US Pilots' Labor Discussion 10/27-11/?

[cleardirect]

That's like saying you gave your wallet away to the mugger holding a gun in your face.

Nobody is going to finance bankrupt company unless they get the deal on their terms.

The company went bankrupt a second time without funding the DB plan.

I think someone finally answered their own question. The lenders were not going to lend any money and allow the DB plan to continue. So your choice was No company No job, and in the end no pension. Or no pension, but financing to bring the company out of BK and a pay check going forward.

Would you all feel better voting on that? Those were the choices.

 

[exB717Flyer]

I'm actually looking forward to the result of the pension referendum. It's fascinating how the Easties actually think their airline could be the only one going through bankruptcy (ahem, make that two) without losing their pension. They could've held all the referenda they liked with 100% voting against -- the judge would've still stripped it away. Experience has shown it's better to negotiate a bad outcome rather than have it forced.

 

[oscarjazz]

Experience has shown it's better to negotiate a bad outcome rather than have it forced.

That is exactly correct. In Delta's case, we saw the writing on the wall from the US Air and United cases. Instead of tilting at windmills, we got a note payment of $650 million and a bankruptcy claim of $2.1 billion which netted us $1.3+ billion in cash. That was more than $2 billion in returns or an average of over $300,000 per pilot. Some pilots received more than $1 million in returns. Sometimes it is better to deal with reality rather than dream about what should have been.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Metroyet,

I initially supported USAPA because I believe their information. However, I was wrong to support them. When I found out the new union was being hihacked by the Hardline sentiment of the ALPA MEC I quickly shifted gears.

I'm not sure what your comment about sympathy is about. I'm content in my personal situation and do not carry any anger, unlike many pilots and apparently you from your posts.

My intent is simple: To provide factual information to help all of US Airways' stakeholders (Shareholders, the Board, Management, Employees, and Customers alike) prosper and have the best possible experience.

I personally believe Union officials enriching them self at the expense of the rank-and-file, union officials providing a distraction on emotional issues to mask the real issues at hand, no new contract movement, multiple lawsuits piting Pilots against Pilots, and a total inability for the same type of Union officials who ran East-ALPA (that now run USAPA) to gain a new contract are all unacceptable points to me.

I hope that makes sense.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[USA320Pilot]

Luvthe9,

Luvthe9 said: "Considering Pollock gave my !.7 million pension away I don't mind spending 1890."

USA320Pilot comments: According to former MEC Chairman Bob Gaudioso, "as long as FASB 106 stands unmodified then restoring the pension would only result in the same situation we were in when they terminated it. The question isn’t really whether the pension was under funded. The real problem is that in 1990 when the IRS came out with FASB 106 which required all DB plans to account for the liability of their DB plan with a 20 year amortization. The government thought they were doing a good thing by forcing companies to fund their plans."

"Instead what they did was set up a system of inevitable failure of most if not all DB plans. Prior to 1990 there was no amortization schedule on DB plans, they were considered on-going plans and as such the funding requirements and liability requirements where reasonably absorbed by most corporations. With the advent of FASB 106 the government set up a situation where if the country was doing well then the stock market was doing well and your company was doing well and there was no need to fund your pension plans. However, if the economic wind turned against you and the country went into a recession and the stock market went down your company would be hit with an unreasonable and in some cases a back breaking funding requirement."

"Now everyone knew these plans would enter into a temporary funding default at some point. Once the stock market went back up the funding levels would again be met and the plans would be solvent. At least in theory! When our plan fell below the funding levels the stock market was around 8400 on the Dow and 840 on the S&P about where it is now. In essence, if our plan was restored right now the company would most likely utilize the bankruptcy route again to get out from under the liability without a change in the FASB 106 requirements."

"ALPA and all the industry knew about this problem when it was first proposed."

"ALPA and the ATA fought the government and tried to get FASB 106 modified or thrown out. The IRS refused to budge. When notification of our plan falling below the funding levels was made all we needed was for the Bush administration."

"The same gov’t whose job it is to protect us. Now, when we had the opportunity to freeze the plan we obviously should have taken it. When Seth Schoefield came to the MEC in the early 90s with a proposal to convert our plan over to a DC plan we obviously should have taken it."

"We as a pilot group are also responsible for the decisions we made to allow the amortization level to be modified a bit and our fund would have been able to weather the storm."

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[Freighterguynow]

USAPA purchased two new Taurus vehicles for their use ..... and now additional use of automobiles, if necessary.

Which is exactly how the former ALPA MEC ran things in Pittsburgh with 2 leased minivans/ additional rentals when needed.

Guess you need to keep on looking for another union to join.

 

[Metroyet]

I personally believe Union officials enriching them self at the expense of the rank-and-file, union officials providing a distraction on emotional issues to mask the real issues at hand, no new contract movement, multiple lawsuits piting Pilots against Pilots, and a total inability for the same type of Union officials who ran East-ALPA (that now run USAPA) to gain a new contract are all unacceptable points to me.

I hope that makes sense.

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Actually it makes NO sense.

A 5th grader could have told you that a completely fractured pilot group, "led" by a majority to strip all rights away from the minority, would have resulted in your list of complaints above.

You thought the company would be scared of a totally disorganized group with ZERO unity?

You didn't think there would be any lawsuits?

Your side was told in no uncertain terms that was going to happen well before the election...you missed that?

You thought that a new union meant new members?

That's odd. What's that old saying about the definition of insanity? Doing the same thing and expecting different results? Who did you think was going to end up running your little Eastie circus?

...you actually considered all of this and EXPECTED that you could achieve a better contract? Your side WALKED OUT of negotiations remember? Since you cheered on that maneuver, (in the hopes you could steal what you couldn't negotiate) I have no sympathy for you.

The fact that you have the Audacity to complain about the pace of negotiations...the ones you guys derailed and intentionally crippled, is hysterical...if not mental. Speaking of mental, why are you so wound up about a couple of thousand bucks in assessments but don't seem to mind the hundreds of millions of dollars lost on the campaign to destroy the West and ignore binding arbitration? You chose this path with your vote...REMEMBER??

Every single problem you have was created by the East. You did it. Get it yet? Life has consequences. Adults should know that.

 

[hp_fa]

Now this is an interesting read. Link

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

Which is exactly how the former ALPA MEC ran things in Pittsburgh with 2 leased minivans/ additional rentals when needed.

Guess you need to keep on looking for another union to join.

Wasn't it the founding "van riders'" position that usapa would be an entirely different sort of union than ALPA? Well other than riding around now in sedans vs. minivans, the usapa leadership sure seems to have been spawned from the same snake mold as alpa. Looks like a duck, quacks, like a duck.......

Looking for another union other than usapa though? Don't think so - gonna fix this one from within. And the re-modeling will take place soon after the inevitable meltdown. Look for the real rumbling to begin Jan 1, when the 35 year CA's see how usapa diluted their "rebate" check. Tick tock.....

 

[electricjet98]

Now this is an interesting read.

OT, but what is your take on USAPA's efforts to move the damages portion of the DFR to Washington?

 

[HPDriver]

Now this is an interesting read. Link

Very good read.

You east guys want to spin this for me?

 

[nycbusdriver]

Now this is an interesting read. Link

Something always puzzled me about NPC threatening to stop the CC processing. Why would they be the only vendor to a company in Chapter 11 to have the privilege of walking away? All other vendors have to continue delivering their services until the court says otherwise. We had hotel managers that had their knuckles rapped by their OWN legal departments for trying to refuse rooms to US crews on layovers. Why did everybody assume NPC would get a pass on this? The NPC card was certainly a big player in the ALPA MEC's decision to cave on the pension.

 

[ClueByFour]

Why would they be the only vendor to a company in Chapter 11 to have the privilege of walking away? All other vendors have to continue delivering their services until the court says otherwise. We had hotel managers that had their knuckles rapped by their OWN legal departments for trying to refuse rooms to US crews on layovers. Why did everybody assume NPC would get a pass on this? The NPC card was certainly a big player in the ALPA MEC's decision to cave on the pension.

Your understanding of how bankruptcy law is incorrect. Vendors don't necessarily have to perform in all circumstances. If they don't have an out, they can still (in some cases) fall back on the original terms of the contract. If the existing contract (entered pre-bankruptcy) allowed NPC to walk away at a certain cash level, BK does not save the airline from that requirement.

 

[hp_fa]

I am not sure that what I am about to say is correct, so don't take this to the bank. However, in most reorganizations the debtor gets to accept the contract as written, reject the contract or renegotiate it. No other processing company was looking for US Air's business, US Air could not reject the contract (because no one else would step in) and NPC obviously didn't want to renegotiate.

Anyway, that would be my best guess right now.

 

[Reed Richards]

Look for the real rumbling to begin Jan 1, when the 35 year CA's see how usapa diluted their "rebate" check. Tick tock.....

Are you talking about union dues being taken out of the LOA 93 checks? I cannot say for sure, but I believe they were recently exempted from dues by the BPR. Any help, anyone?

RR