US Pilots Labor Discussion

[luvthe9]

So I get on an elevator with a Delta pilot today. He is in plain clothes, but I notice his bag tags and his Delta hat riding on his rollaboard. His travel companion (guessing his wife) ask me, "Cactus Pilot...is that a new airline"? He turns to her and says.."No that is the USAirways call sign...and that means he is an America West pilot...one of the good guys."

You will never see any respect on this property, or within the industry. I think it is even going to follow you into retirement.

america west pilots wages



Did you remind him of the fact your group was the low mark in wages, with no retirement? Now we are all down there. He must have been thankin you profusely for the retirement standards you worked for all those years..........Interesting how all those stories you guys spin about how the other airlines out there love the west, and hate the east always come from you, not them. Does this really help you sleep? When do you dream this stuff up? Do you really believe that, seeing how the Australia thing went down?

 

[CallawayGolf]

Black Swan schooled you. You didn't have one factual argument.

LOL. Would this be the same BS that posted this?

All of this will be finished very soon, within days. West to JBlu. East hooks with AK and Hawaiian. Happy Ending.

Having been proven wrong on this, now he’s off to posting that the LOA93 grievance will be a win for USAPA. I have yet to see anyone provide a factual refutation to Siegel’s 9-point argument before Kasher as to why USAPA's claim is not only without merit, but it is frivolous. Is anyone up to the challenge? Without a point-by-point refutation, I’ll stick with my longstanding opinion that short of a total breakdown in logic, Kasher will issue a formal denial of USAPA’s frivolous distraction and that should be forthcoming long before BS’ nonsensical prediction of a US split.

 

[Black Swan]

Pure speculation. But I have heard this is a very real possibility. Don't take it for anything other than what I heard 6 months ago, and now new rumblings. It may not go. Look at the options and you tell me if they did not load up.

Is this what I said Caloway? Read it carefully. Especially the first line. This was close to the beginning of the entire discussion. Before the line you conveniently misquoted as far as context goes.

 

[Black Swan]

You were made completely aware I was hearing a rumor, and passing it to you. I made no pretense as to having any inside info. or factual information. With what I heard and the options, I posted it.

 

[Hate2fly]

Callaway,

The Swan has shared the dinner table with someone who has taught arbitration for over 40 years. He knows all the players! You guys out west had this all figured out. The desert judge was going to take the west to the promise land. Keep your eye on the prize! The swan's source has nailed everything from launching ALPA to spanking all over the desert judge. He knew what the 9th was thinking when they spanked all over the heart doctor. He has done more arbitrations than Kasher. Remember the term Frozen! The swan has laid this out for you knuckle heads and you still don't get it. Get ready to be spanked again. Even a half win for the east 18% plus 3% + 3% puts the east up 24% more than present pay. If we get the Donny B. gentleman special 41% it is just icing on the cake. 3% every May 1st until we have a new contract. The attrition alone gives most of us severe pay increases as we change seats. We have told you all along how this was going to play out. You haven't listened because you guys are younger and smarter. J. Freund told you guys all the risk is on the west side! Boy, was he right!

Hate

 

[Phoenix]

Right after all these years i decide to come to this forum, please, i already stated my position, i am not going to post over and over again for weeks to come, just the general interest, however when i see usapa press releases i may comment, i have nothing to do with us air....
..

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I always appreciate a johnny come lately who begins a long post by telling me to ignore it. Done!

 

[Phoenix]

You got me.

I heard someone wanted to boil my balls in motor oil soni figured I better get on here.

BTW, you guys are going to have your asses handed to you.

LOA 93, Nic, etc - not much to look forward to. Your lucky your miserable careers are coming to an end.

Glass would be smart enough to know the difference between the contraction of "you are" and the pronoun "your". Or maybe he wouldn't be.

 

[cleardirect]

Our side agrees that the NIC is a windfall for the West and your side agrees that DOH is a windfall for the East. You and I have cleared this up for everyone tuning in..............I think you and I should get some sort of retainer fee for our work this morning. B)

You disagree that DOH is a windfall for east pilots?

 

[IADair]

Thank you, thank you, thank you. I always appreciate a johnny come lately who begins a long post by telling me to ignore it. Done!

Dude you are having a hard time understanding the definition of ignore, either you cant comprehend the meaning of the word, or refuse to accept its meaning, hmm similar to the word binding arbitration. This is the second time you are responding to me, even though you are ignoring me. Get a clue.

WE all make bad decisions sometimes, however people with integrity honor their contracts and commitments, how can you tell your children, friends, family, not to honor thier word, their contracts, their commitments. You agreed to binding arbitration, your company was 7 days away from chapter 7. you had no leverage, all you had left was your WORD. Now that is gone. I would never make any type of contract deal like sell a house or car to anyone who believes this usapa garbage is morally right. Because at any time you would just break your word if you decided you did not like the deal. You were bankrupt, you were gone, you got saved by white knights, you agreed to binding arbitration. You cannot reason with religious fanatics.

 

[767jetz]

Translation: "One side should not have a windfall"

Sorry, you don't get to determine what the definition of windfall is. Once you couldn't come to a mutual consensus through negotiation and mediation, and submitted yourselves to arbitration, the arbitrator now decides things like "fair" and "windfall" and "conditions and restrictions." Nothing is a windfall just because YOU say it is.

And by the way, NOWHERE did the merger policy you used say anything about no windfalls. As usual you take the words out of context to suit your needs. ALPA merger policy says (and I'm paraphrasing), no windfalls at the expense of one side. The east getting a larger raise than the west is a windfall to the east, no? But it doesn't come at the expense of the west.

Similarly, a 17 year east pilot who held a bottom reserve position on your smallest, lowest paying airplane, and getting a relative position still at the bottom of the combined list next to a west pilot who held the same position is not a windfall at anyone's expense. That 17 year debt was an expense incurred long before AWA came along to help you emerge from imminent liquidation. Especially since the arbitrator gave you 2/3 of the upgrades, 517 on top for the widebody seats, and lions share of any pay or contractual improvements from a joint contract. Those were HIS conditions and restrictions that HE felt was fair considering the facts and merits of your particular case. And considering you gave him no suggestions besides DOH or nothing, even when he told you you wouldn't get it, I'd say you were lucky to even get that.

It defies reason that you guys think YOUR idea of fair is the only one that matters. It doesn't work that way in the real world. You played your cards with what you had left and painted yourselves into the corner you are in. Good for you. The law will play out and there will be no relief for a majority of you until it is settled. If you are comfortable with your cards, that's great. But when it's time to lay them on the table, don't be surprised if your opponent has a better hand. In the mean time, all this talk about "unfair" and "windfall" and "Nicolau got it wrong" and "gold standard" and on and on is nothing but blind biased opinion.

 

[Black Swan]

Dude you are having a hard time understanding the definition of ignore, either you cant comprehend the meaning of the word, or refuse to accept its meaning, hmm similar to the word binding arbitration. This is the second time you are responding to me, even though you are ignoring me. Get a clue.

WE all make bad decisions sometimes, however people with integrity honor their contracts and commitments, how can you tell your children, friends, family, not to honor thier word, their contracts, their commitments. You agreed to binding arbitration, your company was 7 days away from chapter 7. you had no leverage, all you had left was your WORD. Now that is gone. I would never make any type of contract deal like sell a house or car to anyone who believes this usapa garbage is morally right. Because at any time you would just break your word if you decided you did not like the deal. You were bankrupt, you were gone, you got saved by white knights, you agreed to binding arbitration. You cannot reason with religious fanatics.

Your story just is not believable. Kind of like all the paranormal "encounters" the west guys have all over the system. Elevators, parties, church, the story is all the same. The west pilots are righteous, and the east sucks. After what any pilot in the airline industry HAS to know, the west honestly did not have such a storied and fabulous history. Not banging on the individual pilots, but the management was terrible, and the place honestly was not high up on the list to apply to. Kind of like the ENTIRE USAirways today. Your story is a myth, you take a trip to the airport, then you suddenly have all this insight into arbitration etc. and then you seek the pilots message board. RIIIIIIIIGHT. Hows your daddy? Wow, what a coincidence, another outside "interested party" who is supposedly a UAL pilot, but posts more here.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Is this what I said Caloway? Read it carefully. Especially the first line. This was close to the beginning of the entire discussion. Before the line you conveniently misquoted as far as context goes.

I quoted your entire post. How is that out of context?

Okay, so your pure speculation on the breakup of US turned out to be grossly misplaced, but now we should hang on your every word and analysis of the LOA arbitration? I don't think so. However, I'm asking if you or any of the other USAPA apologists are willing to engage in a point-by-point discussion on the company's 9-points used by Siegel to prove that any pay increase beyond the lump sum payments were intended by both parties when LOA93 was enacted.

I'll even give you a pass on the first two reasons presented (contract language) by the company. They presented clear evidence that the agreement never intended a pay restoration and have the documents and witnesses to back that up. You think they don't so let's move on to something more specific than an interpretation of what frozen means. Here is point number three from the testimony:

Reason No. 3. During the negotiations, the Company communicated clearly and expressly to the ALPA negotiators that the two lump sum payments were being offered in lieu of any other post amendable date automatic pay increases.

The Company communicated through its proposals at the bargaining table and in discussions at the bargaining table expressly on this subject.

The Company's negotiator, Bruce Ashby, will testify that he made that point clear in response to questions from an ALPA negotiator at the negotiation table.

He expressly stated that the future increases and all the terms called for in the then existing Collective Bargaining Agreement would no longer be applicable.

He stated that instead of any of those increases past the amendable date, the only commitment the Company could make would be to the $35 million lump sum payments in January of 2010 and 2011.

And in fact, he said that's all the Company could afford, all the Company could afford to commit to on or after the amendable date.

Now, the absence of post amendable date pay increases is also evident from the Company's proposals. And our witnesses will walk you through the bargaining history of Letter 93.

We're going to see that the parties worked very hard to come up with a combination of wage cuts, productivity improvements, and changes to benefits that would amount to the necessary $300 million in annual cost reductions asked of the pilots.

Some of the Company's proposals, during that period, included wage increases in later years of the agreement or even after the amendable date.

But with those proposals were made, such as the one proposal we saw already for a 5 percent increase on the amendable date, they were expressly stated in the proposals. They were described in the accompanying valuations, the spreadsheets, and they were acknowledged by both pair of parties.

And when those proposals were withdrawn in lieu of the lump some obligation, that was communicated as well.

This was not a silent negotiation. This was not a well, everybody understood discussion.
This was an express discussion about what would or would not happen on or after the amendable date, and it's reflected in the proposals.

The valuations of the Company's proposals also tell the story.

Our evidence is going to show that when the Company made proposals in the latter part of the process, it included valuation sheets to indicate the cost of the proposals being made.

Those valuation sheets were through the amendable date of 2009, but they also had a column that indicated what would happened afterwards.
And when the Company proposed a pay increase at one point, the 5 percent on the amendable date, the valuation sheet showed that.

When they withdrew the proposal and did not include that, the valuation sheet showed that.

At no time in those valuation sheets was it ever indicated in the column after amendable date that there was an automatic 40 percent plus wage increase to be mandated by this agreement.

It wasn't there because that wasn't the agreement. And ALPA knew it, and everyone knew it throughout the process.

The final valuation sheets, which we'll enter into evidence, indicates a series of zeros for
six years after 2005. Indicating an 18 percent pay cut and indicating no increases through 2011.

And the reason there were valuations that ran through 2011 is because the Company's business model ran through that period, and the ATSB loan ran through that period. So the parties were talking about financial analysis data through that period.

You could search every single one of these documents. Not a single one ever, ever indicated plus 40 percent on 1-1-2010.

They indicated zero because the parties had agreed that that would be subject to the negotiation process under Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act.

 

[Black Swan]

I quoted your entire post. How is that out of context?

Okay, so your pure speculation on the breakup of US turned out to be grossly misplaced, but now we should hang on your every word and analysis of the LOA arbitration? I don't think so. However, I'm asking if you or any of the other USAPA apologists are willing to engage in a point-by-point discussion on the company's 9-points used by Siegel to prove that any pay increase beyond the lump sum payments were intended by both parties when LOA93 was enacted.

I'll even give you a pass on the first two reasons presented (contract language) by the company. They presented clear evidence that the agreement never intended a pay restoration and have the documents and witnesses to back that up. You think they don't so let's move on to something more specific than an interpretation of what frozen means. Here is point number three from the testimony:

The part I told you in the next couple of discourses that I was speculating was left out. You cherry picked something and twisted. A lot like you twist the 9th stuff too! Especially the part you always leave out when they say the Nic might not be the final product.... so I am supposed to give you a timeline of a day or so that it would happen? I told you the entire thing was rampant speculation of stuff I heard going around. You don't have to even read my posts OK. I made it perfectly clear it was speculation. Did you take the time to look at the options? I clearly did not make that up.

 

[Metroyet]

Keep the CIRP team ready. Make sure they're armed to the teeth with Kleenex, cookies and milk. Employ the grievance granny, (48yo :blink:?!) to dispense the much needed, comforting hugs....the kind only grandma can give. It's going to be a hard fall. Be ready.

 

[prechilill]

It defies reason that you guys think YOUR idea of fair is the only one that matters. It doesn't work that way in the real world.

Only about three east pilots on this board will understand what you said.