redthread

Go back a few pages to see the last drop and a few pages before that etc. It's cumbersome but the only way unless somebody is keeping track like on the Delta thread (spreadsheet).

flybywire44

Eaglefly, USAPA never asked for LOS in the AmWest merger because it I itself is not inclusive of time spent on furlough. DOH is, but Length of Service applies to only the amount of time an employee is (or was) actively in service building sweat equity. LOS reflects an accrued status, while DOH demonstrates entitlement. Your phrase "reducing length of service" may be misleading as it cannot be reduced. Do you mean to say that "it's highly likely East negotiators at the least will pursue LOS [instead of DOH] for furloughees and [this is] a virtual certainty for flow-thrus?" (sic) What in your view makes this a virtual certainty for flow-thrus? And are you referring to AE pilots who flowed before or after the February 14th, 2013 merger announcement?

The reason I ask these questions is that a pilot's Length of Service at the mainline carrier for purposes of bidding cannot be "reduced" or manipulated. It is an objectively measured, and fixed finite number that traditionally begins when a pilot begins employment at mainline. Obviously, this begins 47 days after a pilot begins employment at AA. No one can (nor do I think would anyone try to) "reduce" or "alter" the time of active service an AA furlough had whether he was on, or off property at the time of merger announcement.

Eaglefly, for an extended period you opposed DOH for years in sympathy of US Airways West pilots. I respected your opinion, but have you changed your position on this? It seems that DOH is in your cohort's best interest going forward.

Moving on... Eaglefly, you stated: "...AA furloughees made their recall bypass election prior to the merger so they had little ability to incorporate a "risk/reward" assessment in returning at any given time." In other words, if a furloughee had known the AA merger was going years ago he/she would have recalled sooner? I disagree. AA career expectations were dismissal long before and during its recent bankruptcy. Would AA furloughs have borne the pain of waiting through years of horrible stagnation for the US Airways merger? The opportunity costs you imply would otherwise be tolerable were awful high. AA pilots likely bypassed to pursue other opportunities. However, this won't be held against these pilots in SLI.

None of us know the future, and is improper to seek handy caps for those who regret the decisions they made about their respective recall status. We need to own this career and the choices we make everyday. I for one would have bought AA stock the moment AMR declared bankruptcy, but at the time I "had little ability to incorporate a "risk/reward" assessment in returning" a profit on my then possible investment.

Eaglefly, you have stated before that respective lists cannot be reordered. Voluntary furloughs who bypassed will keep their relative seniority to pilots who recalled sooner. This remains true. However, many Third-List pilots sense that bypassing pilots create artificial opportunity for involuntary furlough recalls creating a net decrease in conditional notice pilots. Put differently, the relative seniority of the overall AA group was increased when AA involuntary furlough pilot recalls began on January 9th, 2013. This recall of involuntary furloughs would have been delayed has all bypassing voluntary pilots recalled. So the fact that "...AA furloughees made their recall bypass election prior to the merger" was a net benefit to AA pilots as a whole.

Conversely, would it be fair to relieve the most junior pre-merger AA pilot of his/her pre-merger career expectations for each voluntary AA pilot who later recalls after the merger, but before SLI? No, absolutely not. There is no precedent for this. This is literally a case where APA may get to have their cake, and eat it to.

A pilots career is not entirely measured by the number of pilots ahead of him. This merger and seniority integration will not destroy anyone's career expectation. You must consider the addition job security, growth opportunities, and contractual improvements brought by this merger! Absent this merger, Tom Horton indicates that he would have furloughed an addition 400 pilots.

I hope management is able to have narrow body fences if not all fences down by 2016. Maybe APA can trade this for additional JCBA gain "Dropping fences quickly puts many junior at AA [and US Airways] in an especially bad situation. Third-list pilot will lose their 6 year airbus upgrade. However, we should make these short-term sacrifices for our mutual long-term benefit! Avoiding fences is a tremendous advantage to commuters, their health, and families. US Airways motivations for influencing SLI to not include narrow-body fences are actually in everyone's interest. We need to think holistically here.

My apologies if this post in this thread offends anyone.

eaglefly

I'm aware of the differences between "LOS" and "Longevity" and the concept of "DOH". How USAPA chose to apply those concepts in their positions regarding the AW SLI, I'm not aware of. Suffice it to say, I would assume that you as a "third lister" who is not even an East Pilot is stating his own opinions on what USAPA may or may not choose to persue in our SLI and you have no idea what objective USAPA or actually East negotiators may choose to argue in this SLI or even the West's position. Likewise, as a flowthru at AA, I myself cannot say with certainty what APA will ultimately persue as to how they perceive the value of any of those concepts as it applies to former furloughees at AA and how they would weigh the recall variables. I do know however that the questions of "longevity" for flow-thru's is very complex and has little similarity of the more basic application of what occurred regarding Coex "flow-thru's" in the UAL/CAL SLI. In fact, I've been told the APA may very well believe that present "LOS" of present flow-thru's (those who transferred to AA via "Letter 3" process) CAN be manipulated. To fully explain this issue would take much too much time and for a multitude of reasons, I won't expand on this forum, but this issue will be a known issue in this SLI, the question is if APA will acknowledge it and deal with it. As the process plays out, we will find that out.

I opposed several aspects of then East ALPA negotiators unwaivering DOH positions considering that a straight DOH standard in your.......er, actually THEIR merger (you NOT being an East pilot) heavily lopsided a potential SLI result. They essentially refused to reasonably negotiate off that stance. Then, after agreeing to the risks of a BINDING resolution process when their obstinate intransigence didn't payoff, they subverted the result. I didn't agree with that. What I've disagreed with most though is their actions since becoming USAPA (essentially an organization borne of hijacking, no matter how one rationalizes it) and their efforts to this very day of scheming repeatedly to muzzle the minority. I would be just as critical of APA if they attempt to muzzle the East, you, the West or the Letter 3 flow-thru's if a reasonable conflict of interest can be indentified. I'm all about open, fair and honest ability of all relevant parties to have the opportunity to present their position on SLI issues that affect them. I'm completely against myopic self-serving domination and suffocation, which has been a hallmark of USAPA and you know what..........the APA too. I'm also for standing by agreements you make and I can't accept those who muddy their positions depending on the argument, AKA "flip-floppers"

You're free to disagree, but you're basing that on assumptions which are in error, IMO. First of all, the AA bankruptcy wasn't a direct financial necessity, it was a strategic one to primarily do two things, A. whack the pensions and B. shed the retiree medical obligations. Trimming further $$$ from the contracts was an ancillary benefit. It was a scheme to rebalance the books on the backs of labor in order to reconstitute an executive wealth obtainment vehicle that management knew was going stale. Management didn't place an 800+ aircraft order/option schedule 6 months prior to filing as a coincidence. Thousands of furloughees were recalled since 2007 prior to this merge and "years of horrible stagnation" is an assumption and not something that one could assert this merger saved any given AA furloughee from, deferred recall or not. You're last sentence sounds like something an East negotiator would say if it were certain as you state it. Instead, I understand it to be just the opinion of someone who isn't even an East pilot, isn't a negotiator and thus it is another assumption. You certainly have the right to that opinion though.

Your first six words in the first sentence is the best of this post. None of know exactly what the SLI arguments will be. I've heard APA has multiple "models" in consideration and has already been playing with different scenarios and I'm sure USAPA (and probably West reps too) has something similar in play as preliminaries. The rest of this position is simply YOUR desire and if you feel that way, let your reps know. Since you're not an East pilot, I don't know who that would be though.


No, I said each respective list SHOULD not be reordered, NOT that some or all merger representatives won't try to argue for a result that in effect does just that. That is my opinion, but since I cannot say for certain at this time what any given representative group will persue or what an arbitration panel will award, it HAS to be opinion which, whether you like it or not is what you argue here...........an opinion. If you believe the above, then persue the ability to argue for that. You haven't convinced me of it, but perhaps you will to someone more important.

I'm aware of the complexities of SLI's and this one will arguably be more complex then any previous SLI in the past decade. That is all the more foundation to assert what occurred in other recent SLI's should and very well may have little bearing on this one. My advice is not to be too reliant on anything Pinocchio Horton said. This statement in particular was related to strong-arming the pilots during negotiations for a concessionary contract. It was an effort to slip another expendable card into the deck to use to exchange for a more important card (will let you buy that threat away for a concession, etc.) and is a common ploy in contract negotiations in or out of bankruptcy. At that same time the VP of Flight was claiming we were 400 pilots short for the summer 2012 season.

As a non-East pilot who is junior, I'm sure you'd like little or no fence impositions. I have no idea how any of the parties will deal with fences, just like I have no idea how arbitrators will actually merge our lists. I can tell you that most AA pilots are strong advocates of fences as comparatively few present AA pilots would benefit from CLT or PHX access and PHL is close enough to NYC that many wouldn't go there unless they could be more senior. Some would like PHL though as that saves the Jersey/PA guys from the hassles and expense of driving across the bridges to JFK or LGA. I'm sure many more US Airways pilots would LOVE to avail themselves of the more stratified domiciles at AA. Your desires are understandable, I just don't think you'd get agreement from a majority of AA pilots, at least from my perception.

Sliceback

This thread is about AA hiring and interviews.

There are more than enough threads to debate all the east/west issues.

FredFlyer

Agree. Take it elsewhere PLEASE!

BYOB

Thanks for dragging crud from another thread into the thread that those of us not working for US Airways/AA have been trying to avoid.

eaglefly

Agreed, however I believe his positions of certainty on the SLI and impassioned plea to eliminate fences in this SLI required a response as I've been attacked by others of similar persuasion in the past for not responding to his assertions. It tough to be a Usapian punching bag !

This thread should stay on topic. My apologies for my response to him here. In fact, many will be pleased to know that will be my last comment on this SLI on this forum. That should make many very, very happy.

MayDaze

To be fair you are in the American/US Airways Merger forum. Maybe you should should start a new "Latest and Greatest" thread in the correct forum and these guys wouldn't drop in all the time.

Sliceback

1400+ posts. 300,000+ views.

By their actions APC members have decided that this is the AA newhire thread even if it's in the 'merger' section.

MarineGuardChef

I agree it was a very helpful thread during the interview process.