US Pilots Labor Thread 8/20-8/27- NO PERSONAL REMARKS

[Richard]

During the past week we have suspended numerous posters from this board, and deleted scores of posts in their entirety, which violate the rules of the board, and serve no purpose other than to taunt other members or just cause trouble.

Remember that personal remarks/comments/insults/attacks, and ANY form of namecalling or flaming on this board is prohibited, and will result in both deletion of entire posts AND suspension. If you use the term YOU or YOUR in this thread, you better be referring to a group and not an individual.

The few of you who consistently break the rules are bringing discredit both to your side of the argument and profession.

If the posts continue to denigrate as indicated above, we will consider closing the thread for an entire week.....

Discuss the ISSUES all you want-- do NOT discuss the individual posters.

Thank you.

 

[HPDriver]

See that's what I was thinking.

Seniority talks but cash SCREAMS! Throw enough cash at a the pilot groups and it's likely the Seniority integration issue shrinks. Doesn't go away it just becomes less important.

Clearly a move like that wasn't in Doug's playbook.

If Doug wanted this put together, he would have done it a long time ago.

95% percent of the synergies have been realized and having two separate pilot groups does little, if anything, to hurt the operation.

LOA 93 alone saves him over $100M a year.

 

[ROACLT]

If Doug wanted this put together, he would have done it a long time ago.

95% percent of the synergies have been realized and having two separate pilot groups does little, if anything, to hurt the operation.

LOA 93 alone saves him over $100M a year.

It saves him a $150 million a year compared to the Kirby proposal. A real industry standard contract with at least similar wages to Alaska or Jetblue is closer to and additional $350 million a year.

 

[HPDriver]

Which is all grand and good unless/until the pilot group has had enough and does something drastic.

Such as?

Nothing USAPA can do legally. And do you think the west is going to support a wildcat strike?

Ask the APA what happened when they tried something "drastic."

 

[HPDriver]

All sounds like USAPA has a strong case for the majority of there members. NEGOTIATIONS AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING is the way unions settle disputes plane and simply. The majority of the pilots were creative in achieving collective negotiations with the membership and the company. A REDO


This decision is wrong, contradicts established law and is dangerous to the state of the law under the Railway Labor Act.

In no way restricts USAPA from negotiating any and all terms of that agreement, including the Nicolau Award.

Predecessor union’s collective bargaining agreement provides only the beginning point for a successor union’s negotiations and the successor is free to negotiate changes to the agreement. To do otherwise would perpetuate the rejected union as representative.
The court also wrongly held that USAPA is bound by the Nicolau Award as the product of ALPA Merger Policy. ALPA Merger Policy is only an internal union procedure. It is not part of the collective bargaining agreement with US Airways (even if it was, USAPA could still negotiate changes to it.) USAPA cannot be bound to ALPA Merger Policy since it is not ALPA, and only ALPA’s subordinate bodies, the Master Executive Councils (which, admittedly, are not real labor organizations) are bound to follow the Merger Policy. The Merger Policy has no standing under the Railway Labor Act and since USAPA’s successor obligations only exist under the RLA, they cannot include ALPA Merger Policy.
The court’s conclusion that the East pilots had consented to be bound by the Nicolau Award is simply false because even under ALPA, their representatives took the position that the Nicolau Award was not final and binding, and that it violated ALPA Merger Policy. That lawsuit was only dismissed after ALPA lost the union election to USAPA; so the East MEC never took the position that the Nicolau Award was final and binding.

john john,

Don't you find it odd that an attorney has the time to debate the merits of a ruling in a blog? A blog, by the way, that you plagiarized?

Did you also know Wilder stated:

Mr. Wilder(A). I think by definition if the two sides agree, it would be fair and equitable and the impartial resolution is traditionally viewed as fair and equitable even though one or the other pilot groups might not agree with that.

Wonder what his intentions are when he plays both sides of the fence.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

The east pilots don't have the nads to do anything drastic to anyone but the west pilots. Rico for instance. Just like the typical bully.

 

[john john]

john john,

Don't you find it odd that an attorney has the time to debate the merits of a ruling in a blog? A blog, by the way, that you plagiarized?

I just merely cut and paste some points for the blog that was in the thread I DO NOT TAKE CREDIT FOR THE talking points however the points make for a good appeal that is my point. BY NO MEANS ARE THESE MY WORDS. Clear enough for you

 

[HPDriver]

I just merely cut and paste some points for the blog that was in the thread I DO NOT TAKE CREDIT FOR THE talking points however the points make for a good appeal that is my point. BY NO MEANS ARE THESE MY WORDS. Clear enough for you

Then, at the very least, put quotes around what you cut and paste.

And I'd recommend citing the source as well.

You did neither.

Not taking credit after the fact means nothing except that you've been caught plagiarizing someone else's work.

Clear enough for you?

 

[Richard]

John John and others,

Let me clarify.

Cutting and pasting material from another site WITHOUT permission in writing from that author or publisher is PROHIBITED on this board.

Can I be more clear?

Thanks.

 

[john john]

Then, at the very least, put quotes around what you cut and paste.

And I'd recommend citing the source as well.

You did neither.

Not taking credit after the fact means nothing except that you've been caught plagiarizing someone else's work.

Clear enough for you?

Here is my source and where how when and why I said “All sounds like USAPA has a strong case for the majority of there members. NEGOTIATIONS AND COLLECTIVEâ€￾
<a href="http://www.usaviation.com/forums/index.php...st&p=702043" target="_blank">http://www.usaviation.com/forums/index.php...st&p=702043</a>
For your enjoyment and please respond to the talking points and not the poster

 

[Barrister]

See that's what I was thinking.

Seniority talks but cash SCREAMS! Throw enough cash at a the pilot groups and it's likely the Seniority integration issue shrinks. Doesn't go away it just becomes less important.

Clearly a move like that wasn't in Doug's playbook.

Don't think DP will bring that kind of cash. Too many "lost Captain years" in NIC. Too many 24-27 year guys who will never hold a block on a widebody left seat under NIC, too may 20-24 years F/Os who willnever fly left seat at all. You guys keep glossing over the devastation of the east by continuing to chant "but you agreed to it"
Remember my earlier post.....NIC put 80 YOUNG guys senior to our bottom 330 Capt. We don't even have 80 Captains flying it now!!

VNIIMN

 

[cleardirect]

Don't think DP will bring that kind of cash. Too many "lost Captain years" in NIC. Too many 24-27 year guys who will never hold a block on a widebody left seat under NIC, too may 20-24 years F/Os who willnever fly left seat at all. You guys keep glossing over the devastation of the east by continuing to chant "but you agreed to it"
Remember my earlier post.....NIC put 80 YOUNG guys senior to our bottom 330 Capt. We don't even have 80 Captains flying it now!!

VNIIMN

Not that it matters because the arbitrator and jury have ruled. But this excuse keeps coming up.

Since you made the point, how about giving us the facts. Exactly how many in each category?

Too many 24-27 year guys who will never hold a block on a widebody left seat under NIC

How many east pilots fall into this category?

too may 20-24 years F/Os who will never fly left seat at all

How many east pilots fall into this category?

Please use facts and data, no guesses.

Now please tell us how many west F/O’s would never upgrade under DOH? How many east pilots would not have upgraded even without the merger or under DOH? How many west pilots would never hold a line under DOH?

If a statement is made please back it up with facts, not rumor.

 

[Pi brat]

See that's what I was thinking.

Seniority talks but cash SCREAMS! Throw enough cash at a the pilot groups and it's likely the Seniority integration issue shrinks. Doesn't go away it just becomes less important.

Clearly a move like that wasn't in Doug's playbook.

Bob,

It wouldn't have been a matter of cash greasing the skids, it was just a matter of order because the joint contract is the only part that has "veto" power. The east pilots didn't see the NIC being as bad as it was, so if Doug had put out a decent contract it probably would have passed and when the NIC award came out all pieces of the puzzle would have been complete, the merger would have been done. As it is now the chance of a veto is still there and what has kept this all going.

 

[HPDriver]

Well we agree on one thing!! The price of everything, value of nothing gang in Tempe has struck again. Just as I suspected.

Problem with most easties is they keep underestimating this "gang in Tempe."

Guess after years of dealing with incompetent leadership and corporate raiders, you'd get a pretty bad taste in your mouth.

Wish the east would stop looking at Doug as just a "commuter airline" CEO and look at him as a more worthy adversary. He's be easier to deal with.

 

[Pi brat]

Wish the east would stop looking at Doug as just a "commuter airline" CEO and look at him as a more worthy adversary. He's be easier to deal with.

I guess some see him that way, I don't. Just chatting with him I really like him. Some things I agree with-DCA/LGA swap, some I don't-the lack of attention to our best and highest yield customers. On the labor front I see him as about the same as all our other leaders. He just pays lip service to doing the right thing while we have over 300 grievances and despite a federal judge's ruling that could hand him a contract on a silver platter, they drag their feet and blame it on the seniority list.

I would like to know what he is thinking. Is he sorry he didn't get a joint contract so this would be done, or is he glad he didn't and saved millions of dollars that probably helped keep us away from the loan covenants and offset the little $400-$500 million mortgage related investment loss?