The TWA MEC and pilots had to waive their scope provisions in their contract in order for the merger to proceed. They did exactly that. They could have stopped the process cold and TWA would have remained a independent airline. They did not have to except the APA list. You can argue it was a gun to the head ultimatum however that cuts both ways. If TWA was a viable airline then they should have refused to waive their scope provisions. If they were not a viable airline then they made the best choice to preserve jobs for their pilots.

 

Legally, it was an "asset acquisition" with an OFFER of employment. I suppose they didn't have to offer employment, but they did. Based on TWA's situation (3 months operating cash), it was felt that the career expectations weren't there and thus as per Section 13 of the green book a straight staple was contractually required. They met and negotiated a better deal for TWA pilots and provided protections in STL and feathered in the top half of the pilots and stapled the remainder. I believe a large number of the staplee's were already on furlough (some on at least their second furlough).

Most agree doing this deal was stupid and TWA should have been left to its own resources to flourish or flounder. Although many there claim TWA was ready to rise and conquer the industry, most on the other side don't believe that and the demand for DOH and full consideration based on their hideous state is preposterous. Of course, the sides won't agree on this and that will remain in perpituity. It's decade old news.

 

Well now, that's a valuable point... but TWA Pilots absolutely HATE talking about this point! That's because you are 100% correct, Sailing - they had no other options at the time. So, in essence, yes it was forced onto them, but they absolutely could have refused. But they didn't refuse, because refusing meant they would be on their own.

757200ER... your view on this? Could TWA have refused to waive their rights? What would have happened?

 

This is EXACTLY what happened. The top 46% got feathered in at 1:8 and the remaining 54% got stapled.

No, this is inaccurate, eaglefly. TWA had no pilots on furlough at the time of acquisition.

Without a doubt. Crandall himself has acknowledged several times that he would have dumped TWA on 9/12/01. Unfortunately, Con Carty had major size envy.

 

OK folks, I've come to a decision: This will be my last post on the subject of AA/TWA. I realize I'm coming on here trying to reason with folks whose minds will never change, and will most likely always be bitter. So be it. You may all have the last word regarding what happened over 11 years ago. I'll resume posting on any other subject except this one.

To 757200ER, I do appreciate the fact that we've had good and professional discussions before, and I will always reciprocate. Good day sir...

73

 

aa73---there was no '7 year fence around TWA wide-body flying for OZ pilots'; more inaccurate, false, misleading APA/PDP propaganda. There was immediate access to TWA 747/767/L1011 WB CA/FO seats for OZ pilots, in a percentage allowed (16% of JFK/LAX/STL WB seats). Notice AA/APA fenced TWA pilots off all 777/MD11/A300 seats, and forced our pilots from (3) domiciles into 1---STL---which APA and AA now want to close.

Your second point is interesting; yes, TWA's ALPA MEC (while being manipulated and subverted by ALPA national) could have declined to waive scope & rights to LPPs requiring neutral, binding 3rd party arbitration. AA's CEO Carty stated if that was done---AA would walk away from the deal. Many of our MEC's hard-liners wanted to refuse to give this up---but were outvoted. I would have refused---and taken my chances as a stand-alone airline. Let the chips fall where they may, knowing what I know now.

I ask you all: If US and USAPA stated they'd agree to buy AA and all assets, then merge the two seniority lists, but to proceed APA/APFA & TWU had to give up all LPPs and scope, what would you all do? Hang your hat on Horton's 1113 term sheet? Your leaders seem to think US & Parker is the better bet.

Eaglefly is incorrect stating "Based on TWA's situation (3 months operating cash), it was felt that the career expectations weren't there..." . That wasn't true, and (3) offers were on the table for our MEC Chairman to consider at that time. #1 was AMR's purchase of all of TWA's assets after TWA declared chapter 11; #2 was a large code-share and equity swap with AmericaWest, which was given a thumbs-up by most on Wall Street; #3 was a cash infusion by Boeing, management replaced by J Alix (turnaround specialists). There were other options, and TWA had more than '3 months of cash' left with which to operate.

 

Absolutely no way TWA would have survived without filing Chapter 11 to get rid of Carl's cheap ticket deal. TWA also wouldn't have survived after 9/11 and the recession. Where AMR made their mistake was not dropping TWA after 9/11.

 

I love how some people still believe the Nicolau Award screwed the East. They got the top 517 slots when they had 197 wide body captains. I lost seniority on the Nic list and it was a lot more than 1 or even 5 percent, try 18. But you know what, it does not matter. It does not matter if you think it's fair or I think it's fair. What matters is that that award was the product of the process. It was negotiated, mediated and arbitrated. It is the result of the agreed to process and that is what should have been used for the past 5 years and that is why it will be the list used in the SLI. Parker does not want a legal battle to hold up the deal. APA does not, either, evidently because the negotiator notes clearly refer to some kind of ratioed list in accordance with legislation

We are waiting for a federal judge to rule on whether US Airways management would be liable for damages should they not use the Nicolau award. In addition, the West has an immediate DFR win against USAPA should they put forward any list other than the Nic. We lost on the timing in the last suit, we did not lose on the facts of the case. On the contrary, we won easily. And if you think a federal judge is going to come out and rule that binding arbitration is not really binding, throwing out 150 years of legal precedent, then you still believe in the Tooth Fairy and Santa. Or you are USAPA.

 

I believe the SLI will go the way of Delta/NWA and UCAL and our Nicolau Award. It will be ratioed by Group. AA will get most of the Group 1 and 2 slots. Group 3 and 4 will probably go on a ratio of active pilots from both airlines. Furloughees will be placed below any active pilot. December 2012 and beyond should get them back on property quite soon.

Think about this. With you guys going to the America West vacation policy that will require a bunch of more active pilots immediately. Bumping up your line average and using PBS will not lose as many pilot lines as you may think. There will be a net gain of pilots on that one item alone. Now, if your negotiators are smart, they will get the West's 5 +15 credit minimum per day. We get that per duty day and for any layover 24 hours or more. That is why our PHX/HNL trips pay 15+45 for a two and a half day trip and your LAX guys only get 12 hours or so. No 4 day trip pays less than 21 hours, 3 days at 15 +45, two days at 10+30. It's pretty sweet. On the 757 I would fly a 90 hour credit line and only fly 55 hours hard time.

 

Your MEC chairman had 3 offers on the table and he chose the AA deal, especially considering the seniority issue ?

That's not the fault of the APA. I stand behind my operating cash statements as TWA may or may not have had promises, but they didn't have the cash.

I'm going to join AA73 and let you argue your assertions undisputed as it's pointless now.