US Pilots Labor Discussion

[toganoflex]

He gets paid by the hour, he's in no rush to come to a quick conclusion. Yes, he is an "attorney" LMAO.

No, he does not get paid by the hour.

 

[toganoflex]

While riding home on my flight today, I read the latest Leonidas piece of trash that is floating around. It details the history of this SLI integration from a very one sided point of view.

After I finished it, the thing that stuck in my mind was just how similar that writing is to the Wake trial......only one side of the coin was allowed to be viewed by the jury, with strick instructions from Wake to the jury. It was a sham all the way......the jury had no other way to rule.....what else could they say?

To anyone reading the AOL trash, it's the same kind of sham.....no mention of the Mid Atlantic problem that was left out by NIC, nothing about the discrepancy in years of service, the $8 billion that the East pilots gave up to keep their jobs, and on and on......fabricated BS.

You guys out West just keep wishing.......it will come true......sure "that's the ticket"

Those AOL booklets are spot on. You disregard them because they don't conform to your warped sense of reality.

All info is verifiable online. Try it sometime.

 

[cleardirect]

For once think this through. You are all running scared for Glass who you say created LOA 93. Why would he put himself and the company in the position to pay $145 million PLUS $35 million in 2009 without even negotiating? He knows as well as every east pilot, you all have said it. You want everything back that you gave up. Why put the company in a position to start with a $180 million bill? Parker has said it before. Why give pay parity, that is the carrot to change the rest of the contract. The company is not going to snap back hand you the money then neg the rest of the contract, which you want improvements in every section. You would never get it done. You would live on LOA 93 work rules forever.

Think about it from a business point of view. Jerry Glass point of view. If you think he is such a snake he would never allow even the possibility of snap back, especially when he had the club of BK to use. He would have beaten the best deal forever.

This grievance was a distraction for the masses to keep you loyal to Cleary and usapa. Nothing more. How will Cleary and usapa spin a loss? Whose fault will it be? ALPA? The arbitrator? The west pilots? The company? Will you blame the grievance committee for messing it up? Misreading what it says? Blame Cleary for distracting you for over a year getting your hopes up only to be dashed?

 

[Black Swan]

I know it was spelled out very clearly in LOA 93. Lump sum $35 million for 2 years. That was written in there. Why did the company give you $35 million for 2 years starting the day after your contract became amendable?

If it was spelled out for the lump sum why was it not spelled out clearly what rate you would "unfreeze" to? It would have been simple. Attach a rate sheet to the date. No looking no interpreting. Here are the rates.

Try thinking like a business instead of a pilot. The company was not going to give you $70 million PLUS pat raises without negotiating while they had ATSB loans to pay off.

Your context is way off. You have to think like a pilot here, not a businessman. Remember, this was a re opening of a contract, not a negotiations per se. This was a concession that came off the pilots giving up under duress, so you have to view it as such. There was already a pay rate established. The concession merely used that established rate, in order to come up with a concessionary one. That is why the figures and language are used. We had the rates, they reduced them 18% and froze them. They had a start and end date to make it easy.I don't know why Brookman said what he did.I personally took the Butkovic view, and I know he would NEVER give for that long. He loves $$$$ too much for that! I viewed it entirely differently and never thought we would then have to NEGOTIATE at the end.And, the language supports this. I still ask you to produce the word re negotiate in that LOA. It was sold to the pilots as a cut for that time period, which was way too long for me personally. The 35 million was a clawback to get more to go for it. It is that simple. My feeling is they never thought they would have to pay the 35 mil. nor re pay the concession on Dec 31 2009. I think they thought they would be long gone, and they actually are. It is Parker dealing with this, not the original players, so that theory has been proven to be true. This was not negotiations in any traditional sense. You have to view this as the company on fire, and a quick save. That is why the long date was used. The conventional wisdom was the place will either be here or not that far out, and who would give them that pay cut forever. It was long enough as it was. Look at the money the company has made at certain points during this LOA. It bears it out. I will get you the rates later today when Hate2Fly gets back from Europe. he has them.

 

[toganoflex]

I am going to say you are incorrect about number 2. This one, is final and binding. This one is a different animal, between the company and a union. Big difference between this an an internal union dispute/bargaining position. Wait, and you'll see shortly.

Ah yea. Brookman got it wrong and this arbitration IS final and binding. Amazing how its always different for you guys.

And last I checked, the company is a part of this. DJ anyone?

 

[Black Swan]

For once think this through. You are all running scared for Glass who you say created LOA 93. Why would he put himself and the company in the position to pay $145 million PLUS $35 million in 2009 without even negotiating? He knows as well as every east pilot, you all have said it. You want everything back that you gave up. Why put the company in a position to start with a $180 million bill? Parker has said it before. Why give pay parity, that is the carrot to change the rest of the contract. The company is not going to snap back hand you the money then neg the rest of the contract, which you want improvements in every section. You would never get it done. You would live on LOA 93 work rules forever.

Think about it from a business point of view. Jerry Glass point of view. If you think he is such a snake he would never allow even the possibility of snap back, especially when he had the club of BK to use. He would have beaten the best deal forever.

This grievance was a distraction for the masses to keep you loyal to Cleary and usapa. Nothing more. How will Cleary and usapa spin a loss? Whose fault will it be? ALPA? The arbitrator? The west pilots? The company? Will you blame the grievance committee for messing it up? Misreading what it says? Blame Cleary for distracting you for over a year getting your hopes up only to be dashed?

Clear, we had these big rates already! Don't you get it? We were making about 225/hr group 2 capt for a short period of time there. If you cut it 18% for all those years out, with the rest of the givebacks, they got a save and a smoking deal. You are looking at it from your perspective. That was a coup to get those cuts for that period. Nobody knew what the future held at that point. They got a deal for those years, and it paid off. Nobody was looking at this from a negotiation standpoint. You somehow forgot what was going on in that time period. They weren't even thinking about negotiating anything, anytime. It was all about that particular day.

 

[Black Swan]

Ah yea. Brookman got it wrong and this arbitration IS final and binding. Amazing how its always different for you guys.

And last I checked, the company is a part of this. DJ anyone?

Make his case then. What is your argument to support his position, seeing the language of LOA 93?

 

[cactusboy53]

They could have ducked Addington? They DID duck Addington. You wish they ducked it. It cost you 2 million for nothing 😀

Addington is not "ducked".....it is just temporarily duct taped on the shelve. The DFR claim is not RIPE (YET). Once you pass that bar, it is then RIPE and the duct tape is off. BTW, while we have spent our own two million and HELPED your side with your share of legal expenses (against us), it is still the best $$ spent. I wonder how far USAPA could have gone if the AWA union dues were collecting in a trust account somewhere? The fact is without the AWA pilots union dues, USAPA would have been stewed, screwed and tatooed.

The law, ethics, morals and time are on our side. Cleary keeps out-spending the USAPA budget with pointless, fruitless, expensive litigation.

Heck, I have heard el presidente moved his office into the USAPA conference room (because his office had too much road noise.... 😱 ). Gee, I wonder where conferences will now be held? I wonder if that will cost USAPA more $$ to secure additional conference room space? I wonder who is going to pay the professional movers for moving el presidente' stuff from his office to the conference room? I wonder if anyone out east is OK with this little Lord of the Flies regime?

 

[cactusboy53]

I agree BS. This should have went equal pay for equal work from the beginning.

That would be great. Here's the problem: The Parker, Kirby and every other senior manager has stated (even prior to USAPA) that pay parity would arrive by the completed joint contract ONLY. Parker said that giving you pay parity would completely eradicate any east pilot's desire to complete a joint contract. I don't know about you, but as a business person...that makes complete sense to me.

As a result of the AAA actions, the voting in of USAPA and the OBVIOUS delays in a new contract associated with the inception of a completely NEW CBA........we have all spent the last 4 years without a contract improvement. In other words, we are in this pickle because of actions of the majority of this pilot group.

This circumstance is just like the Nicolau (from your perspective): Not getting pay parity is NOT FAIR. You kept asking and were denied....NOT FAIR. If you don't get a favorable decision from Kasher.....NOT FAIR.

The question is this: Are the majority of you willing to work under LOA 93 to retirement, or are you willing to address the possibility that you can change the constitution and make this a union for all US Airways pilots. It is up to each of us to get involved and make changes. Failing that......we await the courts to do Doug's job for him (YEARS & YEARS).

 

[toganoflex]

Make his case then. What is your argument to support his position, seeing the language of LOA 93?

The fact that he's one of your own and was involved with the process.

You, in the other hand, have nothing.

Add to my argument that Parker stated publically that an LOA 93 snapback was a dealbreaker. You really think he and his lawyers didn't do deep DD when putting it all together?

And Kasher is notorious for siding with the company if there is any ambiguity regarding language.

You won't win this.

 

[Black Swan]

The fact that he's one of your own and was involved with the process.

You, in the other hand, have nothing.

Add to my argument that Parker stated publically that an LOA 93 snapback was a dealbreaker. You really think he and his lawyers didn't do deep DD when putting it all together?

And Kasher is notorious for siding with the company if there is any ambiguity regarding language.

You won't win this.

Your Brookman quote was him urging his council to down LOA 93. He was not negotiating. I stand by the language, not the involvement of one pilot. I look at the finished product, not the players. The language stands, Brookman, an opinion. I don't deny he said that at all, I just don't see where it says what he said at all in there. Perhaps he said it the way he did to sway his pilots to say no.

 

[traderjake]

This should have went equal pay for equal work from the beginning.

We were offered equal pay (the West contract) from the beginning and turned it down.

 

[Black Swan]

For once think this through. You are all running scared for Glass who you say created LOA 93. Why would he put himself and the company in the position to pay $145 million PLUS $35 million in 2009 without even negotiating? He knows as well as every east pilot, you all have said it. You want everything back that you gave up. Why put the company in a position to start with a $180 million bill? Parker has said it before. Why give pay parity, that is the carrot to change the rest of the contract. The company is not going to snap back hand you the money then neg the rest of the contract, which you want improvements in every section. You would never get it done. You would live on LOA 93 work rules forever.

Think about it from a business point of view. Jerry Glass point of view. If you think he is such a snake he would never allow even the possibility of snap back, especially when he had the club of BK to use. He would have beaten the best deal forever.

This grievance was a distraction for the masses to keep you loyal to Cleary and usapa. Nothing more. How will Cleary and usapa spin a loss? Whose fault will it be? ALPA? The arbitrator? The west pilots? The company? Will you blame the grievance committee for messing it up? Misreading what it says? Blame Cleary for distracting you for over a year getting your hopes up only to be dashed?

Well, I ask you. How will you deal with this "distraction" if it comes home to roost, seeing how I am always asked how I will live on LOA 93. I know I will not live on LOA 93 long, because every day I fly, I see pilots not willing to live on it. As does the company. It will take Parker out of his job if he lets this go on. But let us get back to the question: What will the west pilots do if the LOA 93 pay is a win. Because that question is much more relevant. We all know what LOA 93 is, what will happen if the east gets the new pay? What is your plan? How will YOU deal with the fact the east pilots will just back burner a contract for a long time. What does that do for you? I see how you react now when it is brought up. You cannot even begin to deal with it. It is just a big denial, and back in your face. I ask again: WHAT WILL THE WEST PILOTS DO IF THE EAST PILOTS WIN?

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

I ask again: WHAT WILL THE WEST PILOTS DO IF THE EAST PILOTS WIN?

I won't even raise an eyebrow. None of us will ever see that if you win. And by none of us, I mean none of us, east or west.

 

[Black Swan]

I won't even raise an eyebrow. None of us will ever see that if you win. And by none of us, I mean none of us, east or west.

I ask you one thing: how do they ignore Kasher? The fact they used the first date, 5/01/04 to take the first cash grab means the end date is valid too. You cannot use one and ignore the other. Kasher is too smart for them. I will wager you if we win, they WILL pay. One question, what does the date mean on the inspection sticker on your car? What does the date April 15 mean? You cannot selectively ignore dates on legal documents, especially when you already showed your intent and used the first parameter.