AOL update
#11
Flies With The Hat On
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: Right of the Left Seat
Posts: 1,339
#12
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 159
Please don't put words in all APA pilots mouths. I personally don't want to get screwed in a senority integration, just like every other pilot, but we won't have a whole lot of say in the out come. This will go to arbitration, B-M, and that will be the end of it. As to the nic award, both parties agreed to arbitration, so it is what it is. Not saying it is good or bad, because I don't have enough information one way or the other, but an agreement was made and is now not being honored. Not casting disparaging remarks either way, just an outsider looking in.
The final integration between AA and LCC will depend on what list or lists is brought to the table by LCC to start the whole shooting match. It is my understanding that if anything other than the Nic award is used, then the AWA case becomes ripe and that opens whole can of worms in the courts.
Best of luck to all of us. This war with management is not over, just some key battles have been won, so keep working together for the final victory.
The final integration between AA and LCC will depend on what list or lists is brought to the table by LCC to start the whole shooting match. It is my understanding that if anything other than the Nic award is used, then the AWA case becomes ripe and that opens whole can of worms in the courts.
Best of luck to all of us. This war with management is not over, just some key battles have been won, so keep working together for the final victory.
#13
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2008
Posts: 131
Please don't put words in all APA pilots mouths. I personally don't want to get screwed in a senority integration, just like every other pilot, but we won't have a whole lot of say in the out come. This will go to arbitration, B-M, and that will be the end of it. As to the nic award, both parties agreed to arbitration, so it is what it is. Not saying it is good or bad, because I don't have enough information one way or the other, but an agreement was made and is now not being honored. Not casting disparaging remarks either way, just an outsider looking in.
The final integration between AA and LCC will depend on what list or lists is brought to the table by LCC to start the whole shooting match. It is my understanding that if anything other than the Nic award is used, then the AWA case becomes ripe and that opens whole can of worms in the courts.
Best of luck to all of us. This war with management is not over, just some key battles have been won, so keep working together for the final victory.
The final integration between AA and LCC will depend on what list or lists is brought to the table by LCC to start the whole shooting match. It is my understanding that if anything other than the Nic award is used, then the AWA case becomes ripe and that opens whole can of worms in the courts.
Best of luck to all of us. This war with management is not over, just some key battles have been won, so keep working together for the final victory.
#14
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,293
Well since we are about to go to court as soon as the deal closes I thought aol updates would be of interest and we can keep the east/west stuff on this thread (with the moderators permission).
AOL update 2/19
And here is the link to the attorney's letter: http://leonidas.cactuspilots.us/2013...and_Siegel.pdf
AOL update 2/19
And here is the link to the attorney's letter: http://leonidas.cactuspilots.us/2013...and_Siegel.pdf
You say that you guys will file suit as soon as the deal closes. I figured as much. But, and maybe I'm reading the AOL update and Harper letter wrong, but they seem to think it is ripe now. I don't see that. The MOU does not put us all on a JCBA as the AOL update says. It is a pathway to get to one, but many obstacles remain and we very well might not get there. I believe US/UA went a year with merger plans before UA pulled the plug because of DOJ(DOT?) objections and a declining economy. If this merger falls through we are still on our separate contracts with separate ops. Seems like you would need to wait for the JCBA to be completed, have USAPA forward a DOH list, then sue. USAPA could negotiate in a way with the APA that does represent the west's best interests, particularly if their attorneys decide that the really are backed into a corner. I know you're laughing, but we don't know yet.
Also, I find this line kind of odd:
"The MOU vote has proven us (and Judge Wake) right: Given enough money there never was an impasse."
That is technically right, but not practically. It kind of like saying "There would be no mold on my deck if it wasn't so humid here." Yeah, that's right, but it is humid in the south, hence I get to deal with mold on my deck. The 7 years that have passed have proven there was an impasse. I always said that with enough money that a Nic inclusive contract WOULD pass. But I also said that I didn't think Parker would put forth a contract with enough money. He has been consistent with the message that a standalone US could not, and he would not, pay the same as DL and UA. But, that if we merged with a bigger carrier we could. That's what happened. A merger allowed the higher rates, and the MOU is seniority neutral, that's why it passed.
Why would your attorneys reference a court case that has been dismissed?
I think you guys are jumping the gun again and I hope it doesn't screw up the merger.
Last edited by R57 relay; 02-20-2013 at 07:09 AM.
#15
I was on an Airways jumpseat and the FO ('08 hire) brought up a good point.
He is currently a line holder on the bus and if the Nic is used he would get stapled below all the west guys. Since the McCaskill-Bond was radified after the Nic Award and the legislation was enacted to prevent this from happening, then what would happen to this guy?
He is currently a line holder on the bus and if the Nic is used he would get stapled below all the west guys. Since the McCaskill-Bond was radified after the Nic Award and the legislation was enacted to prevent this from happening, then what would happen to this guy?
#16
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
A couple of things cacti, with the clear understanding that I am not an attorney.
You say that you guys will file suit as soon as the deal closes. I figured as much. But, and maybe I'm reading the AOL update and Harper letter wrong, but they seem to think it is ripe now. I don't see that. The MOU does not put us all on a JCBA as the AOL update says. It is a pathway to get to one, but many obstacles remain and we very well might not get there. I believe US/UA went a year with merger plans before UA pulled the plug because of DOJ(DOT?) objections and a declining economy. If this merger falls through we are still on our separate contracts with separate ops. Seems like you would need to wait for the JCBA to be completed, have USAPA forward a DOH list, then sue. USAPA could negotiate in a way with the APA that does represent the west's best interests, particularly if their attorneys decide that the really are backed into a corner.
Also, I find this line kind of odd:
"The MOU vote has proven us (and Judge Wake) right: Given enough money there never was an impasse."
That is technically right, but not practically. It kind of like saying "There would be no mold on my deck if it wasn't so humid here." Yeah, that's right, but it is humid in the south, hence I get to deal with mold on my deck. The 7 years that have passed have proven there was an impasse. I always said that with enough money that a Nic inclusive contract WOULD pass. But I also said that I didn't think Parker would put forth a contract with enough money. He has been consistent with the message that a standalone US could not, and he would not, pay the same as DL and UA. But, that if we merged with a bigger carrier we could. That's what happened. A merger allowed the higher rates, and the MOU is seniority neutral, that's why it passed.
Why would your attorneys reference a court case that has been dismissed?
I think you guys are jumping the gun again and I hope it doesn't screw up the merger.
You say that you guys will file suit as soon as the deal closes. I figured as much. But, and maybe I'm reading the AOL update and Harper letter wrong, but they seem to think it is ripe now. I don't see that. The MOU does not put us all on a JCBA as the AOL update says. It is a pathway to get to one, but many obstacles remain and we very well might not get there. I believe US/UA went a year with merger plans before UA pulled the plug because of DOJ(DOT?) objections and a declining economy. If this merger falls through we are still on our separate contracts with separate ops. Seems like you would need to wait for the JCBA to be completed, have USAPA forward a DOH list, then sue. USAPA could negotiate in a way with the APA that does represent the west's best interests, particularly if their attorneys decide that the really are backed into a corner.
Also, I find this line kind of odd:
"The MOU vote has proven us (and Judge Wake) right: Given enough money there never was an impasse."
That is technically right, but not practically. It kind of like saying "There would be no mold on my deck if it wasn't so humid here." Yeah, that's right, but it is humid in the south, hence I get to deal with mold on my deck. The 7 years that have passed have proven there was an impasse. I always said that with enough money that a Nic inclusive contract WOULD pass. But I also said that I didn't think Parker would put forth a contract with enough money. He has been consistent with the message that a standalone US could not, and he would not, pay the same as DL and UA. But, that if we merged with a bigger carrier we could. That's what happened. A merger allowed the higher rates, and the MOU is seniority neutral, that's why it passed.
Why would your attorneys reference a court case that has been dismissed?
I think you guys are jumping the gun again and I hope it doesn't screw up the merger.
#17
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,293
The MOU is an interesting document that I think both sides view as cementing their position. I've read it a dozen times and it has some legalize that may be in there for just that reason, but I can't predict how it will turn out.
Here are some specific clauses that make me scratch my head as how they will affect things:
"d. During the McCaskill-Bond process, including any arbitration proceeding, US Airways,
American or New American Airlines, or their successors (if any), shall remain neutral regarding the
order in which pilots are placed on the integrated seniority list, but such neutrality shall not prevent
said carriers from insuring that the award complies with the criteria in Paragraph 10(b)(i)-(v)."
"h. US Airways agrees that neither this Memorandum nor the JCBA shall provide a basis for
changing the seniority lists currently in effect at US Airways other than through the process set forth in
this Paragraph 10."
"15. US Airways agrees that it will comply with the East and West CBAs and the Transition Agreement
until the Effective Date." This is counter to the AOL update claim.
"Accordingly, except
for those terms specifically identified in Paragraph 3, the Parties agree that each term of the MTA
shall be applicable to all US Airways pilots at the earliest practicable time for each such term, and
such terms, when applicable, shall govern and displace any conflicting or wholly or partially
inconsistent provision of the former US Airways pilot agreements or the status quo arising thereunder.
Once the MTA has been fully implemented, it shall fully displace and render a nullity any prior
collective bargaining agreements applicable to US Airways pilots and any status quo arising
thereunder."
Both sides attorneys feel very confident in their case, but when do they not?
Doug Parker has mentioned twice that I know that the settlement to this may be a three way deal. That all three seniority lists would go through the process. I think that cacti mentioned that M-B prohibits it use on previous mergers, but haven't looked that up. I doubt Parker came up with that idea himself and I think some of the provisions of the MOU could support that.
Again, I certainly can't call it.
Last edited by R57 relay; 02-20-2013 at 07:42 AM. Reason: Added text
#18
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,293
I'm a big fan of your posts R57, I see the same issues as you. The West's legal argument may ultimately pan out, but this letter appears premature at best. Furthermore, it ignores Judge Silver's clear-cut finding that USAPA and LCC were absolutely free to negotiate a list, and that simply failing to use the Nic verbatim was not in and of itself a DFR violation.
At least now cacti and I have a home for discussion that everyone can easily skip and we won't pollute the rest.
#20
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2009
Posts: 581
Cactiboss- Y'all just do what you think that you need to do. But I think that you would be an affective leader if you would just stop posting about it so much. Everybody knows that you are headed in this direction. All of this posturing is not leading to more awareness. Just do it.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post