Temporary Injunction against USAPA filed today

[Crzipilot]

"While there is no prohibition against pilots writing up any and all maintenance items, including very minor items (e.g., broken passenger light, non-essential placards, or a host of other items), in normal circumstances, pilots exercise their authority and discretion to not write up deferrable minor items when it could produce a delay or cancellation of a flight."

Uhmmm....didn't know the FARS said that we can exercise our authority and discretion to NOT write up items. That must be another PHL CP verified approved by the FAA detail I missed....

Is there something in the following reg, that says the PIC has the authority to NOT write up a mechanical irregularities?

§ 121.563 Reporting mechanical irregularities.

The pilot in command shall ensure that all mechanical irregularities occurring during flight time are entered in the maintenance log of the airplane at the end of that flight time. Before each flight the pilot in command shall ascertain the status of each irregularity entered in the log at the end of the preceding flight.

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

I just want to say, I feel for both west and east pilots. You guys were promised big things with this merger, and Dougie failed to deliver. But these recent rumblings just infuriate me.

I am a former west ramper who was fired for attendance in 2009. 4 years of hard work and dedicated service, but because the policy was changed, I and hundreds more were put into a hole which is impossible to escape from. I empathize that you have all made careers out of this, and my 4 years is light in comparison to the hard work and dedication you've all shown in your career, and that goes for both east and west.

That being said, USAPA is being very creative to lean on the company, and not tolerating them anymore. and the way the company is arguing it is complete B.S

I think the statistics argument is complete BUNK. Regardless of what you may think about me getting fired for attendance, that is subjective. But if you want to make the statistics argument, lets look at the statistics for rampers getting fired because of this new policy. I say let the courts look at the statistics of all of the rampers that got fired, or have gotten fired because they were waiting on the final tier, and have gotten fired because their case wasn't heard on time. HUNDREDS were let go improperly because the company was cutting routes, and down-sizing, needed to save money, and did so without laying off employees properly and taking away their benefits and income. Let the courts decide if anything illegal or immoral was done by the company. The amount of workers getting fired deviates far from the norm, but this is no problem because this deviation is saving them money. BUT WAIT... Now a deviation in statistics shows how much money they are losing because their planes aren't coming in on time? NOW the company has a problem, NOW they want to use statistics.

So the company wants to cry foul when your union decides to do something about the NASCAR standards they've put on you, and the coercion into making poor safety decisions, and they're going to argue with statistics? If the pilots have acted with prudence when making a decision whether to have something fixed, and are following company policy, then the company has no argument. If the company were treating its employees fairly, then MAYBE you guys would be quicker to run your checks, or MEL some of those items that could be repaired at the end of the day, and work with the company to help achieve their goals. I don't care what the stats say, if somethings broken, and you are within your right to refuse flying and not put people at risk. Until then, I don't see any good reason for you guys to bend over backwards and help generate that company millions of dollars in which you haven't yet seen, but have been promised. Are your actions illegal? Probably not in most cases. Immoral? Well, they aren't in the best interest of the company, but does the company always act morally and in the best interests of its customers and employees? Just ask me and the 500 other rampers who got fired, because the company needed to save some money and we will have an answer for you. I think what they did broke the contract we had, and is therefore, illegal, let a judge see THOSE statistics.

I applaud you USAPA, you are faced with really tough decisions and you play the game well with Doug and his lawyers, because you understand that's the only language they speak. You move to hit them where it hurts, in the pocketbook, and then they counter back with carefully worded threats. "Oh, we want your union to go down, but not the pilots, because we love you guys. " Um.... Last time I checked, the pilots ARE the union, and if you attack the union, you attack your workforce. These propaganda letters that pit the rest of the workforce against you guys are hilarious because we all know there is no merit to what they say, and these actions are just another move on the chessboard.

If the courts have any objectivity at all, then they will look at this as a quarrel between an employer and its workforce, and tell you guys to work it out on your own. The court can't dictate how a company runs itself, that's what policies and procedures are for. If the company wants to review it's policies on MEL's and quick-turns, and pilot checks, then it needs to do so on its own, people can't run to court every time there's a disagreement.


If rampers on the west had any BALLS, then they would stop working so damn diligently to make the higher ups rich, and start coming up with creative, but LEGAL ways in which to let the company know that they won't be pushed around. Learned helplessness comes to mind when I think of west rampers. They were so used to getting kicked around for so long, nobody has any idea on how to make things better.


Westies, before you attack me, I always appreciated you guys. I spent a lot of time up in the flight deck and you guys were always happy to show me around the flight deck and answer any questions I had. I think you guys deserve the best, and I don't agree you should be put at the bottom of the seniority list. I just throw that out there in case you want to question my objectivity, I know what's at stake for you guys. I just think USAPA is making a bold move here, and it needs to be done for ALL of your sakes.

 

[Hey.. Chill Out]

"While there is no prohibition against pilots writing up any and all maintenance items, including very minor items (e.g., broken passenger light, non-essential placards, or a host of other items), in normal circumstances, pilots exercise their authority and discretion to not write up deferrable minor items when it could produce a delay or cancellation of a flight."

Uhmmm....didn't know the FARS said that we can exercise our authority and discretion to NOT write up items. That must be another PHL CP verified approved by the FAA detail I missed....

Is there something in the following reg, that says the PIC has the authority to NOT write up a mechanical irregularities?

§ 121.563 Reporting mechanical irregularities.

The pilot in command shall ensure that all mechanical irregularities occurring during flight time are entered in the maintenance log of the airplane at the end of that flight time. Before each flight the pilot in command shall ascertain the status of each irregularity entered in the log at the end of the preceding flight.

You know, this reminds me a lot of the ethics in my profession. As an aspiring mental health professional, we have certain ethics we adhere to. Some are very black and white, such as not having sexual relations with current or former clients because of the power differential, but some are in a grey area such as making a decision on whether to attend a function outside of therapy if it may be beneficial to the relationship, but what kind of function may be up for debate because of the unclear boundaries.

This reminds me of the grey area. Sure you can do what needs to be done to MEL something, and others may or may not agree with you, but it's AT YOUR DISCRETION. If you decide to MEL something 100% of the time now whereas before you were doing it 50% there is no prohibition against doing so in any case. Just because the planes are coming in late now, that doesn't mean you've done anything illegal, you've just followed a very vague company policy. There can be much debate about it from lawyers and pilots, but regardless, there's nothing ILLEGAL about MEL'ing things 10% of the time, or 100% of the time, but there's no hard and fast rule on what part needs to me MEL'ed and when.

And I'll tell you one thing, ethics cases like this with such a grey area are deliberated thoroughly, if Doug and Co. are bringing this to court, I don't think it's going to be the open and shut case as some have proposed.

Sorry Doug, maybe you should hash out your company policy in the next round of negotiations so you can convey a clearer level of expectations to your employees. Just don't be surprised if you don't get to that policy because of the 500 other items that need to be addressed in court first because you've been dragging your feet for so long.

 

[A320 Driver]

You know, this reminds me a lot of the ethics in my profession. As an aspiring mental health professional, we have certain ethics we adhere to. Some are very black and white, such as not having sexual relations with current or former clients because of the power differential, but some are in a grey area such as making a decision on whether to attend a function outside of therapy if it may be beneficial to the relationship, but what kind of function may be up for debate because of the unclear boundaries.

This reminds me of the grey area. Sure you can do what needs to be done to MEL something, and others may or may not agree with you, but it's AT YOUR DISCRETION. If you decide to MEL something 100% of the time now whereas before you were doing it 50% there is no prohibition against doing so in any case. Just because the planes are coming in late now, that doesn't mean you've done anything illegal, you've just followed a very vague company policy. There can be much debate about it from lawyers and pilots, but regardless, there's nothing ILLEGAL about MEL'ing things 10% of the time, or 100% of the time, but there's no hard and fast rule on what part needs to me MEL'ed and when.

And I'll tell you one thing, ethics cases like this with such a grey area are deliberated thoroughly, if Doug and Co. are bringing this to court, I don't think it's going to be the open and shut case as some have proposed.

Sorry Doug, maybe you should hash out your company policy in the next round of negotiations so you can convey a clearer level of expectations to your employees. Just don't be surprised if you don't get to that policy because of the 500 other items that need to be addressed in court first because you've been dragging your feet for so long.

Most of the company's complaint is centered around two things: Slow/extended taxi times and maintenance writeups.

I'm restating this because I think it is important. The Airman's Information Manual says to taxi at the pace of a brisk walk. Now I walk on my treadmill at 3.5 MPH, and that is pretty brisk to me. So now I am going to be sued/disciplined for that?

As far as the maintenance writeups go, how many of them are not legitimate? If it's broken, fix/MEL it...period. I can't tell you how many times I've been at the gate and at the last second, "DING", an ECAM pops up for ...whatever. Am I now REQUIRED to use my personal cell phone to call MOC to get directions for a reset? I can't see that. That is what I USED to do...NO MORE. Now I write it up and let maintenance deal with it. That causes delays... SORRY. I've complied with the Flight Operations Manual, the Pilot Handbook and the Federal Aviation Regulations 100%. Anything above 100% is AT MY OPTION and I choose NOT TO. Let the judge chew on that.

Only place we might have a problem is the status quo requirements. HOWEVER, how much has the company violated the status quo by reinterpreting the pilot contract? 500 grievances!!!!!!!!!!! Lets put THAT before a judge and see how he views it.

Something has to give the company some incentive to negotiate...SOMETHING. What they are doing right now is NOT NEGOTIATING. They are hiding behind the seniority issue and that is only ONE section of the contract. The more contentious areas of the contract haven't even been touched. USAPA has made some stupid moves (the RICO lawsuit etc., publically dissing Flt Ops management, etc, etc, etc). But I don't think they are the ones holding up the rest of the contract. DP says months, the he says years, then Isom says MANY years! So, in the meantime, we are supposed to be good little soldiers and put out 150%??? Personally, I think that is a perfectly ridiculous expectation on the part of the company. As others have said, you reap what you sow. The mediators have to see this and my hope is that they will release us from mediation at some point in the not too distant future. If a strike is called, I will honor it. ALL the West pilots could cross a legal picket line and STILL you couldn't operate the airline but a very short time. It doesn't take all of us.

This lawsuit the company filed makes me MAD AS HELL and the fact that the West pilots are cheering them on makes it even worse. I have been openly critical of USAPA and I've tried to be moderate and middle of the road in my opinions, but this is pushing me toward a very hard line. If that is what they want, then they can have it.

Driver :angry:

 

[SparrowHawk]

This lawsuit the company filed makes me MAD AS HELL and the fact that the West pilots are cheering them on makes it even worse. I have been openly critical of USAPA and I've tried to be moderate and middle of the road in my opinions, but this is pushing me toward a very hard line. If that is what they want, then they can have it.

Driver :angry:

This is my fear. We know the hard core in an organization is usually in the minority. The open question is how many are angered as you and how many will act upon that anger?

Now a Question, If the average Taxi time has increased by a minute my question is how many gallons/pounds of fuel burn in that minute? I ask because we all know DP is looking at the dollars and cares little about anything else.

If the fleet is say 400 planes flying 5 segments per day that's 2,000 minutes per day times the cost of the excess fuel burn for that minute. So what kind of cost are we talking here? I ask because if the bean counters fudged the numbers US may not prevail. I don't know about these things. I just know Gin & Tonic for me in 2D 😀

 

[A320 Driver]

This is my fear. We know the hard core in an organization is usually in the minority. The open question is how many are angered as you and how many will act upon that anger?

Now a Question, If the average Taxi time has increased by a minute my question is how many gallons/pounds of fuel burn in that minute? I ask because we all know DP is looking at the dollars and cares little about anything else.

If the fleet is say 400 planes flying 5 segments per day that's 2,000 minutes per day times the cost of the excess fuel burn for that minute. So what kind of cost are we talking here? I ask because if the bean counters fudged the numbers US may not prevail. I don't know about these things. I just know Gin & Tonic for me in 2D 😀

The A330 buurns around 60 lbs/minute during taxi. Not sure about the others.

Driver <_<

 

[Res Judicata]

I just think USAPA is making a bold move here, and it needs to be done for ALL of your sakes.

USAPA is making a supremely stupid move here. They were advised by their scumbag lawyer to not even attempt this. USAPA does not speak for a single pilot on the West. Performance should spell that out crystal clear. I love how they call us "company" pilots. B.S. We are ANTI-USAPA pilots because they are nothing more than vermin scabs. Once they're dead and buried, (which is virtually assured at this point) perhaps the sane pilots on the East will want to come together, forget their unattainable DOH scheme, and finally get paid. Until then, the fight with USAPA, on EVERY CONCEIVABLE FRONT is full on.

 

[Res Judicata]

This lawsuit the company filed makes me MAD AS HELL and the fact that the West pilots are cheering them on makes it even worse.

Driver :angry:

Seriously? If I owned a business that was being so blatantly sabotaged by my employees I'd do the same thing. USAPA has cost the company, as estimated by their Ph.d economist, almost 400 MILLION DOLLARS. Too bad that money didn't end up in the pilots pockets like it should have but the idiots that run your maniac union have decided to become Martyrs. Continue to play stupid if you want, it should be obvious by now that nobody is buying a single line of the USAPA "what slowdown?" B.S.. There is a mountain of evidence in that complaint. USAPA is toast...just like Addington, they can't hide their true intentions. Normal, sane people see right through it. Just like the Jury. If that makes you a hardliner be my guest. Just line up behind the Lemming in front of you and jump.

 

[767jetz]

This lawsuit the company filed makes me MAD AS HELL and the fact that the West pilots are cheering them on makes it even worse. I have been openly critical of USAPA and I've tried to be moderate and middle of the road in my opinions, but this is pushing me toward a very hard line. If that is what they want, then they can have it.

Driver :angry:

Sorry, but this is the bed your union leaders made for you. Blame them.

 

[nic4us]

This is my fear. We know the hard core in an organization is usually in the minority. The open question is how many are angered as you and how many will act upon that anger?

Now a Question, If the average Taxi time has increased by a minute my question is how many gallons/pounds of fuel burn in that minute? I ask because we all know DP is looking at the dollars and cares little about anything else.

If the fleet is say 400 planes flying 5 segments per day that's 2,000 minutes per day times the cost of the excess fuel burn for that minute. So what kind of cost are we talking here? I ask because if the bean counters fudged the numbers US may not prevail. I don't know about these things. I just know Gin & Tonic for me in 2D 😀

To answere your question,

The A320 burns about 30 lbs of fuel a minute. As A320driver pointed out the 330 burns 60lbs/min. Using a conservative 30lbs/min for the entire fleet, and your 2000 minutes/day (I am not sure that would be accurate, but lets use it) the increased burn would obviously be 60,000 lbs. 60,000lbs=9,000gallons, so at a spot price of $3.xx, you have an increase of $27,000/day or $189,000/week or $810,000/30 day month or $9,855,000/year.

Now the price of Gin & Tonic varies greatly depending on the consumption location. Last I checked a liter of Tanqueray goes for about $28.99, but a couple of minis are complimentary in 2D. So, to offset the cost of the extra 1 minute, (30lbs or 4.5gallons or $13.50) the company would have to save 9 Gin & Tonics if the mini cost them $1.50.

 

[A320 Driver]

$9,855,000/year.

[/quote]

That's a far cry from the $400 million the company wants. Figures...

Driver <_<

 

[nic4us]

$9,855,000/year.

That's a far cry from the $400 million the company wants. Figures...

Driver <_<

Yes it is. I do not know where the $400 million figure came from. In my first post referencing it, I said it like this $400 million????? $400 million????. See all the question marks and the repeat of the figure? That was my way of saying, is that right?

I did not read the entire request for the injunction. It is 43 pages long. Is there even a dollar amount listed in there, if so I missed it.

 

[Crzipilot]

You know, this reminds me a lot of the ethics in my profession. As an aspiring mental health professional, we have certain ethics we adhere to. Some are very black and white, such as not having sexual relations with current or former clients because of the power differential, but some are in a grey area such as making a decision on whether to attend a function outside of therapy if it may be beneficial to the relationship, but what kind of function may be up for debate because of the unclear boundaries.

This reminds me of the grey area. Sure you can do what needs to be done to MEL something, and others may or may not agree with you, but it's AT YOUR DISCRETION. If you decide to MEL something 100% of the time now whereas before you were doing it 50% there is no prohibition against doing so in any case. Just because the planes are coming in late now, that doesn't mean you've done anything illegal, you've just followed a very vague company policy. There can be much debate about it from lawyers and pilots, but regardless, there's nothing ILLEGAL about MEL'ing things 10% of the time, or 100% of the time, but there's no hard and fast rule on what part needs to me MEL'ed and when.

And I'll tell you one thing, ethics cases like this with such a grey area are deliberated thoroughly, if Doug and Co. are bringing this to court, I don't think it's going to be the open and shut case as some have proposed.

Sorry Doug, maybe you should hash out your company policy in the next round of negotiations so you can convey a clearer level of expectations to your employees. Just don't be surprised if you don't get to that policy because of the 500 other items that need to be addressed in court first because you've been dragging your feet for so long.

This is a bit of the problem, for people outside the job, to understand, especially how the company has framed their wording. You see, pilots do not make a determination as to whether or not to MEL something. It is not "our discretion" to do so. It is the discretion of MTC. Now that whole discretion is black and white. MEL it or take the airplane off the line.

When there is a discrepancy on an aircraft which a pilot notices. He does not have the certificate to fix such item. He is to simply record it in the flight log. And if you notice, previous quoted FAR states that all discrepancies will be recorded in the aircraft log book. From that point a mechanic must come out, and troubleshoot the issue. (something not always done by Line MTC, but required by the preamble of the MEL) At the point that the trouble shooting is over, the MTC is to either fix the issue, back to normal operations, or if unable to do so, due to whatever reasons, there might be relief granted by a MEL (minimum equipment list) If there is relief granted, and the procedures followed, that particular item is now placed on "MEL" and the log book handed back to the captain. At that point in time, the Captain must survey the new condition of the airplane and the flight he is about to embark upon. After factoring in all the external factors which are included in a particular flight, he makes the decision whether or not the aircraft is still in such condition to complete that flight safely with the before mentioned equipment inoperable. (You will also take not that the MEL preamble, as the FAA dictates, states that the MEL is not a operational tool in which covers the airworthiness of a particular flight, due to too many external influences, it is simply a baseline tool to be used in determining if the flight can be completed with the inoperable components.

So in a nutshell there is no grey area. If there is a discrepancy with an aircraft it gets put into the FDML. Although, the company was nice enough to make a Cabin MTC log, which contains such things as reading lights and stuff in the cabin, which the f/a can fill out, under direction of the Capt. So the company has already put into place a system for some time now, whereas those pesky non essential items they say pilots are writing up, are already reported and taken care of.

I do seem to remember that there was a CBS message around Feb/Mar about MTC writeups, and how the FAA had been noticing that 80% of the writeups were inbound to CLT or in CLT, and that average in itself was strange, and it seemed the airplanes only broke when coming home to a MTC base. (seems most of the CBS messages have been wiped off wings for some reason) Accompanied with this item was a reminder that all MTC items must be reported when they occur, no matter where the airplane is parked. I.E. The FAA DOES NOT LIKE CREWS carrying airplanes, which essentially is what US has done for years. It really isn't a grey area, it's black and white. If there is a discrepancy with the aircraft it is reported, and worked on by MTC. Unfortunately the culture over the years at US has been such that it doesn't always occur like that, So maybe this is just the pilots learning from those Distance Learning Modules concerning all the mtc procedures the company has included in about every other one......

Sorry for the rant, I just sorta of find it deplorable that a FLT OPS manager would, under oath and deposition, insinuate that a discrepancy with an aircraft is something the Captain has the authority and judgement to decide on whether or not to report it. Guess it's been so long off the line he doesn't remember the FARs?

 

[toganoflex]

This lawsuit the company filed makes me MAD AS HELL and the fact that the West pilots are cheering them on makes it even worse. I have been openly critical of USAPA and I've tried to be moderate and middle of the road in my opinions, but this is pushing me toward a very hard line. If that is what they want, then they can have it.

Driver :angry:

USAPA is sure as hell holding up the contract. Who reopened almost all the closed sections? Who has staffed the NC with pilots that have had no neg experience.

What so damn funny here is the the east pilots don't realize the Cleary doesn't want a contract. Not for a while. You thunk USAPA hasn't figured out this Nic thing yet. You don't think they know there is no way around the Nic?

USAPA is going to capture it's left seats through attrition. That takes time and no contract.

You east guys are puppets in Cleary's plan.

 

[PullUp]

Yes it is. I do not know where the $400 million figure came from. In my first post referencing it, I said it like this $400 million????? $400 million????. See all the question marks and the repeat of the figure? That was my way of saying, is that right?

I did not read the entire request for the injunction. It is 43 pages long. Is there even a dollar amount listed in there, if so I missed it.

I read it all. There is no request for money, just for a cease & desist and for the union to notify its members not to do certain things.