You never know with arbitrations. If the Nic isn't used to the West's satisfaction, it sounds as though it will be them that is "****ed" and apparently will even sue AAG and Parker (a show I'd LOVE to watch).

Actually, my now obviously pointless exchanges with your West chum DID have some entertainment value. I went back and reread his exchanges with his fellow pilots marveling at the hilarity of it from a new (and more accurate) angle. It was akin to a minister preaching to his own choir, yet wearing the costume of someone else to sham some of the congregation.

But, if there's one thing I've learned in the last few months, is that the West is capable of just about anything. Personally, I think he'd have had more credibility with East or LAA pilots, if he'd been straightforward about his real identity as most of us are here, at least as to which of the three pre-merger groups we belong to as opposed to existing in subterfuge feigning false neutrality. Like Cacti or others, you may not have agreed with him, but at least you could respect him. Now..........well, at least to me and reading those faux exchanges, he just looks silly.

But, by all means keep up your exchanges. I just think it would be less silly with all the cloakery.

Anyway, he had a good run. He's a known quantity now and tainted at that AFAIC, and while he may generate "harrumphs" from his fellow Westies in the future, I've lost interest in discussion and/or debate with him now on any subject. It's not personal, just business. I'm all for accepting disagreement, but once credibility is shot with me, I lose interest in making effort with someone and I guess that is my issue.

Anyhoo, lot's to discuss with Silver's imminent clarifications and the various revised integration proposals coming, so lots to talk about.

18 yrs at AA? AA wasn't hiring 18 yrs ago.

OK..........LAST post between us (at least from my end). I don't want anyone to consider me unfair.

You're talking about he initial RJ conflict within AA between AA management and APA, yes ?

Well that's another story, but it predates the specific conflicting issues of Letter 3 Supplement W and AE flows longevity concerns which developed subsequent to that. You ARE aware that the Eagle's DID NOT need APA approval to operate RJ's, yes ?

That was simply an accommodation by AA management to avoid intractable warfare with AA pilots and thus the creation of the agreement known as Letter 3 at AE and Supplement W at AA (identical) to provide a benefit and protection to both groups. You see, APA scope then only had a weight restriction, but made no mention of propulsion.

Of course, then AA management fleeced the APA by limiting (supposedly) AE to 67 RJ's (42 E-145's/25 CRJ-700's), but APA failed to realize that modifications to the ERJ airframes could provide an end run to that. In fact, the 37-seat ERJ-135 was already in the works to fly under APA scope and subsequently, the 44-seat ERJ-140 was developed with a fuselage plug to 44-seats. It ALL flew around APA scope making a mockery of Orca's Island and APA allowed themselves to get slipped a rusty musket then becoming simply one of a long list of blunders in their past history, this one turning a supposed 67 RJ's into well over 300. AA pilots were understandably angry and should be, but that wasn't the fault of Eagle pilots. Oh..... we could talk more about Orca's, SuppW. and other various missteps and blunders like multi-million dollar fines for wildcat strikes and integrations statutes formulated due in part to their self-serving tactics, but why go on ?

APA is not invulnerable to making more mistakes and I certainly hope they don't risk adding yet another one to that long list thinking they got the Supp W. pilots concerns and future arguments all figured out, because IMO they don't. In fact, IMO, it's one reason I believe the AAPSIC is actually be overly conservative in their integration models as they are painfully aware of their past and the perception of that past. Ask any TWA pilot. But this is once again pointless between us as YOU my friend obviously aren't part of that past equation.

I think your interests are clearly more immediate in that you hope to capitalize in some way on gleaning Supp W. info due to the West's strong reliance on longevity as a part of your strategy in diluting junior LAA pilots seniority in the integration and part of the 2nd goal of their 3 goal hat trick strategy. Luring the APA (via the AAPSIC) into future trouble from another source wouldn't be a bad cherry to get in the future, especially if you feel they didn't take your side on the Nic issue, eh ?

Again, best of luck to you and farewell.

18 years embroiled with Supplement W (1997). Remember, this is a Westie with a mask and hood I'm dealing with.

No, I was talking about Orcas, where Supplement W was created.
Letter 3 was finalized in Washington, D.C. Thanks for the history lesson though.

I am very aware that Eagle did not need APA's permission to fly RJ's.

The 1991 agreement did not have a weight restriction as you state above. It had a 70 seat limit with a fleet 50 seat average, but no weight restriction.

So as you state, Eagle could already fly jets up to 70 seats.
So it is interesting to read how you state APA was fleeced in 1997 whereby APA added a weight limit, defined commuter jet, defined comprehensive agreement, defined the Company's designator code, codified prohibited transactions, increased the cockpit crewmember floor, limited commuter block hours, included furlough restrictions, limited non-stop flying for commuters, kept the previous 70 seat maximum and 50 seat average (the only previous limitation), limited the total number of commuter jets able to be operated (no previous limit), hub limitations for commuter jets, limited commuter jet stage lengths and limitations on non-owned commuter carriers to name a few.

So prior to 1997 Eagle could fly all the jets they wanted without any restrictions other than they had to be 70 seats or less and a 50 seat fleet average. After 1997 all the above restrictions and more were included in the 1997 agreement.

So exactly how was APA fleeced? In your opening paragraph's you state Eagle did not need APA's approval to operate RJ's and then you criticize APA of being fleeced because they codified numerous restrictions on commuter air carriers that previously did not exist. What?

Prior to 1997 Eagle could have flown a million 50-seat RJ's.
How many could they fly after the 1997 agreement?

You now criticize APA for your predicament. You should be criticizing ALPA Eagle. Maybe even the lead ALPA negotiator. You do know who that was don't you?

You might want to rethink your version of APA history because the battle was a little different then even you recall.

I see a lot of people blasting holes in APA. Granted they have made many mistakes, as most humans and organizations do over time, but
looking at history they have done a pretty good job of fighting for "their"pilots. Just ask a Reno, TWA and Eagle Supplement W pilot how they faired against an APA represented pilot. Remember ALPA represented you not APA. I would suggest focusing your anger at ALPA and move on and hope APA "now" represents you (with your current seniority) equally as well.

I for one am under no delusion APA will be the one who screws up their SLI position. I do think it is likely one group will though.

Please, for the second time, quote the TA ..

What does this have to do with the current integration? There are plenty of folks on the APA list unhappy with where they are. Most though didn't START with APA representation. So yes, folks junior on the APA list are going to be junior on the combined list... Is this a shock or an outrage?

Are folks hoping that the arbs will reorder the lists individually to fix past "wrongs"? I don't see that.

All this stuff with folks wearing "masks" and "capes"... Uh? Junior AA folks are going to be junior for a while. I think the mid-tier folks especially west might get a nice rocket ride as retirements hit given their ages.

Depending on age some of the junior AA guys may move up, others flew a long time at a regional and may time out before they can get anywhere... but will have good job security on the backs of third listers and others.

What's the passion about the history of APA about?

I mentioned that right off the bat. Orca's was the meeting place to ferret out the RJ issue (those meetings occurred after the formation of a PEB under Harris after the failed contract vote). Of course, I wasn't there and wouldn't claim to know all the internal details, but although the basic idea's palatable to APA were agreed to with AMR there, the finalization of that LOA/Supplement didn't occur until Eagle ALPA was brought in to agree (where agreement and even some slight modifications occurred) and then a briefing for the Eagle domicile reps subsequently occurred at the School House that even included Cecil Ewell, among others. Anyhow, my launch into the RJ speech (along with the statement of our final interaction) was really not about that, it was about playing your game to see a little more about you in a critical area of past exposure and I'm sorry I had to turn the tables on you just a little, but what's good for the goose............

...is good for the gander as subterfuge can run both directions. I dangled that related topic and put out that explanation with some inaccurate information to see just what type of response would occur. I was betting it would be the response of NOT "just another American Airlines Pilot" (who just wants to "understand" ) , but someone MUCH, MUCH more then that who understands FAR more then he is feigning. I was correct. Listening to your details, it's more then clear you are far more deeply involved with this mess (merger/SLI) then just another line pilot and far more informed (although not necessarily completely accurate in all areas IMO) about past Eagle/APA issues, which is really the prime component of the question I sought an answer to. I got no joy in doing that, but since I was dealing with someone of like kind, I felt it was appropriate. Now we both have led each other down a primrose path and can understand that feeling a little better. I hope you don't take it personally.

That was my sole point of that post and it served its purpose as a confirmation for me, so now it IS time to move on (no more subterfuge from me). Again, best of luck in the integration M and give 'em he**.

I'd love to make a more detailed response to this part, but I prefer you believe what you believe as opposed to know what I know.

Gee............I wonder which that one is.

It's about nothing necessary to discuss here and you shouldn't concern yourself with this peripheral issue. I could discuss the specific complexities further, but that would be inappropriate here as I've stated repeatedly. You really don't know (in most cases) who you are talking to here or what their motives are as my interaction with Upsddown has now revealed. Some imply and represent they or their interests are X when in fact, they are no such thing.

I think we should concentrate on discussion of Silver's upcoming ruling and of course, the imminent proposals in relation to EACH OTHER, not internal pre-merger or representational issues regarding LAA or AAPSIC that are of concern to others.

Eaglefly,

Do you normally walk around looking over your shoulder for the boogie-man?

What are you talking about? One minute you claim I lack an understanding of the issues. The next I'm a West plant. And now I suddenly know much, much more than I lead on. Are you going to just keep throwing darts until you finally hit something? BTW, keep throwing because I am in no way involved in this SLI any more than you are.

Do you actually think your the only pilot out of 15,000 that makes an effort to stay educated about their career? I have made an effort to remain educated on issues that may effect me or that effect our airline. Sorry you think that makes me something more in your eyes than I am - a pilot trying to stay abreast of his career.

This all seems a little juvenile to me of you playing some "feign game". To what end? You really don't have ANY information that those who need to know don't already know so there is NOTHING you could post that could add any value beyond what is already known.

Why don't you put up the tin foil hat and just use your knowledge to educate, to clarify and to change perceptions about issues that you can clearly and accurately propose and defend? Your time spent on this forum would be much more beneficial for all, particularly yours, and your credibility would obviously increase from what I sense is viewed now.