AA Remaining furloughee analysis?
 

Much has been discussed in regards to the upcoming sli (seniority list integration) as to where the fuloughed aa pilots will fall into the upcoming combined list. Thats a valid discussion but not the intent if this new thread. We need to look more deeply into how many aa furloughs may return and all of the variables that effect this.

I wanted to start a thread that analyzes more deeply the following

1. How many aa furloughs are remaining?
2. What is the average age of the furloughs?
3 . How many have deferred and what is the current protocol for future deferral.

I do understand there are no absolute concrete answers to these questions but I think many of us would like some more information on this subject. I am a third lister like many of us reading this. Im sure many of us would respectfully like to understand this complex dynamic further as it has profound implications on our future seniority.

discuss

I was interested in reviewing those totals myself, and just did so on our APA website. According to their updated totals as of 1/1/14, there are 1170 pilots at AA that remain on furlough, 744 of which have deferred recall. The deferred number is a little confusing to me, since they made a big deal last May of all pilots being offered recall, thus starting the 3 year deferment clock. This means if you have elected to defer your recall to AA, and AA is hiring in May 2016, you must make a go/no go decision at that point. So I would assume that all 1170 of those furloughees have deferred if they are not back--what am I missing?

Anyway, for your planning as a third lister at US, there are quite a few "wild card" furloughees out there at AA and many would be senior to you. However, we are talking about people who have been away from the airline for 10+ years and I would think most have moved on.

Hope this helps...

All pilots have been offered recall, no question about it. I too am confused as to why the deferred number does not match the total out on furlough.

I'm curious about total longevity for the AA furloughs, time spent actually flying the line for AA/TWA. I know some of the most junior furloughees had less than a year on property, but obviously others had more. Can anyone offer insight into rough numbers of guys with 1, 2, 3, etc years of service?

Furlough bypass.
Some maybe Captains for Jet Blue or under contract for their pilot services elsewhere. As their seniority improves, my guess is they will return. Jet Blue has Captains leaving to take Delta recall.

I know this is not the specific intent to discuss here, but wondering if it makes a difference whether a furloughee is actually on the property during the integration or not. What I mean is, could a pilot be put in a different place on the new list just because he/she deferred too long? Or is it just the number that counts? Any speculation on where near-bottom furlough guys may be put?

This has been discussed elsewhere in the merger section and it usually goes south quickly. They can't (and won't) lose their position on the AA list because they exercised their contractual right to bypass.

Guys get upset at the mere mention of this.

Curious to see some hard numbers as well. From what I've read, by the time the intent to merge was announced last year, most of the AA list had been offered recall. The only guys who hadn't been offered recall had pretty low total length of service (1 year or less). This is my understanding but I haven't seen any real numbers.

I think if it shakes out as I suspect, the fears of many 3rd listers about getting totally shafted in the SLI are mostly unfounded. But we shall see. I think it is fair for guys who legally defer recall to not lose out because of it, or at least only lose an amount proportional to their voluntary deferral.

How does it work, in fact, on the AA contract? Let's say you are position 10,000 on the AA list, and are offered recall. You elect to bypass/defer. I'm assuming your position at 10,000 becomes frozen, and as there's movement on the list they guy who was 10,001 becomes 9,999 etc., passing you. So you do lose something.

I think the positions merged in a SLI would be the stovepipe positions, not those actually holding them. So there would be X number of AA 777 captain, X number of US 330 captains, ect on down the list. Then then they go down the list and insert by seniority order.

Just because all AA guys have been offered recall doesn't mean there was room for all of them. If everyone had taken it in seniority order, then there may have been some that had not been offered recall yet.

Just saying, no idea of what the real AA numbers look like. I believe all west pilots have been offered recall, but several deferred, so there may be some over there below the "active line".

3rd listers go up to around 15% from the bottom or more at US. Doubtful that furloughed AA guys would go ahead in the SLI. Check out DL/NW, CO/UA, and 9E/XJ SLIs to see how furloughs have faired in the past.

Ackattacker,

No your # is your #. Many don't come back initially acid they'd like to be able to hold a line in their base of choice. Eventually they can and will return.

On May 1st, 2012 there were 1665 AA furloughs:
Trogdor, all the answers you seek and more are here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...1DIIxmEE#t=150

Okay, but on a more serious note... The most senior involuntary furlough on January 8th, 2013 had less than 8 months of LOS. This is because Eagle pilots sued to have all TWA LCC pilots stripped of their LOS and legally regarded as new hires.

I'd like to know how many AA pilots were on involuntary furlough, but later deferred recall and never completed a cumulative year LOS probationary period? Can anyone answer this?

Whether or not a pilot is on involuntary or voluntary furloughed status at the time of the merger will be a noteworthy issue.

The AA list will not be reordered. All voluntary furloughed and bypassed recall pilots will be regarded as being on property. R57 Relay is correct insinuating that involuntary furloughed pilots not on property at the time of the merger announcement may be regarded as if they would continue to be involuntarily furloughed had all voluntary furloughs/bypass pilots actually returned. In other words, involuntary furloughed and flow-thru pilots may not be granted a status holding position equal to voluntary furloughed/bypass pilots.

It is also worth mentioning that pilots who voluntarily took a furlough (I think APA calls these "Stand in Stead" pilots) may not be the same as pilots who were once involuntarily furloughed and later deferred recall. Cumulative LOS should be a consideration in measuring a pilots cumulative periods of employment before involuntary furlough and after obtaining recall/deferral status.


I don't believe an AA bypass pilot position would be frozen, but it would remain relatively constant to that of the next pilot senior to him and so on.


Third list pilots need to do a two things if they care about their seniority in this integration:

1. Read the arbitrations of LCC/AWA, DAL/NWA and UAL/CAL and study how these arbitrations affected the bottom 15% of each respective list.
2. Ask the USAPA Merger Committee to pursue a bargaining stratagem rooted in the precedence of these industry standard arbitrations. Ie. Merger announcement as constructive notice date for seniority snapshot reflective of accurate carrier pre-merger expectations, LOS for AA furloughs, some blend of LOS & Relative Category/Status...

****Citation for off-property flow through pilots having no recall right:

March 13, 2008, Arbitrator LaRocco ruled in FLO0106 that Supplement W/Letter 3 status rights did "not contain a right of recall to AE flowthrough
pilots who hold AA seniority numbers, but were not furloughed from AA." (Arbitrator George Nicolau, (2009, October 18) Opinion and Award Grv. FLO0208)

Does anyone know the DOH of the last AA pilot hired? I'm not talking about the Eagle flow throughs that never flew mainline, just the last guy to set foot on the property at AA, furloughed or not. I was just trying to remember when AA stopped hiring and couldn't remember if they were hiring right up to 9/11 or not. Thanks in advance.

+ there are about 40 that hold seniority numbers on both list, with a combined total service to the new AA of 15 or so years.

So with the TWA being considered "new hires", that's already reflected on the current seniority list if I remember correctly, right? And that term was only used for where the TWA pilots were to be put on the list? Also, as far as pay, tthey will return to AA at their last pay status (ie 3rd year f/o)? Also, could this finding also affect where they will be put on the giant AA/US airways combined list? Just a thought

Are you trying to infer that some of the "new hire" TWA pilots will be moved on the existing list? Sorry, that is NOT going to happen. Keep in mind that following the stapled TWA group is a fairly large number of "native" pilots along with a few AE flow-through mixed in. After that, there is a group of straight AE flow-through pilots. At the bottom of the list, we now have new-hires (off the street along with more flow-throughs) with the two new classes this month. If you are hoping that the union will screw a particular group like the TWA pilots by altering their position within the APA seniority list, you will be very disappointed. And yes, I AM a former TWA pilot.:)

Not saying that. What I'm asking is, "what does it mean that TWA pilots were considered new hires anyway?" I'm taking the same position as you on this. The current list is reflecting this , my guess is Eagle pilots got ahead of some TWA guys after the suit? And it won't affect their position on any new list in the future, right? So Airways, and whatever other companies AA merges with down the road, etc. Also, TWA pilots won't be paid as new hires, but get paid what they were getting paid 20 years ago, or however long these guys were on the street for...

This is all too complex and convoluted to explain on a message board. In short, the ridiculous "new-hire" term for some of the TWA pilots came about from a law-suit between Eagle ALPA and the APA. For some reason, the judge, in his ruling, used the term "new-hire" for any TWA pilot that had not gone through AA training prior to being furloughed.

As for pay, I was on third year pay when furloughed and came back at third year pay. There is a real push going on right now for the furloughed pilots to get LOS for time while furloughed, but it seems that union leadership (being mostly senior guys) has little interest in pursuing it at this time.

Eagle flow-through pilots did not get any advantage on the seniority list as a result of the law-suit. The ruling simply allowed them to flow-up ahead of more junior furloughed guys. Yes, it was a raw deal for the furloughed guys as it delayed our recall for several months.

I hope this answers some of your questions.

Reading this whole post, it sounds like you are advocating the Usapian position that DOH (or a methodology that supports that) must be used in the SLI, otherwise why would you seek with seeming urgency this information ?

Of course, some Usapains claim here, "oh no, we aren't clinging to that........not us". :cool:

Not surprising and expected, even by APA by the way. For the record, Eagle pilots DID NOT "strip" anyone of anything, it was Eagle ALPA that disputed the TWA flowback situation. I get kicked around pretty good for sticking my nose in East/West Nic squabbles and am frequently told to mind my own business, yet when it occurs in reverse, that's apparently fair ground for a Usapian or their sympathizers. What essentially occurred with the Nicolau FLO-0108 situation was Eagle ALPA's disputing that former TWA pilots had flow back rights to Eagle when they weren't part of that agreement and AMR and APA unilaterally decided they were. That was a FOUR party agreement and four parties didn't agree to that interpretation and when it was forced anyway they cried foul. Nicolau opined that if they were, then Eagle pilots had were entitled to an equal number of new-hire positions at AA and that's how the bottom "chunk" of Eagle flows were awarded their AA seniority (all at the very bottom of the AA list). Many of TWA pilots who DID flow back to Eagle BTW, did so with FULL LOS for pay and were at 18-year pay as opposed to many of the AA native flow backs who were only at 1-2 year captains pay rates.

Yes, but only with USAPA.

APA is expecting USAPA to most likely argue DOH or a supporting methodology should be a factor in the SLI. USAPA is virtually certain to attempt to argue for an integration that WILL try to dilute the seniority of both AA furloughees due to what they believe is a loss of longevity for time on furlough and to Eagle flows for what they believe to be a loss of longevity due to delay in beginning their training at AA. That doesn't mean the APA will agree or that arbitration will result in that, it will simply be their assertion. If USAPA were successful though in arguing for longevity adjustments for AA furloughees and/or flows, it WOULD result in a "reordering" of the AA list. What WILL be in play is the concept of "career expectation" and once you start reordering a seniority list, then you muddy up the pre-merger career expectation snapshot of any given pilot, so it then gets complicated as to meet one party's belief of longevity adjustment negatively impacting a pilot on the post merger list (misguided IMO), you violate another party's belief of career expectations on their pre-merger list.

Yes, the above will likely be the belief of USAPA (just as it yours), but APA will almost certainly argue the opposite. Who knows, perhaps APA will make arguments on why certain East pilots (or even West pilots depending on what USAPA throws down on the table as their "list") should also have "adjustments" made to their positions on whatever list USAPA presents ?

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Maintaining pre-merger career expectations will be the ultimate goal. Exactly HOW that occurs is the "art" (as an APA rep put it). The DL/NW SLI was fairly quiet because it was a merger od two essential equals and the UAL/CO SLI had it's OWN issues, many aspects of which may not apply to this merger. The LCC/AWA SLI never occurred, so I can't see how that factors in, other than the bad taste in the NMB's mouth from past dealings with USAPA. There is no "precedent" when it comes to SLI's and so one could try to argue what occurred in SLI X or Y should apply, but history shows that if you look at the last 10 SLI's over the last decades, they all had differences in argument and outcome. The only two concepts that M-B will promote is a result that is "fair and equitable" and one that preserves the "career expectations" of as many pilots as possible. of course, both sides will have THEIR idea of what those two should be and hopefully the arbitrator will disregard the bulls%&t.

Actually, USAPA will almost certainly try to argue for longevity adjustments (to the negative) for certain classes of AA pilots. I suppose you can do that without physically moving them to more junior positions on the combined list (as opposed to where they originally would have been) and simply use some type of limitation or fence, but it's essentially the same thing. The APA has said they anticipate that considering USAPA's belief in DOH or a methodology equivalent. After all, the East is a VERY senior pilot group in longevity and that position is the best out there in any merger between them and anyone, so it's not surprising.

They're going to go for the jugular.

No, no seniority advantage. There are many of us who didn't agree with the recall ruling by Nicolau, but had no say. I think one reason Nic ruled that way was that he believed that if the flows had not been withheld from their initial class and flowed when they should have, those class spots wouldn't have been open for street hires anyway who took their spots in the first place, or so I recall being told.

Water under the bridge, anyway.

There is a simple fact that many folks seem to be confused on with regard to this (and all other) SLIs. NO EXISTING LIST WILL BE REORDERED, AT ALL, EVER.

There are a lot of things to argue about ... methodologies, ratios, dates, relative positions, the strengths and weaknesses, assets and liabilities brought by the parties to the merger. These and others will all be laid before the arbitration panel when the time comes.

I don't know how this will ultimately turn out, but if Jones is senior to Smith on the pre-merger AA list, he will be senior to Smith on the merged list. He may be one number senior to Smith, or there could be dozens (or even hundreds) of pilots from the other group placed between them.

I thought this was Seniority 101, but it seems lots of people are cloudy on this concept.

Maybe i need to be more specific. What date was the last new hire class for mainline, prior to bankruptcy?

I believe the last new hire class (before we just recently started hiring this month) was just days before 9/11.

I don't know the exact date of the last class, but AA was hiring right up to 9/11. There wasn't another 'new hire' class until just recently (December?), but we did start getting eagle flowthroughs again a year or two ago. I believe those flow-throughs already had seniority numbers.

The real question is, and im sure no one knows for sure, but how many of these 1000 bypasses will be accepting a recall. Would you leave your current gig as a Captain to come back to AA as an FO?

Haha. Interesting question, and a semi-hot topic on the APA web board because of implications with LOS for furloughed pilots, and whether or not APA will choose to support the junior pilots (furloughed, recalled, deferred, whatever) by pushing for LOS or not.

BTW: LOS = Length of Service, i.e., credit for time served on furlough.

I think where the APA might be gun shy about going after credited time for LOS on furlough, might be looking at the East list. If they get credited time for their furloughees within the SLI, then I would imagine what is good for the goose is good for the gander? Wouldn't they have to agree to accepting credit for time served on furlough for the East guys too?

Thanks. A family friend was going to give me what was basically a silver bullet (Alaska term) for an interview at American, but I was still building up my 121 PIC when the hiring stopped. I just couldn't remember if there was hiring right before 9/11.

I hope I didn't sound like I was ignoring the Eagle guys seniority, just wanted to know last guys hired (non Air group), off the street, to jog my memory.

I thought length of service was giving furloughed guys credit for time they had spent on property, not time being on furlough status.

The example would be a guy with 6 years on property but is currently furloughed being given credit for the 6 years he had been active versus a 3 year active pilot at the other merger partner.

In some SLIs the furloughed pilots are placed below active pilots, in others the time on active service is taken into consideration. It all depends on the circumstances and the way the arbitrator looks at the facts.

Many bypassed for different reasons, so that is impossible to answer. I think many though might wait to the last possible minute to get the best assessment of the gains or losses in leaving whatever they have going vs. taking X position on the newly merged list, at least if they can. Exactly when that "minute" is depends on the SLI. IF there is any loss of longevity credit for AA furloughees and they are warned of that, some might have to make that decisions sooner then their drop dead date. If not, then they may wait until the very last minute.

I think anyone who thinks this is not possible is fooling themselves. The APA list is a complete mess when it comes to longevity from about 2000 on comprising several thousand pilots. The extended furlough meant many junior came back sooner and furlough dates and return dates are all over the place. Likewise the flows have anywhere between 18 months and 12 years difference between new-hire class assignment from which they were forcibly withheld and actual training class. It's a complicated question and making complicated adjustments for these pilots which may affect pilots differently could mean that for all intents and purposes, they might effectively have different positions on the new list. It all depends on how each side argues that part of the SLI equation and how the arbitrators value each argument and to what degree. Likewise for furloughees on whatever list USAPA presents.

There are no certainties at this point, only more questions.

IMO, I think it again falls to the concept of "carreer expectations". Regardless of whether an AA pilot was furloughed or when he comes back (if he DOES come back), they had career expectation +1 to the pilot immediately junior to them and career expectation -1 to the pilot immediately senior to them. Same goes for Eagle flows and the U list(s) for that matter. Thus, I think the simplest solution is one where each list presented maintain its individual relative seniority to maintain pre-merger career expectation and then concentrate on feathering of the lists and then use fences to clean up any rough edges that result from the feathering. Over complicating this is going to produce more harm then benefit, if you ask me.

What if it doesn't go to arbitration?

Then Bob's your uncle, done.

Get drunk, recover from the hangover of the overindulgence of libations and apply Preparation H as directed.

Then, man up, move on, get to work finishing the JCBA.

From my understanding, the JCBA must be completed before the SLI. APA reiterated again the other day that this could take up to six months due to many issues. Thus, before the JCBA is done and the SLI negotiations (actual, not protocol) can even start, the NMB will already have ruled APA the bargaining rep for all pilots and USAPA vaporizes as a bargaining rep for the East/West pilots, although their merger committee will still exist to theoretically present a list, make their SLI proposal and negotiate.

Most a virtually certain that arbitration will be required as again, the APA even admitted it very likely the DOH concept or equivalent will be their position in addition to the likelihood of persuing a slice and dice on the longevity issue.

Yeah, i have an in-law at another legacy and he gave me his two cents. It's a great thing for me long term, but he warned me the APA is going to screw me in the integration. Both of us are not convinvced USAPA will represent the west pilots in good faith.

Just out of curiosity, it sounds as though you're a west pilot, so exactly how do you think APA is going to screw you...........simply by default due to unfair representation by USAPA alone or is there something else that APA would attempt ?

I think those at other carriers have no better insight as to what will eventually occur as the rest of us on the inside.

The SLI and JCBA processes run simultaneously.

I will read it over again, but a fast glance on the timeline and MOU I don't see where they say anything about the SLI being a "must do first" item.

If anyone has a reference I'd love to see it.

I have no reason to think poorly of the APA, it's just the fact that they don't represent me yet. They will and should do what is in the best interest of their members. I look forward to being a member one day.

USAPA is controlled by east pilots and they are a fractured group. There are pilots on the east that want to punish guys like me because of an arbitration that was done by a neutral third party. Some of those pilots don't want to just put me below the furloughed pilots, they want me below the new hires that were hired at OUR airline long after I was. Not all east pilots are out to harm the west. There are some good guys/gals out east and even in the union, but because of USAPA's track record I don't have a lot of faith in a fair and equitable process.

I believe the jcba has to be done before arbitration starts, not negotiations. U think the time for negotiations will be up within a couple of months.

Don't give a negotiated sli much chance.