US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Keroseneuser]

The "Are you refusing to fly the airplane" is simply a trigger, just like the flows, that should occur at a point where everything that can be done to dispatch the airplane has been done and now the issue has to be "Can the captain be satisfied that the airplane conforms to it's type design and is safe for flight?"

I am sad to say that on the East side at least "Are you refusing to fly" is not a trigger to "Can the captain be satisfied". Over here it is and has been for some time a direct threat of disipline action or job termination. Mgmt. has made that very very clear to us.

 

[cleardirect]

One of the things that I see as potentially coming out of this current pilot debacle especially if the Company wins that ALL pilots should be concerned. Believe or don't I read evey post carefully, so some sniping at both sides along the way. However one of the huge negatives in my mind is erosion of the concept/precedent of Pilot in Command Authority. While it's certainly true that she exercised bad judgement by melting down in the boarding area, however the real issue has gotten "lost in the sauce" IMO.

Someone has to be the final authority as whether a plane leaves the gate. Someone with "skin in the game" like say a pilot for instance. For reasons known only to Ms Wells she felt uncomfortable taking the plane as did yet another flight crew. You can as a company second guess them the next day and duke it out verbally. However prior to boarding, push back and such the Pilot and F/O are the HMFIC's (Head Mutha F'er In Charge) end of story case closed. I trust your judgement far more than any Chief Pilot as you and I will fly directly to the crash site.

Anything that erodes that authority is not good for customer, employee or even good business. This ruling no matter how it turns out presents a clear and present danger.

I agree. Captain's authority is very important. Except when that authority is abused or misused. Have you ever heard of a rogue cop abusing his authority?

Safety is also important. With credibility if the captain says it is a safety issue it gets fixed. When usapa cries wolf and claims everything is about safety there is no credibility. Yes the captain is in charge but the company also has the right to ask why the captain made that decision. Captains authority is not a get out jail, I can make any decision I want card. The east guys think captains authority means I am god boy, never question my choice.

There is a chain of command and even pilots have supervisors that must be answered to. If you owned the airline and a pilots using "captains authority" decided to run both engines and the APU. Fly 4000 feet below planned altitude burning an additional $1000. per flight for a few weeks costing your business $10,000 would you want to talk to that pilot and at least ask why or would you say; captains authority he must have made the right decision?

How about a pilot using captains authority on a 40 degree day with no rain or moisture decided to deice spending several thousand dollars just because he had the authority to do it. Would you question his authority (decision making) or just let it go?

 

[cleardirect]

Welcome to the insanity.

Who "stormed off to Starbucks"? Is that a narrative that happens with west pilots, so you think to apply the same behavior pattern to east pilots? or, is your fevered grey matter overheated? Again.

I guess you might be a little bereft of grammar knowledge.

One is a statement on the part of the pilot, the other is a question from someone other than the pilot, someone generally in authority, and can easily be used in an accusatory manner. Hardly the "same coin". Generally a statement like the first will be followed shortly after by a question like the second. The east is not used to such treatment and forgive them for interpreting this as "questioning their judgement" as none that I know have ever used such a situation in a personal manner, making the decision only after consulting with their cockpit counterparts and some careful consideration.

I think we have a break through. "The east is not used to such treatment." Well boys you had better get used to it. That is the way the rest of the industry works. Pilots from other airlines get called in to explain their decision all the time. Just because the old US Airways let every captain decide what he thought was safe and how to run the operation is not the way to do it. Maybe that contributed to 2 BK's. I will let you in on a little secret, the pilots are not in charge or do we run the airline. If you want to run the airline go work for management. If you want to fly airplanes you are going to fly them the way the FAA and the boss tells you to.

If you can't do that find somewhere else to work that will let you make up your own rules. If it is unsafe contact the FAA. Yelling safety and misusing your authority is not the way to do it.

 

[Keroseneuser]

There is a chain of command and even pilots have supervisors that must be answered to. If you owned the airline and a pilots using "captains authority" decided to run both engines and the APU. Fly 4000 feet below planned altitude burning an additional $1000. per flight for a few weeks costing your business $10,000 would you want to talk to that pilot and at least ask why or would you say; captains authority he must have made the right decision?

How about a pilot using captains authority on a 40 degree day with no rain or moisture decided to deice spending several thousand dollars just because he had the authority to do it. Would you question his authority (decision making) or just let it go?

I don't think anybody here is disputing somebody called to the carpet for those type of items.

What we are seeing all to often is ligitimate concerns that are dealt with by direct threats of disipline. It is to the point that all crews fully expect to receive a cp call for ANYTHING that impacts the schedule.

History shows that pilot and mgmt. groups that have never had anything bad happen are inclined to accept more risk in day to day operations. With the exception of a few Captains on the 190, everysingle Capt on the east was here to see the carnage and loss of life in the 5 in 5 years. We all endured the years of "USscareways" jokes and the magnifying glass of the FAA and the industry upon us. The experience of that still affects decision making to this very day. It was a very hard learning experience to go thru and everybodys daily operations procedures still lean heavy on "Never Again"

Current mgmt. does not have that experience to draw upon, they have been lucky in my opinion so they use that luck as the basis of their assumptions that current procedures they use are 100% correct and any Captain that sees it differently is a "trouble maker" or on a job action.

 

[cleardirect]

I am sad to say that on the East side at least "Are you refusing to fly" is not a trigger to "Can the captain be satisfied". Over here it is and has been for some time a direct threat of disipline action or job termination. Mgmt. has made that very very clear to us.

Why would you be afraid of disipline or termination? The mighty usapa is there to protect you. Nothing bad should happen while you have those battle hardened soldiers fighting for you. Are you telling me that management is not cowed and intimidated by the thought of Mike Cleary or the grievance granny riding into the CPO and saving the day?

Why would you be afraid. The west guys are not being intimidated. We do our job, if the CPO calls we answer the question and go on with our day. Try it, it works pretty well.

 

[Keroseneuser]

Why would you be afraid of disipline or termination? The mighty usapa is there to protect you. Nothing bad should happen while you have those battle hardened soldiers fighting for you. Are you telling me that management is not cowed and intimidated by the thought of Mike Cleary or the grievance granny riding into the CPO and saving the day?

Why would you be afraid. The west guys are not being intimidated. We do our job, if the CPO calls we answer the question and go on with our day. Try it, it works pretty well.

From what I see daily, one of two things is happening. Either the West is so used to running crap airplanes for so long on a lucky streak with no accidents that they think that is normal for the industry. Or mgmt. is treating the west pilots different from the east and you don't see what is happening over here. I really hope it is the latter of the two.

As far as your attempt to make my comments out to be a USAPA thing, I could care less what union we may be speaking about. My issue is with what I see happening out on the line that affects the percentages of me returning home to my family at the end of the day.

 

[Iclubbabyseals]

The west guys are not being intimidated.

Absolutely wrong. They are intimidated. The west dude whose authority was questioned about delayed boarding with a mechanic working on the entry door. The supervisors who determine that an airframe is "safe" for boarding, no matter the opinion of the FA or pilots.

Many of the east pilots were in actual wars with, you know, real rockets, grenades and bullets. They know what is necessary for flight. tempe's puny attempts to recreate such an air of urgency are (and should be) met with derisive laughter. tempe, wannabe "warriors" in their own minds.

 

[prechilill]

Many of the east pilots were in actual wars with, you know, real rockets, grenades and bullets. They know what is necessary for flight. tempe's puny attempts to recreate such an air of urgency are (and should be) met with derisive laughter. tempe, wannabe "warriors" in their own minds.

EastUS! Welcome back!!! Been doing some dogfighting lately?

 

[cltrat]

if they are not being intimidated it's because they are busy cupping management's balls at least judging from some who post here.

 

[Iclubbabyseals]

EastUS! Welcome back!!! Been doing some dogfighting lately?

Wrong, dudette. Keep trying.

Like I said, most have been in war and laughingly reject tempe's efforts to re-create the same environment vigorously.

The fact that your lack of experience in most anything precludes you understanding how you are being manipulated, and not in a good way. Of course servicing others like you appear to do may be a character problem and maybe not due to a lack of experience.

 

[cleardirect]

I don't think anybody here is disputing somebody called to the carpet for those type of items.

What we are seeing all to often is ligitimate concerns that are dealt with by direct threats of disipline. It is to the point that all crews fully expect to receive a cp call for ANYTHING that impacts the schedule.

History shows that pilot and mgmt. groups that have never had anything bad happen are inclined to accept more risk in day to day operations. With the exception of a few Captains on the 190, everysingle Capt on the east was here to see the carnage and loss of life in the 5 in 5 years. We all endured the years of "USscareways" jokes and the magnifying glass of the FAA and the industry upon us. The experience of that still affects decision making to this very day. It was a very hard learning experience to go thru and everybodys daily operations procedures still lean heavy on "Never Again"

Current mgmt. does not have that experience to draw upon, they have been lucky in my opinion so they use that luck as the basis of their assumptions that current procedures they use are 100% correct and any Captain that sees it differently is a "trouble maker" or on a job action.

Which management are you talking about?

Bular, Schmitt, Hogg, Skinner, Morrell? Those guys that are running flt ops. Where they not there for the 5 in 5? Do you think they think we are just lucky so far? Did those guys not endure the jokes and FAA magnifying glass.

Upper management is about finance. Not day to day ops. Parker does not tell the CPO make sure to threaten every day and tell the gate agents to push at all costs.

 

[nic4us]

From what I see daily, one of two things is happening. Either the West is so used to running crap airplanes for so long on a lucky streak with no accidents that they think that is normal for the industry. Or mgmt. is treating the west pilots different from the east and you don't see what is happening over here. I really hope it is the latter of the two.

As far as your attempt to make my comments out to be a USAPA thing, I could care less what union we may be speaking about. My issue is with what I see happening out on the line that affects the percentages of me returning home to my family at the end of the day.

Let me get this straight. In the 6 years since the merger, the east has drove one off the pavement, collapsed a gear and killed Billy Mays, had numerous ground collisions, shot an airplane, and of course put one in the Hudson, while the West has had a "lucky streak" of zero accidents? Prior to that the West had a 20+ year "lucky streak" of zero (0) fatal accidents.

And, you do not understand why mgmt treats the West pilots different from the east pilots?

Well junior, maybe it is because as the largest operator of A320 series aircraft in the world, mgmt is treating the pilot group that has vastly more experience in that type (i.e. the West pilots), a little differently from the less experienced group that screws up on a regular basis (i.e. the east pilots).

I believe mgmt treats both groups the same. If and when the West pillots ever take out a full page USA Today ad that is a complete lie, and puts the company in a bad light, as a means to force an issue that is contrary to all the contractual obligations between the pilot group and the company, then we damage or destroy a half dozen airplanes, you will see the West pilots being scrutinized more closely by mgmt.

 

[cleardirect]

Absolutely wrong. They are intimidated. The west dude whose authority was questioned about delayed boarding with a mechanic working on the entry door. The supervisors who determine that an airframe is "safe" for boarding, no matter the opinion of the FA or pilots.

Many of the east pilots were in actual wars with, you know, real rockets, grenades and bullets. They know what is necessary for flight. tempe's puny attempts to recreate such an air of urgency are (and should be) met with derisive laughter. tempe, wannabe "warriors" in their own minds.

Here is where we differ. Getting a phone call from the CPO is not intimidation. It is a question nothing more. That west captain was not intimidated because he had to talk to the CPO. He explained the situation and it was over. Maybe he handled more professionally that an east pilots. Respectful conversation and back to work.

Controlling boarding is not really part of our job. If the gate wants to board people and make them walk over the MX they will have to answer for that. If the MX wants to allow people to walk over him while he is working that is his choice. He could stop boarding. The aircraft was being fixed. It was going to be airworthy when they left.

Yes the west dude questioned the delaying boarding. Did he get in trouble or disiplined for it? No. Was he intimidated because he wanted to delay boarding? No.

You guys really need to get out of the 60's captain is god mentality. There is a thing call CRM now. Look into it. The captain does not dictate anymore. CRM includes MX, gate, F/A, F/O ramp, dispatch, ect. Relax, let everyone do their job and when the airplane is ready to go, leave. No need to get involved in everyone else's job.

 

[nic4us]

Absolutely wrong. They are intimidated. The west dude whose authority was questioned about delayed boarding with a mechanic working on the entry door. The supervisors who determine that an airframe is "safe" for boarding, no matter the opinion of the FA or pilots.

Many of the east pilots were in actual wars with, you know, real rockets, grenades and bullets. They know what is necessary for flight. tempe's puny attempts to recreate such an air of urgency are (and should be) met with derisive laughter. tempe, wannabe "warriors" in their own minds.

I believe the story of the mechanic and the boarding door was from PI Brat, an east pilot, but I have a similar story.

Once, I told the gate agent we had a mechanical, and not to board. She replied, "You can't make that decision, I will have to get a supervisor". Seriously, I did not intend to offend her, but I laughed in her face. I regained my composure and said, "well go ahead and get the supervisor, so I can tell them I have decided not to board the airplane".

Did not feel the least bit intimidated by the agents actions. I assume what she meant to say was she needed to get her supervisor involved as per her protocols. Also figured that todays lesson on who is in charge would be better taught with the supervisor at hand, just in case the supervisor needed the same lesson.

 

[Keroseneuser]

Once, I told the gate agent we had a mechanical, and not to board. She replied, "You can't make that decision, I will have to get a supervisor". Seriously, I did not intend to offend her, but I laughed in her face. I regained my composure and said, "well go ahead and get the supervisor, so I can tell them I have decided not to board the airplane".

Had you been an east pilot you most likely would have been called in for a disiplinary fact finding meeting.

I witnessed the same scenario you just described in LGA on a deadhead, the supervisor showed up at the door to the a/c with the passengers in tow and instead of talking with the captain his first words were, "These passengers ARE boarding now and you have zero to say about it"