SO - Where's the SLI?
07-19-2016 | 04:20 PM
#571
Line Holder
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 1,488
Likes: 0
From: tri current
I would be quick to agree if there were two like groups merging into one. The dynamic was such that the two sides were so very lopsided that DOH only benefited the east to an extreme degree. It is for that reason that DOH was not used. To do so would be to essentially staple 90% of one carrier whereby destroying career expectations of that same 90%.
Unity at American I will agree with you it's done. There is too much damage done to too many people all of whom now will pull in different directions. Glad I will miss it all.
WD
Unity at American I will agree with you it's done. There is too much damage done to too many people all of whom now will pull in different directions. Glad I will miss it all.
WD
Revisionist history again WD. The original East proposal was length of service, not DOH. It also included a 7 year fence to protect AWA pilots in PHX and a clause that would place any future returning East pilots as the first to be furloughed should furloughs happen again.
Imagine that, the East proposal actually thought about the long term implications of a length of service proposal because of the uneven nature of the list. The AWA proposal did not!!, it wanted to severely punish the East pilots for being furloughed, but in no way, shape, or form make them whole for the incredibly higher attrition rate on the East side going forward. That is the evil of the Nic award and the West pilot's failure to see how it would devastate careers and result in the actions that have occurred to date have harmed everybody in the industry.
Typhoonpilot
07-19-2016 | 04:44 PM
#572
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
Likes: 0
Revisionist history again WD. The original East proposal was length of service, not DOH. It also included a 7 year fence to protect AWA pilots in PHX and a clause that would place any future returning East pilots as the first to be furloughed should furloughs happen again.
Imagine that, the East proposal actually thought about the long term implications of a length of service proposal because of the uneven nature of the list. The AWA proposal did not!!, it wanted to severely punish the East pilots for being furloughed, but in no way, shape, or form make them whole for the incredibly higher attrition rate on the East side going forward. That is the evil of the Nic award and the West pilot's failure to see how it would devastate careers and result in the actions that have occurred to date have harmed everybody in the industry.
Typhoonpilot
Imagine that, the East proposal actually thought about the long term implications of a length of service proposal because of the uneven nature of the list. The AWA proposal did not!!, it wanted to severely punish the East pilots for being furloughed, but in no way, shape, or form make them whole for the incredibly higher attrition rate on the East side going forward. That is the evil of the Nic award and the West pilot's failure to see how it would devastate careers and result in the actions that have occurred to date have harmed everybody in the industry.
Typhoonpilot
This trip down memory lane though fun has run its course. According to Route66 who is now absent you have prevailed in all that you desired therefore all of this back and forth is completely unnecessary.
WD
07-19-2016 | 05:39 PM
#573
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 547
Likes: 0
recently read this analysis:
If Lorenzo decided to merge CAL and EAL after he transferred the prize assets to CAL and furloughed most of the list - what would we the basis of the merger? what was left or the skeleton that was eastern? or take a snapshot of what the carrier was before the rape.
If you can sort this out then you might have a handle on what faces arbiters.
Goes to the question of using the 2013 snapshot vs historical
If Lorenzo decided to merge CAL and EAL after he transferred the prize assets to CAL and furloughed most of the list - what would we the basis of the merger? what was left or the skeleton that was eastern? or take a snapshot of what the carrier was before the rape.
If you can sort this out then you might have a handle on what faces arbiters.
Goes to the question of using the 2013 snapshot vs historical
07-19-2016 | 05:47 PM
#574
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Nov 2011
Posts: 5,299
Likes: 0
From: A320 Capt
recently read this analysis:
If Lorenzo decided to merge CAL and EAL after he transferred the prize assets to CAL and furloughed most of the list - what would we the basis of the merger? what was left or the skeleton that was eastern? or take a snapshot of what the carrier was before the rape.
If you can sort this out then you might have a handle on what faces arbiters.
Goes to the question of using the 2013 snapshot vs historical
If Lorenzo decided to merge CAL and EAL after he transferred the prize assets to CAL and furloughed most of the list - what would we the basis of the merger? what was left or the skeleton that was eastern? or take a snapshot of what the carrier was before the rape.
If you can sort this out then you might have a handle on what faces arbiters.
Goes to the question of using the 2013 snapshot vs historical
Did you know that Nicolau used the 2007 fleets for his SLI, not the ones from 2005? The year of the merger.
Are you trying to say one group was raped and pillaged?
07-19-2016 | 05:52 PM
#575
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Problem is, USAPA, with three former AWA pilots at the table with input and voting rights, bargained for the MOU. And they didn't vote against it! They were all in! It included equal pay and a special paragraph that the COMPANY insisted on that mandated a fair and equitable integration consistent with federal law. Parker is on record everywhere saying that the seniority battle was over, because it was going to be handled by McCaskill-Bond. And so the East eventually made a very reasonable proposal consistent with the new, agreed upon process.
It isn't everything we desired, but it was reasonable in light of the agreements made in an entirely new landscape. If that's just too much for AA/AWA pilots to handle, if the only thing that satisfies them is seeing 1200 US Airways pilots stapled for furlough fodder, then it certainly speaks volumes about them as people. Whatever occurred in the past, the NIC wasn't the status quo and we all agreed to move on. Now is the time to accept whatever outcome has been produced. I know I'm certainly prepared to do so.
Saul
07-19-2016 | 06:45 PM
#576
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
Likes: 0
Even if what everyone seems to be saying about the outcome is correct (and that's a big "if") it doesn't equal "all that you desired" for most East pilots. We have our share of guys who still want pure DOH (which was NEVER a USAPA proposal, as you all know but regularly fail to acknowledge) and some that want their DOH from previous mergers! The new committee's proposal, which was rushed, was pretty effing mild mannered! It conceded 3-4 years to AWA and about 2 years to AA for a lot of our pilots, and it was based on data that reflected sweat equity. And yet, from several sources, it's going to cause a HUGE uproar from AA and AWA pilots, who apparently were counting on the East pilots being screwed into oblivion and turned into the biggest group of career FO's in commercial aviation. That's the only thing that would have made AWA and AA pilots happy.
Problem is, USAPA, with three former AWA pilots at the table with input and voting rights, bargained for the MOU. And they didn't vote against it! They were all in! It included equal pay and a special paragraph that the COMPANY insisted on that mandated a fair and equitable integration consistent with federal law. Parker is on record everywhere saying that the seniority battle was over, because it was going to be handled by McCaskill-Bond. And so the East eventually made a very reasonable proposal consistent with the new, agreed upon process.
It isn't everything we desired, but it was reasonable in light of the agreements made in an entirely new landscape. If that's just too much for AA/AWA pilots to handle, if the only thing that satisfies them is seeing 1200 US Airways pilots stapled for furlough fodder, then it certainly speaks volumes about them as people. Whatever occurred in the past, the NIC wasn't the status quo and we all agreed to move on. Now is the time to accept whatever outcome has been produced. I know I'm certainly prepared to do so.
Saul
Problem is, USAPA, with three former AWA pilots at the table with input and voting rights, bargained for the MOU. And they didn't vote against it! They were all in! It included equal pay and a special paragraph that the COMPANY insisted on that mandated a fair and equitable integration consistent with federal law. Parker is on record everywhere saying that the seniority battle was over, because it was going to be handled by McCaskill-Bond. And so the East eventually made a very reasonable proposal consistent with the new, agreed upon process.
It isn't everything we desired, but it was reasonable in light of the agreements made in an entirely new landscape. If that's just too much for AA/AWA pilots to handle, if the only thing that satisfies them is seeing 1200 US Airways pilots stapled for furlough fodder, then it certainly speaks volumes about them as people. Whatever occurred in the past, the NIC wasn't the status quo and we all agreed to move on. Now is the time to accept whatever outcome has been produced. I know I'm certainly prepared to do so.
Saul
I can not speak as to what the AA pilots may or may not have wanted. I can however speak as to what the AWA pilots wanted and it is not at all as you described. One has to take into account the theatrics of such comments like stapled and furlough fodder. No the AWA pilots wanted exactly what they agreed to which was final and binding arbitration. If that produced furlough fodder it was based upon the fact that the east entered into the process with almost 50% of its group on furlough, a fact that you seem to not care to acknowledge.
The MOU that you speak of is that the one where the usapa lawyer states that it is neutral to the west pilots but tells the east pilots that we have given away the farm, that mou? The very one that got tossed out in court? It is really neither here nor there and I fully expect this issue to be right back in front of a judge complete with injunction barring the use of the list. The east was given very specific instructions by the courts advocate or leave they did not do that and somehow pilots feel that by changing their names it alleviates them of that instruction. I will say this again, pandora's box came with a lid for a very specific reason and the instructions to never open it. The east decided to ignore that instruction what comes next is more heartache.
WD
07-19-2016 | 07:06 PM
#577
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Feb 2014
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Saul,
I can not speak as to what the AA pilots may or may not have wanted. I can however speak as to what the AWA pilots wanted and it is not at all as you described. One has to take into account the theatrics of such comments like stapled and furlough fodder. No the AWA pilots wanted exactly what they agreed to which was final and binding arbitration. If that produced furlough fodder it was based upon the fact that the east entered into the process with almost 50% of its group on furlough, a fact that you seem to not care to acknowledge.
The MOU that you speak of is that the one where the usapa lawyer states that it is neutral to the west pilots but tells the east pilots that we have given away the farm, that mou? The very one that got tossed out in court? It is really neither here nor there and I fully expect this issue to be right back in front of a judge complete with injunction barring the use of the list. The east was given very specific instructions by the courts advocate or leave they did not do that and somehow pilots feel that by changing their names it alleviates them of that instruction. I will say this again, pandora's box came with a lid for a very specific reason and the instructions to never open it. The east decided to ignore that instruction what comes next is more heartache.
WD
I can not speak as to what the AA pilots may or may not have wanted. I can however speak as to what the AWA pilots wanted and it is not at all as you described. One has to take into account the theatrics of such comments like stapled and furlough fodder. No the AWA pilots wanted exactly what they agreed to which was final and binding arbitration. If that produced furlough fodder it was based upon the fact that the east entered into the process with almost 50% of its group on furlough, a fact that you seem to not care to acknowledge.
The MOU that you speak of is that the one where the usapa lawyer states that it is neutral to the west pilots but tells the east pilots that we have given away the farm, that mou? The very one that got tossed out in court? It is really neither here nor there and I fully expect this issue to be right back in front of a judge complete with injunction barring the use of the list. The east was given very specific instructions by the courts advocate or leave they did not do that and somehow pilots feel that by changing their names it alleviates them of that instruction. I will say this again, pandora's box came with a lid for a very specific reason and the instructions to never open it. The east decided to ignore that instruction what comes next is more heartache.
WD
10h was voted in by west pilots by 98 percent yea.
Labor laws(10H) voted in and MB legislative laws, voted in by congress, trumps judicial interference.
West pilots blew it because of their greed.
07-19-2016 | 07:13 PM
#578
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
Likes: 0
07-19-2016 | 07:22 PM
#579
Line Holder
Joined: Jul 2016
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Saul,
I can not speak as to what the AA pilots may or may not have wanted. I can however speak as to what the AWA pilots wanted and it is not at all as you described. One has to take into account the theatrics of such comments like stapled and furlough fodder. No the AWA pilots wanted exactly what they agreed to which was final and binding arbitration. If that produced furlough fodder it was based upon the fact that the east entered into the process with almost 50% of its group on furlough, a fact that you seem to not care to acknowledge.
The MOU that you speak of is that the one where the usapa lawyer states that it is neutral to the west pilots but tells the east pilots that we have given away the farm, that mou? The very one that got tossed out in court? It is really neither here nor there and I fully expect this issue to be right back in front of a judge complete with injunction barring the use of the list. The east was given very specific instructions by the courts advocate or leave they did not do that and somehow pilots feel that by changing their names it alleviates them of that instruction. I will say this again, pandora's box came with a lid for a very specific reason and the instructions to never open it. The east decided to ignore that instruction what comes next is more heartache.
WD
I can not speak as to what the AA pilots may or may not have wanted. I can however speak as to what the AWA pilots wanted and it is not at all as you described. One has to take into account the theatrics of such comments like stapled and furlough fodder. No the AWA pilots wanted exactly what they agreed to which was final and binding arbitration. If that produced furlough fodder it was based upon the fact that the east entered into the process with almost 50% of its group on furlough, a fact that you seem to not care to acknowledge.
The MOU that you speak of is that the one where the usapa lawyer states that it is neutral to the west pilots but tells the east pilots that we have given away the farm, that mou? The very one that got tossed out in court? It is really neither here nor there and I fully expect this issue to be right back in front of a judge complete with injunction barring the use of the list. The east was given very specific instructions by the courts advocate or leave they did not do that and somehow pilots feel that by changing their names it alleviates them of that instruction. I will say this again, pandora's box came with a lid for a very specific reason and the instructions to never open it. The east decided to ignore that instruction what comes next is more heartache.
WD
Let me get this straight: You "fully expect this issue to be right back in front of a judge complete with injunction barring the use of the list."
So, clearly someone has leaked the details to you, correct?
Thanks for confirming the outcome. I know you really really really want to believe that the EPSIC is just USAPA in disguise, but it isn't. You'll figure this out if granted discovery (which will make Marty SO FREEKIN HAPPY. Can you say "Ferrari?") Also, are you saying the MOU is no longer valid? The Protocol Agreement, too? 10H? None of it? It's funny, I've been watching you delude yourself for many years (on different websites,) but this might be a new pinnacle for you.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
