US Pilots Labor Discussion

[cleardirect]

You and other ahole west pilots like you are building a debt that some poor west pilot may have to pay some day.

And you east guys are building a debt that you are going to leave to the junior east guys. You know the guys that are going to be the minority in 5-10 years went all you old guys leave.

 

[cleardirect]

East/West pilots will not fly together.

You would be wrong.

It has and is happening now. When the east still had furloughed pilots. You remember the 1700 furloughed pilots that you guys brought to the merger? They came west and flew with west captains. They got along just fine.

Currently we have west pilots flying with east captains. So you guys can make up stories and spread crew room rumors but the facts prove you wrong.

 

[Black Swan]

OK, and I've not heard of Todd Jewitt. Who he?

As to LOA93 let's see what the Judge has to say. BTW when is the decision supposed to happen?

Don't get me wrong about Glass. I agree with you 1000% and would never underestimate him. Absolutely the best man for the job during the bankruptcies. This time? He doesn t have the Damocles Sword of bankruptcy and judges to swing. What will be his tactic? We will wait and see.
I am purely speculating on the LOA 93 win, but I have read it and tried to be objective. I still can't get around the fact the word FROZEN is used extensively with reference to the pay, and that term was commonly used in our contract and not in the context of beginning negotiations again. It was a term that was referenced to a reversion back to the prior state only.Such as a training freeze. All it meant is you were held or frozen at that point of position until a date where you were allowed to revert to your bid. It never was used to mean you started over or anything of the sort. Freeze is the term they applied to the pay in LOA 93. I think our team did a very good effort in demonstrating to Kasher what that term meant in past practice in this airline in contractual terms. Also the date of Dec. 31 2009. Why was that put in there if it meant nothing, in the context of a pay freeze? No other issue was addressed this way, nor had a date. I believe it to be the fail safe mechanism to address the pay in a point of time if needed. Nobody thought it would be needed, but there it is, black and white. Seeing Glass is the LOA 93 author, I believe he is back to deal with this messy little issue, should it become a possibility. But anything is possible, and the arbitrator may see it the companys' way.
Todd Jewitt was with Airways prior to all this, and was a contract admin. guy. We dealt with him often with contract issues and training freezes and he is well versed in the contract. Look at the Glass Bio. He is mentioned as one of the "guns" Nobody knows with absolute certainty, but there was said there was discussion with Kasher for booking him in the future, and he stated that he "owed us a couple of decisions, and we would hear in July" That is the story. True? We will have to wait and see.
Enjoyed your Youtube link, and will check out the movie. Good Day.

 

[cactusboy53]

Thanks for the update.

Not following you on tearing up the petiton in front of lanyard wearers.

I carry copies of the three proposed changes:
1. Amends the "Super Majority" language (changing the voting dynamic from 2/3 to 3/5).
2. Amends section A & B of the USAPA constitution: requires the union president to get PRIOR APPROVAL of a MAJORITY of the BPR before he/she makes any changes on committees and ad hoc committees.
3. Amends the seniority basis in the USAPA constitution to include the Nicolau Award as the basis of the New US Airways seniority, and that future seniority integrations shall be accomplished in accordance with applicable Federal Law.

When addressing any east pilot about these, I ask they would consider any of these petitions. Usually the trade response is that they would NEVER sign #3. I tear #3 up in front of them and ask if the other two would be worth considering.

Thanks for the ask.

 

[cleardirect]

Don't get me wrong about Glass. I agree with you 1000% and would never underestimate him. Absolutely the best man for the job during the bankruptcies. This time? He doesn t have the Damocles Sword of bankruptcy and judges to swing. What will be his tactic? We will wait and see.
I am purely speculating on the LOA 93 win, but I have read it and tried to be objective. I still can't get around the fact the word FROZEN is used extensively with reference to the pay, and that term was commonly used in our contract and not in the context of beginning negotiations again. It was a term that was referenced to a reversion back to the prior state only.Such as a training freeze. All it meant is you were held or frozen at that point of position until a date where you were allowed to revert to your bid. It never was used to mean you started over or anything of the sort. Freeze is the term they applied to the pay in LOA 93. I think our team did a very good effort in demonstrating to Kasher what that term meant in past practice in this airline in contractual terms. Also the date of Dec. 31 2009. Why was that put in there if it meant nothing, in the context of a pay freeze? No other issue was addressed this way, nor had a date. I believe it to be the fail safe mechanism to address the pay in a point of time if needed. Nobody thought it would be needed, but there it is, black and white. Seeing Glass is the LOA 93 author, I believe he is back to deal with this messy little issue, should it become a possibility. But anything is possible, and the arbitrator may see it the companys' way.
Todd Jewitt was with Airways prior to all this, and was a contract admin. guy. We dealt with him often with contract issues and training freezes and he is well versed in the contract. Look at the Glass Bio. He is mentioned as one of the "guns" Nobody knows with absolute certainty, but there was said there was discussion with Kasher for booking him in the future, and he stated that he "owed us a couple of decisions, and we would hear in July" That is the story. True? We will have to wait and see.
Enjoyed your Youtube link, and will check out the movie. Good Day.

You read it objectively? You stated that the word frozen was used EXTENSIVELY! The word frozen was used ONCE. The word freeze was used ONCE. I would not call that extensively.

Revisions to Hourly
Pay Rates:

The rates of pay specified in Section 3 of the Agreement, as
modified by the Restructuring Agreement, will be revised as
follows:

1. Freeze current rates effective 5/01/04 through 12/31/09.
2. Reduce rates as frozen by 18%.
3. Reduce International pay override, as stated in Section
3(F) and Section 18(C), by 18% for transoceanic trips;
eliminate international override for non-transoceanic trips.
4. Pay all flying at day rate.

So tell us. Point to LOA 93 that addresses what you think your pay rate unfreezes to. Look closely. The date is attached to line 1. Freeze current rates. The reduced rates does not have a date on it.

So what rates are you dreaming of. Point to LOA 93 and tell us how you got there. The arbitrator is going to have to show the language in the contract that says what rate he thinks you go to . He cannot make up a rate. He cannot "split the baby" and give you some but not all. Where is the language?

 

[Black Swan]

You read it objectively? You stated that the word frozen was used EXTENSIVELY! The word frozen was used ONCE. The word freeze was used ONCE. I would not call that extensively.




So tell us. Point to LOA 93 that addresses what you think your pay rate unfreezes to. Look closely. The date is attached to line 1. Freeze current rates. The reduced rates does not have a date on it.

So what rates are you dreaming of. Point to LOA 93 and tell us how you got there. The arbitrator is going to have to show the language in the contract that says what rate he thinks you go to . He cannot make up a rate. He cannot "split the baby" and give you some but not all. Where is the language?

It is used 2 times in that very short discussion. To me, that is extensive. Pardon me if you feel i exceeded the limit. And by the way, just using it ONCE in the discussion is fine for me, and hopefully for Kasher. There was NO other word referenced other than FROZEN. Kind of like the word DEAD, there is no doubt as to what it means, once or twice..... The rates frozen are the LOA 84 rates, or the CURRENT rate. There is no need to give the rate it reverts to. The term FREEZE deals with those rates. That is what they go back to, not some new rate. Show us where it says they have to go to a new NEGOTIATED rate? The date Dec 31 2009 was there for a reason. That is a nice cold day in December, where things thaw to the old rate. Since we are questioning, why the date Clear? Why is the date there? And even more importantly of why the dates are so important, ESPECIALLY the start date,(even more than the end date) clearly 5/01/04 is this: This is the START point. They could not reach earlier into the contract to achieve the lower pay rate. Did that FREEZE start any other date? NO. Why not? It had that date. An east pilot looked at his W-2 and saw the cut started on that date. So if that date meant nothing as you say, then how would they, how could they, ever PICK A POINT TO START THE CUT??? So if that May date meant something, as every east pilot and the COMPANY knows, as that is the date the cuts started, then how can they arbitrarily blow off the Dec 31 2009 as some date that means nothing? They can't! It has absolute meaning as does the first date, when something drastic started.Something drastic ended. The FREEZE ended. The very fact they used the start date, in itself validates the end date. Why is the date in the pay discussion, and NO other section? Somebody as smart as Kasher will see the date means something. FREEZE THROUGH DEC 31, 2009. Not one day longer. It ends on that date. We got Parker by the short ones on Dec 31 2009, and most of us knew it. You have a nice day clear.

 

[Pi brat]

I carry copies of the three proposed changes:
1. Amends the "Super Majority" language (changing the voting dynamic from 2/3 to 3/5).
2. Amends section A & B of the USAPA constitution: requires the union president to get PRIOR APPROVAL of a MAJORITY of the BPR before he/she makes any changes on committees and ad hoc committees.
3. Amends the seniority basis in the USAPA constitution to include the Nicolau Award as the basis of the New US Airways seniority, and that future seniority integrations shall be accomplished in accordance with applicable Federal Law.

When addressing any east pilot about these, I ask they would consider any of these petitions. Usually the trade response is that they would NEVER sign #3. I tear #3 up in front of them and ask if the other two would be worth considering.

Thanks for the ask.

Okay, gotcha. Didn't understand the tearing up your own petition.

 

[toganoflex]

East/West pilots will not fly together.

Hey smart guy, they already are flying together.

 

[toganoflex]

It is used 2 times in that very short discussion. To me, that is extensive. Pardon me if you feel i exceeded the limit. And by the way, just using it ONCE in the discussion is fine for me, and hopefully for Kasher. There was NO other word referenced other than FROZEN. Kind of like the word DEAD, there is no doubt as to what it means, once or twice..... The rates frozen are the LOA 84 rates, or the CURRENT rate. There is no need to give the rate it reverts to. The term FREEZE deals with those rates. That is what they go back to, not some new rate. Show us where it says they have to go to a new NEGOTIATED rate? The date Dec 31 2009 was there for a reason. That is a nice cold day in December, where things thaw to the old rate. Since we are questioning, why the date Clear? Why is the date there? And even more importantly of why the dates are so important, ESPECIALLY the start date, clearly 5/01/04 is this: This is the START point. They could not reach earlier into the contract to achieve any other pay rate. Did that FREEZE start any other date? NO. Why not? It had that date. An east pilot looked at his W-2 and saw the cut started on that date. So if that date meant nothing as you say, then how would they, how could they, ever PICK A POINT TO START THE CUT??? So if that May date meant something, as every east pilot and the COMPANY knows, as that is the date the cuts started, then how can they arbitrarily blow off the Dec 31 2009 as some date that means nothing? They can't! It has absolute meaning as does the first date, when something drastic started.Something drastic ended. The FREEZE ended. The very fact they used the start date, in itself validates the end date. Why is the date in the pay discussion, and NO other section? Somebody as smart as Kasher will see the date means something. FREEZE THROUGH DEC 31, 2009. Not one day longer. It ends on that date. We got Parker by the short ones on Dec 31 2009, and most of us knew it. You have a nice day clear.

An excerpt from Brookman's letter dated 12/2004:

Deficient Areas of LOA 93 Transformation Plan

1. Duration the amendable date of LOA 93 is December 31,2009. There are no snap backs or provisions for the pilot group to recoup any contractual provisions, benefits or pay during for the next 5 years, and realistically under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, it may take up to 2 additional years to negotiate any changes to the collective bargaining agreement.

 

[toganoflex]

OK, and I've not heard of Todd Jewitt. Who he?

As to LOA93 let's see what the Judge has to say. BTW when is the decision supposed to happen?

There is no judge involved with the LOA 93 arb.

 

[Black Swan]

There is no judge involved with the LOA 93 arb.

You are correct. Kasher is a member of the National Academy of Arbitrators. He is not a judge. He is an attorney.

 

[Pi brat]

And you east guys are building a debt that you are going to leave to the junior east guys. You know the guys that are going to be the minority in 5-10 years went all you old guys leave.

Plenty of bad behavior on both sides but it takes a special ahole to talk about accidents and killing passengers. None us us perfect and the next west guy to screw up will have east guys piling on. Sad.

Btw, I've got closer to 20 years left so don't think we all will be gone soon.

 

[Black Swan]

An excerpt from Brookman's letter dated 12/2004:

Deficient Areas of LOA 93 Transformation Plan

1. Duration the amendable date of LOA 93 is December 31,2009. There are no snap backs or provisions for the pilot group to recoup any contractual provisions, benefits or pay during for the next 5 years, and realistically under the provisions of the Railway Labor Act, it may take up to 2 additional years to negotiate any changes to the collective bargaining agreement.

John Brookman is a pilot. He is not LOA 93. You saw what it said in the LOA 93 pay discussion. None of this was in it. I honestly don't care what Brookman said. His opinion only, and incorrect I may add. It says NOTHING about negotiating anything in that pay discussion and you know it. It simply said freeze, and dates. Brookman incorrectly, surmised something completely incorrect and not in LOA 93.Show me in that document where it says "SNAPBACK," "up to 2 yrs to negotiate," or anything you state. Here it is, now show me where it says Snapback, and negotiate. The ONE, and only thing he correctly pulled out of it was there is no change to benefits. He is correct there. This discussion is all about one thing, rate of pay. Please show me in this document where it says negotiate, or snapback....... Waiting. PS since you joined this discussion. Why does 5/01/04mean the start of this, and they absolutely started the cut there, yet Dec 31 2009 in your and their world takes on no meaning other than a start of negotiations? Yet it clearly does not state that.......That is what you added.


Revisions to Hourly
Pay Rates:

The rates of pay specified in Section 3 of the Agreement, as
modified by the Restructuring Agreement, will be revised as
follows:

1. Freeze current rates effective 5/01/04 through 12/31/09.
2. Reduce rates as frozen by 18%.
3. Reduce International pay override, as stated in Section
3(F) and Section 18©, by 18% for transoceanic trips;
eliminate international override for non-transoceanic trips.
4. Pay all flying at day rate.

 

[luvthe9]

John Brookman is a pilot. He is not LOA 93. You saw what it said in the LOA 93 pay discussion. None of this was in it. I honestly don't care what Brookman said. His opinion only, and incorrect I may add. It says NOTHING about negotiating anything in that pay discussion and you know it. It simply said freeze, and dates. Brookman incorrectly, surmised something completely incorrect and not in LOA 93.Show me in that document where it says "SNAPBACK," "up to 2 yrs to negotiate," or anything you state. Here it is, now show me where it says Snapback, and negotiate. The ONE, and only thing he correctly pulled out of it was there is no change to benefits. He is correct there. This discussion is all about one thing, rate of pay. Please show me in this document where it says negotiate, or snapback....... Waiting. PS, since you joined this discussion. Why does 5/01/04 mean the start of this, and they absolutely started the cut there, yet Dec 31 2009 in your and their world takes on no meaning other than a start of negotiations? Yet it clearly does not state that.........That is what you added.


Revisions to Hourly
Pay Rates:

The rates of pay specified in Section 3 of the Agreement, as
modified by the Restructuring Agreement, will be revised as
follows:

1. Freeze current rates effective 5/01/04 through 12/31/09.
2. Reduce rates as frozen by 18%.
3. Reduce International pay override, as stated in Section
3(F) and Section 18©, by 18% for transoceanic trips;
eliminate international override for non-transoceanic trips.
4. Pay all flying at day rate.

Brookman got it wrong!

 

[toganoflex]

Of course he's incorrect.

He doesn't help your argument ergo he must be wrong and "just a pilot."

I'm curious here as to how many east pilots understand the process. Hypothetically, if the east does win LOA93, what would happen?

Well, here you go:

1. You won't see a pay increase in your next paycheck or the one after that. Heck, if you see any pay increase at all it would be a miracle. That remedy phase can take a very long time.

2. The company can choose not to pay it out for various reasons. I'm sure the fact that is was negotiated by a different CBA would be a great excuse. Heck, what is the definition of final and binding anyway? Just because an arbitrator makes a decision doesn't really matter if one side disagrees with it right? I mean, there is precedence for this isn't there?

I'm trying to figure out the exact case, but it had to do with a seniority issue. Its on the tip of my tongue.

East guys, I wouldn't be holding my breath for an LOA 93 win. And even if you do win, you still lose.