Originally Posted by SewerPipeDvr

So how did I do on my predictions? I believe I said APA would become the BA. Correct there no vote. I said the DC lawsuit was a legal strategy (fancy term for bargaining chip or leverage). I heard they dropped it. Correct there. I said APA would not let USAPA on property. Wrong, but they are severely limited to MC work ONLY, so partial credit there. Lastly, I said APA would allow the West a seat. They did in a round about way. What APA really managed was to shift liability off of themselves from both East or West. Who are you going to sue if either side does not like the results? Not APA, they did not make the decision. I would not have thought USAPA would agree to that. I am sure it was under threat of APA giving the West a seat in MB after they became BA. APA has managed to keep the East/West fight off the property, as I noted they wanted (per several friends with direct knowledge). Right again. Not bad for someone who does not know anything about the law.
My predictions for what is coming up next. I don't think the West will get NIC. This is not for "punishing" the East. What the East did was legal. As was the West keeping the East on regional wages for years. I suspect the West will get a seat, especially in light of the recent DJ that the East filed IN STATE COURT. That is a flag this is to delay the West from getting that money to use for MB. It will get kicked for jurisdiction to Federal Court causing more delay. I suspect the West to file in Federal Court to block or freeze to keep the East from using that money. In my opinion, USAPA made a big mistake. As a part of the MOU, they should have insisted the only monies to be used for MB is the money provided by the company. APA is much bigger and RICHER. They can outspend USAPA or the West three to one. Money wins. Finally, MB outcome. Key is to study the RECENT work of the arbitrators. It will come down much like UAL/CAL. Call it 2/3s of APA will be happy. 1/4 of USAPA will be happy. The rest not so happy. Fences for APAs WB aircraft. I do NOT think the arbitrators will fence the West from USAir WBs. That will be the "little jab" to USAPA. I also think the company might make the APA happy by moving native AA metal onto your routes, and retiring/ selling off the small number of WBs you currently have. Course, I might be all wrong. Just have to wait and see.

Originally Posted by R57 relay

They have clearly stated that they have no role as CBA except the merger committee. They are staying in business(trying) to finish the lawsuits. AOL is appealing their loss. Shouldn't USAPA be able to answer that?

Originally Posted by Frisco727

Yes, USAPA should be able to answer for that.

I'd say let USAPA and Leonidas battle it out. There is only one union, the APA. Updates such as these are troubling:
Seniority Arbitration Board Members

In accordance with the terms of the seniority integration protocol agreement between APA, the US Airlines Pilots Association, American Airlines and US Airways, three arbitrators have been selected for the seniority arbitration board: Dana Eischen, Ira Jaffe and David Vaughn. If negotiations do not produce an integrated seniority list, the protocol agreement stipulates that the arbitration board "shall have the authority to establish a fair and equitable integrated seniority list as required by the McCaskill-Bond Act."

USAPA is a LLC, Leonidas is a LLC. Should Leonidas be allowed a seat at the table?

Originally Posted by SewerPipeDvr

Fences for APAs WB aircraft. I do NOT think the arbitrators will fence the West from USAir WBs.

Originally Posted by DCA A321 FO

Obviously the Eagle flows on property at whatever snapshot date is set, guys at Eagle prior to that date, even if scheduled to flow, would not be included on a list up to that date.

Originally Posted by FreighterGuyNow

Either widebody pilots are protected or they are not - regardless of the domicile.

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Well, they'd be included, but slotted differently. Pilots added to any seniority list (new-hire & Flow thru not yet transferred) after whatever snapshot date is used (most likely the date of "constructive notice") will likely be considered "constructive notice" pilots and their slotting with similar pilots on the other lists will most likely go DOH. It has been understood in other SLI's that these pilots career expectations were based on the combined entity and not each carriers pre-merger condition or future. Constructive notice pilots on each of the 3 lists will maintain pre-merger relative seniority but likely be slotted based on DOH (class) and then by age.

It must be noted that prior to USAPA's dissolution...well, supposed dissolution, they participated in the JCBA negotiations and are listed jointly in the initial JCBA proposal recently sent to management. Regarding seniority, it seeks to define seniority for all pilots based on "occupational date" and any future references to seniority will be based on OCC date for all pilots. The East and West lists use DOH, so it would appear both APA and USAPA agree that that date will be converted to an OCC date (but still the same date). Of course, USAPA is seeking to still remain relevant in yet another one of its endless attempts to reneg on an agreement, so until the JCBA is ratified, anything could change.

As far as Eagle flows though, any future flow isn't on any AA seniority list and doesn't get on that list until first day of new-hire class.

Originally Posted by R57 relay

I'm not sure what bothers you about that. Usapa was the CBA of US pilots and a party to the PA(logical under MB ). All parties agreed to USAPAs place at the table, not so with AOL. But a compromise was reached to let a 3rd party decide the question of AOL participation. What's your issue?

Originally Posted by Al Czervik

How many AA guys are constructive notice? I only see a few hired between 2001 and the merger approval date.