Pilots, Please Confirm Or Deny!

[StraaightTaalk]

well, well, well,

Now for the unruly children, here is a explanation of the maniacal fiends at APA and their plan to rule the world. (starting with priority non-rev travel, of course). I will try to use as few little words as possible, because it seems that those most offended by this alleged act seem exceptionally mentally challenged, especially for buying into AMR's version of the events.

[post="234958"][/post]​

This one paragraph, more than any other on this thread, proves my point that most pilots consider themselves superior to other employees, thus creating the underpinning for their opinion that everybody else in the company is expendable, except for them, of course.

Thanks for making it so obvious. You should have just saved yourself time and not typed your APA BS spin as the paragraph above undermines any point you were trying to make. :down:

 

[AAStew]

This thread is incredulous! LIke I said earlier in it, instead of thinking rationally, most of you are behaving emotionally. Will you never see this is exactly what AA wants us to do, divide and seperate, point and blame. It is truly pathetic. Don't blame the pilots, the f/a's. the rampers, mechs, just blame yourselves for being so foolishly blind.
:huh:

 

[Hopeful]

Here's the link to the video of the Senate Aviation committee on the airline pension plan situation. It is a long video, just fast forward to the end of the video where they discuss outsourcing. Crandall is pro outsourcing on maintenance. You would expect that. But Duane Woerth, APA President doesn't have a problem with outsourcing either!




http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1332

 

[planemech669]

Here's the link to the video of the Senate Aviation committee on the airline pension plan situation. It is a long video, just fast forward to the end of the video where they discuss outsourcing. Crandall is pro outsourcing on maintenance. You would expect that. But Duane Woerth, APA President doesn't have a problem with outsourcing either!
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1332

[post="234982"][/post]​

Unfortunately the link to the video is no longer active. There is nothing mentioned about outsourcing in the witness' transcribed prepared statements. Dead end, try again. :down:

 

[Bob Owens]

Here's the link to the video of the Senate Aviation committee on the airline pension plan situation. It is a long video, just fast forward to the end of the video where they discuss outsourcing. Crandall is pro outsourcing on maintenance. You would expect that. But Duane Woerth, APA President doesn't have a problem with outsourcing either!
http://commerce.senate.gov/hearings/witnesslist.cfm?id=1332

[post="234982"][/post]​

APA or ALPA?

 

[Mach85ER]

During the time of the "higher non-rev classification for pilots" fiasco, I was talking to two pilots. They said that they objected to this and blamed their leadership. So this means that as they understood it, the APA was trying to get a higher non-rev classification for pilots. So if your version is correct, even some of your own people understood it the way non-pilot employees did.

As for direct deposit, I will say thanks, it is convienent but truthfully it was never important to me. I think it would have eventually come about though.

Regarding the APA (and ALPA) negotiating for pilots only, that is obvious and your right, it is labor law. APA has a legal duty to represent it's members to the best of it's ability and to get the best deals possible during contract negotiations for pilots only. Same with APFA and TWU with respect to their members. But, given the financial environment, the "pie" is not as big as it used to be and some are going to try to recover what they lost and then some from that much smaller pie.

[post="234961"][/post]​

You're right aafsc,

I can include more than a few clueless APA pilots in my first response. (and yes, straightalk, I hold the same view of them as I do the likes of you despite your hysterical leaps of thought). I would also fault APA for not communicating it's members as well. We have many in our group that don't have a clue of what the issues are whenever they vote on a contract.

I of the agree with your point about the shrinking size of the "pie". What needs to be realized is that although it may seem like the pilots got a big "9%" snapback in pay, for a large part of our group the pay was reduced far more than simple percentage numbers since we are paid on seat and aircraft size. I am in a group of more than a few that took a 49% paycut and even after the snapback, it would take a 80% payraise to equal my pay of 3 years ago.

Now for our more hysterical posters, don't take this as some "boo-hoo" invite to my personal "pity party". I would ask that when we are comparing pay at AA it should be considered that a large part of the pilot group makes less than nearly every LCC in the country when you compare pay on a years of service basis and not on a seat and aircraft size basis. Do our FA's, Mechs, FSC and agents make less than their LCC counterparts?

have fun

 

[StraaightTaalk]

You're right aafsc,

I can include more than a few clueless APA pilots in my first response. (and yes, straightalk, I hold the same view of them as I do the likes of you despite your hysterical leaps of thought). I would also fault APA for not communicating it's members as well. We have many in our group that don't have a clue of what the issues are whenever they vote on a contract.

I of the agree with your point about the shrinking size of the "pie". What needs to be realized is that although it may seem like the pilots got a big "9%" snapback in pay, for a large part of our group the pay was reduced far more than simple percentage numbers since we are paid on seat and aircraft size. I am in a group of more than a few that took a 49% paycut and even after the snapback, it would take a 80% payraise to equal my pay of 3 years ago.

Now for our more hysterical posters, don't take this as some "boo-hoo" invite to my personal "pity party". I would ask that when we are comparing pay at AA it should be considered that a large part of the pilot group makes less than nearly every LCC in the country when you compare pay on a years of service basis and not on a seat and aircraft size basis. Do our FA's, Mechs, FSC and agents make less than their LCC counterparts?

have fun

[post="235002"][/post]​

Your condescension further proves my point. And, the sure sign that somebody is trying to rationalize and justify the unjustifiable is accusing your opponents of being hysterical.

Sorry to disabuse you of the notion that pilots know all, but your view of APA's bargaining history is, in my opinion, revisionist.

 

[Mach85ER]

How does that old saying go?

When you wrestle with a pig, you just end up dirty, and the pig likes it

Happy New Year,

Later 😀

 

[StraaightTaalk]

How does that old saying go?

When you wrestle with a pig, you just end up dirty, and the pig likes it

Happy New Year,

Later 😀

[post="235012"][/post]​

Actually, in reference to you, Mach, I prefer, "What more can you expect from a pig than a grunt???" :down:

 

[Bob Owens]

You're right aafsc,

I can include more than a few clueless APA pilots in my first response. (and yes, straightalk, I hold the same view of them as I do the likes of you despite your hysterical leaps of thought). I would also fault APA for not communicating it's members as well. We have many in our group that don't have a clue of what the issues are whenever they vote on a contract.

I of the agree with your point about the shrinking size of the "pie". What needs to be realized is that although it may seem like the pilots got a big "9%" snapback in pay, for a large part of our group the pay was reduced far more than simple percentage numbers since we are paid on seat and aircraft size. I am in a group of more than a few that took a 49% paycut and even after the snapback, it would take a 80% payraise to equal my pay of 3 years ago.

Now for our more hysterical posters, don't take this as some "boo-hoo" invite to my personal "pity party". I would ask that when we are comparing pay at AA it should be considered that a large part of the pilot group makes less than nearly every LCC in the country when you compare pay on a years of service basis and not on a seat and aircraft size basis. Do our FA's, Mechs, FSC and agents make less than their LCC counterparts?

have fun

[post="235002"][/post]​

Well then it appears that your union is a company union also.

Instead of acting like a union they have created a situation that is dictated more by luck than skill or merit that leaves some at below LCC rates while allowing the company to truthfully, if somewhat deceptively, claim that their pilots are among the highest paid.

Regarding the 80% pay cut you claim is it true or not that with a large number of pilots appraoching the 60 year mark there is a good likelyhood that by 2008 you will, if you take advantage of the opportunity to do so, be earning as much as you were in 2003?


Can you explain how you figure you took an 80% paycut?

Lets say that you were a 757 pilot with twelve years. Your base pay would have been around $157 before concessions. After the concessions it went down to 125.20. Now lets say you were knocked down to first officer, you would get 68% of captains pay, that would knock you down to $85.13. So you would have seen a 48% paycut, not 80%. Now I dont know your specifics but unless you went from being a 777 captain to 737 FO how could your pay have gone down so much? I'm not saying its not so, I just dont see it, we are talking regular pay here, not OT right?

Also, if you had been willing to transfer could you have mitigated your demotion? I know guys that were A-300 Captains who are still A-300 Captains. Obviously not everyone took such a cut, just as we had guys go from being an AMT to being an OSM, their pay went from $35/hr to $22/hr, a 37% paycut in addition to a 10% cut in benifits etc. So they took a 47% paycut and no matter how many people retire ahead of them they will not be restored.

 

[WingNaPrayer]

Without qualified, knowledgable ground crews of ALL positions, those pilots can't fly . . . and they know it, and so does every traveling passenger.

I think what AA's pilots DO need is a taste of the old America West days when ALL employees rotated jobs constantly to make sure everyone knew what was entailed for every job (of course, pilots were the exception although HP did make them work ticket counter, bagage, gates, etc.)

I think it is a tremendous idea to have each and every employee walk in each other's shoes. It clearly adds an appreciation to the job each other does that a good majority (not all) of pilots just don't have.

Of course, January 10 is just around the corner and there is this twit judge who is about to throw a hammer into the entire industry, so hang onto your hats pilots - you're about to find out how replaceable you really are!

 

[MCI transplant]

Happy New Year MCI! If you ex-TWA people were able to keep 100% everywhere, you would have stolen our seniority numbers and jobs. As for the pilots, the ALPA national president, Duane Worthe, reportedly sat right next to Crandall in front of a congressional committee and basically said he sees nothing wrong with maintenence outsourcing. Since he is the leader of the pilots from all legacy airlines (except AA), he is representing what his members feel. And AA pilots are no different from the pilots at the other 5. Seems like Worthe and the pilots see their salvation and restoration in the destruction of others.

[post="234965"][/post]​

<_< Hello aafsc! I told you I'de be back to play! You stated you were a ferm believer in our contract. Well, we''ll have to discuss our currant contract with referance to seniority some time! Makes interesting reading!

 

[Mach85ER]

Well then it appears that your union is a company union also.

Instead of acting like a union they have created a situation that is dictated more by luck than skill or merit that leaves some at below LCC rates while allowing the company to truthfully, if somewhat deceptively, claim that their pilots are among the highest paid.

Regarding the 80% pay cut you claim is it true or not that with a large number of pilots appraoching the 60 year mark there is a good likelyhood that by 2008 you will, if you take advantage of the opportunity to do so, be earning as much as you were in 2003?
Can you explain how you figure you took an 80% paycut?

Lets say that you were a 757 pilot with twelve years. Your base pay would have been around $157 before concessions. After the concessions it went down to 125.20. Now lets say you were knocked down to first officer, you would get 68% of captains pay, that would knock you down to $85.13. So you would have seen a 48% paycut, not 80%. Now I dont know your specifics but unless you went from being a 777 captain to 737 FO how could your pay have gone down so much? I'm not saying its not so, I just dont see it, we are talking regular pay here, not OT right?

Also, if you had been willing to transfer could you have mitigated your demotion? I know guys that were A-300 Captains who are still A-300 Captains. Obviously not everyone took such a cut, just as we had guys go from being an AMT to being an OSM, their pay went from $35/hr to $22/hr, a 37% paycut in addition to a 10% cut in benifits etc. So they took a 47% paycut and no matter how many people retire ahead of them they will not be restored.

[post="235021"][/post]​

Bob,

The 80% figure was in reference to a post about the size of the 9% snapback. For instance, my paycut from my 2001 salary to my 2003 salary was 49%. This was the 23% plus the double hit of two displacments. In order to get that back, I'd have to get a nearly 100% pay raise from 2003 salary to equal that of 2001. It is a play on numbers, but it was a response as to how large the 9% snapback was. Sounds like the AMT's had a version of the same chit sandwich. Those numbers weren't for overtime either, we don't get it for weekends or holidays. There is a night pay and a about $200/mth after tax int'l pay, but the "hassle factor" is much more than that for the money.

I might get back into the left seat, but as it stands now, 2009-11 might be a more likely. 2012+ maybe will put equal dollars in the pocket as 2001, but you know how far that is and inflation could destroy that too. I also might have mitgated the seat loss for a short time but the displacement list provided by AA wacked me and a bunch of guys off any CA seat at any base. I could hold one size a/c as FO at another base, but that involves either moving with a huge house/tax loss due to COLA, or commuting (working 1/3 more a month for no pay).

hope this helps, bye

 

[Mach85ER]

I think it is a tremendous idea to have each and every employee walk in each other's shoes. It clearly adds an appreciation to the job each other does that a good majority (not all) of pilots just don't have.

[post="235028"][/post]​

Wing,
Most of us didn't just plop into the cushy cockpits. Most of us including me, did jobs worse and more dangerous than any AA postion from -20F to +110. There is room however for education for all to improve this operation.

I'm not sure it would work both ways. We had a notorious crew planner who we finally got to ride through one of his BS scheduled trips. He sat in the cockpit jumpseat snoring the whole 13 hour, night duty period and after landing said, "that wasn't that bad". I think it would be good for some to see the frustration of flying a 11 hour flight, working every angle during that time to get a on-scheduled arrival, then sit 20 feet from your destination for 45 minutes waiting for something unclear (I know the AA blame game and the million different reasons for the wait).

Bye,
day off, spent enough comp discussion here :blink:

 

[Bob Owens]

Mach85ER,Jan 3 2005, 05:45 PM]
Bob,

The 80% figure was in reference to a post about the size of the 9% snapback. For instance, my paycut from my 2001 salary to my 2003 salary was 49%. This was the 23% plus the double hit of two displacments. In order to get that back, I'd have to get a nearly 100% pay raise from 2003 salary to equal that of 2001. It is a play on numbers, but it was a response as to how large the 9% snapback was. Sounds like the AMT's had a version of the same chit sandwich. Those numbers weren't for overtime either, we don't get it for weekends or holidays. There is a night pay and a about $200/mth after tax int'l pay, but the "hassle factor" is much more than that for the money.

Fair enough, You're right, I misread it as an 80% paycut. I should have known better because I have made to point about how if you were making $10/hr and took a 50% paycut to $5/hr you would need a 100% increase to get back to where you were, and of course the company would be complaining how "unreasonable" the employees were in demanding a 100% pay raise after only taking a 50% paycut. Our union, the TWU would likely agree with the company without even figuring out what was really going on. By the way we dont get anything extra for nights or weekends either and our night shift differential is 90% less than yours.


I might get back into the left seat, but as it stands now, 2009-11 might be a more likely. 2012+ maybe will put equal dollars in the pocket as 2001, but you know how far that is and inflation could destroy that too.

Yes I do, the CPI, which understates inflation has averaged 3% a year for the last thirty years. So over the six years of this contract you can add another 18% into that paycut.By the time this contract is over I will have already been forced to leave, you will be closer in pay to a Construction worker than a doctor.

I also might have mitgated the seat loss for a short time but the displacement list provided by AA wacked me and a bunch of guys off any CA seat at any base. I could hold one size a/c as FO at another base, but that involves either moving with a huge house/tax loss due to COLA, or commuting (working 1/3 more a month for no pay).

Well living in NY I can understand your dilemma. On average we commute 10 hours a week. We also have a lot of guys, mostly from MCI, but some from DFW and MIA whose option was New York or the street. These guys spend even more time than we do commuting, some wish they had taken the layoff. Now they are stuck here.

hope this helps, bye

Yes it did. Thanks for the clarification.