MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - May 19, 2007

[700UW]

Someone needs to read ALPA's Bylaws, I bet there is something in there about promoting dual unionism, especially elected reps being the ones doing it.

I would suspect their is a procedure to bring them up on charges and remove them from office.

 

[ClueByFour]

DOH is more fair. Can't GIVE someone equal weight when they didn't put in the years of service to slot in above someone else with more years of service. Just because a pilot got hired with a small carrier and was at Captain's pay flying that equiptment would no way be close to fair to give him 5-10 years just to ensure he flies in Left position to keep a captain's status. Where the pilot who sits in that seat gave the years of service to the company.

IMO, the pilots could slot in 2 for 1 or 3 for 1 if that would work. I don't know what the ratio is but that would be more fair than stapling someone at the bottom who has 8-15 years of service or more.

Why should someone who brought a Captain's job to the merger be bumped or have his/her career expectations diminished by someone who, absent the merger, would never make Captain?

Why should an A320 captain at the top of the 320 captain ranks not be slotted next to his compatriot from the East?

DOH, when one airline had been growing and one shrinking is not even close to being fair. The guys who have tolled in the right seat forever bet on the wrong company--that is not the fault of the guys in the left seat at HP.

 

[Bear96]

I think the East pilots have an argument that must be made, regardless, the arb. ruling is in conflict with the ALPA merger policy.

That would be kind of a hypocritical argument, considering they are acting like they won't be happy with anything less than DOH, which is as much in conflict with the merger policy as you can get.

 

[PITbull]

So you're saying that if an East pilot with 18 years of service can't hold a Captain's position then no pilot in the industry with less time should hold a Captain position? Any pilot who does has somehow gotten a windfall at the East pilot's expense and should be knocked back so that the East pilot can assume his rightful place in the order of things?

Jim

Here's a better example of what I'm trying to convey...Let's take the example of a wholly-owned pilot at U flies left seat such as Piedmont for the past 4 of 10 years of service. Let's just say for the sake of argument that there is a "flow-through" when there is an opening at mainline. His seniority of 10 years only holds right seat f/0...should he be entitled to a captain's position just because he held left seat at the regional????

IMO, AWA was a regional carrier, just not wholly-owned subsidary of U. Why would a pilot who flew 10 years at AWA as a captain, hold captain seat at USairways if his same 10 years could not hold captain seat at U? Should his 10 years entitle him before a 15 or 17 year pilot who let's say in one year, would probably hold left seat if it weren't for the merger? That doesn't mean AWA will never hold captain seat. It means that there are pilots who are in east or west who have more years of service in this combined airline that can hold the left seat.

In this ruling, basically is placing a 15-17 year pilot at the bottom of the list. Their seniority really doesn't matter at all according to this ruling. The East pilot just slots in using the "list" of pilots whom this ruling applies to.


In the case of USAirways pilots, if an East pilot has 18 years of service and hold left seat, why would an AWA pilot who has 10 years who flies left seat at AWA take that seniority and bump a 15 year pilot out of left seat, so that the AWA pilot of 10 years can still fly captain?

There is an East pilot who just e-mailed me. He said if you look at the combined list, he dropped 700 numbers, and he has 23 years flying as an East pilot at U.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Here's a better example of what I'm trying to convey...Let's take the example of a wholly-owned pilot at U flies left seat such as Piedmont for the past 4 of 10 years of service. Let's just say for the sake of argument that there is a "flow-through" when there is an opening at mainline. His seniority of 10 years only holds right seat f/0...should he be entitled to a captain's position just because he held left seat at the regional????

Bad example, PITbull - a flowthru would have the PDT guy coming into mainline at the bottom of the mainline list. A better example would be a merger between US and Mesa. Should a 30 year Mesa CRJ Captain expect to step into an A330 Captain job just because he worked for Mesa 30 years? If Mesa has 100 CRJ Captains with over 28 years, should the 27 year 364 day US guy (who was next in line for A330 Captain) wait until all 100 of them are A330 Captains before he gets a shot at it?

In the case of USAirways pilots, if an East pilot has 18 years of service and hold left seat, why would an AWA pilot who has 10 years who flies left seat at AWA take that seniority and bump a 15 [did you mean 18 as earlier?] year pilot out of left seat, so that the AWA pilot of 10 years can still fly captain?

If that's what you think this award does, you're greatly misinformed. If the 18 year East pilot can hold Captain, he can still hold Captain. No one is bumping him out of it just because of the combined list.

There is an East pilot who just e-mailed me. He said if you look at the combined list, he dropped 700 numbers, and he has 23 years flying as an East pilot at U.

And I suspect that that is all most East pilots are looking at. That pilot may have dropped 700 numbers, but the combined list doesn't take anything away from him - he can still hold the job he held on the East list. There's more people in front of him because the number of jobs available increased.

What that pilot didn't get is the ability to take a West pilot's job away.

You've got to stop looking at it as if it were F/A's merging lists. With your former group, longevity is really all that mattered. A F/A with 10 years had the same pay rate irregardless of whether that 10 years put them at the top or bottom of the list. Payments to the pension plan were based on the same pay rate irregardless of whether 10 years meant the top or bottom of the list. Etc, etc.

With pilots, it's different - one's position on the list determines pay, pension contributions, etc irregardless of how long it took to reach that position. The arbitrator's award keeps everyone in the same relative position on the list, meaning they have the seniority to do what they were doing on the two individual lists the arbitrator used. In fact, most East pilots are higher on the combined list than on the East list, while most West pilots are lower on the combined list than they were on the West list.

Tell me this - in the F/A merging of lists, did you insist that those West F/A's move backward several steps on the pay scale "because the East F/A's have been here longer?" Somehow, I doubt it yet that is exactly what you're saying should happen with the pilots. You're saying that a West pilot doesn't deserve the pay/benefits he has "because the East pilots have been here longer."

Jim

 

[Bud8EE]

What that pilot didn't get is the ability to take a West pilot's job away.

The right fences, condition, and restriction can take care of that. What slotting or ratios do, is affect what was available to the pilot going forward. There is no protection for age, which is the only constant as one travels the road of their career. In this case you have, attrition, upgrades, the broader network and larger aircraft being denied to the pilots of the airline that brought the mass attrition and large aircraft flying to the combined airline. No one knows what would have happened to the individual airlines without the merger unless they are clairvoyant. Needless to say neither of them were darlings. There is no such thing as Career expectation but the 23 year East pilot could easily show the known attrition whether 60 or 65 would be placing him in the left seat of A330 for the last x years of his career. If a West pilot who did not have access to that flying now does and due to age and slotting prevents that progression to the 23 East pilot, expectation and windfall become purely subjective to the individuals. There is no such place for subjectivity in a true unions constitution and because of the mess created by short sighted people in 1991, ALPA and the profession will suffer. It won't be as ugly as quickly as for the pilots of US Airways but just as outsourcing, B-scales, lack of national seniority, and pattern bargaining have led to pilots earning 30% in real wages as compared to 25 years ago and with no pension to boot, it will.

 

[BoeingBoy]

In this case you have, attrition, upgrades, the broader network and larger aircraft being denied to the pilots of the airline that brought the mass attrition and large aircraft flying to the combined airline.

Sounds good, now demonstrate that it's true. (Hint - I can think of one situation that access to a position may be postponed slightly)

Jim

ps - The age angle is interesting. There's possibly some ex-Eastern, TWA, Braniff, PanAm, etc pilots around that would love a seniority list ordered by age.

 

[Mr Furlough]

BoeingBoy,

You wrote: "What that pilot didn't get is the ability to take a West pilot's job away."

Is there a problem here with that? Because that's exactly what the AWA Pilot has done to me with less than 15% of my longevity.

If there is an issue here of one side taking jobs away from another let's put a stop to this right now!

 

[BoeingBoy]

Because that's exactly what the AWA Pilot has done to me with less than 15% of my longevity.

You lost your job and there's a West pilot in it? Didn't think that could happen until the ops merge.....

So what job exactly did a West pilot "take away" from you? The one he had that you feel should be yours? Exactly what job does your longevity entitle you to, if it's not the one you have?

Jim

 

[Mr Furlough]

BoeingBoy,

You wrote: "What that pilot didn't get is the ability to take a West pilot's job away."

Is there a problem here with that? Because that's exactly what the AWA Pilot has done to me with less than 15% of my longevity.

If there is an issue here of one side taking jobs away from another let's put a stop to this right now!

BoeingBoy,

That's cute! I assume you know that there was a decision rendered by Nicolau. And in this decision he decided to place all AAA furloughees at the bottom of the seniority list-even though hundreds had already been recalled. So let's review, take a breath, ok ready?...alright-an 18 year pilot from the east, with 14+ years of "active" service WILL take a furlough ahead of a two year guy from AWA. You still with me old man? Ok, good. What makes YOU so special? Why don't we dissolve YOUR years of service and let YOU be the one to take it in the shorts the next time the music stops and there are not enough chairs? Sound ok to YOU?

 

[Bud8EE]

Sounds good, now demonstrate that it's true. (Hint - I can think of one situation that access to a position may be postponed slightly)

Jim

ps - The age angle is interesting. There's possibly some ex-Eastern, TWA, Braniff, PanAm, etc pilots around that would love a seniority list ordered by age.

For example, a 20 year pilot who was hired in 1987 and currently 45, would reach top position(A330 CO lineholder) based on attrtion, but because he got slotted with 2000 hires, the new 500 pilots ahead of will always bid senior, enjoy the attrition of the 1000 East pilots who were set to hit 60 before him, and they are likely 15 years younger on average. They will be around another 15 years after he retires.

So who received the windfall and whose pre-merger expectation was irreversibly altered. The only argument is to say, well your company would have liquidated, but only God knows that and captain positions, lines, domiciles, wide body positions, are still here as part of the singular airline. Which airlines network brought more potential for international growth and for the addition of future large aircraft additions. These are all subjective and ripe for argument, and Nicalou is no smarter a man than the next and puts his pants on the same as the next guy. The next guy may have seem things completely different and that is the problem.

Again only God knows what would have happened without the merger, and the fact is it did happen. So everything above is subjective and set up for pilot groups to retain lawyers and be pitted against each other. If you want to explain how that is good for ALPA or unionism or pilots, please explain it to me and how things have worked so well up till now.

This profession and especially the careers of legacy pilots continue to head into the $hitcan. I have 18 months or 6 1/2 years to go but I feel extremely lucky given the complete shortsighted outlook of those in my profession to have spent 31 years somewhere, and will retire as 74 captain and dodged the major setbacks of many of my fellow pilots. Unfortunately, I have three sons I couldn't talk out of being pilots, who I really feel saddened for. I know without a doubt, they won't come close to enjoying the career I had, and pilots are to blame, myself included.

 

[ClueByFour]

So let's review, take a breath, ok ready?...alright-an 18 year pilot from the east, with 14+ years of "active" service WILL take a furlough ahead of a two year guy from AWA.

As he should. Presumably the guy from the east did not bring a job to the merger, whereas the guy from the West did.

 

[Mr Furlough]

As he should. Presumably the guy from the east did not bring a job to the merger, whereas the guy from the West did.

Wrong presumption. I was recalled in December of 06. That's a job. We are not yet merged. Still care to furlough me ahead of the two year guy at AWA?

 

[BoeingBoy]

So everything above is subjective and set up for pilot groups to retain lawyers and be pitted against each other.

Exactly - a lot of handwringing over what might happen. One guy says "If everything works out just right, I'd have X" while another says "But if it worked out this other way, you'd only have Y". So the solution seems to be "If I can't have it, nobody can" - burn the place down and nobody gets anything.....

Now if you want to spend an evening discussing the foibles of ALPA over beers, we can attempt to solve all the problems. As far as I'm concerned, though, ALPA is in a symbiotic relationship with the pilots - way too many only care about what's best for them and too few care about what's good for the profession if it means sacrifices for themselves.

Jim

 

[Mr Furlough]

Exactly - a lot of handwringing over what might happen. One guy says "If everything works out just right, I'd have X" while another says "But if it worked out this other way, you'd only have Y". So the solution seems to be "If I can't have it, nobody can" - burn the place down and nobody gets anything.....

Now if you want to spend an evening discussing the foibles of ALPA over beers, we can attempt to solve all the problems. As far as I'm concerned, though, ALPA is in a symbiotic relationship with the pilots - way too many only care about what's best for them and too few care about what's good for the profession if it means sacrifices for themselves.
Jim

I'm glad you said that BoeingBoy, as I agree with you. In that sense, I have hope, albeit small, that the other members of this union will realize that burning a man's career to the ground after-many years of faithful service-is wrong.