US Pilots Labor Discussion

[mrbreeze]

Oh good God, is my face red...my apologies to Breeze, at least till I read LOA 93.

Jim

Apology accepted....I am off to bed, gotta fly tomorrow.

breeze

 

[BoeingBoy]

Didn't take long to find it. Per LOA 93: "Amendable date December 31, 2009" [emphasis mine]

Hopefully Breeze understands the difference between an amendable date and an expiration date. Amendable means LOA 93 stays in effect until superseded by a negotiated agreement (like a new combined contract). There isn't a combined contract yet, so LOA 93 is still in effect. There is no expiration date for LOA 93. In fact, few LOA's have expiration dates - look at the LOA's with 1986 dates still shown as attachments to the current underlying contract? What usually happens is that the LOA language either applies to a certain situation and becomes irrelevant when that situation ceases to exist and at some point thereafter it's removed or at some point it's included in the underlying contract and thus becomes superfluous and is removed.

So we're right back to Breeze is full of it #1 with the correct agreement this time...

Jim

 

[700UW]

What makes you think that? Hemmenways letter all but said they kept that option open.

They've given USAPA plenty of chances, but they may push the button on this one and see if USAPA can hire a lawyer.

The east has permitted a weak and failing union to take them (and us by association) beyond the brink. I won't shed a tear for their choices. Perhaps they will oust Cleary and invite west pilots to lead and see where they take them.

Because that would be against the RLA and would be a major dispute.

 

[cleardirect]

From what I understand, ES is taking place for only one reason....that is to determine if we are going to receive the 3% annually.

Sorry to burst your bubble...just couldn't buy into your idea that it's all over, "trust me", ya know....all your BS.

breeze

There is no 3%. Try and wrap your brain around that fact.

You asked why the ES. Read the update.

• We are still in the early stages of planning our strategy for the Executive Session, but it is unlikely that we will be able to get the Arbitrator to reverse his decision.
• We will ask the Arbitrator to clarify several issues in the draft decision.
• We do not see any grounds to appeal his decision to federal court.

Clarify is not get 3%.

Read what she said.


o Unfortunately, the Union did not prevail.
• It appears that the Arbitrator found that we did not carry our burden of proof.
o In order to prevail in this grievance ALPA's negotiators were required to do the following:
1. The ALPA negotiators must have intended to have the pay restored on January 1, 2010; and
2. The ALPA negotiators were required to clearly convey and communicate this to the Company negotiators during the course of negotiations.


Nowhere in that update was 3% or the possibility of 3% mentioned. The 3% was part of the grievance. He already decided. HE is not going to sever a part of the grievance from the rest. Take a couple minutes and think it out. This is a big loss for the union and the knitting lady. If there was or even the possibility of 3% don't you think she would have said that. It would have eased the blow. But no nothing. THE UNION DID NOT PREVAIL!

DID NOT CARRY THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

But hey if you think it is coming I suggest you go out and buy a new boat or car with the money you expect. Spend babe spend. Beside with 60 per month (720 per year) leaving you should be a captain in no time. Could you show us the retirement schedule that has 720 east pilots retiring in 1 year.

Or you might call the grievance committee and ask them directly. I know you will not believe me or the update. Maybe if a person talks to you very slowly you might understand. NO 3%! The LOA 93 grievance was a complete and total loss.

 

[Move2CLT]

And you just want me to trust you and roll over....sure. I think you're too perverted to trust.

breeze

I'm devastated.

You just keep doing what you've been doing all along - following USAPA.

What has that gotten you?

No snapbacks and no 3%.

I still can't believe you're excited about 3%.

 

[luvn737s]

Because that would be against the RLA and would be a major dispute.

C) Successorship and Labor Protection
1. The Agreement shall be binding upon any successor, including, without
limitation, any merged company or companies, assignee, purchaser, transferee,
administrator, receiver, executor and/or trustee of US Airways Group or the Company.
The Company and US Airways Group shall require a Successor to assume and be
bound by all terms of the Agreement as a condition of any transaction that results in a
Successor.

Which would include LOA93

First, a bankrupt union with a vindictive core would likely ignore prosecuting the inevitable west grievance, just as they have almost all of the ones prior to it. Secondly, the company could "sin in haste, repent at leisure" trotting this provision of the east contract in front of an arbitrator/judge. But a merger might be consummated well before such an argument would be heard.

A relevant union would be handy about now.

 

[mrbreeze]

Beside with 60 per month (720 per year) leaving you should be a captain in no time. Could you show us the retirement schedule that has 720 east pilots retiring in 1 year.

Oops, my bad. The retirement number was a secondary thought in this whole discussion and I threw that number out there without thinking it through. I had a few drinks under my belt....never gave it a second thought.....I think I had heard that about the AA pilots. I honestly was not trying to inflate that number.

breeze

 

[Piedmont1984]

Oops, my bad. The retirement number was a secondary thought in this whole discussion and I threw that number out there without thinking it through. I had a few drinks under my belt....never gave it a second thought.....I think I had heard that about the AA pilots. I honestly was not trying to inflate that number.

breeze

I wonder how many of us PUI (Post Under the Influence) and whether that has helped or hurt our "dialogue".

It's like sharing a friendly drink with a fellow pilot at a pub on a layover. Except you don't like each other, can't see each other and use fake names.

And the bartender is never around when you need him/her.

 

[A320 Driver]

What amazes me is that it took this arbitrator 2 years to say NO. I sure as hell wouldn't use him for anything else. But, they probably will. Unlike many of us, USAPA is not tired of losing yet.

Congraduations to those pilots who provided the company testimony to use against us. You won.


Driver...

 

[Piedmont1984]

What amazes me is that it took this arbitrator 2 years to say NO. I sure as hell wouldn't use him for anything else. But, they probably will. Unlike many of us, USAPA is not tired of losing yet.

Congraduations to those pilots who provided the company testimony to use against us. You won.


Driver...

So far we have lost:

LRJ grievance
The Nic arbitration
The injunction
LOA 93
Addington I (good thing two judges at the 9th are wine drinkers)
RICO was DOA (just as well)
EDNY should be DOA
Terminations over homework assignments
Mucho mucho dinero

Judge Silver up next, discord and disharmony at HQ and a union officer may end up doing the perp walk.

So stop being pessimistic.

 

[Move2CLT]

I wonder how many of us PUI (Post Under the Influence) and whether that has helped or hurt our "dialogue".

It's like sharing a friendly drink with a fellow pilot at a pub on a layover. Except you don't like each other, can't see each other and use fake names.

And the bartender is never around when you need him/her.

I think breeze and Claxon are prime examples.

 

[Move2CLT]

So far we have lost:

LRJ grievance
The Nic arbitration
The injunction
LOA 93
Addington I (good thing two judges at the 9th are wine drinkers)
RICO was DOA (just as well)
EDNY should be DOA
Terminations over homework assignments
Mucho mucho dinero

Judge Silver up next, discord and disharmony at HQ and a union officer may end up doing the perp walk.

So stop being pessimistic.

And don't forget to add that your PIC is out of money.

 

[Move2CLT]

Oops, my bad. The retirement number was a secondary thought in this whole discussion and I threw that number out there without thinking it through. I had a few drinks under my belt....never gave it a second thought.....I think I had heard that about the AA pilots. I honestly was not trying to inflate that number.

breeze

A lot of you east guys like to do that. Sad thing is that you believe them without researching them or verifying the source.

And that's why we're here. To promote truth and offer facts. To challenge you guys and adjust your paradigms.

And you should be thankful BoeingBoy makes the effort to help as well.

 

[Move2CLT]

What amazes me is that it took this arbitrator 2 years to say NO. I sure as hell wouldn't use him for anything else. But, they probably will. Unlike many of us, USAPA is not tired of losing yet.

Congraduations to those pilots who provided the company testimony to use against us. You won.


Driver...

Aren't you tired of your predicament? USAPA is always dangling that carrot in front of you to keep moving you in their direction. And when you look back, you've gone no where.

Now, it's the 3% carrot. And breeze is dutifully chasing it.

How about you driver? Do you believe in the 3%?

 

[HPearlyretiree]

Aren't you tired of your predicament? USAPA is always dangling that carrot in front of you to keep moving you in their direction. And when you look back, you've gone no where.

Now, it's the 3% carrot. And breeze is dutifully chasing it.

How about you driver? Do you believe in the 3%?

Its the Great Pumpkin!!! Once again, it disappointed.