Nov/Dec 2013 Pilot Discussion

[nycbusdriver]

No arguments about Tosi, or McGuckin, but I am not and never have here argued the "mangement side."  They are liars and thieves.  But one of the founding principles of USAPA was a  pro negotiator.  We really did not get one under Bradford or Cleary (the "DiOrio years) but finally got it with Hummel.  All and all I think we stil came out ok, best we could considering the disfunction.  9 days left for me here, can Prechilli start a countdown?  My full ride starts at APA HQ in DFW after the Holidays.  RR

 
I was all in favor of the negotiating team being staffed ONLY by pro negotiators.  It appeared from the start that USAPA was thinking along those lines, as it named the new committee "Negotiating ADVISORY Committee."  To my mind, ideally the pilots would simply advise the contracted pros and then ONLY the pros would sit across the table from the company (with the pilots present in the back row to offer the pros "advice.")  Pilots, for the most part, are not good labor negotiators (Fred Kozak being a notable exception.)
 
The biggest problem with the pros is that they, like anyone else who has never lived the life and contract of an airline pilot, just never quite "get it."  (This was Roland's problem when he begged us to accept MOU I; it was also the reason Nicolau was so very clueless.)  Professional airline pilots share a "life lens" that is very different from any other career.  The downside of that is that airline management has learned over time just where our "buttons" are, and cleverly pushes them when pilots are sitting across the table.  An "All Pro" team could have been an effective buffer rendering our "buttons" beyond the direct reach of the company, but USAPA early on decided to let pilots, who they themselves called advisors, sit at that table across from management.  This was a huge coup for the company, because the "buttons" were still there to be pushed at the company's whim, and likely to their great amusement.

 

[nycbusdriver]

The AA guys are pretty savvy. I say they figure Parker out by tomorrow.
Let's hope the love fest ends soon. They work for America west now.
Would all of you East guys forward the ALPA scab list to your AA friends, wives, brothers so they can see how many scabs they are up against please!

 
I suppose it's good for us that they didn't figure out Parker beforehand, although they were warned repeatedly here.

 

[nycbusdriver]

 
They are, they had USAPA figured out years ago.

 
Probably correct.  And they sure realize that USAPA's proposals on SLI are, by comparison, certainly more beneficial to them than the Nicolau.  That's not to say that they would sign on the DOH, or even LOS, with restrictions and fences.  I am certain there will be a slotted SLI.  But there is no way they would sign on to the Nicolau, either, even if USAPA offered it.

 

[nycbusdriver]

You destroyed 1/3 rd of your career over a temper tantrum, watch the rest of it evaporate before your scab eyes.

 
I seriously question your math skills.
 
But, the upside for us on the east is that in the process of (what you say) "destoying 1/3 of [our] careers," we have effectively destoyed 2/3 of yours!  Yay for us!

 

[Phoenix]

 
I think, perhaps, you are overstating your case.  The point you are missing is that, had we rejected MOU I and the UCC chose to never present anything again to USAPA, we would still have our very strong scope language in place.  The company and the UCC absolutely needed that scope language gone in order to make the merger work in the way they wanted it to.  
 
Sure, maybe Dec 9th would have come and gone and we on the east would still be working under LOA 93 rates, but meantime USAPA would be clipping the thread holding the Sword of Damocles over the New AA.  Maybe the long-term result would be better, worse or the same.  There is no way to tell anymore.  But those of us who voted against MOU II were confident enough that Parker and the UCC were really in a bind.

 
 
Some say that we got everything we could from Change of Control.  Maybe, maybe not.  But the following disclosure of USAirways clearly shows that DUI got EXACTLY what he needed when we gave up CoC in the MOU, and he didn't have it until the MOU became effective on Dec 9th....
 
 
For your reading pleasure... the following statement was not financially possible on 8 Dec (when we still had or CoC)... Enjoy. 
 
 
 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 
US AIRWAYS, INC.’S
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE
STATEMENT
 
........
 
As of December 9, 2013, American Airlines Group, Inc., a publicly traded company (NASDAQ: AAL), owns 100 percent of the stock of US Airways Group, Inc., which in turn owns 100 percent of the stock of US Airways.....
 
 
Robert A. Siegel
 

 

[nycbusdriver]

I think she also said something about me not looking old enough to drive.... or something like that. 

 
If she was an east F/A, she might have been old enough to be your grandmother.  (I think there are still a few old enough to me mine!)  So, that comment form that perspective would be expected.

 

[Phoenix]

 
I was all in favor of the negotiating team being staffed ONLY by pro negotiators.  It appeared from the start that USAPA was thinking along those lines, as it named the new committee "Negotiating ADVISORY Committee."  To my mind, ideally the pilots would simply advise the contracted pros and then ONLY the pros would sit across the table from the company (with the pilots present in the back row to offer the pros "advice.")  Pilots, for the most part, are not good labor negotiators (Fred Kozak being a notable exception.)
 
The biggest problem with the pros is that they, like anyone else who has never lived the life and contract of an airline pilot, just never quite "get it."  (This was Roland's problem when he begged us to accept MOU I; it was also the reason Nicolau was so very clueless.)  Professional airline pilots share a "life lens" that is very different from any other career.  The downside of that is that airline management has learned over time just where our "buttons" are, and cleverly pushes them when pilots are sitting across the table.  An "All Pro" team could have been an effective buffer rendering our "buttons" beyond the direct reach of the company, but USAPA early on decided to let pilots, who they themselves called advisors, sit at that table across from management.  This was a huge coup for the company, because the "buttons" were still there to be pushed at the company's whim, and likely to their great amusement.

 
 
I think the main problem is that pilots are too self absorbed to consider what DUI wanted and needed.  Management plays a shell game and uncovers the first shell....a really good pay rate, the pilots go berserk, and being fully distracted they are unable to consider what is hiding under the next 100 shells... but even if they are looking intently at the shells, few consider that negotiations are about what the other bastard wants and needs... and the bastard will lie about what he wants and needs.  
 
They told us they didn't need us.  They told us they didn't need CoC.  Yet the most clear statement in the MOU was us giving up CoC.  And on 10 Dec the company announced in court that CoC occurred on the 9th of Dec.  
 
To the extent anyone (including Doug himself or any pilot), anyone who said Doug didn't need CoC, they lied, were ignorant, or got played, pure and simple.  

 

[Graceson]

"Every Beginning Is Some Other Beginning's End."


I count four Beginning's Ends:

1) AOL (NIC)
2) USAPA
3) USAirways (Cactus)
4) MANAGEMENT DISEMBOWELING OF LABOR (and those complicit who certainly have the right to disagree but not the integrity to keep it in house.

...this is evolution ...and it will be good.

 

[Res Judicata]

I think the main problem is that pilots are too self absorbed to consider what DUI wanted and needed.  Management plays a shell game and uncovers the first shell....a really good pay rate, the pilots go berserk, and being fully distracted they are unable to consider what is hiding under the next 100 shells... but even if they are looking intently at the shells, few consider that negotiations are about what the other bastard wants and needs... and the bastard will lie about what he wants and needs.   They told us they didn't need us.  They told us they didn't need CoC.  Yet the most clear statement in the MOU was us giving up CoC.  And on 10 Dec the company announced in court that CoC occurred on the 9th of Dec.   To the extent anyone (including Doug himself or any pilot), anyone who said Doug didn't need CoC, they lied, were ignorant, or got played, pure and simple.

What's CoC? I heard about it prior to the MOU vote but being it meant nothing to me, I voted to ratify for the raise. You shouldn't have ratified the TA if you wanted to keep it.

 

[Mach85ER]

 

Mach85ER, welcome to america west!

 
Thanks, and welcome to TWA, Reno, Aircal, Latin America Eastern and Trans-Caribbean. (Not much left of the first 3 except good people)

 

[Phoenix]

What's CoC? I heard about it prior to the MOU vote but being it meant nothing to me, I voted to ratify for the raise. You shouldn't have ratified the TA if you wanted to keep it.

 
 
What it was doesn't matter.  The fact Doug needed it is what mattered.  I did not want CoC.  Doug wanted (needed) it.   
 
From the MOU, Giving up CoC:
 
14. USAPA agrees to waive all change of control provisions, including, but not limited to, Section 1.D
in the East collective bargaining agreement, LPPs, daily minimum utilization, and minimum fleet
requirements in the East and West collective bargaining agreements and in the Transition Agreement
conditioned upon the occurrence of the Effective Date.
 
 
 
Change of Control Occurred on the Effective Date, 9 Dec:
 
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
 
US AIRWAYS, INC.’S
SUPPLEMENTAL DISCLOSURE
STATEMENT
........
As of December 9, 2013, American Airlines Group, Inc., a publicly traded company (NASDAQ: AAL), owns 100 percent of the stock of US Airways Group, Inc., which in turn owns 100 percent of the stock of US Airways.....
Robert A. Siegel

 

[Mach85ER]

 

length of service....period.

 

Ok.

So in two years, AA is forecast to have 67 777's, over 60 767's and the first of 42 firm 787's arriving on the property (Group IV rates). As we stand today, bottom AA 777 Captain has a July 1986 DOH and with the above fleet which should drop to 1988 fairly quickly. 767 Captain lineholders have a 1990 DOH.

If I understand you correctly, your position is that the lists should be DOH only, and if the next 500 current AA based 777/787/767 Captain slots are filled with the long stagnated LCC East bottom narrow body Captain and FO's, the AA FO's and junior narrow body Captains should just stand aside?


Re: The APA comments on Captain pay because they were hired "as Captains", many here have been fighting a battle to raise the FO percentages based on years of service. It's a hard battle and not going anywhere.

 

[A320 Driver]

LOS with a 5 year fence changes the landscape pretty significantly, I would think.

 

[Phoenix]

 
 

Ok.

So in two years, AA is forecast to have 67 777's, over 60 767's and the first of 42 firm 787's arriving on the property (Group II rates). As we stand today, bottom AA 777 Captain has a July 1986 DOH and with the above fleet which should drop to 1988 fairly quickly. 767 Captain lineholders have a 1990 DOH.

If I understand you correctly, your position is that the lists should be DOH only, and if the next 500 current AA based 777/787/767 Captain slots are filled with the long stagnated LCC East bottom narrow body Captain and FO's, the AA FO's and junior narrow body Captains should just stand aside?


Re: The APA comments on Captain pay because they were hired "as Captains", many here have been fighting a battle to raise the FO percentages based on years of service. It's a hard battle and not going anywhere.

 
 
I think he said "length of service, period." LOS.  
 
His point is that in a perfect world pilots would be compensated for their developed skill, and nothing else (ie. flying skill, not skills developed on furlough 😀 ).   Different pay scales for different types is pretty much artificial and has nothing to do with our skill level.  (how much extra skill is involved in plotting the IRS positions, tuning the HF, or setting up the door bell? 😀).  
ALPA should have had a national seniority list too, in a perfect world.  
 
I think most of us realize pay based on type will probably continue. Certainly "career expectations" for APA and USAir East were based on this assumption (though USAir West has, err.. had, same pay for all types).  So at the end of the day most pilots understand the wide bodies should be fenced appropriately to preserve pre merger expectations.
 
Maybe someday the world will have a single seniority list and pilots will be paid for their developed skill level.  Trying to achieve either during a merger probably isn't the way to go, though a pay rate based on skill level rather than types could be a discussion point, but not very doable really in our situation.  IMHO.  

 

[Mach85ER]

PHX,

I agree, the LOS is a another whole subject and probably a better way to go. The the size of the new AAS along with DAL, UAL plus SWA, AS and others, a national list is probably something to be looked at for new hires and the future. I don't think it would work for everyone today.