More EMB-190s to replace 737 for 2008

[ussnark]

So which is is snarkster?

One or the other.

What suits your fancy for today?

I think you misunderstood the person you quote.

Do you not understand the word, "actual"? as in "verified" from another source? Or do you just cruise through life accepting whatever blows your skirt up?

 

[BoeingBoy]

I think you misunderstood the person you quote.

Not really. You've said that the numbers cannot be spun on one occasion because it suited your argument, yet said that management can manipulate the numbers on another occasion - also to suit your argument.

So which is it today - spin or no spin?

Jim

 

[UAL_TECH]

Not really. You've said that the numbers cannot be spun on one occasion because it suited your argument, yet said that management can manipulate the numbers on another occasion - also to suit your argument.

So which is it today - spin or no spin?

Jim

Jim,

I'll take $200 for spin.

😛 UT

 

[BoeingBoy]

UT,

Let me be honest and say that I was guilty of merely taking the bottom line of the East & West P&L statements and making something of those numbers late last year. Since then, however, I've digested more of the "fine print" - the footnotes and such - and discovered that a lot of money that would have stayed at West (AW Holdings) pre-merger is being transferred to US Group, the holding company for East and West.

Of course, the same is true on the East side - large sums of money are being transferred to US Group - but pre-merger US Group reported the "headline" P&L numbers that everyone looked at for the East operation since it was effectively the same company then. Pre-merger you didn't hear "It doesn't matter what US Group made - what did the airline division make?"

Now it's a major topic of conversation - "Look at what the East made relative to the West!" But adjusting for those transfers to Group makes the comparison better reflect the relative sizes of the two divisions.

Jim

 

[USA320Pilot]

Captainzitface,

Yes there will be some loss of Group 2 positions as EMB-190s replace some B737s, but the majority of East pilots do not care enough about this to even think about a joint contract and then passing the Nicolau Award on to the company would be worth the exchange.

The pilot group attrtion will more than handle this.

Meanwhile, during yesterday's webcast the company said international flying grew 17 percent during second quarter and that pace will continue. The growth will be aggressive in the next few years and the Company wants to add nine European cities and two Far East cities.

Then a question was asked "are you considering PHX for international?" The answer was we don't have the aircraft to do it. The company may get the A330-200, which can fly international from PHX and management may look at two destinations. However, they don't anticipate getting that plane until 2009.

Thus, I believe every East pilot would exchange B737 to EMB-190 flying for the widebody growth because of the large pay raises, even with the EMB-190 coming into the East network.

The one disclaimer about this is the PHL gate issue, but I'm certain now more than ever that the East pilots want to keep all of their East Coast flying, especially after yesterday's international news.

As the US Airways MEC said the best option is to keep the two pilot group separate forever and then negotiate a joint contract with separate operations or a joint contract with separate operations. That is the only way the AWA pilots are going to get a pay raise in the near term.

However, I believe the US Airways pilots would support the AWA MEC if it decided to enter Section 6 negotiations to obtain a pay raise. What do you think of these three options?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[ussnark]

Not really. You've said that the numbers cannot be spun on one occasion because it suited your argument, yet said that management can manipulate the numbers on another occasion - also to suit your argument.

So which is it today - spin or no spin?

Jim

I make a distinction between verified numbers and numbers put out in an advertising brochure like the quarterly and annual reports.

Surely you understand the difference?

 

[luvn737s]

As the US Airways MEC said the best option is to keep the two pilot group separate forever and then negotiate a joint contract with separate operations or a joint contract with separate operations.

Separate operations is a non-starter for the simple fact that the company is not going to voluntarily subject itself to the possibility of staffing imbalances that would result in unecessary training events. From the big picture it devalues the airline in the event of eventual sale.

The east, with all of it's "experience" should have had the foresight to see all this and negotiated reasonably to begin with. Now the bully is crying like a baby and is embarassing to everyone.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I make a distinction between verified numbers and numbers put out in an advertising brochure like the quarterly and annual reports.

Surely you understand the difference?

I think I get the picture now :blink:

If it fits you argument, it's "verified" regardless of source or even without a source. If it's inconvenient to deal with, it's "manipulated", "spun", or "advertising" regardless of whether accountants have signed off on it, subject to SEC rules and penalties, or subject to perjury penalties.

Yup, perfectly clear......

Jim

 

[Callsign_Cactus]

You may think you have all of the international growth cornered, but after certificate merge there will be nothing that prevents west pilots from flying any growth widebodies (e.g. A330, A340). Read an excerpt from the TA below:

"The America West MEC and the US Airways MEC will agree internally as to which pilot group shall operate such aircraft or will implement a process, including binding arbitration if necessary, to determine the Association’s position regarding the allocation of such flying. In the event that the Airline Parties do not agree with the Association position, then the dispute will be resolved in accordance with Section X. below. The standard to be applied by the Arbitrator in that proceeding will be the fair and equitable allocation of flying between the two pilot groups. Nothing in this paragraph will delay or prevent the Airline Parties from putting such aircraft into revenue service."

Oh no, binding arbitration again There will be a fair and equitable allocation of flying and the rule of law will force that to occur. Thankfully, the EC will have no say in the matter and the Company will be forced to comply with the arbitrators ruling even if it means opening a west base in PHL.

Mark my words, this will happen and there is no resolution or temper tantrum to be thrown that will prevent the inevitable.

Captainzitface,

Yes there will be some loss of Group 2 positions as EMB-190s replace some B737s, but the majority of East pilots do not care enough about this to even think about a joint contract and then passing the Nicolau Award on to the company would be worth the exchange.

The pilot group attrtion will more than handle this.

Meanwhile, during yesterday's webcast the company said international flying grew 17 percent during second quarter and that pace will continue. The growth will be aggressive in the next few years and the Company wants to add nine European cities and two Far East cities.

Then a question was asked "are you considering PHX for international?" The answer was we don't have the aircraft to do it. The company may get the A330-200, which can fly international from PHX and management may look at two destinations. However, they don't anticipate getting that plane until 2009.

Thus, I believe every East pilot would exchange B737 to EMB-190 flying for the widebody growth because of the large pay raises, even with the EMB-190 coming into the East network.

The one disclaimer about this is the PHL gate issue, but I'm certain now more than ever that the East pilots want to keep all of their East Coast flying, especially after yesterday's international news.

As the US Airways MEC said the best option is to keep the two pilot group separate forever and then negotiate a joint contract with separate operations or a joint contract with separate operations. That is the only way the AWA pilots are going to get a pay raise in the near term.

However, I believe the US Airways pilots would support the AWA MEC if it decided to enter Section 6 negotiations to obtain a pay raise. What do you think of these three options?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[A320 Driver]

You may think you have all of the international growth cornered, but after certificate merge there will be nothing that prevents west pilots from flying any growth widebodies (e.g. A330, A340). Read an excerpt from the TA below:


Mark my words, this will happen and there is no resolution or temper tantrum to be thrown that will prevent the inevitable.

There are NO growth A330s on order. Only replacements for the 767s. You can forget them.

Try your luck with the A340s IF they ever get leased.

A320 Driver B)

 

[BoeingBoy]

There are NO growth A330s on order. Only replacements for the 767s. You can forget them.

I keep delivering the message, but it still doesn't get through.......

There is no restriction on who can operate any aircraft not identified by tail # or delivery date in the transition agreement. The 330's on order are now "new orders" not included in the transition agreement list and either pilot group can fly them whether they replace 767's or not.

The only limited protection either pilot group has on any new aircraft delivered is in the minimum fleet count language and that has a loophole big enough to fly an A380 through as soon as a single certificate is received.

Jim

 

[A320 Driver]

I keep delivering the message, but it still doesn't get through.......

There is no restriction on who can operate any aircraft not identified by tail # or delivery date in the transition agreement. The 330's on order are now "new orders" not included in the transition agreement list and either pilot group can fly them whether they replace 767's or not.

The only limited protection either pilot group has on any new aircraft delivered is in the minimum fleet count language and that has a loophole big enough to fly an A380 through as soon as a single certificate is received.

Jim

Jim,

That has to be seen as a transfer of flying if East is losing aircraft and the West picks up the new ones. I mean, we can argue about the language all you want, but that is still a transfer of flying as far as I'm concerned. I know you can't do that under the TA.

A320 Driver B)

 

[BoeingBoy]

In practical terms, you're right - it's a transfer of flying.

In legal terms - per the transition agreement - there's not a thing to stop it. So much for the "best transition agreement in aviation history", as the CLT F/O rep claimed after it was signed......

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Here's some of the specific language:

"Pilots on the America West Seniority List will operate the aircraft in the service of America West on the effective date of this Letter of Agreement and pilots on the US Airways Seniority List will operate the aircraft in the service of US Airways on the effective date of this Letter of Agreement."

So West pilots can't operate any aircraft that was operated by East on the effective date of the transition agreement. Doesn't say a word about any aircraft delivered after the TA became effective.

"Except as provided in paragraph 6. below, no pilot of either airline will fly as a crewmember on an aircraft listed in Attachment A in the fleet of the other airline."

Paragraph 6 covers East furloughees working at West, nothing more. The rest of that applies to aircraft - specified by tail number/delivery date - listed in Attachment A to the transition agreement. Only those specific aircraft.

"The Airline Parties will not transfer aircraft listed in Attachment A to the fleet of the other airline."

The prohibition against transferring aircraft applies to only those aircraft listed in Attachment A - by tail number/delivery date. See why the A330's suddenly becoming "new orders" isn't just a minor detail? Likewise, the A350's specified are all East's - as long as they're delivered in 2011 and 2012 as specified.

"The Airline Parties intend to consolidate operations under the US Airways operating certificate and as such, should the Airline Parties acquire aircraft in excess of the number identified for that airline in Attachment B, such aircraft will operate as part of US Airways. However, in the event the decision is made to consolidate operations under the America West operating certificate, such additional aircraft will operate as part of America West."

This starts to cover any aircraft not identified in Attachment A or B - by tail number/delivery date - and which airline will operate them. This is where the single certificate starts to come in - if that certificate says "US Airways", America West airlines ceases to exist. Sure, there's still a division of US Group called America West but not an airline. The airline that both East and West pilots work for would by US Airways, Inc. So at that point either pilot group could fly any aircraft not identified in Attachment A or B.

Also notice that this is the only place that the transition agreement refers to the number of aircraft, not specific aircraft in Attachment A or B. that's what get's us to:

"The America West MEC and the US Airways MEC will agree internally as to which pilot group shall operate such aircraft or will implement a process, including binding arbitration if necessary, to determine the Association’s position regarding the allocation of such flying."

"such aircraft" is a reference to those in excess of the number listed in Attachment A or B for each side. Only when deliveries increase the number of aircraft for US or HP above the level in the Attachments will the MEC's get to negotiate/arbitrate the issue of who flys them. If this applies, and until resolution:

"Nothing in this paragraph will delay or prevent the Airline Parties from putting such aircraft into revenue service."

So while the MEC's are fighting it out (assuming the number of airplanes requires that), the airplanes can go into service with whichever pilot group the company chooses.

And that is "the best transition agreement in aviation history"......

Jim

 

[Phoenix]

the "best transition agreement in aviation history", as the CLT F/O rep claimed .....

Jim

As a member of council 90 I have no qualms with "CLT rep" and "Best" being identified as mutually exclusive, unless of course "best" is in terms of benefit to the company.