US Pilots Labor Thread 1/13-1/20

[GorgeousGeorge]

If USAPA seriously entertained that strategy, the counsel for the West would destroy it (and every witness under the sun from the east) with two questions. Can you figure out what they are?

(hint: the first involves asking how many experienced US Air pilots does it take to keep them on the surface of the Hudson as opposed to under Flushing Bay. You can extrapolate the second).

One never should try to equate longevity to safety proficiency, especially when one's whole track record can pretty easily (and graphically) be decimated under cross. Glass houses and stones, and Sulley can't catch them all.

Actually one would think the more critical arguments would be related to the crew working together and how any attempt to slam the two groups together with their obvious hostility could negatively impact safety and prevent an outcome like 1549.

 

[nic4us]

You know what I find real interesting. That the Westies asked for a jury trial when they first filed their case in September 2008 and then on January 15, 2009 they filed a motion to dismiss a jury trial. USAPA filed on the 16th stating they would like a jury trial. Gee, what happened on the 15th? Flight 1549. You have to wonder with all the press coverage "gushing" about how experienced the crew was (29 years for the captain; 23 years for the F/O) how a jury might be swayed. Afraid of a jury now, are we?

Later,
Eye

Eye,

While I admire and share your excitement over the incredible outcome of 1549, (your hero on the Hudson graphic on another thread was impressive) I think it would be best to leave the accident out of the seniority integration discussion. It has no relavance to the case and I think it would be demeaning of either side to incorporate it into the arguement.

Nic4

 

[Megasnoop]

Seniority is not in "federal law."

But keeping someone in the right seat for 7 years due to turning age 58 IS a violation of "federal law." That was my point. Back to the original message. USAPA had no leg to stand on the age 58 by-pass rule. When I turn 58, Id love to have it still in place. What a deal, middle of the Trans-Atlantic FO list now, near the top in 5 years even with NIC, getting 737-CA pay until age 65? Our policy was age 59 1/2, because by the time you got through training/IOE, little time to work your next seat. Your age 58 just catered to the needs of the company to save training costs. It screwed a 58-year-old 737 CA who for the first time had the seniority to bid 757 but was age-barred. Same pay, so no harm, no foul? But you obviously agreed to it, since its in your contract. Don't expect to see it in the next one. I never read a contract that took seniority away more than yours does. Same pay for all CA and FO seats. Where did that brain child come from? snoop, off to Europe

 

[Megasnoop]

Lets remember the facts here and not the BS or revisionist history.

The only reason the NEW aircraft aquired post-merger were placed on the East is because it was the East certificate that was to remain. They were not placed on the East side so only East pilots could benefit from them.

There was also language in the TA that would have placed them on the WEST certificate if it had been determined that the AWA certificate would remain.

I thought you guys just got a new A-321. True? False? If true (I heard theres a rumble about sharing headsets going on), then maybe its your revisionist history that needs a re-read. snoop

 

[cleardirect]

I thought you guys just got a new A-321. True? False? If true (I heard theres a rumble about sharing headsets going on), then maybe its your revisionist history that needs a re-read. snoop

You have been around long enough. You do understand the difference between NEW and REPLACEMENT aircraft correct? The 321 is a REPLACEMENT aircraft.

What revisionist history are you talking about?

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Eye,

While I admire and share your excitement over the incredible outcome of 1549, (your hero on the Hudson graphic on another thread was impressive) I think it would be best to leave the accident out of the seniority integration discussion. It has no relavance to the case and I think it would be demeaning of either side to incorporate it into the arguement.

Nic4

Hi Nic4us,
I understand your apprehension about discussing the matter of two very senior pilots and their job well done. The sad reality is F/O Jeff Skiles would be severely affected by the Nic list. I would not be surprised if USAPA called him to be a witness during a jury trial. God that would suck for the West guys. It would probably go something like this:

Seham: "First officer Skiles you are 49-years-old and have 23-years at US Airways how would the Nicolau list affect you?"

F/O Skiles: "Yes, I have 23-years here. If the Nicolau list were implemented I may not get holidays off with my family, nor a good schedule, lastly I would probably never check out as a wide body captain, which would severely impact my pay."

Seham: "Wide bodies were part of the US Airways fleet before the America West merger -- they did not have them, correct?"

F/O Skiles: "Yes, they did not have them."

Seham: "So, what happens if the Nicolau list were implemented?"

F/O Skiles: "A 38-year-old, 10-year America West pilot would be able to bid the wide bodies ahead of me along with a better schedule and holidays off."

<<<<< Loud GASP from jury>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Seham: "That's because Mr. Nicolau did not utilize all the information regarding each pilot and their age when compiling the list, correct?"

F/O Skiles: "Yes."

Seham: "You're ten years older than the aforementioned America West pilot. Therefore that means you will retire 11 years ahead of him, correct?"

F/O Skiles: "Correct and that means he would get to fly the wide bodies anyway through attrition (retirements)."

Seham: "So, the financial hardship is truly on the East pilot side, correct"

F/O Skiles: "Correct. It appears the America West pilots do not want to wait their turn. They would prefer to cut in line, so to speak."

Seham: "First officer Skiles, what happened to you on January 15, 2009?"

Leonidas Lawyer: "Objection!!!, Objection!!!"

Judge: "Overruled. You may answer the question."

F/O Skiles: "I was the first officer aboard US Airways 1549, which ditched into the Hudson River in New York City."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Loud APPLAUSE from the Jury<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<



Later,
Eye

 

[cleardirect]

Eye,

You should write fiction. That is pretty good.

Totally irrelevent to the case but good effort.

The list is done. The list is not on trial. USAPA is.

 

[Metroyet]

Hi Nic4us,
I understand your apprehension about discussing the matter of two very senior pilots and their job well done. The sad reality is F/O Jeff Skiles would be severely affected by the Nic list. I would not be surprised if USAPA called him to be a witness during a jury trial. God that would suck for the West guys. It would probably go something like this:

Seham: "First officer Skiles you are 49-years-old and have 23-years at US Airways how would the Nicolau list affect you?"

F/O Skiles: "Yes, I have 23-years here. If the Nicolau list were implemented I may not get holidays off with my family, nor a good schedule, lastly I would probably never check out as a wide body captain, which would severely impact my pay."

Seham: "Wide bodies were part of the US Airways fleet before the America West merger -- they did not have them, correct?"

F/O Skiles: "Yes, they did not have them."

Seham: "So, what happens if the Nicolau list were implemented?"

F/O Skiles: "A 38-year-old, 10-year America West pilot would be able to bid the wide bodies ahead of me along with a better schedule and holidays off."

<<<<< Loud GASP from jury>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Seham: "That's because Mr. Nicolau did not utilize all the information regarding each pilot and their age when compiling the list, correct?"

F/O Skiles: "Yes."

Seham: "You're ten years older than the aforementioned America West pilot. Therefore that means you will retire 11 years ahead of him, correct?"

F/O Skiles: "Correct and that means he would get to fly the wide bodies anyway through attrition (retirements)."

Seham: "So, the financial hardship is truly on the East pilot side, correct"

F/O Skiles: "Correct. It appears the America West pilots do not want to wait their turn. They would prefer to cut in line, so to speak."

Seham: "First officer Skiles, what happened to you on January 15, 2009?"

Leonidas Lawyer: "Objection!!!, Objection!!!"

Judge: "Overruled. You may answer the question."

F/O Skiles: "I was the first officer aboard US Airways 1549, which ditched into the Hudson River in New York City."

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Loud APPLAUSE from the Jury<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<



Later,
Eye

Dream on. The only question in front of the Judge/Jury is this: Did USAPA fail in it's Duty to Fairly represent the West pilots?

I'd say that the overpowering of the minority, and the attempted wholesale restructuring of a BINDING agreement that would result in a "pure win for the East and a pure loss for the West" (as the Judge categorized it) with ZERO regard for the west pilots or their input falls into the category of DFR.

flt 1549 is, from top to bottom, irrelevant to the question in the court room.

The West has nothing to fear from a jury trial. I've explained this mess to many lay people and they ALL get what's happening and what USAPA is really all about. This isn't a difficult matter to understand. Binding means Binding. You guys always forget that part.

You Easties have a hard time understanding relevancy. Judge Wake already reprimanded your highly sophisticated "counselor" seham, on just such misunderstanding.

Also, let's face a few facts here. The pax and crew of 1549 had a big serving of plain old Luck involved. Not to diminish what they did, but let's be honest. If they had hit the birds at 500' this story would have ended very differently. Thank God they didn't.

 

[Captain Underpants]

Dream on. The only question in front of the Judge/Jury is this: Did USAPA fail in it's Duty to Fairly represent the West pilots?

Exactly. It's about fairness and the duty of USAPA to represent all USAirways pilots fairly. USAPA's actions while unpopular with some pilots were absolutely necessary to restore fairness to the seniority integration. As Eye has described USAPA has a right to defend their actions by putting the Nic list on trial.

underpants.

 

[Tiger 1050]

Also, let's face a few facts here. The pax and crew of 1549 had a big serving of plain old Luck involved. Not to diminish what they did, but let's be honest. If they had hit the birds at 500' this story would have ended very differently. Thank God they didn't.

Bingo! Let's give credit where credit is due, but I think some here are gonna break their arm patting themselves on the back. Eye makes assumptions that, in reality, show his ignorance. Am I to take from his posts that because AWA was started in '83 or the fact that we have 10 year guys (not anymore though) flying in the left seat that they are somehow less experienced? Apparently prior military/airline experience doesn't count. But then how does Skiles' DOH affect his skill? Interesting. In my personal experience I have flown with military, no-military, old and young. I have yet to see any indication that one is consistently better than the other. I have flown with military guys that couldn't fly their way out of a paper bag and yet I have flown with 30 something captains that showed more professionalism and skill than 90% of their peers. Great job crew of 1549. But let's remember a lot of luck was involved that day. And that is something we can all be thankful for.

As far as the trial... Bench or Jury makes little difference in my mind. The case is simply about USAPA's DFR. Nothing more, nothing less. We'll see who brings their "A" game...

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Bingo! Let's give credit where credit is due, but I think some here are gonna break their arm patting themselves on the back. Eye makes assumptions that, in reality, show his ignorance. Am I to take from his posts that because AWA was started in '83 or the fact that we have 10 year guys (not anymore though) flying in the left seat that they are somehow less experienced? Apparently prior military/airline experience doesn't count. But then how does Skiles' DOH affect his skill? Interesting. In my personal experience I have flown with military, no-military, old and young. I have yet to see any indication that one is consistently better than the other. I have flown with military guys that couldn't fly their way out of a paper bag and yet I have flown with 30 something captains that showed more professionalism and skill than 90% of their peers. Great job crew of 1549. But let's remember a lot of luck was involved that day. And that is something we can all be thankful for.

As far as the trial... Bench or Jury makes little difference in my mind. The case is simply about USAPA's DFR. Nothing more, nothing less. We'll see who brings their "A" game...

The crew had the "right stuff" and we can thank US Airways, PSA, and Piedmont's the picky hiring back in the 80's for this. They chose the best. As for hiring in the past few years....I won't go there.


Later,
Eye

 

[des nudo]

Dream on. The only question in front of the Judge/Jury is this: Did USAPA fail in it's Duty to Fairly represent the West pilots?

I'd say that the overpowering of the minority, and the attempted wholesale restructuring of a BINDING agreement that would result in a "pure win for the East and a pure loss for the West" (as the Judge categorized it) with ZERO regard for the west pilots or their input falls into the category of DFR.

flt 1549 is, from top to bottom, irrelevant to the question in the court room.

The West has nothing to fear from a jury trial. I've explained this mess to many lay people and they ALL get what's happening and what USAPA is really all about. This isn't a difficult matter to understand. Binding means Binding. You guys always forget that part.

You Easties have a hard time understanding relevancy. Judge Wake already reprimanded your highly sophisticated "counselor" seham, on just such misunderstanding.

Also, let's face a few facts here. The pax and crew of 1549 had a big serving of plain old Luck involved. Not to diminish what they did, but let's be honest. If they had hit the birds at 500' this story would have ended very differently. Thank God they didn't.

Indeed.

It'll be good enough to just produce the mountains of material from the AWAPPA chat room, the AOL chatroom, and others', as well as documentation regarding agressive evasion of membership and/or dues obligations...(think crew news videos too...)

That'll be persuasive enough for any juror to determine who and how they were not being treated /represented fairly by USAPA.

Cheers.

 

[Tiger 1050]

The crew had the "right stuff" and we can thank US Airways, PSA, and Piedmont's the picky hiring back in the 80's for this. They chose the best. As for hiring in the past few years....I won't go there.


Later,
Eye

Ha Ha Ha Ha!!! Your really believe that don't you? Well I hate to burst your bubble but we have all kinds with diverse background of experience. Just as the original AAA had. Believe it or not some of us chose to work here. Yeah we knew it was not the pinnacle of airlines but then again we dont seem to have this insatiable desire to feed our egos. We're not that shallow...

Go on and think what you will though. It just proves my point. You are ignorant regarding "experience" and I question your claimed credentials...

BTW I love the reference to the "Right Stuff!" Yeah man, you guys out east are real astronauts! ...Careful your head might not fit through the doorway!

 

[EyeInTheSky]

Indeed.

It'll be good enough to just produce the mountains of material from the AWAPPA chat room, the AOL chatroom, and others', as well as documentation regarding agressive evasion of membership and/or dues obligations...(think crew news videos too...)

That'll be persuasive enough for any juror to determine who and how they were not being treated /represented fairly by USAPA.

Cheers.

des nudo,
Don't forget the AWAPPA videos on YouTube. They are quite lively and are visual evidence of the lack of maturity and class on the West side.

Love this one at 1:32 in the video : "I hate every one of youse.." http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N66EvBBj5tQ

Check out the chick with the sign. What class!

Later,
Eye

 

[Metroyet]

Indeed.

It'll be good enough to just produce the mountains of material from the AWAPPA chat room, the AOL chatroom, and others', as well as documentation regarding agressive evasion of membership and/or dues obligations...(think crew news videos too...)

That'll be persuasive enough for any juror to determine who and how they were not being treated /represented fairly by USAPA.

Cheers.

Again, All Irrelevant!!!!!

WAS USAPA FORMED FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE TO PROVIDE AN OPPORTUNITY TO EVADE BINDING ARBITRATION THUS COMPLETELY DISENFRANCHISING THE WEST?

Watch the Youtube videos....crystal clear.


USAPA has far more to fear in the Discovery process than the West because the West has no FEDERALLY MANDATED RESPONSIBILITY or DUTY TO FAIRLY execute anything with the new (fake) Union.

Your moronic leaders and the Ambulance chaser were dumb enough to make the West's case for them in plain view. I can only imagine was the transpired between private emails from the "national leaders"

We'll see soon enough.



Chat room "Evidence"? So you're saying it's illegal for the sheep not to go willingly to slaughter? I guess in the brain damaged USAPA world of Delusional Grandeur it is... Good Luck Counselor!!! 🙄