Wait a minute that is not the same Woody that ALPA came to the rescue and saved his career when he threatened to TSA that he didnt need a gun or knife to crash a plane???? This is not the same Woody that used the "N" word with one of our former ALPA reps is it?? I read that disgusting email that WOODY sent to him and I never will understand why he did not inform management and get that clown fired for good.

WD at AWA

What I see here in this thread is the usual group spreading the same old venom.

You folks give the profession a black eye far beyond those you accuse.

You play right into managements efforts against the profession.

Your union represents a group, you are in it only for your personal gain.

Pathetic.

Well see GW we have NO UNION. What we have a is group of thugs that dont honor agreements and feel that because of majority status they get to do what ever the hell they want and they do this with reckless abandon. Yes management has been able to capitalize as a result of this but given the outcome what choices did we really have?? Should we have said "ok you guys dont like it so we will just do what ever you say because your happiness trumps all and we all are just rookies out west anyway"????

We stood and continue to stand on principle of things like HONOR and INTEGRITY! I agree it is a black eye and usapa will go down in the aviation history books as being one of the worst things in pilots careers ranked right up there with Frank Lorenzo and Carl Ichan.

WD at AWA

Umm, I have a file on my computer that says "Kirby Proposal." Date of signing A320 C/O was $146.10, TOS. 4 years later it was $152.05. That on top of the gutting of scope, no min fleet and no raise on the E190.

The then ALPA merger policy outline might have been followed, but it's objectives were not.

You have a legally elected union. The NMB said so.

Couple of issues with this post eagle, if you are referring to me.

I never said that the Nic was not the primary reason for the foundation of USAPA. It was. What I said was the many that voted for USAPA voted for them for reasons other than the Nic. Many of the guys that voted for USAPA really weren't hurt by the Nic and have lost with USAPA's election.

And the "TA we tore up" was no where as good or better than the TA. The Kirby proposal was an abomination.

You really need to do some research.

http://www.unbiasedfacts.org/USAPAsU...terNov2010.pdf

God you are a delusional fool. The "Kirby proposal" was a proposal, it wasnt all that was available, it was the company's opening proposal you nitwit. Amazing the lies you hyave to tell yourself to rationalize what you have done.

Their opening proposal? We had been negotiating for several years. It was a comprehensive proposal, far below what we should have had. It is what IS STILL ON THE TABLE FOR A STANDALONE CONTRACT

Do those AOL strings in your back hurt? Have you ever had an independent thought?

Your own MEC chairman testified in court to that fact, it's in the transcripts fool. Go ahead and justify your $124 an hour with no end in sight thanks to you east lunatics. Jeez H christ, we were negotiating a contract, it's not whatever "kirby offers" that is the final product dimwit. A unions job is to negotiate, something you beasties have no clue what to do. Without this merger we have no hope because of the anchor that your pilot group is.

This testimony, fool?

Q. You mentioned Scott Kirby. We have heard of something
called the Kirby proposal. And you mentioned that Scott Kirby
gave a presentation. Did the Kirby proposal get -- was that
offered at that meeting, or was it sometime later?
A. It was at that meeting, yes.
Q. Do you remember what the content of the Kirby proposal was?
A. Yes, I do.
Q. What was it?
A. Well, it was something that was a non-starter. It was
woefully inadequate. I think that's a term -- I don't know if
John was there. I think Mitch Vasin might have been there at
that meeting. Both sides, even after the award came out, we
realized this was not going anywhere, this proposal. It kept
our defined contribution rate for retirement at 10 percent, and
I believe it only raised the current America West rates for
sort of narrow body equipment, only a few dollars into the
future.
It would have still kept us below the -- well below
the average median for airline pilots at the time and for the
life of the contract.
Q. I may not have been paying too close attention. Did you
say that both the East and the West MECs shared that view?
A. Absolutely. We were very concerned at that meeting that
the company leave with no misunderstanding about how we felt
about that proposal. We even rehearsed our, sort of, script
that we would, you know, speak to them when we got back into
session and everybody had sort of a role. Mitch and I think --
Mitch Vasin, vice-chairman at the time –

Q. For the West MEC?
A. West MEC, actually approached Scott by ourselves telling
him that I don't know what to be more shocked over, the
proposal or the fact that the company thinks that this was
something that would move the process along.
Q. Was there any dissent at all by anybody at the JNC, anybody
who did not think that it was woefully inadequate?
A. I don't believe so.
Q. Did anybody ask Mr. Kirby at this meeting if there was any
other -- if there was a way that the Nicolau Award could be
addressed with the company, not with ALPA, not within your
groups, but with the company? Did he engage in any discussions
at all concerning the award?
A. There were several meetings, and I'm not sure if it was at
this meeting. But if it wasn't at this meeting it was the one
right after that in June where we were together with our -- the
same group of individuals, the East representatives, West
representatives, company representatives. Scott Kirby was
there. And I remember -- perhaps it might have been later on
because the Nicolau Award and the effects of it started to sink in.




Q. And in your other discussions with the company, had you
received some informal indication that they might be able --
might be willing to go up as high as 7 or 10 percent above the
West rate?
A. Nothing in writing.
Q. That wasn't my question. Good answer.
Was there informal discussions, sir, about the area in
which the final contract could wind up?
A. There were informal discussions, yes.
Q. And you have -- I don't remember whether you used
loggerhead or log-jam or what the phrase was, would you agree
with me, sir, that the stall in the forward progress of
negotiations towards a single CBA was because the East Pilots,
the East MEC, would not accept the Nicolau Award?
A. Not totally.
Q. Or list?
A. I'm sorry?
Q. I'm sorry. I will try it over. I interrupted you. I
apologize.
Isn't it fair to say that the forward progress towards
a single CBA was stalled because the West refused -- excuse
me -- the East refused to accept Nicolau List?
A. I believe that was one reason.
Q. Is that the primary reason that the East MEC did not move
forward with joint negotiations?
A. From this pilot, no.


Scott Kirby publicly contradicted that an additional 10% was available.


It's a fact that the cost of a JCBA went up after the Nicolau award came out. I'm sure we could have gotten a little better than Kirby, but I doubt enough to overcome the Nic. After the company saw how the Nic divided us, I really doubt it. Why would they?

Then we have the FACT that you guys filed an unripe DFR while we were negotiating a contract........