Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > American
Protocol Agreement Reached per USAPA >

Protocol Agreement Reached per USAPA

Search
Notices

Protocol Agreement Reached per USAPA

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-09-2014, 07:06 AM
  #161  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Feb 2014
Position: 767 capt
Posts: 42
Default

Originally Posted by cactiboss View Post
Hey scumbag, the scum east has promised they will fucckkk every west pilot, that is a fact. I find it hilarious that the east scum now wants west help so they are the only ones to screw the west. Fcccckkk uuu u fuukin fccck, I will give the apa the sandpaper so they destroy your sphincter. I would rather be fccckddd by the apa than help any east scum, I'm fccckd either way.
WOW, Capt. will you please post your flying schedule, because like most of us on the east that have not had a lot of input on what USAPA is doing. My family is east and travels on West metal and I don't want them to be subjected to your anger. Thank you sir. in advance. Will hate to be your first EAST F/O. He or she can take this post to H R if there is any problems. Good luck.
Flyin the Flag is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 08:47 AM
  #162  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Arado 234's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Nov 2013
Posts: 1,764
Default

Careful what you post. Should your ID be revealed one day, you would have a tough time defending your attitude in front of the company and AME.
Arado 234 is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 10:33 AM
  #163  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Default

Originally Posted by Flyin the Flag View Post
WOW, Capt. will you please post your flying schedule, because like most of us on the east that have not had a lot of input on what USAPA is doing. My family is east and travels on West metal and I don't want them to be subjected to your anger. Thank you sir. in advance. Will hate to be your first EAST F/O. He or she can take this post to H R if there is any problems. Good luck.
On reserve but do Hawaii mostly, travel accordingly.
cactiboss is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 10:35 AM
  #164  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Default

Originally Posted by Arado 234 View Post
Careful what you post. Should your ID be revealed one day, you would have a tough time defending your attitude in front of the company and AME.
My attitude against a bunch of degenerate scum that has cost me, my family and my coworkers $ millions? My attitude is nothing compared to what the east has done.
cactiboss is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 11:17 AM
  #165  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Default

Originally Posted by Arado 234 View Post
Careful what you post. Should your ID be revealed one day, you would have a tough time defending your attitude in front of the company and AME.
AME as in Aviation Medical Examiner ?

Well, If using foul language was a disqualifier for a medical certificate, 90% of airline pilots would be immediately grounded. Come to think of it, I'd bet a large percentage of AME's couldn't meet that standard.
eaglefly is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 11:23 AM
  #166  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Default

Originally Posted by R57 relay View Post
Hey sport, I'm giving you credit for just that. I originally believed that the APA just jumped on the SCS bandwagon after Judge Silver ruled, but you have me thinking that was their plan all along. I did some research and found that they used it against TWA.

I can't find a link to the pdf article, but this has most of it and some good info. on MB:

Seniority integration and the McCaskill-Bond statute - Lexology

"Although unions and management were typically the parties in Section 13 arbitrations, other employee groups and individual employees could be granted party status or allowed to otherwise participate. See, e.g., Southern Emps. v. Republic/ALEA, 102 C.A.B. 616 (1983) (describing how seniority integration was negotiated by an "employee committee" established for that purpose without union involvement); Pan Am-TWA Route Exchange, Arbitration Award, 85 C.A.B. 2537 (1980) (noting that three individual engineers were parties to arbitration); NAA I, 95 C.A.B. at 584 (denying dissenting group "full party status" but noting that they'd been given the opportunity to participate in the LPP arbitration). Thus, as indicated by the language of the LPPs, unrepresented employees still had rights to fair and equitable seniority integration and binding arbitration to resolve integration disputes under the Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs."
Sport ?

Wow, that's the nicest thing you've ever called me.

As far as what is up the APA's sleeve, that's anyones guess. Back then M-B wasn't in existence though and now it is and it's mentioned in the MOU itself. It would seem the goal here is to NOT do what occurred in the TWA asset acquisition and the resultant construction of the modified seniority list, but instead have neutral arbitrators ready to make the call. Again, a fair process is possible without USAPA and I think that's the primary goal of the MOU - representational castration of known obstructionists to ensure the process doesn't get bogged down for years.
eaglefly is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 11:46 AM
  #167  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Posts: 203
Default

Looks like a new East bid just came out for August. Haven't looked it over yet. But it does show 45 new hires...
algflyr is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 02:15 PM
  #168  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,293
Default

Originally Posted by eaglefly View Post



As far as what is up the APA's sleeve, that's anyones guess. Back then M-B wasn't in existence though and now it is and it's mentioned in the MOU itself. It would seem the goal here is to NOT do what occurred in the TWA asset acquisition and the resultant construction of the modified seniority list, but instead have neutral arbitrators ready to make the call. Again, a fair process is possible without USAPA and I think that's the primary goal of the MOU - representational castration of known obstructionists to ensure the process doesn't get bogged down for years.
Exactly. It's that "anyone's guess" that bothers me. Forgive me if I am just not anxious to let them decide what to pull out of it. Yes, a fair process COULD be possible without USAPA's participation, but trickery would be easier too. A fair integration COULD be done completely with USAPA running things, but would you take the chance? I wouldn't if I were you.

Have you read the US reserve question thread? Those type posts and the TWA history don't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling about them controlling the whole SLI.
R57 relay is offline  
Old 05-09-2014, 02:31 PM
  #169  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Jun 2010
Position: Doing what you do, for less.
Posts: 1,792
Default

lolwut is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Wiskey Driver
American
6
02-28-2014 01:23 PM
newcfii
Regional
16
01-14-2014 07:32 AM
Snarge
United
56
02-12-2013 06:33 AM
cactiboss
Major
198
11-03-2012 01:52 PM
Brocc15
Major
942
05-25-2012 05:31 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices