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

[Nicstolemyjob]

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.

Thats a little better elaboration. And you are entitled to your opinion...as am I.

The fact remains: (and do your own math)...LOA84 payrates eclipse the Kirby proposal by leaps and bounds....the fact that they may be automatic (after the almost certain arbitration) is HUGE...and cannot be ignored. You may interpret the side-effects of this any way you like...

You see it as a stall-tactic, when the truth is that it is the obvious course to take.

Since flood is on I'll just say this: it seems you and Metroyet have the same misunderstanding of the TA ...and the subsequent rights the company has under it.

As to the bolded statement you made...it is clear (and Wake correctly predicted) that the East may not ratify a single contract containing the Nic...(transcripts day 8)..and he was right. Now, therefore, it seems we may be looking at seperate operations for some extended period of time...and eyes turned toward that potentiality...and page 4 of LOA93...it is what it is.

 

[toganoflex]

Just found this on pilotloop:


Looks like the crack in USAPA's unity is growing alot quicker than I thought.

I've heard that Cleary took it upon himself to fire Brengle without consulting with the BPR. Needless to say, Ciabattoni was none to happy to find out about this after the fact.

So why was Brengle, USAPA's heroic, hired-gun trial attorney let go? Because he doesn't think that an appeal has any chance which is something Cleary and company did not want to hear.

Yikes!

Looks like the wheels are coming off the USAPA wagon!!

Add to that Cleary's move on compensation increases and I think you're going to see Bradford looking to start another union to oust USAPA

 

[ussnark]

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).

Why did not the West initiate Section 6 while under ALPA? It seems there was plenty of time to do so.

 

[Tiger 1050]

Thats a little better elaboration. And you are entitled to your opinion...as am I.

The fact remains: (and do your own math)...LOA84 payrates eclipse the Kirby proposal by leaps and bounds....the fact that they may be automatic (after the almost certain arbitration) is HUGE...and cannot be ignored. You may interpret the side-effects of this any way you like...

You see it as a stall-tactic, when the truth is that it is the obvious course to take.

Since flood is on I'll just say this: it seems you and Metroyet have the same misunderstanding of the TA ...and the subsequent rights the company has under it.

As to the bolded statement you made...it is clear (and Wake correctly predicted) that the East may not ratify a single contract containing the Nic...(transcripts day 8)..and he was right. Now, therefore, it seems we may be looking at seperate operations for some extended period of time...and eyes turned toward that potentiality...and page 4 of LOA93...it is what it is.

Look, whether or not you guys see these wages is of little consequence to me personally. I am furloughed. And if I have my way I'll not return to this airline. With that said, I think given USAPA's record, This is gonna be as close to insurmountable as one can get climbing.

Yes I do see both sides of our debate but I find it a little too convenient that this course is now plotted when before it was to get a complete quality contract.

Your last paragraph clarifies my point. You'll "not ratify a single contract containing the Nic" is exactly why I believe that this LOA 93 crutch somehow softens the blow of this contract in perpetuity. Good for you guys if you get those rates. But I think it's only fair that in doing so you adhere to your end of the bargain. Implement the Nic!

 

[luvn737s]

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.

Make sure you say the last part with an exaggerated deep voice, just for effect!

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

Make sure you say the last part with an exaggerated deep voice, just for effect!

Quite right. Metroyet was right...the company will win everything!!!!

(emphasis added)

Is that better?

 

[Nicstolemyjob]

Look, whether or not you guys see these wages is of little consequence to me personally. I am furloughed. And if I have my way I'll not return to this airline. With that said, I think given USAPA's record, This is gonna be as close to insurmountable as one can get climbing.

Yes I do see both sides of our debate but I find it a little too convenient that this course is now plotted when before it was to get a complete quality contract.

Your last paragraph clarifies my point. You'll "not ratify a single contract containing the Nic" is exactly why I believe that this LOA 93 crutch somehow softens the blow of this contract in perpetuity. Good for you guys if you get those rates. But I think it's only fair that in doing so you adhere to your end of the bargain. Implement the Nic!

Ok. And for the record...I honestly wish you the very best in your plans.

Now, yes, it is no secret that it is going to be vitually impossible to get the east to sign off on a Nic contract...(although I know of several ways to see it happen)...alternative compensation policies...etc...among others.

Wake knew this...he said so on day 8.....he asked Harper for a different remedy....Harper said NO.

LOA84 will make seperate operations almost pleasant going forward for the east...in a serendipity kind of way.

Of course, USAPA will continue to drag the company in to the table with their "rarely available arbitrator" to work on a single contract in the meantime.

 

[EastUS]

Your last paragraph clarifies my point. You'll "not ratify a single contract containing the Nic" is exactly why I believe that this LOA 93 crutch somehow softens the blow of this contract in perpetuity.

While "fair" is being discussed; I couldn't actually count all the times west posters have trumpeted forth: "You can live on LOA93 forever!". Just an observation.

 

[cleardirect]

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.

Check your facts. Call your rep. He can correct you.

 

[nic4us]

Just a couple points here, nic4. Whether there improper jury instructions or the trial was "proper" will be determined by the 9th circuit, not you saying so. After reading the jury instructions, Im suprised it took them a whole 2 hours. just to remind you to fact check before posting, on the expiration of our concessionary pay rates, you said last week,

And we know where that came from, don’t we, Nic4us? It came off your assets/debets. Then you finally got round to reading your own contract (your welcome for me pointing it out in your LOA 13) and just matter-of-fact replied that,

Nice come-back. Noticed you didnt want to reply back to me on that.

First, I felt I did not need to reply to you as I had already admitted to nycbusdriver that I was indeed wrong about the "me too" clause, prior to your posting about it. i.e. I had corrected myself prior to your post ( do not believe me go look up the the thread I admitted I was wrong in post # 269 and the first we hear from you where you mention loa13 is post #287. You did not make me aware of my mistake. But so we are all perfectly clear, I will say again I was wrong about the West's me too clause.

As to who gets to say if the jury and verdict were proper.

On this board I am most certainly entitled to my opinion. My opinion is that the trial was "proper" and I feel those who have Authority,( the 9th circuit) will agree with me.

But while we are at it lets take a look at some other Authorities who have ruled.

A federal judge (the Authority)threw out the RICO lawsuit, yet we hear from USAPA supporters that he is wrong.

G. Nicolau and an arbitration panel (the Authority), crafted an equitable seniority integration, yet we hear from USAPA supporters that they were wrong.

A federal judge (the Authority) held a trial and a jury found USAPA in violation of its DFR, yet we hear from USAPA supporters that they are wrong, or coerced, or just wanted to go home.

So to sum it up. The reason the jury found USAPA in violation of its DFR is because they are, and I do not have to look far to "fact check" that.

 

[RIASU_upe]

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.

I sincerely hope the east is successful in getting "snapback" wages, but all things considered, I would not rush out to buy that new car just yet. I have one question for east...if it is so certain wages will "snapback" to LOA84, why are the proposed rates in the joint contract below LOA84 rates? Why not seek the same rate or slightly higher? If LOA 84 wages apply, then the NAC is currently negotiating a concessionary contract, yes?

I don't know why some of my fellow west pilots are against the idea of east capitalizing on any contractual obligations by the Company. It seems in the long run we will all benefit from higher wages.

 

[BillyGloat]

Ok. And for the record...I honestly wish you the very best in your plans.

Now, yes, it is no secret that it is going to be vitually impossible to get the east to sign off on a Nic contract...(although I know of several ways to see it happen)...alternative compensation policies...etc...among others.

Wake knew this...he said so on day 8.....he asked Harper for a different remedy....Harper said NO.

LOA84 will make seperate operations almost pleasant going forward for the east...in a serendipity kind of way.

Of course, USAPA will continue to drag the company in to the table with their "rarely available arbitrator" to work on a single contract in the meantime.

Lets see, how did that song from En Vouge go? "your never gonna get....not this time....never gonna get it". Lets work on the new contract and stop living in the past. Man it would be nice to have a pay raise! The NIC is gonna be there untouched. Just like death and taxes, the nic is it and I have to pay dues to this sham union :angry2:

 

[cleardirect]

Why did not the West initiate Section 6 while under ALPA? It seems there was plenty of time to do so.

We did. Once usapa came on the proerty they made it quite clear that the west contract advancement was shelved.

 

[prechilill]

We did. Once usapa came on the proerty they made it quite clear that the west contract advancement was shelved.

And any hint of USAPA negotiating section 6 for the east only is going to be another DFR, with damages of course.

I wonder what it is like to keep painting yourself into corners?

 

[nycbusdriver]

Check your facts. Call your rep. He can correct you.

It was one of the USAPA national officers who pointed that fact out to me last January.

Check your own da** facts.