US Pilots Labor Discussion

[cactusboy53]

Local FBI Office Answering Machine: "You have reached the FBI. If you are calling about an active case, please leave your name & number. We will call you as soon as possible."

Mike Cleary: "Yes. This is PRESIDENT MICHAEL CLEARY of the US Airline Pilots Association in Charlotte, NC. I have left numerous messages on this recorder regarding the ID theft I had mentioned before. I know your agents are busy, but this is a VERY IMPORTANT case and I demand results! If you don't respond soon, I will have to authorize a full page ad in the US Today newspaper regarding your lack of action. I may also authorize a lawsuit of some sort as well. I demand that you return my phone calls immediately. Hello? Is there anyone there? Hello??!!??"

Scene @ the local FBI office: Agents mimicking "PRESIDENT MICHAEL CLEARY" while listening to his little tirade. Hoots & guffaws of laughter, tears streaming down the agents cheeks. One agent excuses himself to run to the bathroom before he pees his pants....

 

[Black Swan]

I definitely agree, but it hasn't been me repeatedly claiming a "very specific definition" for the word freeze in the contract. I presented two specific instances where freeze is used in the contract. You first said one had a different definition since it had no end date and the frozen pension was superseded by a different pension. Fair enough. So I pointed out that the other usage - training freeze - had a specific end date just like the freeze in the pay section of LOA 93. Now you're saying that that use doesn't count either. Having an end date specified apparently doesn't matter, although you've ranted on and on about the meaning of having an end date. Now you're desperately trying to cling to a special meaning of freeze, abandoning the arguments you've used for months. So what is there in LOA 93 that gives the word freeze an unusual definition if having an end date doesn't? Sure, you've come up with a definition that isn't in the contract or LOA 93. But what IN THE CONTRACT OR LOA 93 SAYS THAT?

Spare the bs, the insults, the attacks - just point out where in the contract it specifies the meaning of freeze that you're so desperately clinging to...

Jim

I don't get where you are going saying I don't go along with the training freeze concept. I absolutely go with it
with the caveat it is not negotiations in any way, shape or form. I buy the concept totally. A training freeze is simply a hold on a pilots position, at the behest of the company to facilitate their staffing needs on a relatively short term basis. The pilot is held, in base or equipment, or both, and paid what he/she was awarded in the bid. It is not a permanent freeze. Just like the LOA pay. It has an end date, then it reverts to what it is supposed to be. In the case of a training freeze, you move along to your bid award. In the context of a LOA Freeze, you revert to what you were being paid, prior to the freeze and adjustment down. What is so difficult with this concept? You are now trying to say the freeze, as it applies to LOA 93 reverts to what you NEGOTIATE. NO WAY! No use of the term negotiate in training freeze, no use of the term negotiate in the LOA pay Freeze. None whatsoever. It is you who inserted that concept, nobody else. So that use of the term FREEZE in our CBA is absolutely seamless and clear and its' understanding. The general term freeze, as it is applied to a pay freeze, is what I already quoted numerous times. Since you can't seem to get it, here it is, again. You tell me where it says it is forever. The definition fits our financial situation perfectly.




salary freeze


Definition
A situation in which a company temporarily stops giving raises to employees because of financial difficulties.


Read more: http://www.investorwords.com/4360/salary_freeze.html#ixzz1YLMLM5LN



Salary Freeze

What Does Salary Freeze Mean?
The action of a company suspending salary increases for a period of time.
Investopedia explains Salary Freeze
A salary freeze typically occurs when a company is experiencing financial difficulties. It may choose to freeze salaries for a while in order to minimize layoffs. Once the company is in a better financial position, the salary freeze would likely be lifted.
Filed Under: Careers
Related Terms
Bankruptcy Risk
Chasing Nickels Around Dollar Bills
Hiring Freeze
Justified Wage
Layoff
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
More Related Terms



Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/salaryfreeze.asp#ixzz1YLMfaTZP

 

[Black Swan]

You are most likely going to find out this week that the East Pilots have won the LOA 93 pay restoration grievance. Good luck to all of us. In spite of all the adversity, the naysayers, the doubters, the East pilots are going to rightfully achieve their pay restoration.

 

[luvthe9]

I
salary freeze


Definition
A situation in which a company temporarily stops giving raises to employees because of financial difficulties.


Read more: http://www.investorwords.com/4360/salary_freeze.html#ixzz1YLMLM5LN



Salary Freeze

What Does Salary Freeze Mean?
The action of a company suspending salary increases for a period of time.
Investopedia explains Salary Freeze
A salary freeze typically occurs when a company is experiencing financial difficulties. It may choose to freeze salaries for a while in order to minimize layoffs. Once the company is in a better financial position, the salary freeze would likely be lifted.
Filed Under: Careers
Related Terms
Bankruptcy Risk
Chasing Nickels Around Dollar Bills
Hiring Freeze
Justified Wage
Layoff
Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act
More Related Terms



Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/salaryfreeze.asp#ixzz1YLMfaTZP

They will come to understand this concept shortly, you will hear their cries all the way out here. Then they will get it.

 

[nic4us]

You are most likely going to find out this week that the East Pilots have won the LOA 93 pay restoration grievance. Good luck to all of us. In spite of all the adversity, the naysayers, the doubters, the East pilots are going to rightfully achieve their pay restoration.

If Kasher totally disregards the language of the LOA, then maybe you night get something, crazier things have happened.

What kind of torques me though is usapa's persuit of this absolutely frivolous loser of a grievence, because the east whiners are still pissed about the fact that they threw parity and/or any chance of an improved contract out the window with the election of usapa.

LOA93 is all that is in your future for some time to come, then in the end it will be a joint Nic inclusive contract, and the east will have wasted billions...yes billions, in contract improvements.


PS. your rates are "frozen" then REDUCED as frozen. So, it is the same rate once the freeze ends.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

If Kasher totally disregards the language of the LOA, then maybe you night get something, crazier things have happened.

What kind of torques me though is usapa's persuit of this absolutely frivolous loser of a grievence, because the east whiners are still pissed about the fact that they threw parity and/or any chance of an improved contract out the window with the election of usapa.

LOA93 is all that is in your future for some time to come, then in the end it will be a joint Nic inclusive contract, and the east will have wasted billions...yes billions, in contract improvements.


PS. your rates are "frozen" then REDUCED as frozen. So, it is the same rate once the freeze ends.

Well, looks like your" torque wrench" will be getting a work out for a long, long time to come, PS there will be no joint list and the risk you assumed will come to fruition!MM

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Absolutely, and there hasn't been a hybrid DFR filed naming the company and USAPA has there. Until the company does something, without court relief from liability, such a suit would still be unripe.



Not in the sense of one specified by law after which a hybrid DFR suit would be too late because of the TA. But practically, the TA will exist until the two groups are combined so a statute of limitations exists in law for a DFR suit (the 9th clarified when the clock starts) which would include a hybrid DFR suit.

Jim

Well when the two groups are never combihed, and are split apart the threat of any monetary damages goes away! imagine that!

 

[apollo]

What kind of torques me though is usapa's persuit of this absolutely frivolous loser of a grievence.............

A frivolous loser of a grievance is when the west pilots pretended for years that they did not know they were being overpaid for training. When parker came for the payback, you thieves whined about it. You should have admitted you were being overpaid right away but, your flaw is you think it is possible that others are as dumb as the west pilots. This is why the East pilots have LifeLock (tm) and you have phx baselock.

west pilots rant below;

"The catalyst of this was the issue of “Distance Learning Pay.” In what has become its standard operating procedure, the company admitted a mistake on their part last year and said that they overpaid the former AWA pilots for two years in the approximate amount of $2200.00 for Captains and $1500.00 for F/O’s. Our contract never envisioned that degree of incompetence on the part of the company, and requires repayment in only four bid periods. $550.00 per month would leave a mark in any pilot's budget. In an “emergency” Crews News in April of 2010, Parker made the offer to take the matter to arbitration, prove his case, and then (only if the company won the arbitration), to collect the money over a one-year period instead of four bid periods. That offer seemed like a fair and acceptable compromise to our pilots at the time. Fast forward one year to just last week. The USAPA Grievance Chair, without input from even a single West pilot, short-circuited the arbitration in favor of simply having the West pilots repay the alleged overage without question, and without the benefit of submitting the issue to arbitration. Someone described this situation as collusion. After all, the company wanted its money back (or just more money from its pilots), and the union, by the decision it made, has now proven that it wanted the former AWA pilots to give it to them."

Your lucky you did not have to pay in four bid periods.

 

[AWE_SHUCKS]

[REMOVED]

 

[BoeingBoy]

I don't get where you are going saying I don't go along with the training freeze concept. I absolutely go with it
with the caveat it is not negotiations in any way, shape or form. I buy the concept totally. A training freeze is simply a hold on a pilots position, at the behest of the company to facilitate their staffing needs on a relatively short term basis.

I see you still don't understand the training freeze - talking about a hold but calling it a training freeze. So continuing that discussion is fruitless since you keep making it up as you go. How long have you been working under that contract language? A week or two?

So if I understand you correctly, there isn't a single "very specific definition" of freeze in the contract, even though you've claimed that for months. According to you Kasher asked about the historical use of "freeze" in the contract, but all you can come up with is a definition that isn't in the contract and doesn't fit any use of "freeze" in the contract. Yet that's going to carry the day, or at least that's your claim now. Of course, having a "very specific definition" in the contract was going to carry the day for a long time. Then it was "having an end date" that was going to carry the day - after I pointed out a use of "freeze" that didn't fit your new "very specific definition" it was not having to negotiate that was going to carry the day. Now it's disregard the end date, not having to negotiate and a dictionary's definition that's really, really, no kidding, gosh darn it, going to carry the day.

You are a laugh a minute....

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

can't we just asign these little west pricks to do all the east distance learning for 2 years... 😀

Why don't you do that - it would solve all the problems. The Easties would be out of work - no flying, so no job, so no MIGS for you. The West would have all the votes and control the union. What would be first on the agenda after no Easties were in positions with USAPA - accept Nic and negotiate a contract maybe?

Jim

 

[AWE_SHUCKS]

Why don't you do that - it would solve all the problems. The Easties would be out of work - no flying, so no job, so no MIGS for you. The West would have all the votes and control the union. What would be first on the agenda after no Easties were in positions with USAPA - accept Nic and negotiate a contract maybe?

Jim

they are probably stupid enough (like you) to still insist on the nic with no easties working

 

[BoeingBoy]

they are probably stupid enough (like you) to still insist on the nic with no easties working

Just like the retirees that are on the seniority list for up to a year after retirement, the Easties would be on the list in name only...so great idea you had there...

Jim

 

[Claxon]

A frivolous loser of a grievance is when the west pilots pretended for years that they did not know they were being overpaid for training. When parker came for the payback, you thieves whined about it. You should have admitted you were being overpaid right away but, your flaw is you think it is possible that others are as dumb as the west pilots. This is why the East pilots have LifeLock (tm) and you have phx baselock.

west pilots rant below;

"The catalyst of this was the issue of “Distance Learning Pay.” In what has become its standard operating procedure, the company admitted a mistake on their part last year and said that they overpaid the former AWA pilots for two years in the approximate amount of $2200.00 for Captains and $1500.00 for F/O’s. Our contract never envisioned that degree of incompetence on the part of the company, and requires repayment in only four bid periods. $550.00 per month would leave a mark in any pilot's budget. In an “emergency” Crews News in April of 2010, Parker made the offer to take the matter to arbitration, prove his case, and then (only if the company won the arbitration), to collect the money over a one-year period instead of four bid periods. That offer seemed like a fair and acceptable compromise to our pilots at the time. Fast forward one year to just last week. The USAPA Grievance Chair, without input from even a single West pilot, short-circuited the arbitration in favor of simply having the West pilots repay the alleged overage without question, and without the benefit of submitting the issue to arbitration. Someone described this situation as collusion. After all, the company wanted its money back (or just more money from its pilots), and the union, by the decision it made, has now proven that it wanted the former AWA pilots to give it to them."

Your lucky you did not have to pay in four bid periods.

The western thieves seek to not only steal identities, but the company pay they received unlawfully. Amazing that not a one of them noticed they were overpaid.Some 1500 and not a one noticed? It is a very cohesive band of criminals. First they want to steal seniority they never earned, then they steal from the very hand that feeds them, Franke Air. You cannot pull a deal off on Franke Air. They are obsessed with money, and want it all for themselves. Will the bottom line be they are "harmed" when they have to expeditiously pay back the stolen funds? I would imagine, in their twisted and entitled manner of thought, they might press the issue. Very much like the criminal who is injured fleeing the police and injured in a car crash seeks damage against the police pursuer. A twisted logic. Franke Air mgt. is not fooled by criminals, as criminals absolutely possess the skills to recognize same. The western criminals need to pay back with interest the funds they stole. Within the time frame of one month.

 

[Move2CLT]

It's quite obvious that the east is not obsessed with money as they keep giving it away at every opportunity. Pensions and then pay - all given away willing by Wolfe Air pilots.

And then the east idiots execute an illegal job action because they feel badly that they gave away all their money willingly and freely and have now had second thoughts.

Right Claxon?