Top Ten Reasons to Vote NO

[jimntx]

No, you've misinterpreted the numbers. AA is proposing that the pilot scope clause permit AA to fly a number of 71-80 seaters equal to 55% of the number of mainline planes in the fleet. With today's 610 mainline planes, that would permit AA to contract (with Eagle or another commuter airline) for 330 71-80 seaters for a total of 940 planes in the combined fleet (610 + 330 = 940).

Or, it could be that you are reading something into what the company proposed that is not there. (Or, your version is the spin your boss has ordered you to put on the proposal.) The exact wording of the proposal from the APA website states, "In the management scope proposal, they are asking to be allowed to have up to 55 percent of the mainline fleet count (which would currently allow more than 330 aircraft) be 70- to 81-seat jets for regional feed."

It does not say, an rj fleet equivalent to 55 percent of the mainline fleet count. It says 55 percent of the mainline fleet count. As Eolesen replied to me the other day, "Sometimes you just have to take things at face value."

Even more disturbing is the statement that follows that one. "The company wants the ability to codeshare with other domestic carriers, up to 50 percent of system-wide available seat miles." Note that it does not say that these codeshare flights will be "operated by American Airlines."

 

[strikeforce]

Or, it could be that you are reading something into what the company proposed that is not there. (Or, your version is the spin your boss has ordered you to put on the proposal.) The exact wording of the proposal from the APA website states, "In the management scope proposal, they are asking to be allowed to have up to 55 percent of the mainline fleet count (which would currently allow more than 330 aircraft) be 70- to 81-seat jets for regional feed."

It does not say, an rj fleet equivalent to 55 percent of the mainline fleet count. It says 55 percent of the mainline fleet count. As Eolesen replied to me the other day, "Sometimes you just have to take things at face value."

Even more disturbing is the statement that follows that one. "The company wants the ability to codeshare with other domestic carriers, up to 50 percent of system-wide available seat miles." Note that it does not say that these codeshare flights will be "operated by American Airlines."

That's also how I read it, but wanted confirmation from the pilots group to verify if that was AA's intent. And, there is also a statement that reads "no additional aircraft will be added to the mainline".

After working my calculator......AA will have approx. 280 aircraft in the fleet. 610 - 330 = 280.

Now, if AA is allowed to farm out 55% of total maintenance hours based on 280 aircraft instead of 610......there's going to be mass carnage going out the door.

 

[jimntx]

When it comes to this company, I would not for a second concern myself with "what they intended." I would look only at what the actual words say, because that is what they are going to use down the road to screw you over. If it says 55% of mainline fleet count, I think it is safe to say that they mean they want up to 55% of the mainline fleet to be rjs.

They are finally going to get Crandall's wish that AE do the domestic flying and AA do the international flying. It's just that based on what is written, at least some of the AE flying will be done by AA in smaller jets.

 

[Frank Szabo]

When it comes to this company, I would not for a second concern myself with "what they intended." I would look only at what the actual words say, because that is what they are going to use down the road to screw you over. If it says 55% of mainline fleet count, I think it is safe to say that they mean they want 55% ofthe mainline fleet to be rjs.

Since the flying public love the RJs as much as they do, sounds more like a recipe for failure.

Looks good on paper and colored charts, though.

 

[FWAAA]

Or, it could be that you are reading something into what the company proposed that is not there. (Or, your version is the spin your boss has ordered you to put on the proposal.) The exact wording of the proposal from the APA website states, "In the management scope proposal, they are asking to be allowed to have up to 55 percent of the mainline fleet count (which would currently allow more than 330 aircraft) be 70- to 81-seat jets for regional feed."

It does not say, an rj fleet equivalent to 55 percent of the mainline fleet count. It says 55 percent of the mainline fleet count. As Eolesen replied to me the other day, "Sometimes you just have to take things at face value."

Even more disturbing is the statement that follows that one. "The company wants the ability to codeshare with other domestic carriers, up to 50 percent of system-wide available seat miles." Note that it does not say that these codeshare flights will be "operated by American Airlines."

Sometimes, your ignorance (and obvious hatred for me) knows no boundaries. I've read the actual proposal from AA to the APA. Your interpretation is flawed and mine is accurate.

That's also how I read it, but wanted confirmation from the pilots group to verify if that was AA's intent. And, there is also a statement that reads "no additional aircraft will be added to the mainline".

After working my calculator......AA will have approx. 280 aircraft in the fleet. 610 - 330 = 280.

Now, if AA is allowed to farm out 55% of total maintenance hours based on 280 aircraft instead of 610......there's going to be mass carnage going out the door.

As I posted earlier, the current agreement allows Eagle (or other commuters) to fly 50 seaters up to 110% of the mainline fleet count. AA is not proposing that the 71-80 seaters comprise part of the mainline fleet. AA is proposing that the total of the 71-80 seaters equal up to 55% of the number of mainline planes. Your earlier post was incorrect as is this one.

On top of that, you're misquoting the APA website when you said "And, there is also a statement that reads "no additional aircraft will be added to the mainline"." Actually, APA said that there's no language in the proposal that requires that the mainline fleet grow. Think about it for a minute - the more mainline planes, the more RJs are allowed, since the RJ limit will be 55% of whatever the mainline count is.

When it comes to this company, I would not for a second concern myself with "what they intended." I would look only at what the actual words say, because that is what they are going to use down the road to screw you over. If it says 55% of mainline fleet count, I think it is safe to say that they mean they want up to 55% of the mainline fleet to be rjs.

They are finally going to get Crandall's wish that AE do the domestic flying and AA do the international flying. It's just that based on what is written, at least some of the AE flying will be done by AA in smaller jets.

Read the actual proposal and get back to us. Your bolded sentence above makes no sense. The mainline fleet will contain no 71-80 seat RJs. There's a mainline fleet and an RJ fleet. The larger the mainline fleet, the more RJs AA could fly under the proposal.

APA leadership is angry about the 55%, of course.

 

[strikeforce]

Sometimes, your ignorance (and obvious hatred for me) knows no boundaries. I've read the actual proposal from AA to the APA. Your interpretation is flawed and mine is accurate.


As I posted earlier, the current agreement allows Eagle (or other commuters) to fly 50 seaters up to 110% of the mainline fleet count. AA is not proposing that the 71-80 seaters comprise part of the mainline fleet. AA is proposing that the total of the 71-80 seaters equal up to 55% of the number of mainline planes. Your earlier post was incorrect as is this one.

On top of that, you're misquoting the APA website when you said "And, there is also a statement that reads "no additional aircraft will be added to the mainline"." Actually, APA said that there's no language in the proposal that requires that the mainline fleet grow. Think about it for a minute - the more mainline planes, the more RJs are allowed, since the RJ limit will be 55% of whatever the mainline count is.


Read the actual proposal and get back to us. Your bolded sentence above makes no sense. The mainline fleet will contain no 71-80 seat RJs. There's a mainline fleet and an RJ fleet. The larger the mainline fleet, the more RJs AA could fly under the proposal.

APA leadership is angry about the 55%, of course.

You're right and we're wrong.

You're obviously a company tool placed on this internet site to distort the language, numbers and information. The company monitors these sites 24/7....if the company spent as much time running an efficient AA, as they spend monitoring these internet blogs....WE probably wouldn't be in BK. Instead, the company has pouring tons of money on surveillance equipment, camera's, violence training, and additional management, all in the prevention of employee revolt. The company wouldn't have to take these measures if:

1. They trusted their employees, and those employees trusted management.

2. They wouldn't go around and label employees as "bricks".

3. There was mutual respect between management and employees.

 

[FWAAA]

You're right and we're wrong.

On this one, you're correct. Advice: Try reading the actual proposal language instead of the summary on the APA website.

You're obviously a company tool placed on this internet site to distort the language, numbers and information. The company monitors these sites 24/7....if the company spent as much time fixing AA, as they spend monitoring these internet blogs....WE probably wouldn't be in BK.

I tried to correct your outlandish post as politely as possible without any insults. If it makes you feel better to insult me, that's fine. Just stop embarrassing yourself with your incorrect posts.

 

[jimntx]

Sometimes, your ignorance (and obvious hatred for me) knows no boundaries. I've read the actual proposal from AA to the APA. Your interpretation is flawed and mine is accurate.


As I posted earlier, the current agreement allows Eagle (or other commuters) to fly 50 seaters up to 110% of the mainline fleet count. AA is not proposing that the 71-80 seaters comprise part of the mainline fleet. AA is proposing that the total of the 71-80 seaters equal up to 55% of the number of mainline planes. Your earlier post was incorrect as is this one.

On top of that, you're misquoting the APA website when you said "And, there is also a statement that reads "no additional aircraft will be added to the mainline"." Actually, APA said that there's no language in the proposal that requires that the mainline fleet grow. Think about it for a minute - the more mainline planes, the more RJs are allowed, since the RJ limit will be 55% of whatever the mainline count is.


Read the actual proposal and get back to us. Your bolded sentence above makes no sense. The mainline fleet will contain no 71-80 seat RJs. There's a mainline fleet and an RJ fleet. The larger the mainline fleet, the more RJs AA could fly under the proposal.

APA leadership is angry about the 55%, of course.

You are wrong about me hating you. It's much worse. I am indifferent to you as I am to all company stooges. (Perhaps you should be looking at your disdain for anyone who is not you.) However, may I suggest that you go read the APA's website post entitled, Negotiations update, May 11, 2012. I did not interpret anything. I only cut and pasted what the APA posted on their website. If there is any interpretation, it is by the APA.

Let me cut and paste one more time. From the APA website document cited above, "Their proposal does not have any requirement for management to add additional aircraft at the mainline." That statement does not preclude the replacement of current mainline aircraft with rjs.

 

[strikeforce]

On this one, you're correct. Advice: Try reading the actual proposal language instead of the summary on the APA website.


Look, fool: I tried to correct your outlandish post as politely as possible without any insults. If it makes you feel better to insult me, that's fine. Just stop embarrassing yourself with your incorrect posts.

unfortunately, as a mechanic I don't have access to the actual proposal like you do, FOOL! I can only go on the information summary from the APA website.

 

[strikeforce]

So, you expect us to believe that AA will keep over 600 mainline aircraft, as well as, have over 300 71-80 seaters feeding AA. If that's the case why would the AA pilots object? Aren't the pilots concerned with Eagle taking more flights from AA, thus shifting more of the flying to Eagle and the smaller jets?

 

[FWAAA]

I apologize, Strikeforce. That was impolite of me.

The pilots are objecting for the same reasons they have always objected: The APA has long viewed every jet airplane on the property as belonging to the APA and should be flown by pilots on the APA seniority list. As you recall, they weren't very happy at the 200+ 37/44/50 seaters and the 25 (and then 22 more) 70 seaters. The idea that AA might have 330 71-80 seaters understandably makes them livid. And many pilots fear that those 80 seaters will in fact replace some MD-80s. And they probably will on some routes where the MD-80 or 738 is just too large but 50 seaters are just too small.

AA would not have ordered 500+ narrowbody airplanes last year if it was proposing a mainline fleet count under 300. Right now it's 610 mainline and about 300 commuter. AA has proposed a bottom-of-the-barrel mainline APA payrate for A319s: It's apparent that AA wants to replace some MD-80s with smaller mainline A319s flown by mainline pilots paid commuter rates. That makes the pilots livid also.

I understand the fear the pilots and the mechanics have that AA may shift lots more flying to regionals. But it's irrational bombast to claim that AA will shift all domestic flying (or even a large part of domestic flying) to Eagle or other regionals. UA, DL and US already have the freedom to fly a lot of large RJs and they do. AA can only fly 47 of them. That hobbles AA's ability to compete. Yet UA and DL have mainline fleets larger than AA's mainline fleet. (US, of course, is a tiny airline with a small mainline fleet) For example, for a long time, AA has flown 16-18 daily MD-80s between ORD and DFW. Until B6 and VX fly a lot of daily flights on that route, AA will still fly numerous mainline planes between those hubs. Plus hundreds more mainline flights each day.

The current APA contract limits regional jets to 110% of the mainline fleet count. Here's the language:

c.a. Determining the Maximum Number of Aircraft that Commuter Carriers May Operate.


The maximum average number of aircraft that may be operated under this Section D. during a six-month period is the number of Narrowbody Aircraft multiplied by 110%.

AA wants the ability to fly lots of 71-80 seaters, in fact, up to 55% of the mainline fleet count (better than 110% of the narrowbody fleet count, right?). I realize that the company cannot be trusted and that everything AA management says is a lie. Nevertheless, AA is not proposing to count large RJs as part of the mainline fleet. AA is proposing to measure the commuter fleet as a percentage of the mainline fleet, just like it has since AA began flying RJs in 1999. Be pissed at AA for what it is doing and what it wants to do. But don't be pissed about something AA is not even proposing.

 

[strikeforce]

I apologize, Strikeforce. That was impolite of me.

The pilots are objecting for the same reasons they have always objected: The APA has long viewed every jet airplane on the property as belonging to the APA and should be flown by pilots on the APA seniority list. As you recall, they weren't very happy at the 200+ 37/44/50 seaters and the 25 (and then 22 more) 70 seaters. The idea that AA might have 330 71-80 seaters understandably makes them livid. And many pilots fear that those 80 seaters will in fact replace some MD-80s. And they probably will on some routes where the MD-80 or 738 is just too large but 50 seaters are just too small.

AA would not have ordered 500+ narrowbody airplanes last year if it was proposing a mainline fleet count under 300. Right now it's 610 mainline and about 300 commuter. AA has proposed a bottom-of-the-barrel mainline APA payrate for A319s: It's apparent that AA wants to replace some MD-80s with smaller mainline A319s flown by mainline pilots paid commuter rates. That makes the pilots livid also.

I understand the fear the pilots and the mechanics have that AA may shift lots more flying to regionals. But it's irrational bombast to claim that AA will shift all domestic flying (or even a large part of domestic flying) to Eagle or other regionals. UA, DL and US already have the freedom to fly a lot of large RJs and they do. AA can only fly 47 of them. That hobbles AA's ability to compete. Yet UA and DL have mainline fleets larger than AA's mainline fleet. (US, of course, is a tiny airline with a small mainline fleet) For example, for a long time, AA has flown 16-18 daily MD-80s between ORD and DFW. Until B6 and VX fly a lot of daily flights on that route, AA will still fly numerous mainline planes between those hubs. Plus hundreds more mainline flights each day.

The current APA contract limits regional jets to 110% of the mainline fleet count. Here's the language:



AA wants the ability to fly lots of 71-80 seaters, in fact, up to 55% of the mainline fleet count (better than 110% of the narrowbody fleet count, right?). I realize that the company cannot be trusted and that everything AA management says is a lie. Nevertheless, AA is not proposing to count large RJs as part of the mainline fleet. AA is proposing to measure the commuter fleet as a percentage of the mainline fleet, just like it has since AA began flying RJs in 1999. Be pissed at AA for what it is doing and what it wants to do. But don't be pissed about something AA is not even proposing.

you seen the proposal, is there anything in the proposal that guarantee's AA pilot's will fly the 500+ new aircraft??

you're right AA will replace S-80, and some 737 flying with RJ's. I've been at AA for 22 years, and when I started ORD had more mainline flying than regional flying, and over those years ORD has twice as much regionals as mainline. If I was a pilot, I would be extremely concerned with any language where RJ's can account for over 50% of the mainline aircraft. And, then add 50% co-sharing ability. Plus, the new pay bands that reduce wages.....only leads most to believe that AA will most likely fly INTL flights and Eagle being the domestic carrier. For maintenance purposes.....it's a no brainer, less aircraft means less maintenance, means less mechanics. VOTE NO!

 

[FWAAA]

I haven't seen any change to the basic scope language, and that says that except as otherwise provided, all planes flown by AA or on behalf of AA belong to the pilots on the APA seniority list. And AA isn't proposing exceptions that would modify it so that someone else could fly those 500+ mainline planes. Guaranteed? Nothing's guaranteed, but APA members will still fly AA mainline planes.

There is that other hated proposal - the domestic codeshare language. UA and US have long had that kind of codeshare. DL, NW and CO did it before their mergers. AA wants to be able to codeshare with basically all of B6 and US (as the proposals don't assume a US takeover). Pilots don't like that either. I don't think it's a good idea. IMO, better to buy B6 and takeover US than codeshare with them.

 

[eolesen]

There's never been a proposal to fly the new orders with anyone except AA pilots on the APA seniority list. Period. No room for interpretation whatsoever on that one.

What AA has been seeking is the ability to operate RJs where they want to. Today the limits on how much AA can outsource is based on ASMs and the size of the aircraft used, and in the case of the TWU, which routes can be flown. That's crippled AA's ability to compete with DL, UA and even US.

AA is looking to replace it with language that limits the total number of aircraft operated to be a percentage of the mainline fleet. Much simpler to measure compliance with, too, I might add. The TWU's cap is a mess to try and figure out.

 

[strikeforce]

There's never been a proposal to fly the new orders with anyone except AA pilots on the APA seniority list. Period. No room for interpretation whatsoever on that one.

What AA has been seeking is the ability to operate RJs where they want to. Today the limits on how much AA can outsource is based on ASMs and the size of the aircraft used, and in the case of the TWU, which routes can be flown. That's crippled AA's ability to compete with DL, UA and even US.

AA is looking to replace it with language that limits the total number of aircraft operated to be a percentage of the mainline fleet. Much simpler to measure compliance with, too, I might add. The TWU's cap is a mess to try and figure out.

the ability to fly RJ's where AA wants is obviously seen as a threat. And, rightly so. Again, add in the 50% of domestic code sharing, and what's left of AA??? Probably INTL flying, maybe??