DrivinTheDash

As has been pointed out, largely to no avail, we would not be going from 90 minutes to 2 hours, as there is a huge disparity between "callout time" and "normal driving time to the airport". That said, no matter how much experience anybody has with a 2 hour callout at other airlines (my regional, in fact, had callout times as low as 75 minutes, depending on the base!), the reason it's not the worst idea ever is that both AA and US have fought for years to maintain more liberal, vague language, and it's not something that should be given up so easily. Canoe may be willing to give that up for "50 grand," but, even assuming that number is valid, I'm not willing to sell it so cheaply. I have 30+years left here. Hopefully, most of them won't be on reserve, but you never know. I'm not willing to give up that concession for, using your numbers, less than $2000/year.




Good point... "Greed always makes you poorer." Perhaps we should not be so hasty to act in greed to take higher payrates now, if the trade off will leave us far poorer in QoL for decades to come.


No - a vote is not required to make it official. Welcome to the APA! The BOD has the discretion to approve, reject, or send for member ratification any TA. The impression I've gotten from most of the communication put out has been is that this will most likely be sent out for ratification, if the BOD determines that the deal is worth voting for.

I don't really like the idea of the BoD approving a contract without member ratification, but I absolutely believe that they should have the authority to keep a sub-standard agreement from ever being presented to the pilots. If we go to arbitration, it won'tbe "just their choice;" rather, it will be the choice of the pilot group, which agreed to go to arbitration if we are unable to reach acceptable terms in negotiations.

dvhighdrive88

Analyst predicts a pilot deal at American Airlines by mid-December | Dallas Morning News

So what's this story all about? Sounds like Hunter Keay is trying to be the omnipotent legacy expert. Pretty soon he'll be spewing refuse like Weinberg from Motley Fool about flying jets and airlines.

15% raise over what? Scope? Work rules? Anybody have any details on what this "expert analyst" think the APA BOD will approve by mid December?

Personally think the blow hard is dead wrong. If he thinks the APA and the pilots will just cave on scope, PS and decent work rules for 15% he probably thinks he knows something we don't. So what's the angle on this story? Another article to bounce the stock price likely.

eaglefly

Well, the beginning mostly states the obvious. From then on, it's clearly a sympathetic piece to management (few "analysts" are supporters of organized labor). There is accuracy in the statement that APA is in a tough spot, but that's mostly their own doing. Absent any meaningful changes to Parker's "initial" proposal, APA leadership would be committing seppuku by simply folding and sending that proposal out for vote. They'd enrage a much too large percentage of their pilots and nullify their own validity to Parker and their pilots, especially after their posture to both sides. Neither side really wants arbitration, so that means both really want an out that gives both a victory, so to speak (at least the appearance of one) in that they were each able to compromise to achieve an agreement. I agree with Keay in that this will occur.

Based on the two "wants" by the sides, there will be some relatively soft alterations. The two bookends of pay and scope will go largely unchanged and I agree with Keay that profit-sharing will remain off the table, just as scope is. Perhaps a one-time "signing bonus" to goose the agreement by giving the pilots at least something out of this years present and almost certain future profits ?

Whatever the final deal, it is certain to leave those on the extreme hardcore end of the rejection bell curve disappointed (a DAL contract), but will validate that the tack of the opposite end of the bell (the Steve Miller "take the money and run" crowd) was a poor plan that needlessly left value on the table. I get the idea Keay probably came to that conclusion after a discussion with Parker who is more then happy to use sympathetic media sources to assist in managing pilots expectations.

dvhighdrive88

Ok so scope stays at 76 seats and how many of these larger RJs do they want?

When you say one end wants a DAL
Contract shouldn't this be the springboard to start from and move up? They are talking DAL rates plus 15% right...not current plus 15?

Seems Parker is big time anti profit sharing so that's off the table from their perspective as well?

PurpleTurtle

The APA is good, but Jerry Glass is better. Sadly, the deal will happen sooner than later, IMHO.

Glass will continue to back away from "high-viz" things he never intended to get (scope, 2-hour call out, and the year extension) and he will continue to get fawning support from both the media and the pilots who can't do complex math (i.e are fixated on pay rates). The pay rates will be front in center in the mind of simpletons, but we will all pay for it twice over in the concessions that are impossible to value (because the company refuses to give us the data). We will get nothing for the 757 replacement, i.e. the AB321, nothing for LOS, Nothing for min calendar day (average calendar day, maybe).

Parker will lock in the cheap costs for years to come, providing his cost advantage over the competition. He will never have to compete on a level field. He is cheap like that. Customers get cheap. Employees get cheap. And Jerry Glass gets luxury, because he can deliver the cheapest employee costs in the industry.

The APA is good but they lost it when they let their judgement be clouded by an inordinate hatred of Horton.

60% membership ratification by the end of January. Welcome to America West Grande, the airline none of us even bothered to apply to.

Yes, we are making $4B profits but nobody remembers so we get an industry trailing contract (if you do the math). Jerry Glass is that good.

eaglefly

I'm not stating what I think SHOUlD happen (what I personally feel is minimally acceptable), just what likely WILL happen when the dust settles and APA hands us what they hand us. APA has been sending their usual mixed messages and I believe that THEY believe the initial proposal is simply undoable as they cannot both sell that now and maintain credibility (with anyone). Parker IMO is almost as adverse to arbitration as APA and thus both need an out.

Is Keay simply speculating on 15% above DAL rates being the solution to PF or has someone thrown that to him ?

We don't know.

I think "profit-sharing" per se will not occur, but that doesn't mean another form of compensation for its absence like percentage override to DAL or "signing bonuses" will be in its place.......heck, it already IS in its place, just at a minuscule 3% which APA has already said is unacceptable.

I think the APA will produce their usual result just like LBFO I and II, whereby something is negotiated that gives them an acceptable political over-wing exit escape while being just enough that they can hold up and say, "it's the best we can do" and "it provides a better outcome to arbitration". Many will be pi$$ed as usual, but it would likely pass ratification. We must remember that the first LBFO was the lowball of lowball offers and was retched and yet the APA leadership supported it at the roadshows even standing behind the huckster in a $1000 suit selling it to us. It failed, but a significant portion of pilots actually voted for it.

Like the ultimate SLI award, we should also expect a "hybrid" result somewhere in the middle of the two "want" wildcards in the JCBA. Again though, between where we're at now and arbitration, I'll take arbitration without hesitation.

eaglefly

I wish I could agree that the APA is "good". The APA is as self-serving as any other union. In the fall of 2012 we had the ability to force change and the pilots were living up to their end. Instead, the current President pulled the rug out from under them with one automated phone call and neutered us all.......for over a decade (our next realistic time frame for implementation of a new CBA to replace the JCBA will be in the 2023-2027 range or 9-13 years). I certainly hope we don't end up spending that decade at the far back of the compensation (pay, bennies, work-rules) spectrum with DAL and UAL, but it sure looks that way.

The result you see from that day is the situation we now must accept we are in. Pilots (collectively) have always been their most effective enemies and Jerry Glass's entire strategy is based on nothing but exploiting the weaknesses we demonstrate that are so obvious. Jerry isn't smart at all, just perceptive and opportunistic and emotion is his favorite tool.

Route66

Why, what happened to you union hard core "stick it to them" rants? You are both suddenly sounding like you give up.

Come on.....tell the APA to stick it to the company, you anti-union slackers!

flyinawa

I'd call you a lot of things but pragmatic isn't one of them. These two sentences are about as clear as mud. Are you implying some sort of sarcasm? Is it that the East agreed to binding arbitration and then thought they could get something better? And if that's the case, what should the West have tried? Based on what you SEEM to be implying, you don't have to honor a deal if you think you can get something better. Is that it? Why would any group agree to ANY arrangement with pre AWA/US merger East pilots? (I'm not finger pointing at that third list guys, they've been held hostage by both pilot groups AND management throughout this entire debacle)

Listening to USAPA loving East pilots complain about the West is much like listening to a guy explain how his wife is to blame for the beatings he gives her. You're blaming the West for the injunction? USAPA started an illegal job action without even attempting to get the West pilot's support. Remember the "Good Union Pilot" lanyards the East made to show solidarity against management? Not one West pilot was ever given one of those. Some guys asked and were told they couldn't have one. Some "Union".

Also, make sure you tell your new APA friends about the baseless legal filings USAPA made against the Cactus 19 and..what was it, "100 unnamed defendants"..in the event anyone else spoke out against them. Some of our guys paid big bucks out of pocket to defend against that garbage. And before you start making the "Yeah, but" excuses about how big bad West pilots were hurting USAPA's feelings, remember that case got thrown out TWICE, and the second time with prejudice. It was nothing more than an intimidation tactic undertaken by a representational union against it's members. Keep that in mind next time you complain about APA not pandering to you.

PurpleTurtle

Poser. Did you join APA yet?