Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[nic4us]

If the past is any indication? 99.999% chance the scumbag scabs look for ANOTHER do-over. I'm sure it's being plotted over a bucket of KFC as we speak.

I am sure they are scouring the federal law trumping uscaba C&BLs looking for "vague language" in the membership voting process that was violated.

The fun starts when you try to predict WHO files a grievance and for WHAT.

 

[luvthe9]

Listening to the APA scope guy, I bet it doesn't.

Uh, what scope? Remember, you gave that away.

 

[luvthe9]

I wondered why Luv the 9 and Claxon have been conspicuosly absent since the MOU vote results were released!

Present

 

[Walmartgreeter]

Black Swan bemoaned: "The training dept rumor is 49 E 195 s to be announced soon. 118 seats, and pay 114 an hr. Nice.
You are only beginning to see what they have in the playbook now that the MOU got voted in. "

Bad news? Let me see, the company can still add 7 or 8 more 190s on the East (or West) that do not count towards our min fleet. Heck, they can add all they want, but APA will have to get two of them for every one after the POR above 31. Our min fleet still protects us until the POR. For all intents the POR will not be approved until later this year. 6 months? 8? I have not a clue. But until that time ANY 190s coming this way would be GROWTH aircraft. If the POR comes sooner, than bonus for Me (and it really is all about Me!) I would now get 14% to my DC…but I digress. Let's say we get 4 of those, combined with the 190s supposedly on the way from Republic, bringing us to 31. That leaves 45. 15 Here and 30 at APA. The Horror!

Of course the trend is to Group I aircraft. But realist have determined it would be better for OUR pilots to be flying them on OUR property, not at places like Eagle and Republic. Is the New AMR going to replace some 319s and MDs with 195s? I would guess yes. Are they going to replace 321s and 757s with 195s? I would guess no. We have furlough protections and downgrade protections that the Company gave us with little battle over…they will be Zero cost to the corporation. Just using attrition they will probably shrink this operation by 10-15%. How could they not, at least that has been the case in most mergers? But maybe not, if the economy continues to at least tread water, and looking at how little overlap the two carriers have. I personally looked at the situation like this. I am stagnated NOW at $124 an hour. It takes another 600 pilots to go ahead of me to move up to the 330, and even then on Reserve. So attrition over the next few years just gets me a better block, not a pay raise. I chose the higher pay, understanding I would have to ride out a few more years of stagnation.

So I reason, as did Legal, the NAC, BPR, Officers, and almost 76% of our pilots that the protections given justify the risk (always there, always) of moving forward. As to the contract language, I still maintain it outshines anything I have seen here in the last 10 years. It is managements' goal to keep it nebulous, it is our goal to make it clear. Somewhere when the benefits outweigh not getting EXACTLY what we want language wise, we move on. This is no different in any contract negotiations we have ever had. The more leverage you have, the clearer the language. And what was our leverage, other than trying to stop or slow down the deal? It was not much, and fighting that battle (the Ciabattoni option) paid me NOTHING in the meantime, with a risk of maybe nothing yet again, and NOTHING for anyone other than Group II and above on the East even with a win. And an economic argument by the APA in M/B that would probably crush us.

Now how about the "B" scale we are supposedly slamming down on the new hires coming here. I believe a B scale is when a new guy does the same job as the guy hired a month before him..for less pay. What we will have here is new hires making MORE than those that come before them. Please tell me next January a 2 year 190 C/O getting $114 is unfair. And a 12 year guy getting $123? That is what I have made for the last 8 years, and I have closer to 30 here. And looking forward to Jan 16, a 2 year C/O will be making $136, and the 12 year guy $148…more than a 76 C/O makes now. Industry standard rates. Nope. Improvement, how can anyone deny that?

Look guys and gals, the makeup of the BPR is not going to change, McKee rules. And the makeup of the Officers and staffing is not going to change, Hummel rules. Now might (just maybe?) be the time to circle the wagons. Other than their Nic issues, I can only guess even our West BPR members might be ready to do that. We all stand to lose a lot if we go up against the APA divided. They have their own internal issues, but I will tell you they are a mature, well-funded, and "take no prisoners" group. They could care less about LOA 93, our lost retirements, our union political history, or even our anger at a call sign. The big unknown is how we end up after the operation is merged. Our best hope influencing that outcome is unity.

Greeter

 

[A320 Driver]

If only we could bring back the the Pittsburgh hub, the DC9, and Seth Schofield to run it all we could get back everthing we lost.

More likely, we'd lose it all over again.

 

[A320 Driver]

Uh, what scope? Remember, you gave that away.

We did not give away scope. We changed it and mostly for the better (large RJs).

 

[noDOH4u]

I wondered why Luv the 9 and Claxon have been conspicuosly absent since the MOU vote results were released!

I was wondering the same thing!

Typical loudmouth, until something doesn't go the way he wants. Then slithers away to hide, hoping people will forget his obnoxious loud mouth.

Paging luvthe9.... Oh luvthe9???!!!!! Where are youuuuuu?

Hey fat boy, looks like your "no" vote campaign

FAILED MISERABLY!

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Time to come back and squeal about how unfair it is. I'm counting the hours to see how long until the same old windbags come back to spin this. It proves once and for all that the biggest loudmouths on this forum are in the minority by far.

So, luvthe9... where the heck are you, loudmouth!

You were the biggest mouth peace when the recall failed. Remember? LARGE FONT and bright colors and all. Are you not man enough to admit you were on the losing side with your non-stop "vote no" campaign. And by an embarrassing 75% no less.

 

[luvthe9]

We did not give away scope. We changed it and mostly for the better (large RJs).

Yes, those large RJ s are better. Especially when they take away the larger city pairs.

 

[luvthe9]

I was wondering the same thing!

Typical loudmouth, until something doesn't go the way he wants. Then slithers away to hide, hoping people will forget his obnoxious loud mouth.



So, luvthe9... where the heck are you, loudmouth!

You were the biggest mouth peace when the recall failed. Remember? LARGE FONT and bright colors and all. Are you not man enough to admit you were on the losing side with your non-stop "vote no" campaign. And by an embarrassing 75% no less.

Right here you idiot. Go back a page before you mouth off.

 

[luvthe9]

I have a better question, where is your pal Move2clt??????

 

[A320 Driver]

Yes, those large RJ s are better. Especially when they take away the larger city pairs.

Honestly, I couldn't care less. They will have to fly the A320s and B737s someplace. Over 400 of them on order as opposed to ZERO 190/195s. Where ever that happens to be, then that is where we shall go. That article that's been posted by the CEO of Embraer is wishful thinking. He hopes he gets an order, but he will get inline behind Boeing and Airbus.

 

[Piedmont1984]

Hmmm. There were three ballots which closed this past week.

Did you happen to notice the results of the two OTHER than the MOU?

I wouldn't be so secure in the thought that what you term the "anti Hummel" group are necessarily in the minority.

The "anti-imperial-presidency" group is definitely in the majority. The MOU vote was a result of far more factors than whether of not one supported Hummel. The PHX pilots voted overwhelmingly in favor of the MOU, but I can see no inference that this translates to overwhelming support for Hummel.

I think it's fair to say that what we have is an effective, but ugly, system of checks and balances. The MOU was much more a Hummel agenda than a BPR agenda, but in the end he prevailed. OTOH, the PHL elections and the CLT recall went counter to what I expect were Hummel's wishes. The system works and at the end of the day everyone needs a drink. That's the reaction when you watch sausages being made. I think the 'majority' sentiment is more issue oriented than you give them credit for. I voted for Hummel but against the recall, I am for the merger but voted against the MOU - issue oriented.

This site moves so fast I almost missed your post.

 

[Pi brat]

I am planning on starting a second tally of damages beginning at the first class date in which West pilots were denied their system seniority when all LCC pilots were moved to a new and improved and most importantly EQUAL pay rate in violation of the agreements they entered into in 2005.

From any future POR you will see nothing but Nic at your airline/s!

Man, I don't blame you. As successful as your first tally went, I'd do one or two more!

I'm not sure, but since the PHX based pilots of US Airways, know as "west", voted for the "moving to...." (buy what, 98%?),and were well aware that the MOU contained further constraints on bidding and seniority lists, that your tally will once again be useless.

But hey, everyone needs a hobby.

 

[Pi brat]

Black Swan bemoaned: "The training dept rumor is 49 E 195 s to be announced soon. 118 seats, and pay 114 an hr. Nice.
You are only beginning to see what they have in the playbook now that the MOU got voted in. "


Greeter

I kind of see things they way you do and I hope we are right.

I don't like the 190 rates and I would have favored a slight drop in the other rates to bring them up. I think when you have a lower rate like that, it drags the others down over time, trying to make up for them later. Thing is, we don't have line item veto and I can't see a replacement of our fleet with them.

On a dollar per seat basis, the 330 gets less. And even though I think it should be at jetBlue's rate, it is a 16% raise over our rates.

 

[Bill Brasky]

Sounds like Horton wants better scope protection....

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/source-amr-us-airways-delay-210942067.html