US Pilots' Labor Thread 6/9-6/16--PLEASE OBSERVE THE RULES

[fodase]

Snoop,

USAPA is currently negotiating for a single contract because the company would not open the East contract early. Seniority issues aside the company will not agree to a single contract under the transition agreement because they don't have to ever. There is no resolution process after mediation.

A fair contract will require industry standard pay rates of around $185/hr. for A320 Captains, a 50% pay raise. We already have these rates negotiated in the current contract effective when the pay freeze expires. If the company refuses to pay the contract rates they will likely be ordered to by an arbitrator.

The only other way to return to industry standard rates and a fair contract is to follow the section 6 process of NMB mediation, 30 day cooling off period and either Presidential intervention or self help. The company can not refuse NMB mandated section 6 negotiations.

It could not be a DFR to negotiate separate contract improvements although the union may be required to engage in some parallel good-faith negotiations to eventually resolve the seniority dispute. Seniority dispute negotiations may or may not be included in the NMB contract dispute resolution process so section 6 could lead to continued separate contracts or a single contract.

USAPA is fully aware that section 6 will have to be filed to get the company to move although they have not yet decided when to file the section 6 notification.

underpants

So why hasn't usapa pursued west's section six? It was open right before usapa won the election, why hasn't usapa pursued it?

 

[ussnark]

Vote any way you like but the Nic will be apart of any subsequent contract.

You and I agree!!!!

Any subsequent contract will exclude the Nic. Thank you.

 

[Metroyet]

Metro LOA 93 pay rate provision ends after Dec. 31, 2009. LOA 84 is the contract that was in effect regarding pay rates when LOA 93 was made effective. So Jan. 1, 2010 the pay rates of LOA84 are no longer modified by LOA93 and are therefore effective.

The company has flat out told you that they don't see it that way and will not pay you. USAPA lost the 3rd list arb. That was in plain black and white. They even had parker on video explaining the 3rd listers would "of course" be furloughed before any incumbent pilots.

If the company won that one, they'll win all of them.

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

The company has flat out told you that they don't see it that way and will not pay you. USAPA lost the 3rd list arb. That was in plain black and white. They even had parker on video explaining the 3rd listers would "of course" be furloughed before any incumbent pilots.

If the company won that one, they'll win all of them.

Good that you are not on a NC then.

They are operating under the TA for the 3rd list FUR's....SUCCESSFULLY. (seperate ops)

They are operating under the TA for the "out of seniority furloughs"...SUCCESSFULLY. (seperate ops)

Neither has anything to do with the "reversion" to LOA84 pay for the East...(no TA involvement)

Talk about "blinded with emotion"...

 

[Tiger 1050]

Why don't you explain to me how LOA93 and "our situation" are entertwined? I'd like to hear it.

Let me be clear that the ONLY reason you guys are trumpeting anything from LOA93 is to further frustrate the implementation of the Nic. "Don't give in boys! We've got a snapba... err, I mean reinstatement coming!" Absent the Nic you'd be clamoring for a new contract years ago. Unfortunately you fail to recognize the fallacy in the sound of your trumpet...

 

[Hate2fly]

The company has flat out told you that they don't see it that way and will not pay you. USAPA lost the 3rd list arb. That was in plain black and white. They even had parker on video explaining the 3rd listers would "of course" be furloughed before any incumbent pilots.

If the company won that one, they'll win all of them.

Metro, I sense some anger! 2010 will be here before you know it.........we in the east are looking forward to our LOA84 pay and the MDA law suit results. 2010 is looking like a great year in the EAST!

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

Let me be clear that the ONLY reason you guys are trumpeting anything from LOA93 is to further frustrate the implementation of the Nic. "

Of course, you can prove this.....right?

Be clear...by all means....elaborate your position....

Oh, and still waiting for the "inter-connectedness" of LOA93 and "our situation"....

(or was this quote it?)

And by your supposition, even if USAPA is correct about LOA93/LOA84....they shouldn't pursue it because...well, just because.

Right?

 

[Tiger 1050]

Of course, you can prove this.....right?

Actually there is a source much more enlightening! Try the transcripts from a federal court case entitled Addington v. USAPA! There you'll find what you are looking for. And yes, it is clearly spelled out for you. A certain founder even left evidence of his (and therefore USAPA's) intent. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it is USAPA's and their constituents every wish to perpetuate these ideals. In fact the jury your leaders so coveted found you liable because of this. But now somehow the jury wanted to leave early or were pressured by those who did. Oh! And don't forget the biased jury instructions issued by a hostile judge! That's a good one. So I suppose you'll have to be somewhat open-minded in your reading but rest assured, it will come to you.

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

Actually there is a source much more enlightening! Try the transcripts from a federal court case entitled Addington v. USAPA! There you'll find what you are looking for. And yes, it is clearly spelled out for you. A certain founder even left evidence of his (and therefore USAPA's) intent. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that it is USAPA's and their constituents every wish to perpetuate these ideals. In fact the jury your leaders so coveted found you liable because of this. But now somehow the jury wanted to leave early or were pressured by those who did. Oh! And don't forget the biased jury instructions issued by a hostile judge! That's a good one. So I suppose you'll have to be somewhat open-minded in your reading but rest assured, it will come to you.

And this translates to pursuing the expiration of LOA93 rates...how?

The mistake that the west makes is that this DFR case and subsequent jury finding translate into every action that USAPA takes....it does not.

In the narrowest of issues the jury found what Wake expressed to them....nothing more.
(Wake kept them narrow intentionally..throughout the case)

That USAPA correctly follows a logical avenue for immediate gains on the east due to pre-existing east contract language has NOTHING to do with your precious DFR case.

Let that sink in for awhile.

 

[hp_fa]

That USAPA correctly follows a logical avenue for immediate gains on the east due to pre-existing east contract language has NOTHING to do with your precious DFR case.

I agree with that. But I also am waiting to see what the company does do regarding this. Hopefully, and I mean that, you will see your pay raises soon after 1/1/10.

Now, the other issue does remain and that is that West has been effectively precluded from their own Section 6, seemingly both by company actions and USAPA actions (or lack of actions).

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

I agree with that. But I also am waiting to see what the company does do regarding this. Hopefully, and I mean that, you will see your pay raises soon after 1/1/10.

Now, the other issue does remain and that is that West has been effectively precluded from their own Section 6, seemingly both by company actions and USAPA actions (or lack of actions).

It doesn't take a rocket-scientist to see what will happen. They will "have a different interpretation" of said language. This buys them arbitration...(months). Finally, at some point, they will be forced to comply with a gun held to their head.

But think of the savings month-over-month while they delayed. Much like the parity-delay they use now on the east.

edit- of course, they will have to pay retro-actively back to 1-1-2010 sooner or later...they choose later.
Totally expected from a management that hates their employees and considers them a liability.

Well, to that I would say this: when Dougweiser learns how to fly with SK as his F/O; then they can run their own airline any way they want to....until then: they have to pay their employees to do it....and pay they will.

 

[hp_fa]

I agree with that too. That is why I had phrased what I had said the way I did.

Fly-it and grieve-it is a a fundamentally flawed and one-sided process.

 

[ussnark]

Let me be clear that the ONLY reason you guys are trumpeting anything from LOA93 is to further frustrate the implementation of the Nic. "Don't give in boys! We've got a snapba... err, I mean reinstatement coming!" Absent the Nic you'd be clamoring for a new contract years ago. Unfortunately you fail to recognize the fallacy in the sound of your trumpet...

Are you saying that as long as the east pilots have hope that they will get a return to "appropriate compensation and work conditions" that they will then further frustrate the implementation of not fall for the west windfall known as the "nic"?

 

[Tiger 1050]

And this translates to pursuing the expiration of LOA93 rates...how?

The mistake that the west makes is that this DFR case and subsequent jury finding translate into every action that USAPA takes....it does not.

In the narrowest of issues the jury found what Wake expressed to them....nothing more.
(Wake kept them narrow intentionally..throughout the case)

That USAPA correctly follows a logical avenue for immediate gains on the east due to pre-existing east contract language has NOTHING to do with your precious DFR case.

Let that sink in for awhile.

Now I know you've been around long enough (longer than me) to know that LOA 93 was considered a great burden. Which it is. Before we got to the trial there was NO talk of any kind of snapback or anything of the sort. It was simply to get a quality contract. Now that it is becoming clear that the Nic will stand, USAPA and its constituents are quite happy to remain under LOA as the notion of the subsequent wage increase transforms from fantasy to possibility to probability (in their minds). Many of your fellow pilots have said it here! "We'll wait as long as possible." they'd say. "We get a pay increase that dulls the pain of LOA 93!" So maybe we are looking at this from a different angle but it is clear that further frustration of the Nic implementation is plan de jour. This reinstatement lessens the sacrifice of remaining on LOA 93 and all that it entails. You want to go after the company fine. You have my support. However from my perspective this is nothing more than a rally cry for the troops to maintain their ranks. You see I believe there is a small fissure or two that seems to be widening in the foundation of this tragic experiment.

 

[Tiger 1050]

It doesn't take a rocket-scientist to see what will happen. They will "have a different interpretation" of said language. This buys them arbitration...(months). Finally, at some point, they will be forced to comply with a gun held to their head.

This is, of course, assuming you win. I can think of some pretty clear language in favor of the pilots that was turned around on us in a recent arbitration... But then maybe USAPA wasn't really interested in seeing that one through.