US Pilots Labor Discussion

[BoeingBoy]

Oh Jim, this is a really big issue.

Not if everyone is as financially independent as they claim. None of those issues you mentioned should have a affect on someone who doesn't need this job anyway. That they are so important to so many on the East side says plenty about how financially independent they really are (or aren't).

I know that I started preparing for retirement when I saw the Braniff guys having to start over, so I was able to vote no on every concession knowing that not giving concessions could very well sink the company, but I thought the company was asking too much. But I didn't need the job. So those claiming not to need the job but holding on to hope for the LOA 93 grevience, DOH, another lump sum payment, etc have actions shouting while their claims whisper.

Jim

 

[AWE_SHUCKS]

Buzz off...were having fun. Go watch Oprah or something.

That does it...

 

[Freighterguynow]

And that summarizes the real intent of USAPA. It is the one believable and honest thing you have said. It proves that the sham of wanting to get a contract, wanting to do what's "fair," wanting to stop the delay, wanting to represent all US Airways pilots is simply a smoke screen.

There's no time line in ALPA merger policy - if it takes years then so be it. The Atlas/Polar guys are 9 years into it, we are 5 and, by all accounts, the CO guys are going to give you a first hand experience as well.

 

[CallawayGolf]

And you are again, dead wrong. LOA 93 and its' expiration date were negotiated LONG before the West and AWA was even an issue. Long before USAPA was even around. So how do you even link the two? Of course you are a total expert on all issues with our contract, aren t you. All we want in the East is the LOA expiration date enforced and pay to go to LOA 84. That is it, that is all. Had nothing to do with the west in its' inception, and you are totally incorrect, as usual. 🙂 Give us the pay we negotiated, long ago, and we are fine. Has nothing to do with the West. Just because they were too stupid to address the pay parity issue is not our fault. They built the gun, loaded it. It might now be used against them. They need to take responsibility for their oversights. If you chose to enter into an agreement with no pay parity, then suffer the consequences. It is that simple.

You can blame pay parity on the west all you want, but there was zero chance that Management was going to opt for pay parity in separate contracts instead of negotiating a JCBA. Everyone knows that the east is trying to avoid the NIC & a JCBA by holding out all hopes for the LOA84 pay rates to be restored. USAPA has revealed their hand to Management, the NMB, the courts and anyone else who wants to know what they are thinking. That could prove to be a big downfall when every other entity believes that it is USAPA's responsibility to negotiate for a JCBA rather than hunker down under the cover of LOA84 rates.

A win on that grievance only intensifies the potential DFR liability USAPA is subject to and no telling what harm will beset the east as a result. Conversely a loss on the grievance and an affirmation from judge Silver on the sanctity of the NIC and USAPA will be spinning out of control like a toothpick in a category five hurricane. The outcome of either event is uncertain for the moment, but a USAPA "win" yields little in the way of a cessation of hostilities. However, USAPA losses will expose the unstable foundation of its house of cards and it could all be over soon for the upstart organized crime syndicate.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Meh, population inside city limits is not a very meaningful statstic for purposes of this discussion. Much more useful to look at the population of the region as a whole (i.e., within driving (or in Philly's case, public transit) distance of the airport).

By that more relevant measure, PHL is much bigger.

No,no.

ONLY residents within the city limits of PHX and PHL are allowed to use their respective airport. So the argument that PHX is bigger than PHL is totally relevant.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Since nearly every East poster claims to be financially independent, why even worry about LOA 93 or the Nic. Neither will affect your liifestyle according to missfit.

Jim

Not if everyone is as financially independent as they claim. None of those issues you mentioned should have a affect on someone who doesn't need this job anyway. That they are so important to so many on the East side says plenty about how financially independent they really are (or aren't).

I know that I started preparing for retirement when I saw the Braniff guys having to start over, so I was able to vote no on every concession knowing that not giving concessions could very well sink the company, but I thought the company was asking too much. But I didn't need the job. So those claiming not to need the job but holding on to hope for the LOA 93 grevience, DOH, another lump sum payment, etc have actions shouting while their claims whisper.

Jim

Ok, KOAT.

It's really not rue that "nearly every East poster claims to be financially independent." You're just pulling THAT out of your rear end. But, let's assume that it is true.

Then my explanation is that we, the financially independent East posters, are but a tiny fraction of the thousands of East pilots who don't post here. In fact, they probably don;t even know that there's a "here" here.

We financially independent posters are merely looking out for the future financial welfare of that massive number of non-posters from the East.

Prove me wrong.

 

[CallawayGolf]

We financially independent posters are merely looking out for the future financial welfare of that massive number of non-posters from the East.

Does that protection of financial welfare include forcing everyone in the east, including the E190 pilots, to stay on LOA93 (or worse) for years while the pathological USAPA leaders waste time, money and better pay in a futile effort to avoid binding arbitration? That’s some big-hearted, self-sacrificing act of protection for the financial welfare of the east pilots alright. Having friends like that is worse than having an enemy.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Prove me wrong.

I'll go you one better and not even disagree. It's the East posters that claim financial independence (or who's "wives" do for them) that are also hoping for the favorable outcome of the pay grievance, make a big deal about pay parity, angry about the Nic, etc that I'm addressing. Not one, other than you, has said they're hoping for those things for others' sake. Makes me go hmmm - don't need the job but so very interested in improving the payoff they get from the job...

BTW, I see a lot of the E word thrown around concerning the LOA 93 pay issue - expire and it's variants. Isn't it interesting that the E word isn't in the pay section of LOA 93...

Jim

 

[Black Swan]

You can blame pay parity on the west all you want, but there was zero chance that Management was going to opt for pay parity in separate contracts instead of negotiating a JCBA. Everyone knows that the east is trying to avoid the NIC & a JCBA by holding out all hopes for the LOA84 pay rates to be restored. USAPA has revealed their hand to Management, the NMB, the courts and anyone else who wants to know what they are thinking. That could prove to be a big downfall when every other entity believes that it is USAPA's responsibility to negotiate for a JCBA rather than hunker down under the cover of LOA84 rates.

A win on that grievance only intensifies the potential DFR liability USAPA is subject to and no telling what harm will beset the east as a result. Conversely a loss on the grievance and an affirmation from judge Silver on the sanctity of the NIC and USAPA will be spinning out of control like a toothpick in a category five hurricane. The outcome of either event is uncertain for the moment, but a USAPA "win" yields little in the way of a cessation of hostilities. However, USAPA losses will expose the unstable foundation of its house of cards and it could all be over soon for the upstart organized crime syndicate.

Let me get this straight. There is no harm to the East with the west pay being higher, yet if the East wins LOA 93 pay restoration, you want it or have a DFR? Calloway, this is what continues to get your side in over their heads with contract issues, and labor issues. If you were never included in LOA 84 and then LOA 93, how do you then claim you are the beneficiary of same,or harmed if the outcome is favorable? You only got your profit sharing from the GENEROSITY of the East, yet you did nothing for pay parity. You are entitled to nothing from us. If there is a way to use the profit share to make the pay equal, I certainly urge USAPA to pursue it. By same token of your first statement, how would you expect the company to pay you the LOA 84 rates? You yourself stated there are separate contracts.

 

[A320 Driver]

"Around" 15th - it varies from year to year and month to month.

For all of 2009, PHX was 10th and PHL was 11th. For 2008, PHX was 9th and PHL was 12th. Through either Aug or Sept of this year, PHX was 12th and PHL was 13th. I've seen PHL as low as 17-18th but because nearly all the top 10 airports are the same year after year. I'm surprised that PHX made 9th in 2008 given the normal top 10 airports.

PHL suffers from primarily one thing - proximity to NYC and WAS which are normally in the top 10 cities for passengers to/from mid-sized and larger airports. That proximity makes travel to/from NYC/WAS using alternate modes of transportation not just feasible but competitive with flying, so those alternatives take passengers away from PHL.

Jim

Thanks Jim. Sounds like they are very close.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Let me get this straight. There is no harm to the East with the west pay being higher, yet if the East wins LOA 93 pay restoration, you want it or have a DFR? Calloway, this is what continues to get your side in over their heads with contract issues, and labor issues. If you were never included in LOA 84 and then LOA 93, how do you then claim you are the beneficiary of same,or harmed if the outcome is favorable? You only got your profit sharing from the GENEROSITY of the East, yet you did nothing for pay parity. You are entitled to nothing from us. If there is a way to use the profit share to make the pay equal, I certainly urge USAPA to pursue it. By same token of your first statement, how would you expect the company to pay you the LOA 84 rates? You yourself stated there are separate contracts.

Despite you signature line, your observation skills are lacking. Nowhere did I say that the west was entitled to or should even be considered to be entitled to LOA84 rates under separate contracts. What I said and implied was that if USAPA wins on this and then avoids future negotiations for a JCBA, then this could expose USAPA to not fulfilling its duties to all its constituents. Saying “we got enough to keep us satisfied and will gladly retire without a new JCBA” violates the intent of the TA and perhaps opens up new DFR suit that has nothing to do with the NIC. The risk of not honoring agreements still resides over USAPA’s and the east pilots collective heads.

 

[767jetz]

...the CO guys are going to give you a first hand experience as well.

I laugh every day at the way some of you like to think, even hope that UA will suffer your same fate, so that you can feel better about your uniquely crappy position. And your statement above shows how little you actually know about simple, basic process. Let me enlighten you as to why it won't happen...

There may very well be some pilots on both sides who are not pleased with certain aspects of the UA/CO merger. But they have little effect, since the majority of pilots recognize the benefits for all of us, and recognize the HUGE leverage we have with the company right now. (Just like NW/DL) The Joint Negotiating Committee is responsible for getting a JCBA that will pass ratification. So far EVERY section has been passed to the company, and EVERY section has now been passed back to ALPA with room for improvement. 95% of the contract improvements are backed by the full JNC, (including pay rates "well north" of Delta's), with the exception of pay banding for the 777/747. Note that this progress has been made in a matter of 2 months, as opposed to the YEARS you guys have been without contract improvements.

Now with those facts in mind, do you really think for a New York minute that the ENTIRE JCBA will be trashed because of that one issue? If you do, then you don't understand ALPA merger policy, which SPECIFICALLY states that the JCBA will be ratified BEFORE any SLI (Seniority List Integration) discussions takes place. Trying to make the pay banding issue a SLI issue is specifically forbidden by the process that both sides are bound to. While talks are still ongoing, and understandings will be reached, there is always the option of involving the ALPA executive board to resolve the issue as per ALPA merger policy. Either way, for me and many pilots I talk to on both sides, the pay banding is not a deal breaker, and the general opinion is that certain MEC members are chest pounding and positioning due to politics, since the MEC's will eventually have to be merged by new elections.

So to go back to your assertion that "CO guys are going to give you a first hand experience" is nothing but wishful thinking. There is no line pilot that has the direct power to derail the process. Everyone gets a vote on the JCBA. No one gets a vote on the SLI. The SLI is in the hands of 6 selected individuals on the merger committee, and an arbitrator if necessary, who work in complete autonomy from the MEC. They do not begin work until after the JCBA is ratified. Therefore no one can withhold a vote on the JCBA in an attempt to delay what they perceive as an unfair SLI. SLI is the final step that seals everyone's fate.

So, in your infinite wisdom, explain to us all how anyone, on either side, can do what you are claiming. And spare us the representation election BS. First there would not be the votes necessary. Second, (and I know this is a hard concept for some of you to fathom) both sides have committed to accepting the final result and moving forward.

 

[88 B.T.D.]

Does that protection of financial welfare include forcing everyone in the east, including the E190 pilots, to stay on LOA93 (or worse) ......

E190 pay has nothing to do with LOA93. It is all in the transition agreement. By the way, there is no way to even address this pay rate until June 2015, even in section 6 negotiations. ( per TA)

 

[A320 Driver]

What he nailed was restating the misconception that Management doesn’t want a contract and that they are the only reason for the five-year delay in getting to a JCBA. The truth is that they do want a new pilot contract and have already offered $120M annually to get it. That may not be the winning number, but are you really suggesting that if USAPA agreed to use the NIC and to accept the Kirby proposal that Management would back away from that offer? If Management would accept the NIC/Kirby then Driver’s post lacks veracity as the only real impediment to a JCBA at the $100M+ level is USAPA’s stated intention to violate the TA and use another seniority system. As always, every one of these problems and issues can be attributed to USAPA being incompetent, insolent, disingenuous, and generally bringing spit wads to arm themselves for battle with a well fortified “enemy”.

I think you are wrong. I've been there. I've seen the humming and hawing and the body language when they are asked if the so called "Kirby" proposal is still a solid offer. You should have seen the look on DP's face when asked "If there are only $40 million in synergies left in this merger, then why would you want to spend $120 million to get a pilot contract" (loose quote, but right in there). DP's response: "because it's the right thing to do". You could see it all over him. It was all he could think of. No facts, no numbers, no business plans, no payback...nada, nothing.
You need to look at the negotiating minutes and see just how far the company has backed away from that proposal.

The company is happy just the way things are: big bonuses, nice profits, good numbers on the operation, and the financial community completely charmed.

Driver <_<

 

[CallawayGolf]

I think you are wrong. I've been there. I've seen the humming and hawing and the body language when they are asked if the so called "Kirby" proposal is still a solid offer. You should have seen the look on DP's face when asked "If there are only $40 million in synergies left in this merger, then why would you want to spend $120 million to get a pilot contract" (loose quote, but right in there). DP's response: "because it's the right thing to do". You could see it all over him. It was all he could think of. No facts, no numbers, no business plans, no payback...nada, nothing.
You need to look at the negotiating minutes and see just how far the company has backed away from that proposal.

The company is happy just the way things are: big bonuses, nice profits, good numbers on the operation, and the financial community completely charmed.

Driver <_<

You can think I am wrong all you like, but what you have is your feeling about what was behind Doug's words and body language. What I have is sworn testimony on the record in a federal court. Now what I think is that Doug was being honest - he does believe the Kirby proposal is the right thing to do. Of course the Kirby proposal set the bar – if USAPA cannot get above or anywhere near that bar already set by Management, then they are a complete failure at everything except lining the pockets of $eham.