Really, like I said, it's like they were talking about two different mergers. I like the panel of 3 idea.

 

I noted several points made that are interesting and relevant to the AA/US Airways pilots SLI. First, in regard to their argument, it's of no surprise they seek a straight DOH integration. With their seniority, it would be akin to stapling most of the AWA dispatchers to the bottom. I find it interesting that they claim on page 3 that "every other unionized employee group at US Air and AWA that has yet addressed the question has adopted date of hire as the method for integrating the seniority lists of the pertinent crafts or classes of employees". I find this difficult to believe considering the seniority of all US Airways groups relative to AWA unionized employees, especially pilots. As far as I know, no AWA pilots subscribed to that philosophy. In arguing their position regarding pre-merger financial conditions of the two carriers, they laud US Airways successful completion of Chapter 11 bankruptcy, yet dismiss AWA as being able to do the same using the Chapter 11 process which is a subjective assumption that just happens to assist them in their argument. Of course, this is of no surprise when trying to argue your interests. Bloch ruled for DOH primarily due to this specific integrations "equities" and the "meaningful gains" that even with a DOH ISL, the AWA dispatchers would have realized. In summation, Bloch states, "that the date of hire approach has been adopted by other unionized groups in both companies is, in and of itself, not dispositive; the facts and the relative equities of each of the affected groups ultimately are what will determine a given outcome".

At any rate, the relevant issues Local 545 does bring up should be of note to all involved here (and hopefully APA will be reviewing this arbitration for pertinence to our SLI as well). First, in arguing their position, 545 council discusses the weight of "pre-merger financial conditions" of the two airlines and "what the two carriers brought to the combined entity" as factors to be considered in their SLI. I like that. Additionally, they note that the AWA dispatchers were at time of merger working under inferior compensation and that due to the merge with US Airways they would "reap substantial increases in wages, benefits and working conditions".

Sound familiar ? It's also one facet Bloch uses to justify his award in this situation !

I like how 545 discusses how US Airways brought "approximately twice the number of jet aircraft as AWA and had more firm orders for additional aircraft then AWA". At least one union at US Airways thinks this should be a factor when considering SLI. I like that too and so did Bloch. They go on to support that with the difference in operating revenues, destinations and passengers carried, all indicative of a more robust and viable product. Cash on hand is also mentioned and while AA was exiting a VERY successful bankruptcy, just like US Airways did according to 545 (akin to one of 545's arguments for their belief in SLI - DOH), it had more cash on hand then US Airways. Brand name recognition and global influence and network also point to future viability. Most favorite of their statements though, is that "US Airways brought to the merger a far more generous collective bargaining agreement, an agreement that will apply to the AWA dispatchers as soon as the instant seniority integration is complete" and "when they come under the US Air collective bargaining agreement, AWA dispatchers will experience salary increases" and also go on to mention 401(k) increases. That sounds kinda familiar too, except that has already occurred for US Airways pilots and as a pre-condition to agreeing to the MOU, which alas........USAPA reneged on, just like everything else they've theoretically agreed to and in this instance, AFTER they got the increases (that was the critical error by Parker and APA IMO - considering USAPA's history, they should have made it contingent on no opposition to the MOU terms and revocable should any dispute of those terms by USAPA be initiated).

They go on to discuss similar SLI's, notably Pan Am/National mechanics and in response to disputing 542's "rank/ratio" counter-argument, that it had been primarily used in "pilot and flight attendant integrations because of the complexities of rank/status, routes, equipment and domicile", in essence, inadvertently making a noteworthy consideration on why DOH isn't a good litmus for pilot integrations due to their complexities and more appropriate to "office, clerical and station employees". This is especially relevant considering the DOH based seniority of most East pilots and all core USAPA spear-throwers. In Section III, 545 summarizes this argument toward DOH saying, "first, because this case involves Flight Dispatchers, it has none of the issues of rank/status, route, equipment or domicile that complicate pilots integrations" and "second, the two combining carriers do not present financial profiles significantly different from each other". In our case, we ARE pilots and our carriers DO present both financial and logistical profiles significantly different from each other, both is size and scope as well as what was "brought to the combined entity". Therefore, in reading 545's arguments regarding this SLI, both APA and USAPA should recognize the similarities in play, the problem is unlike this past SLI where these arguments are raised by 545 to support their DOH arguments, this time all go in opposition to that consideration considering the specifics of this merger and SLI (also apparent if one reads between the lines in Blochs opinion). Of course, USAPA will have none of that, I'm sure and will convolute and twist these factual and relevant points around in the hope of supporting their Constitutionally based DOH position.....or perhaps attempt to ignore them altogether.

This SLI has as many differences to our merger and pilot SLI as similarities, but certain realities are relevant, that being what each pilot group has gotten from the merge and will conceivably get. The point is that the process to determine SLI be fair and EQUITABLE and the last part MUST take into account pre-merger positions of the companies and pilots and expectations based on known items.

 

Not sure what you are reading EF. Let me try the link now that I'm on a PC.

http://www.jamhoff.com/PDFs/ArbitratorDecisionAward.pdf

These are Bloch's words, not the TWU's:

"The Financial Picture
From the evidence, it is clear enough that the merger with AWA was a
meaningful factor in U.S. Airway’s emergence from bankruptcy. Together, the
two companies were able to attract investments that, operating alone, they might
not have secured. However, West’s
claim that U.S. Airways emerged from
bankruptcy “only because it [was] acquired by a stronger enterprise”
10
is reflected
neither in the KPMG audit report (cited by West)
11
nor in any other portion of the
evidence...."

I agree with a lot of your post. AA is larger, with more widebodies. I see then as having a leg up in this merger because more AA pilots stand to reach a higher pay level. But, while I'm sure the APA will argue that they saved us, we have the APA's lovefest with our CEO and the fact that nobody outside of AMR gave your management's plan a chance of working. Looks like the merger served us both,

 

Again, all should note the fact is while Bloch DID find DOH most appropriate in THIS situation, he is quick to include that this award is not a blanket advocation of that concept.

 

I've never said it was and don't see it happening here. The point is that arbitrators are human and as shown by the different opinions of the facts between Nicolau and Bloch, you never know what you will get.

 

APA: We’re in ‘a dramatically better position than any of us imagined’ two years after American Airlines entered bankruptcy

APA: We?re in ?a dramatically better position than any of us imagined? two years after American Airlines entered bankruptcy | Dallas Morning News

 

Great arguments on both sides Eaglefly and R57.

Eaglefly, please acknowledge that USAPA is advocating a UAL style integration. DOH may be a facet of the integration, or LOS may usurp with relative category and status. DOH carve outs may be made for those pilot retiring in relatively short order, but you may take comfort in the fact that their block hours and aircraft will remain.

You folks have very little to worry about. The percentage of pilot retirements at US Airways are mind boggling. Before the wide body fences fall, the top half US Airways will have retired. Leaving ~2,300 active pre-merger announcement East/West pilots on the new AA list.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but you may be basing your post on the assumption that AA's pre-merged career expectations were stand-alone. They weren't, AA had an undetermined destiny in bankruptcy inclusive of hundreds of pilot furloughs, and fleet reductions. AMR had lost control of itself, and the courts approved only one avenue for a return to viability via this merger. "Together, the two companies were able to attract investments that, operating alone, they might not have secured." AA's transition away from bankruptcy depended on this US Airways integration. i.e. 50% code-sharing yielded to 35% US Airways code-sharing, and 15% code-sahring. Lets choose to look at each other as individuals of equality who will be sharing block hours in a proportional manor AS A TEAM! AAL is East/West and APA.

That being said. APA brings the majority of bases, routes, airframes, furloughs, and block hours. I believe we all expect that you, and your fellow APA pilots will receive proportional credits for these.

Instead of debating here, we may best serve ourselves reading up on the DAL/UAL pilot SLI. They're the best ticket to more accurate imaging of these things.

Here's a tit-bit:
http://ual.alpa.org/LinkClick.aspx?f...7675&mid=22338


Neil is just as well spoken in person.

It is interesting listening his "lines" for some of the more controversial SLI issues.

 

7000 retirements over the next decade.

 

If one reads that article, the statements by Roghair deals strictly with contractual terms realized as opposed to those Horton wanted to ram down the throats of AA pilots. That has little to do with the various aspects of each groups pre-merger situations relative to each other and/or what each pilot group or carrier brings to the table to balance out the goal of "fair and equitable" in regards to our SLI, with the exception that if it weren't for the merger, US Airways pilots would still be wallowing at the bottom of the industry in compensation exactly as 545 made an issue of when arguing their integration interests vs. 542 just now with US Airways pilots wearing the other shoe of that argument.

Nice attempt at spin, but your localizer needle is full scale deflection on this one.

 

You want ME to argue for USAPA ? USAPA will argue whatever is in its best interest and if history is any teacher, it will have little to do with anything "fair" or "equitable". If they were interested in fair, they wouldn't be muzzling the West and if they were interested in equitable, DOH wouldn't be on in play. Come to think of it, if they were playing with ANY degree of either, they wouldn't be reneging on what they agreed to as per the MOU.

I'm confident the arbitrators will decide what career expectations each group had pre-merger. The arguments by 545 in that arbitration show Bloch's been down that road before and he'll be able to weed out the B.S. Virtually all the insiders in the industry knew AA's bankruptcy was one of convenience and it was flush with cash and had exceptional assets, infrastructure and brand recognition and was in no danger of going anywhere but to a financially healthier state, albeit at the expense of the employees, especially the pilots. 400 orders and 400 options wouldn't have been negotiated pre-chapter 11 if they didn't (and you can be sure that will come up in SLI argument). You (or USAPA) are free to play that card to Mr. Bloch and other arbitrators, but I can assure you they'll not likely fall for it. The furlough claims were Horton's negotiating tactic for intimidation purposes to APA in the hope of getting capitulation from the pilots for LBFO 1 and then LBFO 2. Weeks after the Bankruptcy in late 2011, Hale was concurrently saying he was 400 pilots short for the 2012 Summer flying schedule.

No offense, but I always find it interesting when Usapians argue potentially detrimental FACTUAL aspects of this merger that have the potential to dilute their SLI interests then resort to a "team" philosophy and then when they identify (or defend) aspects they believe are in their favor, individuality returns.

Not if USAPA has anything to say about it. Come to think of it, there are some moderately senior East pilots and a few 3rd listers who think differently as well, but that's to be expected.


As stated before, this SLI has aspects neither of those did and expectations of these being blueprints IMO, is misguided. Both of those SLI's followed ALPA merger policy which is inapplicable to this SLI. Some of their SLI aspects MAY be considered, but it is not required. Besides, as long as USAPA is holding up the show, there will be plenty to debate here and rightly so.