US Pilots Labor Discussion

[toganoflex]

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

Nope. Not really. Proof? You're still under LOA93.

 

[IADair]

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.

MuH wea, you just cant reason with a fanatic, you had signs and protesting at the airport to get attention, you got attention you wanted now you BLAME ME, you had a truck driving by with a sign about contracts. america west was not in great shape, no doubt about it, however that is not the issue, the issue is you agreed to binding arbitration, the courts will find NIC king of the land, that is the bottom line, all this is stuff is nonsense.

yeah you use the google plus in us airways, pilots, contract, dispute, you go to usapaorg or something, etc .. yeah all this stuff pops up, easy to research, not that hard to google and mean everyone does it, you just keep clicking links, not to mention remembing in 2005? i think how you guys intentionally lost all those pax bags over the holidays, You guys just dont get it, here saying stuff, like who is your daddy? WTF dude.

Again as stated before you see this same stuff on political message boards anytime you disagree with someone, you get accused of being iether the democrat or republican based on reply.

Your postiion as a group is so insane, that is is easy for a regular joe to do a little research based on facts and easily determine that you guys are whack in regard to this issue.

That's about it,

 

[traderjake]

Cleary stated AMENDABLE date. So now you agree that the grievance should not have gone to Kasher?

Swan, do you just get schooled by clear?

Am I reading this incorrectly?

from page 4 of LOA 93

Duration: Amendable date December 31, 2009


TRANSFORMATION PLAN LETTER #93
Transformation Plan Term Sheet
US Airways Group, Inc. (the Company), US Airways, Inc. (US Airways) and Air Line Pilots Association (Association) agree to the following terms and conditions with respect to the Association’s participation in the Company’s Transformation Plan (Transformation Plan) (All terms contained herein are subject to final contract language in accordance with the terms herein):
Effective Date:
1. The earlier of: (x) the date of ratification and signature by the Association's President, or (y) the date interim relief under Section 1113(e) is granted by the Bankruptcy Court.
2. If interim relief is granted by the Bankruptcy Court prior to
ratification and signature, and ratification and signature have not occurred by October 22, 2004, then interim relief shall be implemented and effective as of the date it was granted by the Bankruptcy Court.

3. The Company may, and the Association agrees that the Company may, implement a retroactive pay reduction pursuant to 1. and 2. above.

Duration: Amendable date December 31, 2009.

Other terms of 1998 Agreement, as amended:
Other than as specifically modified in these documents, all terms and conditions of the ALPA-US Airways Collective Bargaining Agreement effective January 1, 1998, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.
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 18.0%
3. Reduce International pay override, as stated in Section 3(F) and Section 18(C), by 18.0% for transoceanic trips; eliminate international override for non-transoceanic trips.
4. Pay all flying at day rate.
Lump Sums:
The following lump sums shall be paid by the Company:
January 1, 2010 - $35 million
January 1, 2011 - $35 million

4

 

[Hate2fly]

Callaway,

Did Bruce Ashby testify? They brought him in from India............there was a reason Ashby didn't testify.......I wonder what that was?

Hate

 

[CallawayGolf]

Wow, 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.

You were the one who used the term "days" to indicate an announcement was imminent, not me. I asked you back then if you were willing to retract if something didn't happen by the end of June which is way more than just a few days. You then claimed that you were just speculating because you likely didn't want to back up your assertions with facts or be held accountable for your spreading false information.

So there was activity in the options. What that means requires an interpretation of the facts which clearly you didn't have. Of course if anyone with knowledge of an imminent transaction was actually engaging in active trading would be violating the SEC insider trading laws which would just be plain stupid, so you can be assured that if options are being traded it is only being done by those with no knowledge of the situation (such as yourself).

So, back to LOA 93. Can you explain why the documents presented to and accepted by ALPA didn't include any amounts for wage increases in 2010 or 2011 beyond the lump sums even though the columns for those years were included in the documents? Why were the 40% wage increases not included? Why would ALPA accept them if they weren't reflective of the actual agreement covered by LOA93? Why should Kasher believe USAPA in light of the company's evidence presented on this point?

 

[Black Swan]

You were the one who used the term "days" to indicate an announcement was imminent, not me. I asked you back then if you were willing to retract if something didn't happen by the end of June which is way more than just a few days. You then claimed that you were just speculating because you likely didn't want to back up your assertions with facts or be held accountable for your spreading false information.

So there was activity in the options. What that means requires an interpretation of the facts which clearly you didn't have. Of course if anyone with knowledge of an imminent transaction was actually engaging in active trading would be violating the SEC insider trading laws which would just be plain stupid, so you can be assured that if options are being traded it is only being done by those with no knowledge of the situation (such as yourself).

So, back to LOA 93. Can you explain why the documents presented to and accepted by ALPA didn't include any amounts for wage increases in 2010 or 2011 beyond the lump sums even though the columns for those years were included in the documents? Why were the 40% wage increases not included? Why would ALPA accept them if they weren't reflective of the actual agreement covered by LOA93? Why should Kasher believe USAPA in light of the company's evidence presented on this point?

I said days, because I heard days. Not that I knew days. And I said It was speculation. And I didn t agree to the end of June, because why would anybody expect someone to guarantee speculation and rumor, that is except you



Black Swan, on 13 June 2011 - 03:14 PM, said:
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.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Callaway,

Did Bruce Ashby testify? They brought him in from India............there was a reason Ashby didn't testify.......I wonder what that was?

Hate

He didn't. And unless one of us is Siegel, we really don't know why. I presume it was because the time was short and the company had already presented enough testimony to bury USAPA's intentional misunderstanding of the LOA93 agreement. Was he deposed? Was that deposition included in the mountains of evidence presented in the case?

Do you really think Siegel would fly Ashby in from India and only discover hours before he would testify that his testimony would be harmful to the company's position? Even if you don't like him representing the company's interests, I would think you would at least respect him as a highly competent litigator who knows how to line up his case well before he stands before a judge or arbitrator.

Of course you would probably prefer to engage in a conspiracy theory rather than assume that Siegel actually knows how to argue a case.

 

[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:

Very interesting discussion, and lead up for Mr. Ashby. The very same Mr. Ashby who had an affair with a married woman, who just happened to be married to a USAirways Pilot. Hey! Where is Mr. Ashby's testimony? Come on Calloway, show it! Oh, you didn't know? They flew Bruce all the way in from India, and somehow were reluctant to put him on the stand. So reluctant, that he never did get to testify. I wonder why? You gave us all that big lead up, where they told about Bruce being the lead negotiator, and how he would walk us through it. He didn't walk us through it, he just walked...........Here is another rumor for you Calloway. Somebody said the guy who wrote the big LOA said he wouldn't lie for them.

 

[Black Swan]

You were the one who used the term "days" to indicate an announcement was imminent, not me. I asked you back then if you were willing to retract if something didn't happen by the end of June which is way more than just a few days. You then claimed that you were just speculating because you likely didn't want to back up your assertions with facts or be held accountable for your spreading false information.

So there was activity in the options. What that means requires an interpretation of the facts which clearly you didn't have. Of course if anyone with knowledge of an imminent transaction was actually engaging in active trading would be violating the SEC insider trading laws which would just be plain stupid, so you can be assured that if options are being traded it is only being done by those with no knowledge of the situation (such as yourself).

So, back to LOA 93. Can you explain why the documents presented to and accepted by ALPA didn't include any amounts for wage increases in 2010 or 2011 beyond the lump sums even though the columns for those years were included in the documents? Why were the 40% wage increases not included? Why would ALPA accept them if they weren't reflective of the actual agreement covered by LOA93? Why should Kasher believe USAPA in light of the company's evidence presented on this point?

Why didn't the negotiator testify when they bought him from India?It says right in the opening he knew all about it, the intent... Where was the costing on the two 35 million payments? Where where the other cost analysis that the lead up said would support the fact they could not afford them? Even Kasher asked for them. They couldn't produce them, because they didn't do them. So much for that part of the lead up for Mr. Ashby to talk about the non affordability . Maybe they wanted Mr Ashby to testify to a lot of that nice lead up, that happened to not be true. He knew somebody was going to ask for all that bunk about not having the money, and he couldn't produce the cost documents. I wouldn't put him on the stand either.



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.


Ashby did all of that for them, an integral part. He was right there. Why, did Mr Ashby not get his day??? Maybe he could lie for the previous team, and his buddy Dave Siegel, but Doug Parker? Why do it and risk anything for Parker? He owed Parker NOTHING.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Very interesting discussion, and lead up for Mr. Ashby. The very same Mr. Ashby who had an affair with a married woman, who just happened to be married to a USAirways Pilot. Hey! Where is Mr. Ashby's testimony? Come on Calloway, show it! Oh, you didn't know? They flew Bruce all the way in from India, and somehow were reluctant to put him on the stand. So reluctant, that he never did get to testify. I wonder why? You gave us all that big lead up, where they told about Bruce being the lead negotiator, and how he would walk us through it. He didn't walk us through it, he just walked...........Here is another rumor for you Calloway. Somebody said the guy who wrote the big LOA said he wouldn't lie for them.

So SSMP didn't get their chance to embarrass this guy before the arbitrator with the poor personal decisions he made? Does that somehow change the fact that the 2010 and 2011 valuation columns didn't show any kind of wage restoration beyond the lump sum payments? How desperate are you to win that you need to rest your hope on the personal moral failures of one person, which in the end don't change the black and white facts of the grievance?

 

[Hate2fly]

Trader,

Read this very carefully.......


Other terms of 1998 Agreement, as amended:
Other than as specifically modified in these documents, all terms and conditions of the ALPA-US Airways Collective Bargaining Agreement effective January 1, 1998, as amended, shall remain in full force and effect.



Hate

 

[Black Swan]

So SSMP didn't get their chance to embarrass this guy before the arbitrator with the poor personal decisions he made? Does that somehow change the fact that the 2010 and 2011 valuation columns didn't show any kind of wage restoration beyond the lump sum payments? How desperate are you to win that you need to rest your hope on the personal moral failures of one person, which in the end don't change the black and white facts of the grievance?

Not desperate at all. I just happen to know the pilot whose wife he had the affair with, and then Ashby later threatened with termination. That went right to HR. Ashby is not a very nice person. I am glad he was smart enough to not lie for Doug Parker. He had moved on to India with Rakesh. He didn't need to lie. You can dance around this all you want. The meat is this: they were going to have their negotiator testify as to why the company could not afford to pay the pilots. They told Kasher they did not do the cost analysis. If Ashby had been asked to produce the documents lead had promised, how would that have looked? That is not desperation, that is having them by the short ones, and they knew it. He would have to produce the documents, lie about losing them, or skip town. We all know what choice he made.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Good grief, BS has another conspiracy theory to explain everything. He and 9 are going to be two embarrassed people when the LOA 93 decision comes in, although it'll probably be explained by another "I wasn't saying what the outcome would be, just speculating."

Jim

 

[Phoenix]

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.

I would never ignore you outright. At least not yet. I just stopped reading your posts at the point where you made it clear that you had no clue. Is that you Glass!? Do you have anything to do with USAir yet?

 

[Black Swan]

Good grief, BS has another conspiracy theory to explain everything. He and 9 are going to be two embarrassed people when the LOA 93 decision comes in, although it'll probably be explained by another "I wasn't saying what the outcome would be, just speculating."

Jim

Funny BB. Tell us why he came from India, lead built up how he was going to walk everybody through it as he was the negotiator, show the costing. Bottom line is this. 1. He came from India, 2. He never took the stand 3 He never did the costing. 4 He was touted as the expert witness. As far as the outcome? I am on record as saying I feel it could go either way. I strongly feel we will prevail, but you just never can call it. Satisfied? By the way, where is the conspiracy?