What's new

US Pilots Thread for the week 9/14-9/21.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Please do tell. What other possibilities existed one week before US Airways was to file for Chapter 7?
Where do you get that?

You may wish to acquaint yourself with SEC filings from both US and HP from at least May through the "merger" announcement. You might find out that, stand alone, from filed data, US had about a year, presuming no change (things did get much better) and HP had about a month. This was not Chapter 7 but when "cash ran out", as BB likes to portray.

You might also find out that US had two other suitors, other than themselves. HP had none. HP was a basket case with a giant note due shortly. US had viable options and no "giant notes" short term.

The filings are free.
 
1 - If DOH/LOS is such a fundamental principle of trade unionism, aren't fences a violation of that fundamental principle? Must be a fluid principle if it's so easily modified by "offering up" fences.

2 - If DOH/LOS is the only fair method of integrating lists, and doesn't harm the West, what are any supposed fences protecting the West from?

3 - By offering fences as protection for the West, aren't you admitting that the West would be harmed by a DOH/LOS integration? If DOH/LOS is so eminently fair, as you continually claim, why "offer up" any protection at all?

Jim

Was the fence designed to keep one in or out?

1. DOH and LOS is the norm for almost every union.
2. Themselves
3. Call it safe integration


I find your devil's advocate to be pointed and punishing.

I will not be on the web boards when I retire. Much more important things to do.
 
1 - If DOH/LOS is such a fundamental principle of trade unionism, aren't fences a violation of that fundamental principle? Must be a fluid principle if it's so easily modified by "offering up" fences.
How do you get that?

The core principle is DOH/LOS, temporarily modified by fences to account for the "feeling" that no one should be worse off than they were before. In a prior merger proposal, the HP dudes wanted DOH. Now they don't.

With "the nic", there is no "fundamental principle", the pilots subjecting themselves to the vagrancies of whose team presents a better argument and the bowel movements of an arbitrator.

2 - If DOH/LOS is the only fair method of integrating lists, and doesn't harm the West, what are any supposed fences protecting the West from?
Losing seat position from what they had before?

3 - By offering fences as protection for the West, aren't you admitting that the West would be harmed by a DOH/LOS integration?
Don't fences go both ways? Don't fences make temporary misalignments livable?

Accepting "the nic" would subject the pilot careers at US to uncertainty and doubt, even with fences built to the moon.

How would you structure "the nic" so that no one was "harmed" on the east?

Let me see here. Fences for 3500 pilots vs fences for 1700.
 
How do you get that?

The core principle is DOH/LOS, temporarily modified by fences to account for the "feeling" that no one should be worse off than they were before. In a prior merger proposal, the HP dudes wanted DOH. Now they don't.

With "the nic", there is no "fundamental principle", the pilots subjecting themselves to the vagrancies of whose team presents a better argument and the bowel movements of an arbitrator.


Losing seat position from what they had before?


Don't fences go both ways? Don't fences make temporary misalignments livable?

Accepting "the nic" would subject the pilot careers at US to uncertainty and doubt, even with fences built to the moon.

How would you structure "the nic" so that no one was "harmed" on the east?

Let me see here. Fences for 3500 pilots vs fences for 1700.

Yep it's all about the east pilots , forget that 7 years was the normal upgrade time out west, forget that once merged management decided to grow the east while shrinking the west, very nice of you to fence us in to a shrinking domicile, yep awa pilots had no expectations, or at least they don't matter.
 
Here's the irony about that statement.

Originally, West was freaked out about East guys "moving in" to LAS or PHX and taking their spots...."how many PSA are there?...you guys will all come out west...we can't have that...leave us alone..."

NOW, since Parker has identified the "leisure markets" in the system...the West doesn't want to be "locked in to a shrinking domicile..."

Do you not see what you are saying?

Thats funny, first, it was all about preserving the PHX LAS domiciles FROM the east....now it's wanting to be able to get OUT of those domiciles...

It's all about our saviors'...I guess.
 
Yep it's all about the east pilots , forget that 7 years was the normal upgrade time out west, forget that once merged management decided to grow the east while shrinking the west, very nice of you to fence us in to a shrinking domicile, yep awa pilots had no expectations, or at least they don't matter.
And lets be clear about something...the concerns of the west for "keeping the east out" would have required fences...it was always going to be a factor...and we kept hearing about it...

Now, you just don't like what those fences will mean as it doesn't advance your cause to your satisfaction.

It was OK...now it's not?

Why do you suppose management is growing the East and shrinking the west? could it be because the east loses all the money and the west is the profitable side of the op...as so many suggest?

hmmm, I wonder.

I'll remind you, growth, shrink, furloughs...are ALL functions that management is doing...not the evil east guys...you wanna be pissed at someone? pick the right target.
 
And lets be clear about something...the concerns of the west for "keeping the east out" would have required fences...it was always going to be a factor...and we kept hearing about it...

Now, you just don't like what those fences will mean as it doesn't advance your cause to your satisfaction.

It was OK...now it's not.

We were concerned that a doh list would basically staple 85% of the west, fortunately Nicolau saw the inequity in that, btw do you think that fencing us into a shrinking base is ok?
 
We were concerned that a doh list would basically staple 85% of the west, fortunately Nicolau saw the inequity in that, btw do you think that fencing us into a shrinking base is ok?
I think fencing you into your base of choice, the one you all were pissing all over to mark it for yourselves is just fine...exactly what you all wanted..(right up until Parker told it like it is..and furloughed)

The fact that it is shrinking at the same time is academic to me...and something you may address Parker about...

Do YOU think it's OK to argue both sides of the fence as it suits you? so that you may all run and hide to the profitable side of the system when yours is proving itself not to be?

please.
 
I think fencing you into your base of choice, the one you all were pissing all over to mark it for yourselves is just fine...exactly what you all wanted..(right up until Parker told it like it is..and furloughed)

The fact that it is shrinking at the same time is academic to me...and something you may address Parker about...

Do YOU think it's OK to argue both sides of the fence as it suits you? so that you may all run and hide to the profitable side of the system when yours is proving itself not to be?

please.

Not at all, I expect to have my career expectations premerger to carry as much weight as the easts, something no one out east can grasp.
 
Yep it's all about the east pilots , forget that 7 years was the normal upgrade time out west, forget that once merged management decided to grow the east while shrinking the west, very nice of you to fence us in to a shrinking domicile, yep awa pilots had no expectations, or at least they don't matter.
Well, lets just look at what you've already said here again, shall we?

You've just said the west is shrinking and you object to being fenced in that shrinking domicile.

And you also say you don't think its ok to argue both sides of the fence, after admitting that it was important initially to avoid stapling.

going in circles here.

Do not tell me about what your "career expectations" were or are...we all have them...few ever get them. We have been told to enjoy LOA93 by some of your pals out there..they brag about making more $$ ( in the less profitable system...a dangerous thing to brag about)...lawsuits everywhere...fight to death...etc etc...

enjoy your shrinking hubs...you wanted them, you got 'em.
 
We were concerned that a doh list would basically staple 85% of the west, fortunately Nicolau saw the inequity in that, btw do you think that fencing us into a shrinking base is ok?

OK...so that defines your version of "inequity"? So "equitable" must equal far fewer years flown but equally entitled?...and...you haven't the slightest reservations about wanting to be able to displace a coworker out east with twice your years in service?

Pre nic..it was all about not being displaced by the evil easties. Post nic..it became an engorged mantra of No Fences!!...No Mercy!!...Take NO East Prisoners whatsoever!! AWA was the Great Savior that had it all together and was doing wonderfully well all around. Upgrades were all guaranteed at 7 years or less. Nowadays?...AWA's still great, and any/all issues that disadvantage the west are entirely the fault of the east, and wouldn't have ever existed except for the merger...even though it's been proclaimed by management that AWA would have definately shrunken, if not simply ceased to exist at all. We'll sue you to try and get our sacred St Nic, and with that...your east seats and slots...but....we'll whine about what's happening in the meanwhile anyway.....and the east is just being entirely unfair all around.....The money's really being made out west, and the shrinkage is entirely unfair, and all the fault of the east. It "logically" follows that west workers should be able to head east and take east work away.....

Sheesh!..Have I got the west's continually variable "righteous position" at all correct so far?
 
OK...so that defines your version of "inequity"? So "equitable" must equal far fewer years flown but equally entitled?...and...you haven't the slightest reservations about wanting to be able to displace a coworker out east with twice your years in service?

Pre nic..it was all about not being displaced by the evil easties. Post nic..it became an engorged mantra of No Fences!!...No Mercy!!...Take NO East Prisoners whatsoever!! AWA was the Great Savior that had it all together and was doing wonderfully well all around. Upgrades were all guaranteed at 7 years or less. Nowadays?...AWA's still great, and any/all issues that disadvantage the west are entirely the fault of the east, and wouldn't have ever existed except for the merger...even though it's been proclaimed by management that AWA would have definately shrunken, if not simply ceased to exist at all. We'll sue you to try and get our sacred St Nic, and with that...your east seats and slots...but....we'll whine about what's happening in the meanwhile anyway.....and the east is just being entirely unfair all around.....The money's really being made out west, and the shrinkage is entirely unfair, and all the fault of the east. It "logically" follows that west workers should be able to head east and take east work away.....

Sheesh!..Have I got the west's continually variable "righteous position" at all correct so far?
You want to go to binding arbitration by a neutral third party to settle this? oh yeah we have already done that.
 
You want to go to binding arbitration by a neutral third party to settle this? oh yeah we have already done that.


Then it would seem you've nothing to complain about, nor fret over in any way. All must indeed be well.....
 
Where do you get that?

You may wish to acquaint yourself with SEC filings from both US and HP from at least May through the "merger" announcement. You might find out that, stand alone, from filed data, US had about a year, presuming no change (things did get much better) and HP had about a month. This was not Chapter 7 but when "cash ran out", as BB likes to portray.

You might also find out that US had two other suitors, other than themselves. HP had none. HP was a basket case with a giant note due shortly. US had viable options and no "giant notes" short term.

The filings are free.

Why do I hear circus music as I read this post? HP had three successive quarters of profit prior to the announcement of the acquisition. US was close to extinction. Where in the SEC filings does it say differently? Please do tell who these other suitors were?
 
Fellow America West pilots,

When we recently announced the pull down of AWAPPA from its current structure, we promised you that we would not do so until we were able to provide you more information and closure about agency shop and membership issues. Although we have had updates about both of those issues prepared for some time, certain events have required us to withhold and/or revise the updates.

Within the last couple of weeks, USAPA sent letters to the Company demanding that it fire four pilots who USAPA claimed had not paid union dues or fees. While there are literally thousands of West and East pilots who have not paid dues, USAPA chose to send these letters to the Company demanding only that these four West pilots be fired. So far as we know, USAPA has not sent any other letters since sending these four.

USAPA mailed these letters on September 5th which started a critical fifteen day timeline to pay the dues alleged or submit a request for a review by the Company. All four pilots chose to request a review with US Airways Vice President of Labor Relations in accordance with Section 29 of the West collective bargaining agreement. Last night, we received word that the Company upheld the appeals of all four pilots. While each pilot raised numerous issues in arguing that the provisions of Section 29 were nor properly interpreted or applied, the VP of Labor Relations upheld the appeals based on the following issue (and therefore did not address the other issues each pilot raised):

While all four pilots had applied for membership with USAPA, only one pilot received email notification that her application had been accepted. This appeal was upheld on the basis that USAPA had violated its own Constitution and By-Laws by allowing the USAPA BPR to accept the application rather then the domicile members as required. The appeal states that unless it is clear that membership has been granted based upon established admissions procedures, the obligation to pay dues is in doubt and the pilot will not be fired.

The other three pilots had received no notification of whether their application had been accepted or denied. If in fact USAPA had denied their application, section 29 would not apply to them at all and there would be no obligation to pay dues money.

We will post copies of the company's decisions and other related documentation under the "members only" portion of the AWAPPA website sometime this weekend.

USAPA now has the opportunity to appeal these decisions within ten calendar days and submit the case before a neutral arbitrator.

USAPA continues to tell pilots to watch what our Management does and not what they say. We believe that the same test applies to USAPA's self-appointed leadership team. While USAPA claims that it wants West pilots to be part of the union, its actions have proven they are only interested in continued discrimination and intimidation. In addition to their baseless lawsuit against our pilots that was promptly dismissed by the Federal court, it also published an update on September 4th that announced the "acceptance" of over 600 West pilots' membership applications. But instead of notifying and welcoming these pilots, on September 5th, it sent letters to four of those pilots in an attempt to have them fired. Additionally, it seems as if the acceptance of the West membership applications was improper and invalid.

It is important for all pilots - West and East - to recognize that USAPA may send additional certified letters to pilots they believe are delinquent in union dues or fees and letters to the Company asking that they be fired. The date of this certified letter triggers a critical 15 day timeline that, if ignored, could lead to possible termination.

To summarize:

1) If you are delinquent on your dues or fees with USAPA, there is no basis upon which USAPA may seek your termination unless they have sent you a certified letter in accordance with Section 29. However, if you have been sent a certified letter from USAPA, it is imperative that you either:
a. Ensure that USAPA has received full payment no later than 15 days following the date of the letter, or
b. You have requested a review in accordance with Section 29.A.5.a no later than 5 days following your receipt of the certified letter. [Note: there is no guarantee that a review will prevent your termination]

2) We believe that those who applied for USAPA membership in accordance with our recommendations are not USAPA members for two reasons:
a. There has been no official notification of membership acceptance
b. The applications were not approved in accordance with the USAPA Constitution.

We realize that this news raises many more questions that it answers about Section 29. As always, you may submit your questions to info@awappa.org, and we will do our best to incorporate your questions into future updates. Expect to see a more detailed update about this issue in the next few days.

In solidarity,

AWAPPA
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top