US Pilots Labor Discussion

[nycbusdriver]

I suspect that it's because a USAPA win on LOA 93 (significant pay raises) would provide a game changing amount of financial leverage with regard to ongoing contract negotiations with Team Tempe and it would also be a pay rate that quite a few West pilots would be interested in obtaining also.

If the east pilots win with Kasher, those pay rates would have to be the new starting point for negotiations. The NAC wouldn't dare give up any hourly pay unless there were huge offsets in work rules and benefits. There would be vitally NO incentive to back off that level of compensation for the east pilots. NONE.

If the NAC thinks they can use an LOA 93 win as a bargaining chip to balance out a pay raise for the west, they're smoking dope.

After the way the Tempe brain trust, their Crystal City predecessors and the American Worst pilots have treated the east for the last 8 years, there is absolutely no motivation over on the east to give anybody, management or west pilots, a break.

If Kasher comes through for the east pilots, the phrase, "Full pay to the last day," takes on a whole new meaning and level of significance.

If USAPA wins the LOA 93 "final and binding" grievance does US Airways have comply with the Arbitrator's Opinion & Award and pay the higher wage rates?

DUH!

Of course, in your true fashion, you can cry that the company can't afford it and that the pilots should voluntarily give back the pay to save the corporation.

(For those of you who don't know it, he actually advocated returning some of our pay to the company immediately after 9-11.)

 

[nycbusdriver]

Wow, we agree on something.

Truly amazing, huh?

 

[Rookie Jr]

My fear is that you may be exactly correct

If you are not an east pilot why would it matter to you?

 

[Zone5]

If the east pilots win with Kasher, those pay rates would have to be the new starting point for negotiations. The NAC wouldn't dare give up any hourly pay unless there were huge offsets in work rules and benefits. There would be vitally NO incentive to back off that level of compensation for the east pilots. NONE.

If the NAC thinks they can use an LOA 93 win as a bargaining chip to balance out a pay raise for the west, they're smoking dope.

After the way the Tempe brain trust, their Crystal City predecessors and the American Worst pilots have treated the east for the last 8 years, there is absolutely no motivation over on the east to give anybody, management or west pilots, a break.

If Kasher comes through for the east pilots, the phrase, "Full pay to the last day," takes on a whole new meaning and level of significance.

---------------------------------------------------------------


Like I said, not very likely!

Leverage is a tool. In it's simplest mechanical form a lever (pre-LOA pay), in conjunction with a fulcrum (a willingness by all three players to sit down with a blank sheet of paper) can be used to lift an incredible amount of weight. On the other hand the lever alone, can also be used as crude and notably less effective weapon with which to bludgeon the objective in question.

The art of compromise should never be abandoned in favor of an all or nothing, shall we say, neanderthal approach to problem solving. Unfortunately, none of the players in this drama today, seem to be particularly interested in reaching a workable consensus. Mutual Assured Destruction didn't end the Cold War and it won't end this one either. It's ALWAYS all about the money.

seajay

 

[Rookie Jr]

If USAPA wins the LOA 93 "final and binding" grievance does US Airways have comply with the Arbitrator's Opinion & Award and pay the higher wage rates?

In the land of "what goes around comes around" I would have to say no. Isn't it the east view that final and binding is just a negotiating point? Or final and binding doesn't apply if one side disagrees? If final and binding doesn't apply to the Nicolau why would it apply to Kasher?

 

[Move2CLT]

In the land of "what goes around comes around" I would have to say no. Isn't it the east view that final and binding is just a negotiating point? Or final and binding doesn't apply if one side disagrees? If final and binding doesn't apply to the Nicolau why would it apply to Kasher?

Funny too how many an eastie never seems to mention the remedy phase.

Any eastie want to know how long our TA10 remedy phase has been going on?

 

[nic4us]

If USAPA wins the LOA 93 "final and binding" grievance does US Airways have comply with the Arbitrator's Opinion & Award and pay the higher wage rates?

Depends on what strategy the company wished to persue.

I would imagine the first thing the company would do is file in court to have the arbitrator's award nullified as it would fall far outside the industry standard contractual language found when a revision of pay or snapback was entitled. The company will claim that the only interpretation they could have had pre-merger was that 12-31-09 was an amendable date.

If that fails, they would go to remedy, while downsizing the east far below TA fleet mins, (you do know there are dates in the TA right?) and apply severe pressure for a compromise, prior to paying dime one.

 

[luvthe9]

In the land of "what goes around comes around" I would have to say no. Isn't it the east view that final and binding is just a negotiating point? Or final and binding doesn't apply if one side disagrees? If final and binding doesn't apply to the Nicolau why would it apply to Kasher?

hang around a while, you will learn something. 😀

 

[Iclubbabyseals]

In the land of "what goes around comes around" I would have to say no. Isn't it the east view that final and binding is just a negotiating point? Or final and binding doesn't apply if one side disagrees? If final and binding doesn't apply to the Nicolau why would it apply to Kasher?

Two very different issues.

One is to resolve what a contract already in place "says". The other is, presuming the arguments are sane and true, to engineer a new list.

Apples and oranges.

 

[Move2CLT]

Two very different issues.

One is to resolve what a contract already in place "says". The other is, presuming the arguments are sane and true, to engineer a new list.

Apples and oranges.

Arbitration and arbitration.

Sounds like apples and apples to me.

 

[nic4us]

Two very different issues.

One is to resolve what a contract already in place "says". The other is, presuming the arguments are sane and true, to engineer a new list.

Apples and oranges.

There is a contract "already in place" that has never been question about what it says, because it is extremely plain.

ALPA merger policy for seniority integration.

The policy was followed, the list constructed (engineered if you like), and accepted and paid for by the company.

To sum,,,the contract, and the list are already in place.


PS. LOA93 says you have an amendable date.

 

[nic4us]

hang around a while, you will learn something. 😀

We already know how bad you folks whine, nothing new to learn from this arbitration.

 

[Iclubbabyseals]

Arbitration and arbitration.

Sounds like apples and apples to me.

Heck, IANAL but even I know the difference, but, with your simple-minded, two dimensional posts, I can certainly understand your confusion.

 

[traderjake]

hang around a while, you will learn something. 😀

Another week gone by and no LOA 93 decision.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K8E_zMLCRNg

 

[Move2CLT]

Heck, IANAL but even I know the difference, but, with your simple-minded, two dimensional posts, I can certainly understand your confusion.

Like I said, apples and apples.

Your arbitration is the same as any other arbitration. Just because you wish otherwise doesn't make it so.

The truth will set you free seal beater. In the mean time, read this quote over and over to yourself.

"To him who looks upon the world rationally, the world in turn presents a rational aspect. The relation is mutual" - G. Hegel