the next few years, while this thing is being put together, without our input!


seajay

May we should turn around and go back to Egypt, at least they gave us plenty of food and water!

 

[A320 Driver]

WE played a huge part in enabling LCC to financially be able to pursue this wedding with a 28% take in a $10B merged company.

You are right...we have. And we made a much greater sacrifice than was necessary because we didn't take the deal our advisors told us to take. Instead, we let members of the MEC hold us hostage to a "better" deal that ultimately included a fraction of the stock, less vacation and less pay. But, by golly, we showed them, didn't we? Thus, LOA93 in it's present form was born. There are many of us that do NOT want that little slice of history repeated but here we are again. Many are completely ignoring our advisors and putting their faith in the armchair quarterbacks in our pilot group. If we lose money, position, or benefits, in whatever form because of this arrogance, I call that a loss. I've seen it before.

Your willing to settle for substandard pay and very crappy language as a payoff for that involuntary investment we've all made.

Personally, I don't consider a 40% increase in pay and vacation and a 60% increase in retirement contributions "substandard" and our lawyers tell us there is nothing "crappy" about the language. So you listen to Paul, Woody, Dave and the rest of the boys that have brought us to this point and vote the way you want. If it's voted down, lets compare notes in 6 months and see where we are vs. where we could have been. Then you tell me with complete honesty that we are better off. Driver...

 

[nevergiveup]

The way I read section 18: voting is complete at 2pm est Friday. If the AMR board has not announced its intent to merge, the MOU with regard to USAPA is history.

 

[nevergiveup]

You are right...we have. And we made a much greater sacrifice than was necessary because we didn't take the deal our advisors told us to take. Instead, we let members of the MEC hold us hostage to a "better" deal that ultimately included a fraction of the stock, less vacation and less pay. But, by golly, we showed them, didn't we? Thus, LOA93 in it's present form was born. There are many of us that do NOT want that little slice of history repeated but here we are again. Many are completely ignoring our advisors and putting their faith in the armchair quarterbacks in our pilot group. If we lose money, position, or benefits, in whatever form because of this arrogance, I call that a loss. I've seen it before. Personally, I don't consider a 40% increase in pay and vacation and a 60% increase in retirement contributions "substandard" and our lawyers tell us there is nothing "crappy" about the language. So you listen to Paul, Woody, Dave and the rest of the boys that have brought us to this point and vote the way you want. If it's voted down, lets compare notes in 6 months and see where we are vs. where we could have been. Then you tell me with complete honesty that we are better off. Driver...

I think most of the group is satisfied with the pay. It's all of the holes and fear that they are intentially put there for management to take advantage of.

 

[3dtv]

The way I read section 18: voting is complete at 2pm est Friday. If the AMR board has not announced its intent to merge, the MOU with regard to USAPA is history.

Wrong. You will find out if the MOU passes that it is valid.

 

[nevergiveup]

Wrong. You will find out if the MOU passes that it is valid.

It says the board has to agree to merge before we vote. Please explain how it would be valid. I'm not arguing, just trying to find out.

 

[Piedmont1984]

It says the board has to agree to merge before we vote. Please explain how it would be valid. I'm not arguing, just trying to find out.

USAPA put out an update this week. A letter was signed. The MOU may be ratified before the AMR board approves the merger.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Why not delay the vote until some things are clarified??? Here is a recent letter written to the BPR and NAC:


Gentlemen,

Paragraph 18.b of the MOU clearly states that the MOU ratification date by USAPA pilots CANNOT be before the AMR Board of Directors APPROVE the Merger. To my knowledge, that has not occurred yet... Here is the language from the end of paragraph 18.b:

...the ratification vote of USAPA's membership shall be completed no earlier than approval of the Merger by AMR Corporation's Board of Directors and no later than 60 days after such approval (if any).


The paragraph also states that the USAPA ratification vote must be done no later than 60 days AFTER the AMR BOD approval. Evidently there is no great rush since the AMR BOD has yet to approve the merger... We will still have two months AFTER the BOD approval to vote. Let's get good information to vote upon...

After reviewing the Q and A section, I realize Captain Hummel received a letter clarifying that an early ratification wouldn't change the terms of the MOU, But why the big rush? I think the vote should be delayed in the light of wrong information being presented to the membership during the roadshows and the Grievance committees concerns being withheld from our pilots...


In the Paragraph 18.b letter to Capt. Hummel, it said all other parts of para. 18.b are still in effect. Thus, we have until 60 days AFTER the AMR BOD merger approval to vote on this. There is no rush to ratify this now! We have a minimum of TWO MORE MONTHS!! Please allow for the postponement of this vote...

That's my take. There is still time to clear up much of the language. I also think we're ALL (yes that would include West) get some stock as well. That would give us a seat at the table as well.

 

[nevergiveup]

USAPA put out an update this week. A letter was signed. The MOU may be ratified before the AMR board approves the merger.

tkx. I must have missed that. But it makes you wonder as the letter changes what the MOU says and we are voting on the MOU as it has been presented to us. not the letter. I can see legal action from somewhere if the AMR board waits to make their announcement, especially from the group opposed to the MOU if it passes.

 

[end_of_alpa]

This is part of the APA presentation regarding SLI and the following is a synopsis of the APA presentation at the recent joint APA/USAPA meeting in DCA:

Captain Gary (APA) referenced the history of how this legislation came into law as it evolved primarily from the TWA acquisition by AMR, but then went on to discuss how &ldquo;Fair and Equitable&rdquo; could be achieved and ruled upon by a panel of three neutral arbitrators. As you&rsquo;ll notice from the above slide, Date of Hire is referenced and was mentioned as being one of the most equitable avenues towards integration. However, Captain Gary went on to discuss several caveats which could affect the weighting of a pure DOH integration as they pertained to career expectations at the time of the merger. He stated that one factor may be if one pilot group was significantly older or younger than the other group. Another aspect could be if one side brought an aging fleet of aircraft to the mix while the other party had a fleet of relatively new aircraft as well as the future plans of orders on either side. The final component that was mentioned was the comparative pay rates of both pilot groups. In other words, if one side was making a considerable amount more or less than the other side, an argument could be made that the pilot group making more money would be increasing the expectations of the other pilot group and should, therefore, be treated accordingly in a merged seniority list. We point this out because this is the opinion of our Merger Counsel Pat Szymanski, which was shared by our peers at the APA in DCA, and could easily be the opinion of the APA Merger Committee, and potentially the opinion of the arbitrators involved in our seniority integration.

Interesting, no mention of the NIC, imagine that!

Furthermore, it looks like being on the MOU pay scale might be kind of important too.


seajay

Is that this guys LAST name (Gary) or is this the the NEW APA?

Captain Steve, meet Captain Bobby. Captain? Captain. Sounds like an AOL video.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Guess what. You east pilots fu%^&amp; that up and can't be trusted.

From now on contracts will be done first then seniority.

We had a seniority solution but you did not like it and walked away. Now we can never get to a contract.

So cooler heads have removed your ability to delay and damage mergers.

Then expect the LABOR unions to continue their erosion. But oh, wait!

The NEW labor movement is to endorse the Obama immigration bill to allow IMMIGRANTS into the country so they can increase membership.

These immigrants will be applying for jobs including airline pilots, probably with greater minority "rights" then yours. They don't need seniority either. Just your job. Robert Reich seems to lead the charge on giving ALL beings in the universe equal rights under our laws. No wonder the Afro-American community continues to remain at the bottom of the food chain.

Cabotage is going to be the new norm.