US Pilots Labor Thread 6/2-6/9 STAY ON TOPIC

[hp_fa]

Have a sit down with management and USAPA negotiating committee(who represent the entire USAiirway pilots per NMB) to negotiate under section 6 on the table the LOA 93 pay rates with the EXPIRATION grievance the DFR appeal. Put it all out there come up with a contract and have vote of all membership in good standing. If the negotiating committee who represent the entire USAiirway pilots per NMB follows the rules and regulations of the NBM the outside courts are secondary and limited

John John,

If I am understanding you correctly that can't happen now for at least two reasons.

First, under the Transition Agreement between the AAA MEC, the AWA MEC and the Company, accepted as it was required to do under the terms of the TA, the Nicolau list as being the seniority list. USAPA won't proceed with that list representing the seniority list as it exists.

Second, per testimony at trial, USAPA will not allow it's own Negotiating Committee to have the power to temporarily agree to any contract sections that are under negotiation, reserving any and all such powers to the BPR. The problem with this is why should the Company negotiate with any entity that will not have the power to agree to anything? I would guess that this specific problem could be cured by dissolving the Negotiating Committee and have the BPR constitute the Negotiating Committee of themselves, but to date I haven't heard anything that indicates they are doing that. (BTW, if I heard that testimony incorrectly then someone can correct me. I have not gone and found the testimony that I refer to in the transcripts.)

Does that address your proposal?

 

[ussnark]

The problem with this is why should the Company negotiate with any entity that will not have the power to agree to anything?

If that were true, why would any union even sit down unless the CEO were there?

 

[Tiger 1050]

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 1 1 13(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 3 1 , 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:
Lump Sums:
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 12/3 1/09.
2. Reduce rates as frozen by 18.0%
3. Reduce International pay override, as stated in Section
3(F) and Section 18©, by 18.0% for transoceanic trips;
eliminate international override for non-transoceanic trips.
4. Pay all flying at day rate..


The following lump sums shall be paid by the Company:
January 1,2010 - $35 million
January 1,201 1 - $35 million
Such lump sums will be allocated to individual pilots according to a
formula to be provided by the Association to the Company, along
with each pilot’s individual allocation, no later than two (2) months

So having looked at LOA 93 I must admit I cannot find any expiration. I am not saying it isn't there but I think you guys are reading your desires into this. If the term "Expire(s)" is in this document I'd like you to point it out. In fact the "Duration" is what seems controlling to me (see big red letters above). I'd say your "expiration" which gives you a snap-back is wishful thinking. No contract under RLA ever expires. They only become amendable! The company will argue this 'til the cows come home. Arbitrators will side with the company. Sorry guys....

 

[exB717Flyer]

You know what, Ex? We don’t care if you support us or not.

I shall keep that in mind.

Our pay snapback will be arbitrated, not negotiated.

And you're proud of that? An Eastie of all people should be well aware of the risks inherent in arbitration.

And with poisonous posters like you, any wonder - - -

Oh, you flatter me.

 

[HPearlyretiree]

You know what, Ex? We don’t care if you support us or not. Our pay snapback will be arbitrated, not negotiated. And with poisonous posters like you, any wonder - - -

Funny, you use the word "arbitrated"

Remember that "binding arbitration"?

The one that caused the east to form USAPA in a cowardly attempt to duck out of?

How rich that you demand arbitration.

 

[prechilill]

It says so much about character and principles HP.

 

[N924PS]

I guess the jump-seater wearing a provocative red anti-USAPA lanyard was not bringing politics into the cockpit?

I guess it's still a free country. Were the East pilots wearing their black USAPA lanyards?

Seems to me the East started the provocation way back when with the first round of lanyards and bag stickers.

And from the tone of the initial post, it sounds as if the East crew started the barbeque.

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

Well thanks for your hospitality.

Your big mistake was bringing up politics on the jumpseat at all. You simply should have asked if he had a nice flight from Europe flown your damn airplane to BWI and said a polite good-bye.

Hope you feel better venting on the poor fellow, but except for making your chest puff a bit, I'm certain your tasty discussion served no purpose whatsoever.

Nice try...it was HE who brought it up...not us.

"...so, what do you guys make of the court case you lost?..."

Not too bright as we were still on the ground and could have left him...but didn't.

For Tiger: go back to your LOA 93 post and re-read item #1...

start with: "current rates of pay shall be frozen from....TO when?...12/21/2009.

End of story. The pay reduction has an expiration date...if it didn't, I'd agree that the entirety of the LOA93 amendment date stands. It does: with the exception of the specific pay reduction from LOA 84.

Read it again.

 

[ClueByFour]

Looking at that language, and not having the negotiating notes, it would not shock me at all to see an arbitrator rule that the rates don't snapback, but the %3/year raise comes back. The company is going to argue that the "freeze" is the only thing that expires 12/09.

 

[aquagreen73s]

Seems to me the East started the provocation way back when with the first round of lanyards and bag stickers.

Whatever happened to the gold "seniority matters" lanyards? Wasn't USAPA concerned about disenfranchising the West? No worries, so feel free to put 'em back on fellas as the West doesn't care!

And from the tone of the initial post, it sounds as if the East crew started the barbeque.

Odd, considering which side is being slowly roasted under the magnifying glass of the law. It'll be good and ready in about nine months.

 

[aquagreen73s]

Looking at that language, and not having the negotiating notes, it would not shock me at all to see an arbitrator rule that the rates don't snapback, but the %3/year raise comes back. The company is going to argue that the "freeze" is the only thing that expires 12/09.

Also, USAPA has a real problem with unclean hands as the sole purpose for them arguing for "snapbacks" is because they are trying with all their might to ignore an arbitrated decision by another federal arbitrator. USAPA's motive conflicts directly with anything that might be discovered in the notes. USAPAians might like to feign innocence and pretned that the two matters are independent, but there's no way an arbitrator is going to ignore the rest of the picture. If Bloch (or whoever hears the arbitration) stretches and finds for the East, the precedent he's setting chips away at the very purpose of the collective bargaining process. Fat chance he'll do that. Don't believe me? Then read the TA9 arbitration as Bloch there pulled intent out of the TA when neither party argued the TA! And he used that "finding" to rule in favor of the company.

Not trying to convince anyone as I understand quite well that nothing convinces the East of anything; they'll believe the latest fantasy du jour come hell or high water. But, for the record, the East loses the snapback grievance.

 

[ussnark]

And from the tone of the initial post, it sounds as if the East crew started the barbeque.

Read the original post. Perhaps you missed it. and, you presume much to call it a "barbeque". You have no idea who opened up, who did to whom and whatever. All cynical speculation on your part. It might be true, but you could not make that case from what is written.

You wanna poke a hornet's nest with a stick, you gotta deal with the consequences. Note: the jump-seater did get a ride.

 

[oscarjazz]

Looking at that language, and not having the negotiating notes, it would not shock me at all to see an arbitrator rule that the rates don't snapback, but the %3/year raise comes back. The company is going to argue that the "freeze" is the only thing that expires 12/09.

That's how I read it too. The raises should start again in 2010 but not a snapback of the wages. The wage reductions were listed on a separate line that did not include a time frame. Same with night pay and international pay.

 

[nic4us]

Seems to me the East started the provocation way back when with the first round of lanyards and bag stickers.

First sticker etc. I saw was and east pilots DOH sticker on his flight bag, pre-Nic.

More recently the only thing I see east pilots sporting is the Union Pilot badge backers. Which I believe are similar to the pilot to pilot volunteers, is that correct? and what is the difference between a blue one and a red one?

One thing I would like to point out is some West pilots wear a silver cactus tie pin. This particular pin has nothing to do with Nic, it was given to pilots who took part in informational picketing. Do not have one as I was working that day.

 

[john john]

Funny, you use the word "arbitrated"

Remember that "binding arbitration"?

The one that caused the east to form USAPA in a cowardly attempt to duck out of?

How rich that you demand arbitration.

And US went in to bankrupts twice to duck out past "binding arbitration"
Not sure what HP did in bankrupts did they even have unions then