Originally Posted by Route66 (Post 1775487)

So what REALLY brings you here?

I DO have a "dog" in this fight, because I AM a line Captain.

What "good" ideas? Like how the union needs to perform job actions for the MOU they AGREED to? How bad Parker and Kirby treat their pilots? You mean like how the pilots on these forum threads REALLY know much about unionism anyway? Hell they can't even name the founders of the APA or ALPA, nor do they care.

So I need help yet YOU don't have a "dog" in this fight?

Really? REALLY?

I treat my fellow crew members with the highest respect and courtesy every flight and I have NEVER had a complaint....NONE.

I've NEVER busted a checkride. NEVER.

I've followed SOP to the best of my abilities since I got hired and so far have not had to report to the Chief Pilot for any violation of Company policy. In short, I do what I'm paid to do and what the contract allows for.

I really like flying for a major airline.

Hell, I even LIKE the new uniform.

However, I think there ARE constructive ideas that the UNION needs to address... yet they (APA and ALPA) continue to use systemic flaws of business operations that went out the door with deregulation, 9/11, the great recession, fuel prices just to name a few.

Are they spoken about HERE on the FORUM? Only if you view unionism the old way like the majority of the pos(t)ers here do.

In fact, the APA is twisting in the wind NOW for the MOU that came into effect less than a year ago and the Pilots are whining about how little money they make because of a deal that I SAID COULD BE IMPROVED (yet got voted in by the majority of LUS pilots)!!

But no, I'm not anti-union. I'm anti-stupidity for simply saying that there is a better way but you have to take the TIME to prepare for the future. Hopefully you're preparing for your future in a reasonable manner.

Here, want to learn SOMETHING about American Airlines since you always liked them get this: they've offered them MORE than the contract allows to bring up pay more in line (though NOT Delta) with industry rates. Yet the pilots here at APA (former East USAPA pilots) make the incredulous EXCUSE to cover for the APA:

"It's also important to understand that before USAPA's involvement, CEO Parker met with the APA board and "promised" them that should the company capture the synergies, revenues and profits earlier than anticipated, he would bring the pilots' pay up earlier than the negotiated three-year mid-contract adjustment. Specifically, Doug Parker told APA: "When we make Delta profits, I'll pay you Delta wages."He also told the APA board that because this Delta pay issue may be problematic with the unsecured creditors, he couldn't make it a part of the written contract, but he assured APA this would occur. The problem is that in the company's recent "take it or leave it" proposal, we would be paid "Delta wages" for only the first year of the contract; we would then trail them for many years beyond. Their proposal, of course, also didn't include profit-sharing, which last year equated to an additional 15% for Delta pilots and was conditional on accepting several work rule concessions."

So here you can learn SOMETHING if you are an "aspiring" Airman for a major airline: "you'll ONLY get paid for what you negotiate and GET IT IN WRITING" because "promises" from management are just that. If it's not in writing, YOU WON'T GET IT! Yet of ALL the unions in the world the APA of all of them should know better yet they keep doing the same ole same ole.

And if you DO get it in writing do not expect any promises to give you more until the next contract is PLANNED FOR and completed.

So, is PLANNING a BAD IDEA???

Originally Posted by eaglefly (Post 1775493)

From delusion to delusions of grandeur. :cool:

The illness seems to be intensifying.

Originally Posted by Route66 (Post 1775545)

So instead of the "mud slinging" here is an offer of exchange: Why don't you just evaluate my post with a lucid and reasonable response which you haven't done.

Originally Posted by bernouli (Post 1775607)

EF, your post count is at 5,016. holy sheet.

Originally Posted by eaglefly (Post 1775612)

No, it's 5,017. :D

Pretty wild, eh ?

Originally Posted by eaglefly (Post 1775593)

Evaluate it ? I can't even understand it.

You clam to not be "anti-union", but that flies in the face of virtually everything you say and advocate.

Originally Posted by bernouli (Post 1775613)

mmmmm hmmmmm

Originally Posted by Route66 (Post 1775634)

Where? What I SAID was that the "old" union mentally that YOU obviously espouse was simply living in the past. Unionist HAVE to change. Obviously that would NOT include you it seems.

You can't understand it because you can't or WON'T read the history.



I didn't DEMAND. What I said is we HAVE a contract (MOU), Parker is under NO obligation to GIVE US MORE and if we wish to improve what we've ALREADY NEGOTIATED then drawing lines in the sand like "hell no to scope relief (whatever your vision of that is or isn't) for example and just going to arbitration and taking what we have without ANY review, analysis and back and forth instead of DRAWING A LINE IN THE SAND is a fools errand. We have to come back in five or six years to blend the pilot group over time so the union will have more negotiation strength. But you and yours want it all and they want it now.



You think they are meaningless and that may BE your opinion but there are many others and apparently even the union that have LEFT their hardline stance these past few weeks, sticking the rhetoric aside and actually TRYING to come up with some sort of JCBA that somehow salvages SOME possible remuneration for the pilots with a contract that the Company will be happy to honor as is if that is what the UNION wants. But that is not practical NOR prudent on behalf of the pilots. You obviously believe otherwise and if others don't agree with YOU then be prepared to incur the wrath. NO?



What I SAID was that the ONLY WAY you were going to effectuate a JCBA on the back of an already agreed to MOU was to negotiate with the Company and salvage SOME renumeration that we would not normally get because of the cost neutral provision of arbitration in the MOU OR....since the Company has SAID that they did better than they expected they were willing to accelerate pilot pay with 8 (now seven) caveats that the union should look at before they slap the Company with their "glove" and challenge them to a dual. But what I saw then still doesn't change my mind that it was a good deal. It WAS AND IS in comparison to the MOU.



Could it possibly be that you are so set in your "ways" that logic, reason and READING COMPREHENSION are simply beyond your grasp? And could it be that you were SO FOCUSED on somehow beating me over the head with your, lets just say EXTREME myopic, views are probably why we have an inferior contract in the first place. NO?

Go back if you dare, read what I posted (you won't) and what many others here were posting. I already know what you said.

Let's face it. You don't like me because I won't tell you YOUR truth.

I guess your mirror is broken.

Originally Posted by Route66 (Post 1775635)

You said it best.

Originally Posted by eaglefly (Post 1775671)

Yes, that eaglefly's awful, isn't he ? :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by eaglefly (Post 1775669)

Yes, mine is broken and yours is crystal clear. :cool:

I see no purpose in point-to-point debate with you. We obviously differ in our perceptions. I could go back and cherry pick your posts with no problem to prove my perceptions, but it's not worth the effort to me. Nothing I say to you would sink in anyway and I'm happy where I'm at. I don't need your validation. As for the JCBA, you have little to worry about IMO. It's all but certain APA will agree to a arbitration avoiding deal, so for me it's pointless to discuss it further.

Now, tonight you can lie back and close your eyes with a smile once again convinced you've got the world pegged and it's exactly how you see it. For some people, that's the only way they can tolerate life and it's not important for me to strip that from you. :)

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle (Post 1775702)

You still engaging this poser?

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle (Post 1775702)

You still engaging this poser?

Originally Posted by Sunvox (Post 1395640)

So any CAL pilots like to gamble? I'll lay 2:1 odds that based on 7563 UAL pilots and 4589 CAL pilots making a list of 12154 . . . .

I will be between 6200 and 7100. This puts me next to a 02/05/1996 hire and I am a 04/01/1996.


WB-CAP UAL(1557)/CAL(741) list numbers 0 to 2298
NB-CAP UAL(997)/CAL(1220) list numbers 2299 to 4515
WB-FO UAL(2384)/CAL(1250) list numbers 4516 to 8149
NB-FO UAL(2625)/CAL(1378) list numbers 8150 to 12154

if it gets sorted DOH I'm 6281 and if it gets sorted relative seniority I get 7087



Status and category - check
Longevity -check
Career Expectations - we agree to disagree, but a draw at best and has never ever ever been used to override status and category in the first part of the list even in USAir's case where arguably they were on the verge of liquidation, and UAL had profit in the last quarter announced before the merger and CAL did not so nah nah my dog's bigger and meaner than your dog.

Originally Posted by Sunvox (Post 1778548)

No dog in this hunt, and I fully expect folks to look at my post and ignore it, but having just gone through this process and having spent an inordinate amount of time learning all about the "rules" of the game here's a SWAG at some expectations for your situation.

1) The Nic will play no part because of Judge Silver's decree.
2) The most important factor will be Category and Class.
3) Career Expectations will be moot as both sides will argue 'til they are blue in the face to demonstrate how their sides expectations were better and both sides will have compelling arguments.
4) Longevity will get some weight. The biggest question will be how much this plays a factor in the arbs decision.



When the UAL SLI was going on I looked at the facts and made a post where I gave a range for myself on the new list. The mid-point of that range was 6681. My final number in the award was 6551. Here is the post . . .





If someone wants a close guess of how they will end up here are my recommended steps.

1) Make a list of planes and pilots that existed the day the merger was announced at AA/East/West.
2) Create however many categories you think are reasonable based on the payscales in existence at that time: more payscales=more bands at category and class (given the West's top plane is a 757 I would bet on 6 categories: WBC LNBC NBC WBFO LNBFO NBFO)
3) Count the positions at each outfit in each category and merge the lists based on DOH for one run and straight percentage for the other list.
4) Your answer will be somewhere in between the two.




BUT



You will NEVER impact this process with bickering online nor will your ultimate seat and progression change dramatically as a result of the SLI. What will change your life immediately is your JCBA. I realize this is impossible, but the single most important argument you should be having is how much to demand from the JCBA. You have Parker over a barrel that is if you can speak with a unified voice. The opportunity to improve your future dramatically is here right NOW. At UAL we fought bitterly and one side held the JCBA ransom to try and improve their standing and as a result we ended up with a less than ideal JCBA. Don't make our mistake. Write your reps and tell them to fight for the best and quickest JCBA you can get!

Originally Posted by Sunvox (Post 1778548)

No dog in this hunt, and I fully expect folks to look at my post and ignore it, but having just gone through this process and having spent an inordinate amount of time learning all about the "rules" of the game here's a SWAG at some expectations for your situation.

1) The Nic will play no part because of Judge Silver's decree.
2) The most important factor will be Category and Class.
3) Career Expectations will be moot as both sides will argue 'til they are blue in the face to demonstrate how their sides expectations were better and both sides will have compelling arguments.
4) Longevity will get some weight. The biggest question will be how much this plays a factor in the arbs decision.

Originally Posted by flybywire44 (Post 1778644)

Lets not forget that USAPA did not have resources to properly analyze the MOU as they were to busy fighting with the West.

So now West loses Nic and, along with East, fails to get the best JCBA result. :(

Originally Posted by Route66 (Post 1778664)

Actually, it WASN'T the resources but the way resources were deployed. The President wanted a deal and the NAC wasn't staffed in a way that was conducive to a path for an MOU so the removal of two of the negotiators, the addition of two that the President wanted along with the President negotiating directly with the Company effectuated the MOU (II) that sent the CBA out to the rank and file.



USAPA was already fighting with the West for years and it certainly seems nothing has changed. The West keeps suing and when they LOSE their argument before the PAB they will continue to sue the Company and the APA and when they don't win there they'll do what they did a few years ago and report the APA pilots for any job actions (or at a minimum they simply won't go along) along with failure to honor a strike.



That's the way it will be. As the West will say...."Insha'Allah".

Originally Posted by flybywire44 (Post 1778805)

I refuse to see how USAPA task loading with West legal action didn't affect the unions attention span.

I agree the union has the resources, but the attention span of leadership was not fully available for JCBA.

West pilots hurt themselves in this area by extension.

Originally Posted by Route66 (Post 1778585)

Most of what you have revealed is true for ALPA merger policy. While there "seems" the perception of ALPA policy is fair and equitable that definition carries different meaning than fair and equitable under MB. . . .



In short you're longevity within a few months carried the day because the method used was more longevity than ratio. I read the award.


. . .


Thanks for the insight.

Originally Posted by flybywire44 (Post 1778644)

Lets not forget that USAPA did not have resources to properly analyze the MOU as they were to busy fighting with the West.

So now West loses Nic and, along with East, fails to get the best JCBA result. :(

Originally Posted by Sunvox (Post 1778852)

A few minor nit-noids . . .

1) Although true the Mccaskill-Bond Statute uses the Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions which do not include specifics like the ALPA policy, it does use the same words "fair and equitable" and given Arbitrator Eischen's long history I am confident that Category and Class will carry the day.

2) I'm not sure I agree with your characterization of the UAL SLI with regards to longevity. The list was created using a mathematical sorting algorithm provided by UAL-ALPA. In the original UAL proposed ISL I was 500 numbers higher than I ended up. The reason this happened was because the original list was created with a 50/50 weight wherein Category and Class was equal to longevity, but in the final award the arbitrators used the tool to make the ratio 65/35 where longevity accounted for only 35% of the final result. This resulted in my losing over 500 numbers and instead of being mixed with '96 hires I was mixed with '98 hires.

But, like I said, really just nit-noid stuff.

It's a shame most folks have such a pessimistic outlook 'cuz I think this could be good for everybody if you can just somehow get it behind you.


And, you're welcome! It's all just entertainment on the inter-webs anyways and doesn't mean a thing in real life :D

Originally Posted by flyinawa (Post 1778863)

Just so I understand it correctly....the WEST is to blame for USAPA not adequately analyzing the MOU? Good lord, man...is there anything East pilots WON'T blame on the West?

Originally Posted by flyinawa (Post 1778863)

Just so I understand it correctly....the WEST is to blame for USAPA not adequately analyzing the MOU? Good lord, man...is there anything East pilots WON'T blame on the West?

Originally Posted by FreighterGuyNow (Post 1778922)

We will give you a pass on ebola.

All the rest is on you.

Originally Posted by flyinawa (Post 1779048)

That heart burn you got after wolfing down two double quarter pounders? Yeah...sorry about that.

Originally Posted by Bad-Andy (Post 1779254)

How about global warming? Can I get an apology for that, too? :D

Originally Posted by flyinawa (Post 1778863)

Just so I understand it correctly....the WEST is to blame for USAPA not adequately analyzing the MOU? Good lord, man...is there anything East pilots WON'T blame on the West?

Originally Posted by Route66 (Post 1778836)

I know it didn't "affect" their attention plan. As you can see, a Protocol agreement has been reached and from what I have read so far the West Pilots have NO CASE for participant status. NONE.



As far as JCBA (as per MOU II) USAPA wasn't the ONLY one dancing to the tune. So was APA whose BOD voted for it (the MOU) and USAPA rank and file. They GOT what they wanted and the JCBA WILL be fully available either through the current negotiations OR through arbitration.



The JCBA didn't come BEFORE the MOU, it is a result OF the MOU and it is being negotiated assuredly. But make no mistake, we'll get a JCBA either through negotiations OR through arbitration.



Back to the seniority integration here is MY prediction:



The West do not have legal standing to participant status and



The US Airways pilots can PROVE that their contribution to the survival of American Airlines and the merger with US Airways thereof was significant and consequently the US Airways pilots as of the CN date will have significant positional recognition in relation to the APA pilots in the merged seniority list.