US Pilots Labor Discussion

[BoeingBoy]

To touch on the "sound of crickets", what's interesting to me is those who claimed he did everything right until USAPA charged him with overbilling (is more than the union can afford overbilling?), then those same people say nothing about him.

From my perspective, you've got to start with an undeniable fact - pilots are the only group that have much of their career (pay, lifestyle, retirement income, vacation choices, schedule choices, etc) controlled by seniority instead of time with the airline. Among the big airlines, US was the only one that had pilots with so little seniority but so much time with the airline. In 2005, just before the merger was consummated, US pilots on furlough had more time with the airline than junior captains at any other big airline. In 2000, when the UA/US merger looked like it might happen and US had no furloughed pilots, a relatively senior US FO could have held widebody captain at any other network carrier - thanks to the 1991-1997/8 furloughs.

So what seems fair for workers everywhere - time with the company - can be unfair when so much is governed by seniority instead of time with the company. If Nic had decided on a DOH merger, the junior US F/O (who was the bottom furloughed pilot not counting CEL in 2005) would have suddenly become senior to some west 757 captains. Fair to the west? Nic in effect split the baby - awarding the most senior 517 US pilots the sole right to bid the widebodies for 5 years because HP had no widebodies, then integrating the rest of the active (working) pilots by equipment/seat (seniority) and finally putting the US pilots that didn't have a job on the bottom (behind everyone that had a job). If his award had been put in place in 2005, which is what it was designed for - that PID thing, everybody would have had the seniority to have held pretty much the same job as they held the day before.

Nic also said something of importance - that the majority of the benefits of the merger would go to the east pilots by virtue of the west's generally better contract (pay, vacation, duty rigs, etc). So would it be fair to also give the east a seniority advantage over the west? His answer was "No."

Jim

 

[nevergiveup]

To touch on the "sound of crickets", what's interesting to me is those who claimed he did everything right until USAPA charged him with overbilling (is more than the union can afford overbilling?), then those same people say nothing about him.

From my perspective, you've got to start with an undeniable fact - pilots are the only group that have much of their career (pay, lifestyle, retirement income, vacation choices, schedule choices, etc) controlled by seniority instead of time with the airline. Among the big airlines, US was the only one that had pilots with so little seniority but so much time with the airline. In 2005, just before the merger was consummated, US pilots on furlough had more time with the airline than junior captains at any other big airline. In 2000, when the UA/US merger looked like it might happen and US had no furloughed pilots, a relatively senior US FO could have held widebody captain at any other network carrier - thanks to the 1991-1997/8 furloughs.

So what seems fair for workers everywhere - time with the company - can be unfair when so much is governed by seniority instead of time with the company. If Nic had decided on a DOH merger, the junior US F/O (who was the bottom furloughed pilot not counting CEL in 2005) would have suddenly become senior to some west 757 captains. Fair to the west? Nic in effect split the baby - awarding the most senior 517 US pilots the sole right to bid the widebodies for 5 years because HP had no widebodies, then integrating the rest of the active (working) pilots by equipment/seat (seniority) and finally putting the US pilots that didn't have a job on the bottom (behind everyone that had a job). If his award had been put in place in 2005, which is what it was designed for - that PID thing, everybody would have had the seniority to have held pretty much the same job as they held the day before.

Nic also said something of importance - that the majority of the benefits of the merger would go to the east pilots by virtue of the west's generally better contract (pay, vacation, duty rigs, etc). So would it be fair to also give the east a seniority advantage over the west? His answer was "No."
517 the sole right for five years? I recall the age 65 change came after the NIC. Could be wrong though.
Jim

 

[nevergiveup]

517 the sole right to WB for 5 yrs? Didn't the age 65 change come after the NIC, or was there a fence in the NIC.

 

[luvn737s]

? The cold hard reality is that failing a merger you'd be junior at some other airline or out of the industry. I know it hurts to face reality sometimes.

No, that was mentioned as a possibility at the time of the merger, but there was very little proof ever offered to back that up. From the present day perspective, AWA's stand alone prospects would not have been much different from their peers - Air Tran, Alaska, Jet Blue. That's the only proven "reality".

 

[SparrowHawk]

No, that was mentioned as a possibility at the time of the merger, but there was very little proof ever offered to back that up. From the present day perspective, AWA's stand alone prospects would not have been much different from their peers - Air Tran, Alaska, Jet Blue. That's the only proven "reality".

Assuming you're correct that a stand alone HP would not have gone into BK and liquidated your prospects of career expectations were not all that great.

Having followed HP & US finances since 9/11 I was not then or now convinced that HP would have survived without a merger. Now airlines can muddle along for year (witness TWA) after year without a profit as long as they are cash positive, US did it for years as well. But just as the chickens flew home at US they were in the air at HP. Both were on the train to oblivion, US just took a train with fewer stops.

If they both managed to last through 2006 the fuel price run up would have cooked their collective goose Hell, US in its current condition can barely adsorb the fuel cost even with half a billion in fees.

 

[No Land Green]

Hell, US in its current condition can barely adsorb the fuel cost even with half a billion in fees.

You nailed it Sparrow. Separate Ops and LOA 93, they keep the brand name profitable.

 

[N924PS]

517 the sole right to WB for 5 yrs? Didn't the age 65 change come after the NIC, or was there a fence in the NIC.

You would already know the answer to your own question if you ever bothered to read the ENTIRE Nicolau Award and not just where your name fell on the list.

 

[prechilill]

Assuming you're correct that a stand alone HP would not have gone into BK and liquidated your prospects of career expectations were not all that great.
.

You forgot " in my opinion" with your unsubstantiated comment above. You people love to make things up, then cite your own BS as fact. Here is what things were really like for AWA in 2005:
Profitable quarters
20 something aircraft on order

Deny away PB, I expect it from you.

 

[Move2CLT]

You nailed it Sparrow. Separate Ops and LOA 93, they keep the brand name profitable.

And our profit checks coming.

 

[No Land Green]

And our profit checks coming.

Yes and they will stop when there is a JCBA. This company fully merged will not be profitable.

 

[BoeingBoy]

517 the sole right to WB for 5 yrs? Didn't the age 65 change come after the NIC, or was there a fence in the NIC.

Yes - the age change eliminated the language but gave those flying captain on the widebodies 5 more years to fly them. But that doesn't change the fact that Nic, when he presented the award, gave the 517 exclusive right to bid the widebodies for 5 years (unless vacancies were unbid by the 517).

Jim

 

[Pi brat]

You forgot " in my opinion" with your unsubstantiated comment above. You people love to make things up, then cite your own BS as fact. Here is what things were really like for AWA in 2005:
Profitable quarters
20 something aircraft on order

Deny away PB, I expect it from you.

Anytime you talk about the future it is your opinion, because no one on earth knows what it is. Doug Parker is one person that should be in a position to have a pretty good idea and although I can't remember him using the word liquidate, the words Death Knell spell it out pretty clearly. AWA was not as far down the plank as US, but it was about to step up and it seems like you guys are the only ones that can admit it. We've been over this over and over, but I'm pretty sure 2004 was a loss, and 2005 profits were heavy on the fuel hedging. Over and over Parker has said that the legacy carriers getting their costs down and fuel prices meant that the AWA model no longer worked. I think the actions they have taken show that to be true, otherwise they would have kept on doing what they were doing out west instead of focusing where they have. BTW, US had more airplane on order than AWA. Nicolau states in essence that he didn't count them because you never know if you will get them and I agree with him there, neither airline was likely to get them. Parker has said that you may have been able to adapt as you had more time than US, but that it would have been more painful that we went through. If we hadn't had this seniority fight he is probably right, except that the east pilot subsidy has helped us through the rough spots.

So why do we spend so much time trying to convince on another? Because that is the basis for our view of fairness with the Nic. It does not matter now. I've been as guilty, or more so of arguing the point, but it really doesn't matter now because of potential mergers. We are too far down the road. We need to let it go and see what Judge Silver has to say, do the best we can with a contract and maybe sooth the burns there. Then be looking out for the possible merger scenarios. Those might make this look like a small brush fire.

 

[prechilill]

Yes and they will stop when there is a JCBA. This company fully merged will not be profitable.

I agree 100%, USAir owns nothing of value, industry - leading costs withstanding. Your airline destroyed PSA, I expect no difference with AWA.

 

[cleardirect]

No, that was mentioned as a possibility at the time of the merger, but there was very little proof ever offered to back that up. From the present day perspective, AWA's stand alone prospects would not have been much different from their peers - Air Tran, Alaska, Jet Blue. That's the only proven "reality".

Go back and read the LOA 93 transcripts. This is under oath, not rumor or opinion. US Airways was done. Yes all east pilots would have been at the bottom of anohter list, looking for a job or working in another business.

And Dr. Bronner related a story to us
10 about -- this is the first time I had ever seen him
11 visibly shake. And he related a story to us that
12 they would, in fact -- he had just come from a Board
13 meeting with US Airways. That's why they were in
14 Charlotte.
15 And he related us the story that they
16 were -- they fully expected to have a going concern
17 letter issued from the auditors, that they would not
18 be able to make the ATSB covenants.
19 That they had not been able to execute the
20 financing agreement with General Electric Capital
21 that would have enabled them to purchase the Embraer
22 170 and 175s that were part of the plan of
Page 73
1 reorganization and part of the pilots scope relief
2 that had been given up, as I related earlier.
3 They weren't going to be able to do that,
4 which in and of itself, he said was a breach of the
5 ATSB loan covenants. And he thought that it looked,
6 in his words, very dire for the airline.
7 Q. You have touched on this, but I want to
8 come back to it.
9 Based upon what was said at the bargaining
10 table, what is a going concern letter?
11 A. A going concern letter is industry speak,
12 I guess, for a letter that is published by a
13 corporation's auditors wherein they call into
14 question the ability of the corporation or the
15 entity that they're auditing to continue as a going
16 concern.
17 The standard convention is to look out one
18 year and issue an opinion as to whether they think
19 the audited entity will be a going concern a year
20 from now.
21 That's shorthand speak of what a going
22 concern letter is. And he was concerned that that

Page 74
1 letter would be issued with regard to US Airways.
2 He told us that if it was, the ATSB could
3 take steps to immediately call the loan.
4 Q. And did Dr. Bronner, in fact, take his
5 message to the MEC?
6 A. Well, we sat with Dr. Bronner during that
7 message and also turn a dinner meeting where we
8 discussed that even more.
9 And he said to us, he goes, I'm not even
10 sure that any amount of money can fix the problems
11 that we have here. He said, We're interested right
12 now in saving jobs. He said, I didn't get into this
13 industry or your company not to save the jobs. We
14 didn't come here for that. That's not what RSA is
15 all about.
16 He said, I'm really open to some
17 suggestions as to how we might be able to do that.
18 He said, As far as the covenants are concerned, he
19 said, I think I can hold the ATSB off if we can
20 appear to be working collegiately towards these
21 financial problems.
22 Specifically, he asked us to work together

(703) 331-0212
Page 75
1 with him so that we could show the financial
2 community that ongoing efforts were being taken so
3 that when a going concern letter came out, he had
4 something to temper that with.

 

[No Land Green]

I agree 100%, USAir owns nothing of value, industry - leading costs withstanding. Your airline destroyed PSA, I expect no difference with AWA.

I know Pre I feel our pain, why don't you just demand eternal separate ops, that way Parker won't, who is now "USAir" , destroy AWA, a.k.a. the West.