There is no “pie”. That is a mythical construct created by management.

What possible cooperation was needed to either allow or force a merger with AA and the WO??? Why the F would the company need APA approval? In reality, the only thing meaningful APA could offer is concessions to BUY back regional scope. Beyond that, why does management care what APA thinks on the matter? They don’t need our permission to do it…

 

AAG did need WO unions to sign off on the LOAs that raised the pay. WO unions wanted something else. Pay, as good as it is, is not what they were primarily after. WO unions wanted to work with APA. I think there are a number of solutions that would have satisfied the WOs before it came to raw pay. Could have been a powerful ‘joint union’ to benefit all AAG pilot groups. WO got record pay instead. APA got frustration.

 

To paint a clear picture. The WO unions had been working together for months to try and come up with solutions to the attrition we were all facing. We saw the opportunity to stop the attrition and simultaneously add thousands of pilots and tens of thousands of block hours back to the mainline APA purview.

It was made clear to us that American wasn’t going to entertain any discussions on this solution (which would have actually saved them money compared to what they’re doing now) without ALL parties being on board. Envoy, Piedmont, PSA, and of course APA. The 3 MECs approached APA about it during a meeting and it was made clear in no uncertain terms that APA was not interested. APA was warned that what could result is that American takes drastic measures to stop the attrition (the pay we’re all seeing) and that could harm APA. Ferguson said, “any gains for you are good for us.” or something to that effect. He was wrong then and what you’re seeing now is further proof of that.

I get it. It was the beginning of an election year for APA. No one is making wild changes in an election year. No one as bland and predictable as APA’s leadership, anyway. The ship has basically sailed at this point. APA was the roadblock. It is what it is. Another feather in the cap for the old guard at APA.

 

What, exactly, does it mean “to be onboard” in this context?? How could APA make the merger “more palatable” to management. The only thing I can think of is concessions. They don’t need APA permission to merge.

 

Sounds like somebody went hook, line, and sinker for a management spun tale.

 

If by somebody you mean all 3 WO MECs and ALPA National’s labor relations team with years of dealing with the exact same negotiations team as APA, then sure. For what it’s worth AA told us that APA would never sign off on it. And here we are.

But hey, keep telling yourself whatever you want. APA screwed up (again). Is anyone shocked? No. This thread is becoming tiresome honestly. Good luck on your contract.

 

It would hypothetically be an incredibly complex integration with the different pilot labor groups involved. Not to mention the other labor groups that AAG would have to figure out in the aftermath. If any 1 labor group got cold feet that could sink a potential negotiation for a solution such as that. Anyway, doesn’t matter now. The opportunity has passed.

 

Yeah, you bought off on this tall tale. No way the management wants to run anything more complex/involved than they already have. So yeah, management inventing this story and then you believing it is more believable than what you have proposed. Good for you, though.

 

If true, I’m guessing the APA was worried about the SLI not ending up a staple.

 

If you cannot understand the ramifications of all that AA flying being done in-house I don't think we need to engage any further.