Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Folks lets give credit where credit is due. Thanks to the pilots who had the cajones to stand up against ALPA and form a union to right a huge wrong. Thanks USAPA, hello APA. Buh-Bye Nicolau.

Later,
Eye
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
Folks lets give credit where credit is due. Thanks to the pilots who had the cajones to stand up against ALPA and form a union to right a huge wrong. Thanks USAPA, hello APA. Buh-Bye Nicolau.

Later,
Eye

C'mon eye, you weren't just trying to fight a wrong. You were trying to staple the west pilot group with DOH, not exactly noble. Don't expect a parade.

Bean
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
Folks lets give credit where credit is due. Thanks to the pilots who had the cajones to stand up against ALPA and form a union to right a huge wrong. Thanks USAPA, hello APA. Buh-Bye Nicolau.

Later,
Eye
How did that work out.

So far they have not righted anything and caused more problems than we had.

bye-bye usapa!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
I've heard that McKee and his incoming band of merry men have plans in place to challenge the MoU due to a technicality with the Constitution. They will file a protest in April.
 
Thanks for the "History" lesson, not that anybody paying attention needs one. I will agree with you that the AWA-AAA SLI attempt was poorly executed, due primarily to the intransigence of BOTH pilot groups and you are correct, there will be no "do-over" of the AWA-AAA SLI, because there never was one, as the ratification of an East-West JCBA (a requirement to complete the integration, as per the TA) never occurred and now, never will.

I guess we just have a philosophical disagreement on how best to proceed, I have no problem whatsoever with a pilot negotiated SLI ratified by a majority of the pilots who will be governed by it. Such an agreement is most definitely my preference, no need to explain further why you prefer not to go with the majority rule approach, I think we all pretty much get that.


seajay

OK, I had to look that one up. So......are you saying that the AWA pilot group arriving at the arbitration table with the position of relative seniority meets the definition of intransigence? Perhaps you are saying that we intransigent because we refused to return to the table and negotiate away from the final & binding arbitration?

You are wrong. It is not a philosophical disagreement. It is a LEGAL disagreement. Your pilot group by association agreed to a final and binding arbitration, but have chosen to take the low road and attempt to evade the legal final product by any means possible.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
The west pilot class will be seated at the SLI table so they've not gone anywhere. This can be confirmed by Hummel and the Merger Comm.
Negative.

There has been NO information that I have heard in writing. If you mean to say there may be West PILOTS on the merger committee that may be a separate issue. Legally, there CAN BE NO "CLASS" on the committee.
 
Negative.

There has been NO information that I have heard in writing. If you mean to say there may be West PILOTS on the merger committee that may be a separate issue. Legally, there CAN BE NO "CLASS" on the committee.

AoL has been invite to sit at the table. You can confirm this with Hummel. They will be there.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.