PurpleTurtle

Correct, since this is technically an amendment to the contract rather than a new contract. Do they have the balls to pass something without membership political cover?

psw757

I kind of get the impression that if mgmt agrees to everything in the APA counter, the APA board will not send it for a vote by membership as they view it as more than fair to both sides. I also think if it were to go for vote that it will be a lot closer than many think and is another reason they potentially would not send it out. It would show how divided the group is and avoids a potential situation the FA's just went through.
This is just my opinion but if APA sends it to vote and it narrowly fails, this makes the APA look bad. Again, just my opinion.

At this point I could really care less, I would like closure so we can move on to the next step whatever that is.

PurpleTurtle

I think you are correct that a membership ratification could fail. Certainly there is that risk, and that presents a risk to the company...

The company has been asking pilots for concessions and if the membership were to reject the company ask they would be forced to swallow their pride to provide a better offer or save face and go to arbitration without getting their concessions that they are willing to buy for $1.5B... A tough choice, if the membership rejects..

The company re-do with the FAs won't work in our case, because they did not have concession tied to their deal but we do.

Again it's all noise. The company needs to get a "yes" from the APA BOD or have an excuse as to why the can is being kicked.... Since they are making about $11B in the first two years, no investor will fault them much.

PurpleTurtle

"After seven months of negotiations with management, the APA Board of Directors was able to craft a comprehensive settlement proposal that very narrowly passed with a 12-10 vote, and even more narrowly met your MIA reps minimum standards. By now, all of you should have had a chance to review the latest proposal APA sent over to management last Wednesday evening. Considering our history, management should come to understand that if this extremely conservative proposal could barely pass the Board, its chances of passing a membership vote are likely worse. And if it is degraded at all by a counter-proposing of more concessions, well, again, management need only look at our history to see where that will go."

Perfect.

Standby for Glass to wow us with his prowess.

eaglefly

A "BOD ratification" requirement card could be one Parker would play. It seems clear that flat out rejection of APA's counter-counter isn't likely as they BOD would then be unlikely to pass managements previous counter to the pilots all but assuring the arbitration process starts (how it would conclude would still be a question). While APA has confirmed membership ratification isn't required, to cut the pilots out would put them in a bad spot and it's been inferred that the pilots will have their say. That in and of itself adds leverage because whatever is agreed to, it would have to pass the majority of the pilots, so Parker will be careful to craft his LBFO for that goal.

Route66

Well, you're a better man than I am, I'll give you that.

As far as the Profession is concerned we can disagree but I'm comfortable with the job I've done representing "OUR" profession. What I say about it is that it can ALWAYS be improved on.
As far as our pilot group let's just say that they always seem to blame others rather than look at where they are and how THEY put themselves there in the first place. Was it the Company (it could have been), was it something outside the company, was it someone, etc. But then you have to access what to do the next time this situation comes up.

You lost your retirement (I assume you mean the PBGC got it) and so did I. Do we complain or do we move on? Sure I complain about it sometimes but I also know that I still have to move forward. The PAB, the SLI....the JCBA. We just keep trucking along, mostly rudderless as a group.

You somehow want to shoot the messenger but the question you SHOULD be asking is how deep the resolve of this pilot group to dig deep and ask the serious questions?

I'm not saying we owe Parker a deep french kiss for "keeping the doors open" at this place. Sure we took some licks doing it, but I would like to see that we find ways to show management/Company that if they give us this, we can DO this and here is what it costs. I'm not saying that the APA BOD isn't trying to do that NOW but again, when I first got here there were those that wanted to "burn this place down" (figuratively) the BOD (and the adversarial messages they were posting) were simply inflammatory.

It's quieted down over the past two weeks and it seems like they are working with the Company. We'll see what the outcome will be soon enough.

I'm just curious, but does one PAY for respect or does respect, like leadership, have to be EARNED?

Route66

A very well written and great synopsis.

Well, at least the APA doesn't disappoint me. If it left the last sentence off, it would have been a good statement to the pilots. The rest just rattles the cage. Glass has heard it all before.

What if they said, instead:

"After seven months of negotiations with management, the APA Board of Directors was able to craft a comprehensive settlement proposal that very narrowly passed with a 12-10 vote, and even more narrowly met your BOD (unity here) minimum standards.

Nonetheless, the pilots look forward to working for the future, mutual benefit for ALL the employees and customers of the New American and we hope that this sincere proposal to management will crack open the door of mistrust and obstruction to shed new light on the shared future for all of us and help make the New American the pride of our employees and the envy of the industry.

If the Company accepts what we consider an olive branch to bring this Company together the way all of us believe it can be, we will bring to you a roadshow, along with Company representatives, what we MUTUALLY agree on and explain to you exactly what it does for ALL of us in a JCBA.

Fraternally, the APA BOD."

(Or something to this effect).

PurpleTurtle

I don't think the message is "kumbaya". The message is "This is the APA BOD's absolute best offer (consider yourselves damn lucky to have this much offered). It is more than reasonable and the BOD has nothing more to give."

Route66

Yep. That's the way I took it.

Can't teach and old dog new tricks.

PurpleTurtle

Yep, no new tricks. Tomorrow Glass counters with worse than the first company offer and threatens arbitration. After that the capitulators form ranks and attack the CLT PHL reps (at the behest of Kirby), run a recall effort, and the new BOD accepts the true LOA 93 v. 2...

The infighting will be legendary. Put on your helmet and jump in the foxhole, it's about to get ugly....

Or just maybe Parker will agree and bring the positive culture change he promised.... Right after he shows us his pet flying pig.