Airline Pilot Forums

Airline Pilot Forums was designed to be a community where working airline pilots can share ideas and information about the aviation field. In the forum you will find information about major and regional airline carriers, career training, interview and job seeker help, finance, and living the airline pilot lifestyle.




View Full Version : AA Pilots Unite Or Fold Forever


ATRCA
01-04-2015, 05:08 AM
Today could, and should be the turning point in what was one of the greatest professions in American history. Today is our chance to collectively tell the elitists that they are done taking, and we are done giving. AA pilots work for the largest and most profitable airline in the world. The executives who have stolen our profession are compensated beyond that of any of their peers. The 15,000 professionals who truly run this operation are about to vote on, and if passed, own the most concessionary contract amongst all of the legacy carriers.

Highest grossing airline.
Highest paid management.
Worst contract in the industry.

To quote my father-in-law. "You pilots have more influence than anyone could possibly imagine. If you would just unite and stop being so easily bribed with money and stop selling the souls of your youth for cash, you could all get what you deserve for your services. I mean damn man airplanes don't fly themselves! What the hell is wrong with you guys?"


kingairip
01-04-2015, 05:24 AM
Apparently, your father-in-law was unfamiliar with the National Railway Labor Act.

ATRCA
01-04-2015, 05:27 AM
Apparently, your father-in-law was unfamiliar with the National Railway Labor Act.

Well there's the first defeatist. Who's next?


navigatro
01-04-2015, 05:38 AM
Well there's the first defeatist. Who's next?

Those that are smart enough to comprehend what will happen if this is turned down.

Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 05:54 AM
Today could, and should be the turning point in what was one of the greatest professions in American history. Today is our chance to collectively tell the elitists that they are done taking, and we are done giving. AA pilots work for the largest and most profitable airline in the world. The executives who have stolen our profession are compensated beyond that of any of their peers. The 15,000 professionals who truly run this operation are about to vote on, and if passed, own the most concessionary contract amongst all of the legacy carriers.

Highest grossing airline.
Highest paid management.
Worst contract in the industry.

To quote my father-in-law. "You pilots have more influence than anyone could possibly imagine. If you would just unite and stop being so easily bribed with money and stop selling the souls of your youth for cash, you could all get what you deserve for your services. I mean damn man airplanes don't fly themselves! What the hell is wrong with you guys?"

Well, the CEO himself expects pilots to do their jobs and if they did, it would carry a lot more leverage. The best statement to make from a standpoint of unity and the resistance to this tyranny is a rejection of this ridiculousness and arbitration that preserves as much of the Green Book as possible while still getting near Delta pay in 1 year.

THEN, at some point, Parker would almost certainly have to come back to the table with a different attitude. This TA will be the long-term contract here while we all watch the others pass us by in the express lane and disappear out of sight.

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 05:55 AM
Well there's the first defeatist. Who's next?

He's been one from the start. Keep moving to those that are salvageable. :rolleyes:

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 05:56 AM
Those that are smart enough to comprehend what will happen if this is turned down.

Don't cut off your nose to spite your face.

What exactly will happen ?

kingairip
01-04-2015, 06:25 AM
Well there's the first defeatist. Who's next?

Whatever, MF. The proof is in the pudding. Guys like you, your father-in-law, eaglefly and Purple Turtle ran USAPA for years. We saw the results. Didn't work out so well. Wages at bankruptcy rates and the laughing stock of the industry resulted. No thanks.

ghilis101
01-04-2015, 06:30 AM
What exactly will happen ?

with a NO vote, the company realizes that the BOD was representing the interests of its 15,000 pilots that came together and voted no, and then comes back to the table with a better offer since their attempt to circumvent the union didn't work.

don't vote yes just because youre afraid of arbitration. that's the last reason to vote yes. These are not desperate times.

flyinawa
01-04-2015, 06:31 AM
Apparently, your father-in-law was unfamiliar with the National Railway Labor Act.

Almost introduced coffee to my nasal passages....

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 06:32 AM
Whatever, MF. The proof is in the pudding. Guys like you, your father-in-law, eaglefly and Purple Turtle ran USAPA for years. We saw the results. Didn't work out so well. Wages at bankruptcy rates and the laughing stock of the industry resulted. No thanks.

.....so you think agreeing to this with the certainty of living it for the next decade while the other carriers all pull ahead will provide a DIFFERENT result then in the past ?

Seems to me, it's YOU that plans on repeating the past, but, perhaps inadvertently. If as little as possible of the Green Book is altered and we still get near Delta pay in now LESS than a year, that seems to me the best chance of correcting this situation much sooner and with a much better long-term result. I do realize how shiny and warm 30 pieces of Silver are though, for that has swayed what were once good minds to disaster all the way back to biblical times.

It didn't work out too well in the long-run for Judas either. ;)

texaspilot76
01-04-2015, 06:47 AM
I can't believe how all you hard liners just don't get it. If we turn this down, we will retain the status quo crappy MOU as our contract. We will not get min calendar day in arbitration, we wont get anything else either. Because of this crappy MTA, we are not in a position to negotiate.

Accepting this agreement will give us industry leading pay with only minor adjustments given to the company. Or you can vote it down and not get squat.

Yes, min calendar day would be nice. But we won't get it no matter what. Might as well take the money.

As far as the other stuff you are all are griping about, it's all chicken feed. It's not a big deal.

Combined Int/ Dom: Who cares? Not a big deal. We've had that at US for years. It will hardly affect the widebodies. It will only affect narrow bodies that fly to the islands and Mexico.

HBT: we need this changed so it will open up the Asian market which we desperately need

Nighttime landing currency: Big freaking deal. Oh no, you might lose your beauty sleep one day every 3 months. And only a handful of pilots at that.

Callout language: The proposed language is the same as Delta. Besides, if you're on short call, you need to be in base. Period.

ATRCA
01-04-2015, 07:14 AM
Obviously the intent of this thread was not apparent. This TA should not even make it to a vote. Hell it shouldn't even make it to the end of the week. Effective today we should be doing our job, and only our job. Five days of the pilots not picking up anyone else's slack would rewrite this TA to include every single bullet item that the APA asked for.

That is not a job action it's simply each of us deciding that we will not be "going for great"

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 07:20 AM
I can't believe how all you hard liners just don't get it. If we turn this down, we will retain the status quo crappy MOU as our contract. We will not get min calendar day in arbitration, we wont get anything else either. Because of this crappy MTA, we are not in a position to negotiate.

Ahhh, Now I can see how you've convinced yourself that short-term gain is worth long-term agony.....you don't believe there will be any long-term agony. What should occur in arbitration is preserving the present AA Green Book provisions which are just fine. If Parker wants changes in the future, he can bargain PROPERLY for them.


Accepting this agreement will give us industry leading pay with only minor adjustments given to the company. Or you can vote it down and not get squat.

We'll get pay in LESS then 1 year better then United and close to Delta with arbitration AND the strong potential for PROPER bargaining where we have some leverage as well, MUCH sooner then 10 years.

Yes, min calendar day would be nice. But we won't get it no matter what. Might as well take the money.

Why are you myopically focusing on this one issue (don't answer that........we know. ;)). There are MANY issues that will be deader then dog**** for a decade if we accept this deal.

As far as the other stuff you are all are griping about, it's all chicken feed. It's not a big deal.

"All" the "other" stuff INCLUDES being stuffed in a closet for a decade with no options for a little more pay a year earlier.

Why do you think Parker is giving us the Bums rush ?

Combined Int/ Dom: Who cares? Not a big deal. We've had that at US for years. It will hardly affect the widebodies. It will only affect narrow bodies that fly to the islands and Mexico.

HBT: we need this changed so it will open up the Asian market which we desperately need

Nighttime landing currency: Big freaking deal. Oh no, you might lose your beauty sleep one day every 3 months. And only a handful of pilots at that.

Callout language: The proposed language is the same as Delta. Besides, if you're on short call, you need to be in base. Period.

You're concentrating on the trees Jerry wants you to concentrate on (and believing as gospel everything proven liars say). What you should be concerned about is what the negotiating forest will look like in a decade when we get our next chance to negotiate and you've got 17 years left while most of the rest of us got far less. We may flip roles then and guess what, that's exactly what Doug expects. Management can always count on one side of a pilot group to screw the other. ;)

Besides, all the $$$ you're PRESENTLY calculating you'll be ahead of Delta and United will turn into a deep deficit within a few years and fall dramatically backwards from there. Why not wait 11.5 months and get most of that and keep virtually all of what we have now and let things develop to the point Parker decides he needs to treat us the way he promised to and failed ?

I realize you too are beyond hope, but I'm hoping those who still have an open mind will consider the long-term disasterous ramifications of succumbing to union-buster Glass's strategy of divide and conquer.

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 07:25 AM
Obviously the intent of this thread was not apparent. This TA should not even make it to a vote. Hell it shouldn't even make it to the end of the week. Effective today we should be doing our job, and only our job. Five days of the pilots not picking up anyone else's slack would rewrite this TA to include every single bullet item that the APA asked for.

That is not a job action it's simply each of us deciding that we will not be "going for great"

The BOD even punted to the pilots without full International/Domestic contractual language ! Parker once again totally disregarded our concerns and made a joke out of the BOD.

No way I will EVER reward this guy for anything !

I'm perfectly content to patiently wait 11.5 months for my significant raise and circle the wagons around my present CBA provisions in arbitration. Sadly, so many have gone completely koo-koo for Cocoa Puffs and even completely Stockholm for Parker and Glass.

The younger you are at AA, the worse this deal is for you, no question about it.

nimslow
01-04-2015, 07:25 AM
Whatever, MF. The proof is in the pudding. Guys like you, your father-in-law, eaglefly and Purple Turtle ran USAPA for years. We saw the results. Didn't work out so well. Wages at bankruptcy rates and the laughing stock of the industry resulted. No thanks.


Enjoy your soon to be once again, sub standard pay, while we continue to be the laughing stock of the industry.

kingairip
01-04-2015, 07:51 AM
Enjoy your soon to be once again, sub standard pay, while we continue to be the laughing stock of the industry.

And you'd rather have even worse sub-standard pay while we're the laughing stock of the industry.

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 08:00 AM
And you'd rather have even worse sub-standard pay while we're the laughing stock of the industry.

Laughing Stock for other inmates seeing you standing your ground with the expectation of another day to fight and still getting paid better then United Pilots and almost as much as Delta ? I'll accept being that kind of laughing stock. :)

At least with that kind, there's at least a possible parole date, wheras WITH this TA it's a decade till the CHANCE at parole.....and that's just a HEARING for parole, not guaranteed release. Meanwhile, every day for that decade everyone in the cellblock knows you're willing and available to be passed around for a pack of menthols. :eek:

nimslow
01-04-2015, 08:04 AM
And you'd rather have even worse sub-standard pay while we're the laughing stock of the industry.

I'll gladly wait 11 months for a raise, while walking around knowing I didn't gleefully climb into the rape van, at the promise of some free candy.

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 08:08 AM
I'll gladly wait 11 months for a raise, while walking around knowing I didn't gleefully climb into the rape van, at the promise of some free candy.

We can only hope we are the majority. There are plenty of pilots at the New AA that have itchy bungholes and a terrible sweet tooth. :cool:

Diesel1030
01-04-2015, 08:20 AM
We can only hope we are the majority. There are plenty of pilots at the New AA that have itchy bungholes and a terrible sweet tooth. :cool:

One positive is all the guys I have flown with recently are NO voters. I do hope there are more out there. Voting in a concessionary contract is ridiculous right now.

kingairip
01-04-2015, 08:20 AM
I'll gladly wait 11 months for a raise, while walking around knowing I didn't gleefully climb into the rape van, at the promise of some free candy.

Well...don't just stand around *****ing about things on the internet like a pathetic loser. Be a man. When things weren't going the way I wanted around here, I went off and got class dates at Delta, JetBlue and an interview offer from United. Then, I turned them down at a time and place of my choosing...on my terms. You can bet...if things look bleak around here, I'll bail to FedEx..they're about to ramp up hiring. Man up! Don't get put in a rape van...whether you climb in or are forced in.

Do people really need to be told this? Pathetic...

DCA A321 FO
01-04-2015, 08:23 AM
i'll gladly wait 11 months for a raise, while walking around knowing i didn't gleefully climb into the rape van, at the promise of some free candy.


^^^^^^^^^^^ what he said

DCA A321 FO
01-04-2015, 08:28 AM
Well...don't just stand around *****ing about things on the internet like a pathetic loser. Be a man. When things weren't going the way I wanted around here, I went off and got class dates at Delta, JetBlue and an interview offer from United. Then, I turned them down at a time and place of my choosing...on my terms. You can bet...if things look bleak around here, I'll bail to FedEx..they're about to ramp up hiring. Man up! Don't get put in a rape van...whether you climb in or are forced in.

Do people really need to be told this? Pathetic...

No one is saying they want to leave, for various reasons like base locations, retirements and such we are going to stay, we just don't want to be dougis's *****

Aren't you gods gift to commercial aviation

kingairip
01-04-2015, 08:30 AM
Aren't you gods gift to commercial aviation

No. I'm just not a pathetic whiner. I chose my own fate.

contrails
01-04-2015, 08:35 AM
No. I'm just not a pathetic whiner. I chose my own fate.

Don't you think though, that in 2015, with record profits, and the fact that you are still in an airline where you have a seniority number and would start again at the bottom at another airline, that it would behoove you to utilize the system that is in place to possibly reject a deal that is lacking several key work rules and other things?



Saying "go work somewhere else" was applicable back in the industrial revolution when people would fall into vats of oil and drown or get chopped up in some machine. We've evolved a bit since then, hence the whole concept of a union.

You're a highly trained professional. You don't have to go work somewhere else. You work for a good company. They're trying to call your bluff and they'll laugh all the way to the bank if you vote yes to something that doesn't "pass the sniff test." The last thing the CEO wants is to drag this out in front of the BOD. It's not going to take years if it's voted down. Wake up.

ghilis101
01-04-2015, 08:41 AM
No. I'm just not a pathetic whiner. I chose my own fate.

no, you have not chosen your fate yet. This vote determines your fate, for the next several years. You determine your company culture right here. You will either be empowered and unified, or manipulated and weak . I have my fingers crossed for a no vote. It means too much. Show them youre serious about a real contract offer. Vote no and you'll get the respect you deserve. Standing up to a bully might mean youll get punched in the face if youre 1 on 1. But you have 15,000.

DCA A321 FO
01-04-2015, 08:43 AM
No. I'm just not a pathetic whiner. I chose my own fate.


Who is whining?

kingairip
01-04-2015, 08:47 AM
Don't you think though, that in 2015, with record profits, and the fact that you are still in an airline where you have a seniority number and would start again at the bottom at another airline, that it would behoove you to utilize the system that is in place to possibly reject a deal that is lacking several key work rules and other things?


If I thought that was the path to best value, I would vote to reject this deal. Problem is...a bunch of morons created and voted in a contract through 2019 that sets our cost level in stone. The vote no crowd crowing now should have voted no to that contract. As it is, a no vote now is just a hope and a dream that management will give more. Hoping and dreaming isn't a strategy of successful people.

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 08:53 AM
Well...don't just stand around *****ing about things on the internet like a pathetic loser. Be a man. When things weren't going the way I wanted around here, I went off and got class dates at Delta, JetBlue and an interview offer from United. Then, I turned them down at a time and place of my choosing...on my terms. You can bet...if things look bleak around here, I'll bail to FedEx..they're about to ramp up hiring. Man up! Don't get put in a rape van...whether you climb in or are forced in.

Do people really need to be told this? Pathetic...

Wow !!!

You must be gods gift to the airline industry with all these carriers tripping each other to get you on the payroll. :rolleyes:

How did you end up in the middle of this mess at what may be the most financially and emotionally disappointing carrier of all the other players ?

You really must have screwed up as even Jet Blue can beat some of our rates and QWL provisions. I'd advise you to immediately phone FedEx as I'm sure their management will dispatch a GV to pick you up, but with your concessionary philosophy, I couldn't do that to their pilot group.

kingairip
01-04-2015, 08:54 AM
no, you have not chosen your fate yet. This vote determines your fate, for the next several years.

This vote doesn't control my fate. It matters very little to me one way or the other. Whatever is decided, I promise you I won't be on this board complaining about it. I'll leave that to eaglefly and his ilk.

ghilis101
01-04-2015, 08:55 AM
If I thought that was the path to best value, I would vote to reject this deal. Problem is...a bunch of morons created and voted in a contract through 2019 that sets our cost level in stone. The vote no crowd crowing now should have voted no to that contract. As it is, a no vote now is just a hope and a dream that management will give more. Hoping and dreaming isn't a strategy of successful people.

that's taken completely out of context. remember:

1- you were in bankruptcy
2- you trusted Parker in good faith in that MOU under a promise that this day would come and you'd be offered a fair JCBA. (You weren't offered a fair JCBA, just to be clear)

Now youre financially very profitable and growing. You also now know Parker's true colors. You don't need to learn any more lessons. You know now that its time to put an end to the bleeding. Vote no.

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 08:59 AM
If I thought that was the path to best value, I would vote to reject this deal. Problem is...a bunch of morons created and voted in a contract through 2019 that sets our cost level in stone. The vote no crowd crowing now should have voted no to that contract. As it is, a no vote now is just a hope and a dream that management will give more. Hoping and dreaming isn't a strategy of successful people.

The same majority who screwed that pooch are the same ones looking to bang this dog too. Some of us are trying to zip up their pants for them, but when a whole group of pilots arrive waving their schlongs all over the place looking for the same furry receptacle, it makes our efforts that much more difficult. The "hoping and dreaming" is done by those who think this bad deal will be palatable for the long-term.

Tuck it back in, zip it up and just say "no".

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 09:12 AM
This vote doesn't control my fate. It matters very little to me one way or the other. Whatever is decided, I promise you I won't be on this board complaining about it. I'll leave that to eaglefly and his ilk.

If it passes, there will be nothing to complain about. The majority will have decided our lfate and thus we must all live with it for many, many years. I suspect the complaining will be from those who want a do-over in a few years once they fully digest the long-term consequences of cutting their balls off like this. Of course, should it fail, you can also be sure there will be those who wanted the quick cash and will attempt to tip over the apple cart in the hope Doug and Jerry can pick up a few apples and use them as effective weapons against the group again.

EMBFlyer
01-04-2015, 09:14 AM
The same majority who screwed that pooch are the same ones looking to bang this dog too. Some of us are trying to zip up their pants for them, but when a whole group of pilots arrive waving their schlongs all over the place looking for the same furry receptacle, it makes our efforts that much more difficult.

Tuck it back in, zip it up and just say "no".

You paint such a beautiful picture with the English language! :D

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 09:27 AM
You paint such a beautiful picture with the English language! :D

I think from a message effectiveness standpoint, you have to find new and creative ways to communicate to the human mind. If anything here, I'd hate to be called "boring". ;)

nwa757
01-04-2015, 10:11 AM
This agreement would set AA pilots up to trail Delta 2016-2020 as they get their new contract as well as United in 2017.

It's a shame that people don't have more self respect and respect for their profession. About to lock a bankruptcy contract in for another 5 years for pay that is barely on parity with the rest of the industry.

fr8tmastr
01-04-2015, 10:29 AM
Whatever, MF. The proof is in the pudding. Guys like you, your father-in-law, eaglefly and Purple Turtle ran USAPA for years. We saw the results. Didn't work out so well. Wages at bankruptcy rates and the laughing stock of the industry resulted. No thanks.
Frickin Brilliant, do you really have that little of a clue, or are you just too busy hating USAPA to see anything?
Judging by the lack of backbone and general impotence of this pilot group I'm going to go with you have no clue.

Hurry out and vote YES to the latest concession plan, you sure deserve it!!!! Just think you will be the highest paid pilot all the way through December of 2015 when Delta gets their profit sharing. Not to mention their vastly superior working conditions.
Enjoy your shiny nickel, it will be a big deal for several months

kingairip
01-04-2015, 10:37 AM
Frickin Brilliant, do you really have that little of a clue, or are you just too busy hating USAPA to see anything?
Judging by the lack of backbone and general impotence of this pilot group I'm going to go with you have no clue.

Hurry out and vote YES to the latest concession plan, you sure deserve it!!!! Just think you will be the highest paid pilot all the way through December of 2015 when Delta gets their profit sharing. Not to mention their vastly superior working conditions.
Enjoy your shiny nickel, it will be a big deal for several months

Delta gets their profit sharing in February, dumb a$$.

fr8tmastr
01-04-2015, 10:37 AM
No. I'm just not a pathetic whiner. I chose my own fate.
Yea, by agreeing to whatever you are told by management, you sure are a tough guy.

fr8tmastr
01-04-2015, 10:45 AM
Delta gets their profit sharng in February, dumb a$$.
No **** sherlock that is why until the end of the year when the total pay for the year is added you will make more, hourly vs total pay.
But hey I expect nothing more from a management do boy like yourself than to argue semantics all the while ignoring the real issue.
I think there is a exec that needs their shoes shined, better get yourself over there right away.

kingairip
01-04-2015, 10:56 AM
No **** sherlock that is why until the end of the year when the total pay for the year is added you will make more, hourly vs total pay.
But hey I expect nothing more from a management do boy like yourself than to argue semantics all the while ignoring the real issue.
I think there is a exec that needs their shoes shined, better get yourself over there right away.

Yeah...you sound like a real winner. Why don't you go to Delta then and stop your ****ing and moaning? Oh wait...you're a loser and Delta won't hire you. Got it. Typical.

Enjoy your miserable life, loser!!

eaglefly
01-04-2015, 01:12 PM
Yeah...you sound like a real winner. Why don't you go to Delta then and stop your ****ing and moaning? Oh wait...you're a loser and Delta won't hire you. Got it. Typical.

Enjoy your miserable life, loser!!

I would assume by that point you'd be at FedEx, yes ?

Why would you stay at AA and remain at the back of the compensation conga line for the next decade when FedEx will take you in a heartbeat ?

Just trust them
01-04-2015, 01:52 PM
Whatever, MF. The proof is in the pudding. Guys like you, your father-in-law, eaglefly and Purple Turtle ran USAPA for years. We saw the results. Didn't work out so well. Wages at bankruptcy rates and the laughing stock of the industry resulted. No thanks.

You are a complete moron. Or a complete fool. Probably both.

The wages were at bankruptcy rates because that's how Doug likes it. ALPA (not USAPA, and that's not to defend USAPA, but to educate idiots like you) negotiated junk terms and he took advantage.

The people who were on the other side of the table from USAPA are the same filth that are now on the other side of the table from APA. APA has negotiated junk terms and Doug will once again take advantage of that.

They are in the process of showing the industry who is the new 'laughing stock'. That means you and others like you. Embrace it you fool.

PurpleTurtle
01-04-2015, 02:20 PM
The LAX reps cut lose from the union and joined Glass. Wilson sat by, then sanctioned Kirby direct negotiations. Then the chairman of the negotiating committee conceded defeat openly to anyone who would listen, then posted on a public forum.

Talk about DFR breach by the numbers...

Thought APA was better/smarter than that...

PurpleTurtle
01-04-2015, 02:27 PM
At least we have a union to count on that will give up scope so we can get our next pay raise..

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 05:46 AM
At this point, the company has no real vested interest in caving in to give APA everything it wants. I know some of you think the company is willing to pay just about anything to get HBT and I/D combinations, but I think most of you have grossly over-valued those items and the willingness of management to get those changes.

The problem is we already have a contract. This vote is simply an amendment to that contract. Management has already costed out the previous contract, and they were prepared to work under that contract. Saying no at this point does nothing but tell the company to pound sand and support the "we sure told them" attitudes.

For those of you who think Parker and Kirby sit around in their offices and in their homes plotting of new ways to screw pilots, you shouldn't give yourselves that much credit. I really don't think they do. Our contract is one of many rocks they have to deal with on a daily basis. Is it a big deal? Sure, it's a big deal, but it's not the only deal and I really don't think they give a crap whether we take their offer or not. Obviously they would prefer we did so they could move forward with some efficiencies, but outside of that, they really don't care.

The truth is we're not going to see Min Calendar Day, Group III A321 pay, improved LTD, full LOS or any of those other things, even if we vote this down. I'd be willing to bet on it. So the choices are either live with the Green Book and the lower MTA pay, or take a deal that implements the Green Book plus a few structural changes and get higher pay. That's really the choices ahead.

And spare me the "inmates" comparison. Jeez, you guys are full of rhetoric. It's not a prison, you are free to leave at any point...and this job is certainly far from the worst job I've ever had...actually, minus the commuting, it's the best job I've had so far.

R57 relay
01-05-2015, 06:01 AM
At this point, the company has no real vested interest in caving in to give APA everything it wants. I know some of you think the company is willing to pay just about anything to get HBT and I/D combinations, but I think most of you have grossly over-valued those items and the willingness of management to get those changes.

The problem is we already have a contract. This vote is simply an amendment to that contract. Management has already costed out the previous contract, and they were prepared to work under that contract. Saying no at this point does nothing but tell the company to pound sand and support the "we sure told them" attitudes.

For those of you who think Parker and Kirby sit around in their offices and in their homes plotting of new ways to screw pilots, you shouldn't give yourselves that much credit. I really don't think they do. Our contract is one of many rocks they have to deal with on a daily basis. Is it a big deal? Sure, it's a big deal, but it's not the only deal and I really don't think they give a crap whether we take their offer or not. Obviously they would prefer we did so they could move forward with some efficiencies, but outside of that, they really don't care.

The truth is we're not going to see Min Calendar Day, Group III A321 pay, improved LTD, full LOS or any of those other things, even if we vote this down. I'd be willing to bet on it. So the choices are either live with the Green Book and the lower MTA pay, or take a deal that implements the Green Book plus a few structural changes and get higher pay. That's really the choices ahead.

And spare me the "inmates" comparison. Jeez, you guys are full of rhetoric. It's not a prison, you are free to leave at any point...and this job is certainly far from the worst job I've ever had...actually, minus the commuting, it's the best job I've had so far.

It seems to me that the only thing the company really wants is HBT for the 787, everything else they can work around. Intl/dom they can just not open intl US bases. And I'm not sure they are excluded from getting HBT in arbitration. People are making big assumptions without the facts and many have forgotten the big claims, and losses on previous arbitrations.

Kasher will pay anyone? Any Alaska pilots reading this want to share the experience a few years back and what the predictions were?

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 06:51 AM
At this point, the company has no real vested interest in caving in to give APA everything it wants. I know some of you think the company is willing to pay just about anything to get HBT and I/D combinations, but I think most of you have grossly over-valued those items and the willingness of management to get those changes.

The problem is we already have a contract. This vote is simply an amendment to that contract. Management has already costed out the previous contract, and they were prepared to work under that contract. Saying no at this point does nothing but tell the company to pound sand and support the "we sure told them" attitudes.

For those of you who think Parker and Kirby sit around in their offices and in their homes plotting of new ways to screw pilots, you shouldn't give yourselves that much credit. I really don't think they do. Our contract is one of many rocks they have to deal with on a daily basis. Is it a big deal? Sure, it's a big deal, but it's not the only deal and I really don't think they give a crap whether we take their offer or not. Obviously they would prefer we did so they could move forward with some efficiencies, but outside of that, they really don't care.

The truth is we're not going to see Min Calendar Day, Group III A321 pay, improved LTD, full LOS or any of those other things, even if we vote this down. I'd be willing to bet on it. So the choices are either live with the Green Book and the lower MTA pay, or take a deal that implements the Green Book plus a few structural changes and get higher pay. That's really the choices ahead.

And spare me the "inmates" comparison. Jeez, you guys are full of rhetoric. It's not a prison, you are free to leave at any point...and this job is certainly far from the worst job I've ever had...actually, minus the commuting, it's the best job I've had so far.

Agreed that Parker & Co. have no reason not to probe both APA and this pilot group to find out exactly what we are about. Why should Parker roll over now ?

Parker can always come back to the table at some future point as he did at Envoy and several times. But once we demonstrate our willingness to feed upon each other for personal gain philosophy, we are that much weaker next time. The slightly higher pay and slightly sooner isn't worth the damage to our future from my perspective. So far, Parker and Glass have made a embarrassing mockery out of this union leadership and if the pilots don't correct that, we'll pay dearly in the future.

The slightly better and slightly quicker raises will cost us ten times that in the long run.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 06:59 AM
The process that's been playing out at Eagle/Envoy isn't the same process that's playing out here. There's already an end-game set in writing for our JCBA process. With the Envoy pilots, it's open-ended...much like how it will be when this contract ends. In 2020, it may take several rebuffs of the company to get them to play ball. I think we'll all be prepared to do so at that time. Pay, while not "industry leading", will be in the ballpark of industry standard so there shouldn't be any whining about pay rates by then. I would hope that 2020 is more about getting QOL issues than industry-leading pay. Gradual steps is the key.

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 07:44 AM
The process that's been playing out at Eagle/Envoy isn't the same process that's playing out here. There's already an end-game set in writing for our JCBA process. With the Envoy pilots, it's open-ended...much like how it will be when this contract ends. In 2020, it may take several rebuffs of the company to get them to play ball. I think we'll all be prepared to do so at that time. Pay, while not "industry leading", will be in the ballpark of industry standard so there shouldn't be any whining about pay rates by then. I would hope that 2020 is more about getting QOL issues than industry-leading pay. Gradual steps is the key.

Actually they are VERY much the same. The same strategy is being used and so far, it appears the same results. The SPECIFICS aren't the issue, but that's exactly the subterfuge Parker and Glass hope to distract us with. It appears it has worked perfectly on you, though.

There will be no more "gradual steps". Take a look at the weakness our fractured BOD has exhibited. They look like the Keystone Cops. If the pilots fall prey to the same behavior, come 2020, we'll be in even worse shape. But, that doesn't change the fact that Parker will consider that to be a quid-pro-quo negotiation essentially once again TRADING work rules and other contractual provisions to offset the cost of pay raises which are still likely to be not "industry leading" JUST AS WE ARE DOING NOW.

It's clear to me you simply are unable or unwilling to understand both the devastating ramifications of bypassing our last opportunity to be relevant to PARKER from a cohesive union standpoint or an entity with negotiating leverage. Again, since we will have little that's truly of value to him as scheduling, insurance, disability and pensions have all been gutted, the last bastion will be scope and trading Group I for more pay raises.

Heck, at that point it's likely the general consensus of most of us close to retirement will be "why not", gimme my money !

A yes vote for this now essentially means we have just committed seppuku. If that occurs, in 2020, I'll be willing to give Parker anything he wants for a few more bucks in my last years because we won't even be a union then (well, actually we aren't one now, just an association), we'll be 15,000 (likely substantially less) independent contractors all looking out for #1 and isn't that what Parker ultimately wants and why he brought in Jerry Glass and what's Jerry's specialty ?

Union busting.

He doesn't do it overnight, but begins by destroying its foundation until it does what it's doing here right this very minute.

Collapsing under its OWN weight.

At this rate, all they will have to do in 2020, is show up at the rubble and collect what left that has value to them.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 08:06 AM
DOOM! GLOOM! ALL IS LOST! Better start calling that truck driving school. Truckmasters, right?

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 08:13 AM
DOOM! GLOOM! ALL IS LOST! Better start calling that truck driving school. Truckmasters, right?

You really should think about a management position.

Unless, of course, you're already in one. ;)

texaspilot76
01-05-2015, 08:18 AM
You really should think about a management position.

Unless, of course, you're already in one. ;)

And what's wrong with that? You make it sound like it's a bad thing for someone to advance their career into a higher position.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 08:29 AM
You really should think about a management position.

Unless, of course, you're already in one. ;)

I have no qualms with people in management. They have a job to do. If you think they take those positions just to make your life hard, then you have a problem. Chill out. And no, I don't want a management job. If I wanted to do that I would have stayed in the Air Force and gone to the Pentagon. I like flying airplanes.

texaspilot76
01-05-2015, 08:34 AM
I have no qualms with people in management. They have a job to do. If you think they take those positions just to make your life hard, then you have a problem. Chill out. And no, I don't want a management job. If I wanted to do that I would have stayed in the Air Force and gone to the Pentagon. I like flying airplanes.

I agree. People like Eaglefly actually believe that Doug Parker sits in his office everyday thinking, "How can I screw the pilots today?" They actually think that management spends all their time thinking of ways to hurt employees.

DCA A321 FO
01-05-2015, 08:37 AM
And what's wrong with that? You make it sound like it's a bad thing for someone to advance their career into a higher position.

He was being facetious Einstein.

full of luv
01-05-2015, 08:40 AM
I agree. People like Eaglefly actually believe that Doug Parker sits in his office everyday thinking, "How can I screw the pilots today?" They actually think that management spends all their time thinking of ways to hurt employees.

What they think about is how much will it take to get the APA to vote for a contract with 50.1% support. That is what they want to pay. The rest can be spent on bonuses and profit sharing for mgmt.

It depends on your definition of hurt. What do you think is a fair amount for a pilot to make?
Are AMR pilots deserving to make at least as much as Delta / UCH pilots?
Mgmt doesn't want a strike, but they surely don't want to match Delta and offer profit sharing and such if they can get APA a contract for 20% less.

full of luv
01-05-2015, 08:42 AM
And what's wrong with that? You make it sound like it's a bad thing for someone to advance their career into a higher position.

The point is that it is disingenuous to come here as a mgmt employee and try and get employees to settle for less then their peers at similar corporations.

If he wants to be mgmt, so be it, but that negotiation won't be handled by APA that will be direct with the corporation.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 08:48 AM
The point is that it is disingenuous to come here as a mgmt employee and try and get employees to settle for less then their peers at similar corporations.


Except that's not what's going on here. You guys and your conspiracy theories...geez. Just in case you didn't notice, Eaglefly thinks every pilot who doesn't automatically vilify management and adopt his "rain cloud" approach is management or a management wanna-be.

DCA A321 FO
01-05-2015, 08:51 AM
Except that's not what's going on here. You guys and your conspiracy theories...geez. Just in case you didn't notice, Eaglefly thinks every pilot who doesn't automatically vilify management and adopt his "rain cloud" approach is management or a management wanna-be.

Huey, management will furlough you in a second to save a nickel.

They don't give a flying fu(k about you. Maybe EF understands that.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 08:53 AM
I promise you I understand that. Airline management isn't any different from any other workplace. I don't understand why you guys think that people coming from outside the airline world must have had a different landscape to deal with? Do you think that other employers won't furlough or lay people off? Give me a break...

DCA A321 FO
01-05-2015, 08:59 AM
I promise you I understand that. Airline management isn't any different from any other workplace. I don't understand why you guys think that people coming from outside the airline world must have had a different landscape to deal with? Do you think that other employers won't furlough or lay people off? Give me a break...

No break,

Like you I came from the military, I cannot believe the BS this management, chief pilot level, has tried to pull.

As far as upper levels, they do sit around and try to figure ways to steal money from you.

As far as other employers, being furloughed is different, there is no industry like ours, take a 10 year captain, hire him, throw him on the bottom of a list, then furlough him.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 09:13 AM
BS? Like having an assignment that I was promised through a previous commander canceled by a new box-checker commander? Or having a supervisor deny leave simply because he didn't understand how leave/passes work (long story)? Or the unit where everyone treaded lightly because we had six commander-directed downgrades in the span of a few months (out of 12 pilots...it was a C-21 detachment)?

Or how about being threatened with NJP if I didn't pay a $2,500 hotel bill because the finance guys were "backed up" and my government credit card was 2 months past due? Or how about the time that my friend (who was a great pilot and a good officer...just wasn't a golden boy) got a surprise RIF notification while we were deployed? And that they extended his separation date so he could finish his deployment? "Bad news is you don't have a job when you get back. Good news is we got your separation date extended so you can finish your 6 month deployment!"

Or how about the flight engineer in my squadron who got Letter or Reprimand because his wife sent him a battery-powered alarm clock in the mail while we were in Kuwait...and when the alarm went off in the package, they had EOD blow it up because they thought it was a bomb? He didn't get his alarm clock, AND he had his career f*cked.

Hey, I get it. We've all had bad bosses. I don't know where you worked in the military, but I've seen plenty of horrible commanders and supervisors that jerked people around on a regular basis. At least here we have a process to grieve things we feel were wrongly dealt with.

And I really think you overestimate how much time the upper level management spends dwelling on this stuff. They hire guys like Glass and tell their middle management "don't exceed this cost" and then let the dogs loose. In the end, all they really look at are the cost valuations for the entire deal...they couldn't care less how much time you do or don't work.

texaspilot76
01-05-2015, 09:21 AM
BS? Like having an assignment that I was promised through a previous commander canceled by a new box-checker commander? Or having a supervisor deny leave simply because he didn't understand how leave/passes work (long story)? Or the unit where everyone treaded lightly because we had six commander-directed downgrades in the span of a few months (out of 12 pilots...it was a C-21 detachment)?

Or how about being threatened with NJP if I didn't pay a $2,500 hotel bill because the finance guys were "backed up" and my government credit card was 2 months past due? Or how about the time that my friend (who was a great pilot and a good officer...just wasn't a golden boy) got a surprise RIF notification while we were deployed? And that they extended his separation date so he could finish his deployment? "Bad news is you don't have a job when you get back. Good news is we got your separation date extended so you can finish your 6 month deployment!"

Or how about the flight engineer in my squadron who got Letter or Reprimand because his wife sent him a battery-powered alarm clock in the mail while we were in Kuwait...and when the alarm went off in the package, they had EOD blow it up because they thought it was a bomb? He didn't get his alarm clock, AND he had his career f*cked.

Hey, I get it. We've all had bad bosses. I don't know where you worked in the military, but I've seen plenty of horrible commanders and supervisors that jerked people around on a regular basis. At least here we have a process to grieve things we feel were wrongly dealt with.

And I really think you overestimate how much time the upper level management spends dwelling on this stuff. They hire guys like Glass and tell their middle management "don't exceed this cost" and then let the dogs loose. In the end, all they really look at are the cost valuations for the entire deal...they couldn't care less how much time you do or don't work.

This is probably the most intelligent post I have read on here. They don't care about anything other than the bottom line. They see numbers and figures, and not scheming ways to screw you.

DCA A321 FO
01-05-2015, 09:39 AM
BS? Like having an assignment that I was promised through a previous commander canceled by a new box-checker commander? Or having a supervisor deny leave simply because he didn't understand how leave/passes work (long story)? Or the unit where everyone treaded lightly because we had six commander-directed downgrades in the span of a few months (out of 12 pilots...it was a C-21 detachment)?

Or how about being threatened with NJP if I didn't pay a $2,500 hotel bill because the finance guys were "backed up" and my government credit card was 2 months past due? Or how about the time that my friend (who was a great pilot and a good officer...just wasn't a golden boy) got a surprise RIF notification while we were deployed? And that they extended his separation date so he could finish his deployment? "Bad news is you don't have a job when you get back. Good news is we got your separation date extended so you can finish your 6 month deployment!"

Or how about the flight engineer in my squadron who got Letter or Reprimand because his wife sent him a battery-powered alarm clock in the mail while we were in Kuwait...and when the alarm went off in the package, they had EOD blow it up because they thought it was a bomb? He didn't get his alarm clock, AND he had his career f*cked.

Hey, I get it. We've all had bad bosses. I don't know where you worked in the military, but I've seen plenty of horrible commanders and supervisors that jerked people around on a regular basis. At least here we have a process to grieve things we feel were wrongly dealt with.

And I really think you overestimate how much time the upper level management spends dwelling on this stuff. They hire guys like Glass and tell their middle management "don't exceed this cost" and then let the dogs loose. In the end, all they really look at are the cost valuations for the entire deal...they couldn't care less how much time you do or don't work.



This is probably the most intelligent post I have read on here. They don't care about anything other than the bottom line. They see numbers and figures, and not scheming ways to screw you.

Hey Tex, paying you less or making you work more days with crappier work rules is screwing you.

Huey, I never quantified how much time they spent on it, just that they do and your incoming boss has zero obligation to honor the promises of the outgoing boss.

The rest of that stuff that happened in your units, well, you Air Force boys have issues.

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 09:44 AM
Huey, management will furlough you in a second to save a nickel.

They don't give a flying fu(k about you. Maybe EF understands that.

Think of the future options management has with this pilot group. It's likely Parker being the smart cookie he is will dust off the divide and conquer strategy in 2020 just as he's successfully using now. If I were Parker, I'd orchestrate some excuse to threaten a furlough like Horton did in 2012 when he said he'd furlough 400 to influence the C13 contract negotiation (at the same time Hale accidentally made it public he'd be short about that amount for the summer 2012 schedule). If he can make the junior minority a piņata in a furlough threat game, he can get them to beg the majority to save them with concessions (which they won't). Another option is to use that to move Group 1 scope to the Eagle system along with junior pilots and give nice raises for the majority in exchange for no furloughs.

Again, there's a thousand and one ways to play this gullible pilot group against each other and we all see now that this is a VERY effective strategy. 2020 is going to be a complete mess. As it stands now, most a Group III pilots will end up in Group II (pay cuts) and if he places a nice order for Group 1 to replace most of the S80's, many Group II go to Group I (pay cuts). It may just be for many, the pay raises they thought would propel them upwards are simply temporary payoffs that will be recouped in the future leaving many no better off for handing over more work rules. The above is also a nice foundation for 2020 to put the junior minority in peril by offering $$$ to,the majority.

I wouldn't wanna bet how THAT vote would go. :eek:

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 09:49 AM
The rest of that stuff that happened in your units, well, you Air Force boys have issues.

Why do you think people are trying to get out of the Air Force? It's not like it used to be. I don't know when you were in the military, but a lot's changed even since I started flying in 1996. And after non-stop deployments (I spent nearly 3 of the last 6 years on active-duty deployed) I don't see how they can convince enough people to stay. Not for that kind of nonsense, and not when they are reducing benefits and keeping pay stagnant.

ghilis101
01-05-2015, 09:52 AM
Huey,

You and I are probably not to far apart in age and have similar backgrounds so we have a long ways to go in this industry. I can understand why you see things as rosy compared to the military but this appears to be your first job under a collective bargaining agreement. Here's some important takeaways: nothing happens fast in negotiations. The fact that management is rushing you into a deal should seem odd considering they almost always slow negotiations down to their benefit. Second, you're absolutely rifgt, management doesn't sit around planning your demise, but they do follow the negotiating playbook. And again it's not personal to them, just business, but it also requires us to take the appropriate response to each one of those steps. They're going for a very early kill here, and it's rather unusual because usually a pilot group would see this coming a mile away and the next play would be made and so on and so forth.

Finally, past practice has proven that pilots make significant gains in times of economic prosperity, and take concessions in times of economic recession. Never in history has a pilot group taken concessions during times of economic prosperity. You have a lot of leverage. They just don't want you to know that. This isn't 2001 or 2004 or 2007. The rush to get a deal is because they know each day the economy gets stronger, oil gets cheaper, and you watch your peers at DL and UA make more than you, you become more empowered

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 09:52 AM
This is probably the most intelligent post I have read on here. They don't care about anything other than the bottom line. They see numbers and figures, and not scheming ways to screw you.

Those numbers and figures have to be based on something attainable. The weaker you are, the lower the baseline for those figures. In typical contract negotiations regarding compensation, there's a concept referred to as "the box". The goal of both sides is make that box initially as big as possible in the hope of moving the middle point closer to their side. There was no box here, nor true negotiation. Parker feels he simply has to establish himself as a tough negotiator NOW to maintain leverage in the future, even if he should not have it in a particular situation and thus yes, there is a "bottom line ", but there also is an emotional component in play.

Even APA admitted it in some of their valuations of Parker quibbling over 50 million when they're projected to rake in 12 billion in 2014/15. Considering how weak and out of control we are projecting ourselves to be, Parker would be a fool to go any lower then necessary which is not likely his bottom line. Remember, that we are being told that there was still "negotiating room", but that Parker balked because of APA's "overreach" in their counter-counter which was in and of itself fairly modest.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 10:04 AM
Huey,

You and I are probably not to far apart in age and have similar backgrounds so we have a long ways to go in this industry.

I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 10:15 AM
I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.

A lot of us are willing to live with it to. We still get perhaps 85% of our pay raises in less then a year, section 6 sooner, an excellent chance of slapping Parker's hand away from our work rule till and the opportunity to remain relevant in our next bargaining chance be it 2019 or sooner.

With this TA, we get a quicker and slightly better payoff that will likely cost us more in the long run and a death sentence as a cohesive union and group capable of correcting the present imbalance.

full of luv
01-05-2015, 10:36 AM
I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.

Huey,
If your already happy and satisfied with the job, why the rush to accept more money for QOL and pilot group concessions for a slight bit more? Let it run to arbitration, let the QOL stand with more pay. If those concessions are worth it to MGMT, they will come back to the table even after arbitration.

ghilis101
01-05-2015, 10:44 AM
I do understand all of those things you wrote. But I have my position on this particular situation because it's not really true "negotiations". That occurred when the MTA was penned. APA had a chance to make that happen then, because it was at that point that various people (including Parker and Kirby) wanted the MTA signed so they could proceed with the merger. This is just the mopping-up phase. They already cleaned APA's clock. HBT and the other issues have value to them, but not enough value to drive them to cave into any of APA's more costly requirements. The only "out" we have is an arbitrated result, and I'm pretty certain the company is willing to live through an arbitrated contract if that's the way we want to go.

Huey, the prevailing argument from people wanting to vote yes is that arbitration would yield worse results. However this won't be the case because you won't go to arbitration. If you vote no, the company will come to the BOD and accept the min calendar day proposal. It's the next logical step in the chess match

texaspilot76
01-05-2015, 10:58 AM
Huey, the prevailing argument from people wanting to vote yes is that arbitration would yield worse results. However this won't be the case because you won't go to arbitration. If you vote no, the company will come to the BOD and accept the min calendar day proposal. It's the next logical step in the chess match

There's no certainty that would happen. I'm not willing to risk the pay raise for that gamble.

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 11:30 AM
Huey, the prevailing argument from people wanting to vote yes is that arbitration would yield worse results. However this won't be the case because you won't go to arbitration. If you vote no, the company will come to the BOD and accept the min calendar day proposal. It's the next logical step in the chess match

76 is willing to risk destroying his future for a slightly early, slightly better pay raise that will likely be more then offset in other ways as time goes on.

Now THAT is a gamble. :cool:

DCA A321 FO
01-05-2015, 11:39 AM
76 is willing to risk destroying his future for a slightly early, slightly better pay raise that will likely be more then offset in other ways as time goes on.

Now THAT is a gamble. :cool:

You are asking Tex to think too much.

texaspilot76
01-05-2015, 11:44 AM
76 is willing to risk destroying his future for a slightly early, slightly better pay raise that will likely be more then offset in other ways as time goes on.

Now THAT is a gamble. :cool:

Slightly better? $25k this year alone is slight?

Even if we went with the MOU rate, and gave up the pay for this year, the proposed company rate would still be worth around $10k a year more than the MOU rate in 2016.

Sorry, but the miniscule items that the company wants is worth the pay to me.

KiloAlpha
01-05-2015, 11:44 AM
Has anyone talked to their union reps regarding the possible effects of the 2018 Cadillac Healthcare plan review?

What does this provision allow the company to do? Can they act unilaterally?

This issue alone could all but nullify the shiny pay raises.

MarineGrunt
01-05-2015, 11:46 AM
76 is willing to risk destroying his future for a slightly early, slightly better pay raise that will likely be more then offset in other ways as time goes on.

Now THAT is a gamble. :cool:


Destroying future? I think thats just a little bit dramatic...

I am in the NO column right now (if I was able to vote) based on some QOL items, but if it passes, it certainly doesn't destroy my future.

I don't know why APA didn't slide the Delta contract across the table from the very beginning, but I expect nothing less when section 6 negotiations start.

texaspilot76
01-05-2015, 11:51 AM
Destroying future? I think thats just a little bit dramatic...

I am in the NO column right now (if I was able to vote) based on some QOL items, but if it passes, it certainly doesn't destroy my future.

I don't know why APA didn't slide the Delta contract across the table from the very beginning, but I expect nothing less when section 6 negotiations start.

No kidding. All you hardcore unionists keep projecting this doom and gloom. I think there's a more political union agenda behind all that rhetoric. "Oh no! The sky is falling!"

I agree with the post above that when regular section 6 comes up, if the company is still profitable, we will have the leverage to secure a Delta or better contract. We do not have that ability right now.

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 11:54 AM
Has anyone talked to their union reps regarding the possible effects of the 2018 Cadillac Healthcare plan review?

What does this provision allow the company to do? Can they act unilaterally?

This issue alone could all but nullify the shiny pay raises.

The value plan is at company discretion. Cadillac affects the other two and this could be arbitrated. From my understanding though, we have a reverse "me too" scenario that puts us in the same boat as other employee groups and thus our premiums could end up in the Obama Care range. They could get all that money back and then some.

But don't look at the man behind the curtain.......look over here......here.....I have some shiny candy for you ! :rolleyes:

texaspilot76
01-05-2015, 12:02 PM
The value plan is at company discretion. Cadillac affects the other two and this could be arbitrated. From my understanding though, we have a reverse "me too" scenario that puts us in the same boat as other employee groups and thus our premiums could end up in the Obama Care range. They could get all that money back and then some.

But don't look at the man behind the curtain.......look over here......here.....I have some shiny candy for you ! :rolleyes:

If I'm not mistaken, under the law, the company is required to pay the tax.

The best way to insure that our healthcare won't erode further, short of a supreme court victory, is for everyone to vote in a Republican president in 2016.

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 12:05 PM
Destroying future? I think thats just a little bit dramatic...

I am in the NO column right now (if I was able to vote) based on some QOL items, but if it passes, it certainly doesn't destroy my future.

I don't know why APA didn't slide the Delta contract across the table from the very beginning, but I expect nothing less when section 6 negotiations start.

It doesn't ?

Could you tell me what your strategy is in 2020 when we once again drop to our knees and pray Parker doesn't say "no" ?



Specifically,

A. Tell me what leverage we will have with our broken group still blaming each other for this disaster who will all be older with many who haven't already retired, are very close to it ?

B. Tell me what leverage we will have with the worst (most competitively advantageous to management) work rules and benefits of all the competitive legacy carriers ?

C. Tell me what leverage we will have with the lowest pay scales of the big three ?

D. Explain why Parker won't kick the can for another 5 years after that considering the above future FACTS ?

E. Convince me as an older, more senior pilot much CLOSER to retirement why I shouldn't act in self-interest as many advocate now (rationalized or not) for a few extra bucks and a little sooner as opposed to the more favorable long-term interests of the group, especially when I'll be gone before any succeeding agreement ?

Make it good, because next time around without a believable plan nor a GROUP to stand with, I'll have flipped big time and trust me.......I'll have plenty of company.

Your move.

MarineGrunt
01-05-2015, 12:08 PM
If I'm not mistaken, under the law, the company is required to pay the tax.

The best way to insure that our healthcare won't erode further, short of a supreme court victory, is for everyone to vote in a Republican president in 2016.

The R's will never get rid of Obamacare even if they had the perfect opportunity. Just like the Dems will never sign on to immigration reform (could have had 100% their way in 08-10). They all need their bogeyman to fight against.... but thats another topic entirely....

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 12:10 PM
If I'm not mistaken, under the law, the company is required to pay the tax.

The best way to insure that our healthcare won't erode further, short of a supreme court victory, is for everyone to vote in a Republican president in 2016.

Not likely on the P vote...and again, with reverse "me too", we'd be tethered to others and in 5 years, what's that going to cost in premiums ?

$15-17,000 annual with perhaps a $5000 deductible ?

I hope you save a lot of that money from here on out, pal.

You're going to need it.

AAG's biggest labor albatross is health care now that pensions have been gutted. Trust me, in that respect, he'll dump us out like soiled laundry and why shouldn't he ?

It's not like we're going to do anything about it, eh ?

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 12:12 PM
The R's will never get rid of Obamacare even if they had the perfect opportunity. Just like the Dems will never sign on to immigration reform (could have had 100% their way in 08-10). They all need their bogeyman to fight against.... but thats another topic entirely....

Saw a thing on TV news evaluating the next P bid. Basically came to the conclusion that Hillary will need only something like 1/4 of the electoral votes that will be in play. In other words, our next President will wear skirts, regardless of who the R's field unless she flops over before then.

MarineGrunt
01-05-2015, 12:12 PM
It doesn't ?

Could you tell me what your strategy is in 2020 when we once again drop to our knees and pray Parker doesn't say "no" ?



Specifically,

A. Tell me what leverage we will have with our broken group still blaming each other for this disaster who will all be older with many who haven't already retired, are very close to it ?

B. Tell me what leverage we will have with the worst (most competitively advantageous to management) work rules and benefits of all the competitive legacy carriers ?

C. Tell me what leverage we will have with the lowest pay scales of the big three ?

D. Explain why Parker won't kick the can for another 5 years after that considering the above future FACTS ?

E. Convince me as an older, more senior pilot much CLOSER to retirement why I shouldn't act in self-interest as many advocate now (rationalized or not) for a few extra bucks and a little sooner as opposed to the more favorable long-term interests of the group, especially when I'll be gone before any succeeding agreement ?

Make it good, because next time around without a believable plan nor a GROUP to stand with, I'll have flipped big time and trust me.......I'll have plenty of company.

Your move.

A-E) Destroying one's credibility/standing for future negotiations is a far cry from "destroying one's future." Even that is debatable. But I'll let you guys that live your lives on this forum to hash that one out....

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 12:21 PM
A-E) Destroying one's credibility/standing for future negotiations is a far cry from "destroying one's future." Even that is debatable. But I'll let you guys that live your lives on this forum to hash that one out....

That's what I thought.

No plan whatsoever. :cool:

See you in 2020 my friend when I'll advocate giving Doug a blank piece of paper to fill in the blanks if it gets me a little more $$$ in 2020 vs. him stalling for 5 years.

The only variable is what he fills in the blanks to pay for it. :eek:

That will be the majority philosophy from all the old geezers in their late 50's and 60's who will be the majority (heck....that's a significant percentage of the yes crowd NOW !). Everyone needs to plan their foxhole position now and to all those who think anything will be different in 2020, well,....................pucker up, Buttercup.

MarineGrunt
01-05-2015, 12:33 PM
That's what I thought.

No plan whatsoever. :cool:

See you in 2020 my friend when I'll advocate giving Doug a blank piece of paper to fill in the blanks if it gets me a little more $$$ in 2020 vs. him stalling for 5 years.

The only variable is what he fills in the blanks to pay for it. :eek:

That will be the majority philosophy from all the old geezers in their late 50's and 60's who will be the majority (heck....that's a significant percentage of the yes crowd NOW !). Everyone needs to plan their foxhole position now and to all those who think anything will be different in 2020, well,....................pucker up, Buttercup.

W-T-F are you talking about??? I was pointing out the absurdity of you saying that some are in the process of destroying our future and you somehow want my point-by-point plan for 2020 as a retort???

By the way.... my "plan" is to vote NO on this proposal in case you didn't catch it already.

ghilis101
01-05-2015, 12:34 PM
There's no certainty that would happen. I'm not willing to risk the pay raise for that gamble.

And that, my friend, is what the company set out to do by negotiating directly with the pilot group. They knew you'd get on your knees because you bought in to the threat of arbitration. Have the courage to vote no. You will be offered another deal prior to arbitration. They're making you think this is an 11th hour deal when in fact it's still more like 7pm.

eaglefly
01-05-2015, 01:06 PM
W-T-F are you talking about??? I was pointing out the absurdity of you saying that some are in the process of destroying our future and you somehow want my point-by-point plan for 2020 as a retort???

By the way.... my "plan" is to vote NO on this proposal in case you didn't catch it already.

My point is, if one plans to vote yes now, they better have a plan for 2020. No one does because we have no weapons of leverage and twice the vulnerability. Many yes voters don't care about that, only quick $$$.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 04:16 PM
Has anyone talked to their union reps regarding the possible effects of the 2018 Cadillac Healthcare plan review?

What does this provision allow the company to do? Can they act unilaterally?

This issue alone could all but nullify the shiny pay raises.

As stated, the two plans other than the value plan would have to be arbitrated. And according to the company proposal, any outcome would have to be cost-neutral to us (in other words, if we have to pay higher premiums, we would have to be compensated for that somehow).

It's a big IF because the GOP doesn't need to repeal Obamacare to get rid of the tax. They can just amend the law or strip it of funding. And whoever gets into office in 2016 will still have to face Congress, which will likely remain in GOP control until they anger enough voters. Experience shows this flip-flop happens every 6-8 years. So right around 2020 we'll probably see the Congress go back to the Dems.

There's already a legitimate challenge to the law in the form of the Supreme Court case that's hearing the issue regarding how the law was written. From what I've gathered and read, they did a really poor job writing the law and stipulated specifically that state exchanges can receive federal subsidies, but there's no specific spending authorization for subsidies for the federal exchange.

If you go strictly by the law (and precedent), then that means most Americans will lose their subsidies because the law does not specifically authorize that funding. The administration (and the Dems) contend that "the law implies it", but having been a budget authority in the military, if the law doesn't specifically authorize funds, it cannot be funded just because "we meant it but didn't write it in there". The legally correct way is to amend the law to authorize the appropriation of funds for federal subsidies...but do you really think the GOP will pass such legislation? I think not.

Hence why a lot of people feel Obamacare is in trouble regardless of whether Clinton takes office or not.

450knotOffice
01-05-2015, 04:29 PM
My prediction, for what it's worth (but I think I'm right):

Pilots vote no, probably by a slim margin.
Company and union go to arbitration.
Award is handed out.
Company says they'll live with it, and we'll see ya in 2019.
Then the company will stonewall us for many years.

AFRES Bum
01-05-2015, 04:32 PM
I can live with that and I hope you are right... ( I think there is a chance the company comes back to negotiate for more if there is a no vote, but if not I don't care! )

ghilis101
01-05-2015, 04:36 PM
My prediction, for what it's worth (but I think I'm right):

Pilots vote no, probably by a slim margin.
Company and union go to arbitration.
Award is handed out.
Company says they'll live with it, and we'll see ya in 2019.
Then the company will stonewall us for many years.

that would be a HUGE win for the pilots. Realistically, you vote no, they'll come back and accept the APA offer with min calendar day for the instant ratification that's been promised if the company accepts. and your 23 percent pay raise just turned into more like a 30-40 percent pay raise depending on how PBS is implemented

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 05:03 PM
that would be a HUGE win for the pilots. Realistically, you vote no, they'll come back and accept the APA offer with min calendar day for the instant ratification that's been promised if the company accepts. and your 23 percent pay raise just turned into more like a 30-40 percent pay raise depending on how PBS is implemented

I do not see them coming back and offering min day. They haven't yet come back with that huge of a sweetener, and I doubt they will anytime soon. It's not a huge win for the pilots.

Everyone loses about $100k in economic terms. Parker will only play this same game in 2019 and it'll be early 2020s before we see any kind of contract...and we'll not only have to make up the QOL ground, we'll have to make up the pay ground as well...since the MTA will have us a very very solid third place by then.

AFRES Bum
01-05-2015, 05:08 PM
you are wrong in that the MTA gives up quality of life, those things are not open to the arbitrator.... I can live with the MTA

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 05:11 PM
you are wrong in that the MTA gives up quality of life, those things are not open to the arbitrator.... I can live with the MTA

You misunderstood what I wrote. I didn't say the MTA gives up quality of life (actually, it did...but that's already said and done). I said that if we go with just the MTA, we will not only have to claw back the QOL items that are noticeably missing from the MTA, we'll have to claw back the pay as well. Two big hurdles to jump, instead of one.

ghilis101
01-05-2015, 05:15 PM
I do not see them coming back and offering min day. They haven't yet come back with that huge of a sweetener, and I doubt they will anytime soon. It's not a huge win for the pilots.

Everyone loses about $100k in economic terms. Parker will only play this same game in 2019 and it'll be early 2020s before we see any kind of contract...and we'll not only have to make up the QOL ground, we'll have to make up the pay ground as well...since the MTA will have us a very very solid third place by then.

They will come back. You think Parker can stand in front of the his board on January 20th and say, I still haven't solved our labor issue, and not catch massive flak for it? You think hes gonna say, "don't worry I got this, In the next 3 to 6 months we'll maybe get this handled in arbitration, but I don't know what the end result will be" ?? Its not going to go well for him to not have clear answers. You will get a new offer before arbitration. They don't want unknowns. They want something definitive. They want it now, not 6 months from now.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 05:19 PM
They won't have to wait 3 to 6 months to get it taken care of in arbitration. I'm telling you arbitration will be over in a few weeks, not months. And arbitration is already costed out. The arbitration you're talking about (unknowns, etc) does not exist in the MTA language. The board mostly cares about economics, and the cost-neutral language preserves the economics of the deal. The HBT carve out and combined division stuff will not have a major effect on their bottom line. They ran US Airways as a floating leper colony and somehow made that work. HBT etc is minor compared to that.

CanoePilot
01-05-2015, 05:28 PM
The more I think about the more ****ed I'm getting about the offer. I'm on the fence about it, but on the one hand I want the money and on the other I want to tell Parker to tuck off.

Hueypilot
01-05-2015, 05:37 PM
No one said you had to be happy about getting the pay raise. Although it's economically in our favor, it's still a sh!tty deal. It's just less sh!tty than what we'd get going through the other door.

Diesel1030
01-05-2015, 09:29 PM
This is why the company prefers to negotiate with the membership.

A year ago all here were just fine with the MOU.. Now look at folks readily willing to trade concessions to get the money early.

Look hard at these concessions and ask yourself.. If they are so minor why is mngt wanting it? All of these wants have a price tag and they want to get it the cheapest. We are nearing the end.. Let's let our reps do their jobs.

In a few weeks the company will post even more record profits as well as the compensation details of our execs for the year (Will be fun to see their profit sharing ).They can and should be compensating us better.

inline five
01-06-2015, 05:43 AM
The more I think about the more ****ed I'm getting about the offer. I'm on the fence about it, but on the one hand I want the money and on the other I want to tell Parker to tuck off.

You just described the mentality of the flight attendants.

Are you a flight attendent? Or a pilot?

inline five
01-06-2015, 05:49 AM
This is why the company prefers to negotiate with the membership.

A year ago all here were just fine with the MOU.. Now look at folks readily willing to trade concessions to get the money early.

Look hard at these concessions and ask yourself.. If they are so minor why is mngt wanting it? All of these wants have a price tag and they want to get it the cheapest. We are nearing the end.. Let's let our reps do their jobs.

In a few weeks the company will post even more record profits as well as the compensation details of our execs for the year (Will be fun to see their profit sharing ).They can and should be compensating us better.

People are assuming profits will go ape next year. I'm not so sure. Yes oil prices are down but so is the overall market for oil, demand has dropped tremendously. Europe and Asia are weakening as is our Mecca, Texas. Latin America traffic has dropped off the cliff.

Domestically the U.S. is OK overall for now helped by the extra oomph of cheap gas but that could go either way. SWA increased traffic in DAL 13% alone in one month while ours dropped 1% in the same month. Our domestic strength is non-existent in the face of LCCs and ULCCs. We need a strong world economy to be profitable unlike SWA.

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 07:36 AM
People are assuming profits will go ape next year. I'm not so sure. Yes oil prices are down but so is the overall market for oil, demand has dropped tremendously. Europe and Asia are weakening as is our Mecca, Texas. Latin America traffic has dropped off the cliff.

Domestically the U.S. is OK overall for now helped by the extra oomph of cheap gas but that could go either way. SWA increased traffic in DAL 13% alone in one month while ours dropped 1% in the same month. Our domestic strength is non-existent in the face of LCCs and ULCCs. We need a strong world economy to be profitable unlike SWA.

No. AA will make the most it's ever made in 2015. No paranoia or fear factor, this isn't 2007, and voting out of fear is the worst thing you can do. This the the greatest period of economic prosperity in the history of the airline industry.

Al Czervik
01-06-2015, 09:03 AM
The more I think about the more ****ed I'm getting about the offer. I'm on the fence about it, but on the one hand I want the money and on the other I want to tell Parker to tuck off.

Canoe... There's hope for you!! If only Texaspilot would come around!

CanoePilot
01-06-2015, 09:59 AM
Canoe... There's hope for you!! If only Texaspilot would come around!

The difference between Texas and I is that he's popping a boner like this is the best contract ever. I just don't want to turn down the money and go to arbitration and then not get ****. The thinking that we'll bring the company to their knees and come out ahead in pay with arbitration is flawed. Why hasn't APA put out detailed information comparing each proposal (mou or company offer)?
The biggest mistakes in this whole situation can be placed on APA for doing the backroom deal with doug and not even including the US air pilots in anything. In the typical AAroggance they thought parker was some small time ceo who would be desperate. They were so gung-ho about getting rid of Horton at all costs they didn't think ahead. Well now we know the cost.

texaspilot76
01-06-2015, 11:01 AM
Not true. I never said this is the best contract. It does lack in several areas. However, I'm a realist and know that this is the best were gonna get at this point and it is a heck of a lot better than the MOU.

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 11:14 AM
Not true. I never said this is the best contract. It does lack in several areas. However, I'm a realist and know that this is the best were gonna get at this point and it is a heck of a lot better than the MOU.


But didn't you also say that the previous offer was the best you were gonna get and you wanted to accept that deal as well? The BOD stood their ground and got you some improvements. Do you really think they were being hardliners? The argument I hear from some yes voters was the BOD was too greedy. Do you agree? Because if that really is the prevailing opinion, maybe we need to define what a "hardliner" is these days. Maybe I'm alone here, but you do have to draw a line somewhere. I think When PBS gets implemented and you find yourself working tirelessly to make only slight improvements in pay, you'll maybe rethink your strategy. I hope that's not true. I hope that you can comfortably get 15-16 days off a month and make 80+ hours pay, but in the case that you end up working 19-20 days for pay in the 70-75 hour range (see my previous examples), you may find yourself bidding reserve for some pay and QOL relief, because you'll have no work rules to protect you, and you'll be relying on the good faith of the company to give you days off as a lineholder that they're not obligated to give. It need not be that way.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 11:40 AM
The difference between Texas and I is that he's popping a boner like this is the best contract ever. I just don't want to turn down the money and go to arbitration and then not get ****. The thinking that we'll bring the company to their knees and come out ahead in pay with arbitration is flawed. Why hasn't APA put out detailed information comparing each proposal (mou or company offer)?
The biggest mistakes in this whole situation can be placed on APA for doing the backroom deal with doug and not even including the US air pilots in anything. In the typical AAroggance they thought parker was some small time ceo who would be desperate. They were so gung-ho about getting rid of Horton at all costs they didn't think ahead. Well now we know the cost.

Full documentation is expected soon to allow everyone to make an informed decision. APA legal counsel EJ has described our expectations of arbitration exactly as I have said for weeks. As per the MOU our pay is set with the most substantial increases in 11.5 months. These will put us above UAL pilots, but still below Delta. ALL Parker's "wants" go sailing right out the window as well as the minor items already tentatively agreed to between the parties. The present Green Book (has that been so bad ?) is the default contract and the arbitration process is STRICTLY to bring the other two contracts in compliance with the Green Book, the only stipulation is that in doing so, the companies costs must not increase.

That can be done without giving Parker any of his wants and as per the MOU, arbitration is NOT an opportunity for Parker to make it something it is not, nor use it to get the "wants" he couldn't achieve through negotiation (which again has been mostly dictation and ultimatum). There is no requirement to "streamline" the Green Book either. APA could simply ask for carve outs for whatever work rules are specific and necessary to the US Airways domiciles to apply to all present and future pilots based there (PHX is likely to lose its present domicile/Hub status within a few years).

The Green Book essentially remains intact, we get slight raises now and the big raise in 2016. We get exposure to additional Delta increases should those occur, we get section 6 a year sooner and most importantly, we remain as a relevant and more cohesive union and negotiating force into the future, instead of a fragmented and broken group of independent contractors all looking out for themselves. There is STRONG likelyhood that such an outcome will at some point compel Parker back to the table and with a bit more respect and propriety.

I've run the financials for myself and I'd have to be crazy just to say no solely for retaliation and/or anger and leave that money. It's TAINTED money though and the price for accepting it is too high. That's the trade in front of us now.

Take a quick buy off and pay the long term price (which is far more devastating) - or- undergo the process we previously agreed to that has a large portion of the pay off already built-in and a contractual description of how the remainder is to be resolved and who and what the boundaries are. The F/A's arbitration followed their guidelines to the letter and so will ours.

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 12:12 PM
Well said EF. So with that being said, will arbitration force USAIR bases to establish separate intl/dom bases or will it be status quo? Is this the thing they might fear in arbitration? They clearly fear something about arbitration. Let's find out what that is.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 12:19 PM
Well said EF. So with that being said, will arbitration force USAIR bases to establish separate intl/dom bases or will it be status quo? Is this the thing they might fear in arbitration? They clearly fear something about arbitration. Let's find out what that is.

The Green Book is the baseline contract. The purpose of arbitration is NOT to streamline any provisions simply because it would be "easier" for management, but to bring the other contracts IN COMPlIANCE with the Green Book provisions. Parker doesn't get to "propose" contractual changes he made but couldn't get, including wholesale combination of divisions and then "offer" a corresponding compensator based on valuation X. This arbitration's purpose doesn't allow that. Neither did the F/A's and when THEY asked for things they couldn't get through negotiation, they were rejected for exactly that reason. Goose and Gander realities here.

The present Green Book has domicile specific provisions already such as carve out flying in DFW and MIA for former TWA, so this is something well within the boundaries of this arbitral result. It would not change PRESENT costs one iota which IS the litmus.

Surprise
01-06-2015, 12:23 PM
I take back what I said earlier, ghilis. We need more guys like you over here. :)

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 12:25 PM
So if one a yes voter is it only about the money at all other costs? I seriously wish PBS had gone into effect this month. I think that this vote would have been a definite no if people realized just how hard they would be worked in terms of days away from home when paper bidding goes away. My main concern is voting yes on this, then seeing the results on QOL when PBS gets implemented will cause major buyers remorse.

inline five
01-06-2015, 12:27 PM
The Green Book is the baseline contract. The purpose of arbitration is NOT to streamline any provisions simply because it would be "easier" for management, but to bring the other contracts IN COMPlIANCE with the Green Book provisions. Parker doesn't get to "propose" contractual changes he made but couldn't get, including wholesale combination of divisions and then "offer" a corresponding compensator based on valuation X. This arbitration's purpose doesn't allow that. Neither did the F/A's and when THEY asked for things they couldn't get through negotiation, they were rejected for exactly that reason. Goose and Gander realities here.

The present Green Book has domicile specific provisions already such as carve out flying in DFW and MIA for former TWA, so this is something well within the boundaries of this arbitral result. It would not change PRESENT costs one iota which IS the litmus.




If the arbitration panel can create carve outs for HBT and dom/intl in the US Air domiciles there is ZERO reason for the US Air pilots to vote No.

We would get none of the benefits of AA contract with all of the downsides of losing the proposed one (pay).

Jetdriver7
01-06-2015, 12:35 PM
The process that's been playing out at Eagle/Envoy isn't the same process that's playing out here. There's already an end-game set in writing for our JCBA process. With the Envoy pilots, it's open-ended...much like how it will be when this contract ends. In 2020, it may take several rebuffs of the company to get them to play ball. I think we'll all be prepared to do so at that time. Pay, while not "industry leading", will be in the ballpark of industry standard so there shouldn't be any whining about pay rates by then. I would hope that 2020 is more about getting QOL issues than industry-leading pay. Gradual steps is the key.

You are wrong. The play book used at eagle/envoy is exactly the same play book here. Same deal pushed across and everytime saying this is the final offer. I left eagle just after bankruptcy and have watched this mess go down on both sides. It's amazing people do. It educate themselves with this management team when it's done right in front of them. The strategy was completely transparent.

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 12:36 PM
I take back what I said earlier, ghilis. We need more guys like you over here. :)

Haha! You'll be happy to know that most of the poolies I'm in contact with are on board with protecting the dignity of our profession and the preservation of our self worth. I commend you and support your group for the amount of pain you suffered over the past 14 years and still did your job like the consummate professionals that you are. You deserve better and I do have high hopes for this group. I'm by no means a hard liner, although from some of the responses I've gotten I'm starting to feel like some think I am. What happened to our profession to make one think that voting no to a contract that lags our peers significantly is a bad thing?

I used to fly for a guy named Connie Kalitta for 7 years .We signed a contract back in 2007 but gave away some daily credit protection and reduced some work rules. While I didn't vote because I was ineligible on probation, I was thrilled about the 1st year pay raise. The end result was a higher pay scale but lower w-2s for everyone because our pay protections and value of a day was reduced to nothing. We worked longer periods of time for the same pay. Today in 2015 I'm watching this exact same scenario unfold at AA, and I want you to heed this warning that the pay rates are a distraction. Your QOL is at risk, and in times of such economic prosperity if you want to sell it, make them pay for it.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 12:40 PM
If the arbitration panel can create carve outs for HBT and dom/intl in the US Air domiciles there is ZERO reason for the US Air pilots to vote No.

We would get none of the benefits of AA contract with all of the downsides of losing the proposed one (pay).

You sure about that ?

How much of Charlotte could end up with Group I flying and/or elimination of any and all Group III ? How about the same equation in DCA or Philly ? If PHX closes and everyone there needs to move or commute, what do their NEW options look like once they have no future negotiating leverage because Parker has all he wants or needs (not that you care) ?

Many pilots in those doms intend to transfer for various reasons anyway and might have to in the future to maintain their present Group pay scale. What if they contract like PHL to become mostly International Widebody (fed by Group I), but smaller overall ?

Are HBT and combining divisions actually BENEFITS to pilots that you'd be left out of ?

Combined divisions in your domiciles doesn't sound so bad as it exists already and no one is complaining and isn't THAT one of the arguments being made by some Easties as to why Parker's demands aren't so bad ?

HBT isn't a benefit with the exception it may crate additional jobs in SOME domiciles, but I don't recall present East doms being one of them.

Just what are you REALLY missing out on ?

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 12:41 PM
You are wrong. The play book used at eagle/envoy is exactly the same play book here. Same deal pushed across and everytime saying this is the final offer. I left eagle just after bankruptcy and have watched this mess go down on both sides. It's amazing people do. It educate themselves with this management team when it's done right in front of them. The strategy was completely transparent.

$$$ can blind some to just about anything. :cool:

Jetdriver7
01-06-2015, 12:45 PM
Slightly better? $25k this year alone is slight?

Even if we went with the MOU rate, and gave up the pay for this year, the proposed company rate would still be worth around $10k a year more than the MOU rate in 2016.

Sorry, but the miniscule items that the company wants is worth the pay to me.

Yes I do consider it slight given the fact of what's being given up. Why do you think Parker wants no min day + hbt + intl/dom all in one. Another thing coming soon is pbs as well. The money you think you will make extra will disappear due to sitting on trips and in hotels not getting paid. Even 25k is maybe 1400 a month you'll see in your pocket at best. Just be patient for parity.

inline five
01-06-2015, 12:45 PM
In min day is so important, and the company values it at $85 mil over the course of the contract, reduce the pay rates by $85 mil and ask for min day.

Done.

$85 mil over 5 years over 15,000 pilots is around $1100 a year net wage loss, or roughly $1.25/hr. The senior CAs would bear the brunt of the wage reduction anyway.

APA should've done that when they did their LBFO, because they knew how much min day was important to the pilot group.

Jetdriver7
01-06-2015, 12:48 PM
The difference between Texas and I is that he's popping a boner like this is the best contract ever. I just don't want to turn down the money and go to arbitration and then not get ****. The thinking that we'll bring the company to their knees and come out ahead in pay with arbitration is flawed. Why hasn't APA put out detailed information comparing each proposal (mou or company offer)?
The biggest mistakes in this whole situation can be placed on APA for doing the backroom deal with doug and not even including the US air pilots in anything. In the typical AAroggance they thought parker was some small time ceo who would be desperate. They were so gung-ho about getting rid of Horton at all costs they didn't think ahead. Well now we know the cost.

The apa has sent out numerous charts showing mou pay and managements offer and delta as well as delta getting some raises. It's all been sent numerous times.

Timbo
01-06-2015, 12:49 PM
Sorry to interrupt, but I don't have time to go back through 12 pages. Does this offer have Preferential Bidding in it? I'm a Delta guy who was very much against it when PBS came to us. It did cost us a lot of jobs. Exactly how many is up for debate, but the range is anywhere from 8% to more than 15%, depending on what you want to use for parameters, because when we went to PBS, we also raised our monthly caps.

We now have a whole lot of guys who are flying right up to the FAR's, every month. That's 25 more hours, per month, than under our old 75hr. cap system. i.e. they are flying 33% MORE!

How many jobs do you think that eliminates when you multiply it out by the thousands or guys who are doing it? For every 3 guys flying 33% more, that's one less body you need.

I know that PBS was one of the sticking points in your earlier negotiations, but I haven't heard if it's still alive in this agreement, or is it fully dead?

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 12:51 PM
PBS is being implemented as we type. First roll-out on the smaller fleets around fall-ish of 2015. The larger fleets will see it in early 2016.

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 12:52 PM
In min day is so important, and the company values it at $85 mil over the course of the contract, reduce the pay rates by $85 mil and ask for min day.

Done.

$85 mil over 5 years over 15,000 pilots is around $1100 a year net wage loss, or roughly $1.25/hr. The senior CAs would bear the brunt of the wage reduction anyway.

APA should've done that when they did their LBFO, because they knew how much min day was important to the pilot group.

That was an overinflated estimate of the value of min calendar day, probably based on every single lineholder working 20 days a month making 103 hours pay per month. The APA ask of min calendar day for the current proposal is beyond fair, to be viewed as a greedy proposal is shocking to me. Deltas pilot group is 2000 less pilots and their package is currently worth $2.5 billion, according to recent company quotes. That contract was signed in 2012. You're being offered a $1.7 Billion deal, and you have to spread that among 2000 more pilots. To ask for 85 million more (I bet it's not even half that) is beyond fair.

inline five
01-06-2015, 12:55 PM
That was an overinflated estimate of the value of min calendar day, probably based on every single lineholder working 20 days a month making 103 hours pay per month. The APA ask of min calendar day for the current proposal is beyond fair, to be viewed as a greedy proposal is shocking to me. Deltas pilot group is 2000 less pilots and their package is currently worth $2.5 billion, according to recent company quotes. That contract was signed in 2012. You're being offered a $1.7 Billion deal, and you have to spread that among 2000 more pilots. To ask for 85 million more (I bet it's not even half that) is beyond fair.

Of course it's fair, but it's not happening. Y'all need to face the facts.

So with that reality, giving up $1/hr to get the rig in there seems like a smart choice.

We are hindered by the cost neutral MTA. That is what we are fighting against.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 12:56 PM
In min day is so important, and the company values it at $85 mil over the course of the contract, reduce the pay rates by $85 mil and ask for min day.

Done.

$85 mil over 5 years over 15,000 pilots is around $1100 a year net wage loss, or roughly $1.25/hr. The senior CAs would bear the brunt of the wage reduction anyway.

APA should've done that when they did their LBFO, because they knew how much min day was important to the pilot group.

Shoulda, coulda, woulda. We are where we are and the choice now is between instant gratification and terminal invalidity or patience and relevance.

Timbo
01-06-2015, 12:57 PM
PBS is being implemented as we type. First roll-out on the smaller fleets around fall-ish of 2015. The larger fleets will see it in early 2016.

Thanks, did you also raise the monthly max flying cap?

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 12:59 PM
Thanks, did you also raise the monthly max flying cap?

I don't know that detail, so I'm not going to guess if they did or not. I would imagine they'd have to or they'd defeat the purpose of having PBS. Who knows at this point, I'm sure we'll find out more. Regardless of the outcome of this vote, PBS will be here to stay in about a year.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 12:59 PM
Sorry to interrupt, but I don't have time to go back through 12 pages. Does this offer have Preferential Bidding in it? I'm a Delta guy who was very much against it when PBS came to us. It did cost us a lot of jobs. Exactly how many is up for debate, but the range is anywhere from 8% to more than 15%, depending on what you want to use for parameters, because when we went to PBS, we also raised our monthly caps.

We now have a whole lot of guys who are flying right up to the FAR's, every month. That's 25 more hours, per month, than under our old 75hr. cap system. i.e. they are flying 33% MORE!

How many jobs do you think that eliminates when you multiply it out by the thousands or guys who are doing it? For every 3 guys flying 33% more, that's one less body you need.

I know that PBS was one of the sticking points in your earlier negotiations, but I haven't heard if it's still alive in this agreement, or is it fully dead?

What Huey said.

Buuuut, they need the HBT and division consolidation fast to roll PBS out on sched. Without it, they'll need to revamp the process for present rules delaying PBS, unless of course Parker comes back to the table like he did at Envoy multiple times.

It's known as a "bum's rush".

Looks like a lot of us are eagerly taking the bait. :(

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 01:03 PM
That was an overinflated estimate of the value of min calendar day, probably based on every single lineholder working 20 days a month making 103 hours pay per month. The APA ask of min calendar day for the current proposal is beyond fair, to be viewed as a greedy proposal is shocking to me. Deltas pilot group is 2000 less pilots and their package is currently worth $2.5 billion, according to recent company quotes. That contract was signed in 2012. You're being offered a $1.7 Billion deal, and you have to spread that among 2000 more pilots. To ask for 85 million more (I bet it's not even half that) is beyond fair.

The first sign post on Error Blvd. (his post), is "the company values". Virtually everything the company maintains is their valuation is inflated. That's what their excuse was on the last minute rejection of Min. Calendar day and they CLEARLY are untrustworthy.

inline five
01-06-2015, 01:07 PM
The first sign post on Error Blvd. (his post), is "the company values". Virtually everything the company maintains is their valuation is inflated. That's what their excuse was on the last minute rejection of Min. Calendar day and they CLEARLY are untrustworthy.

Welcome to what arbitration will be

Timbo
01-06-2015, 01:12 PM
I don't know that detail, so I'm not going to guess if they did or not. I would imagine they'd have to or they'd defeat the purpose of having PBS. Who knows at this point, I'm sure we'll find out more. Regardless of the outcome of this vote, PBS will be here to stay in about a year.

One thing I like about PBS is, you build your own line (seniority permitting of course). Under our system (and they are all different from what I've heard) we chose the trips we want to fly AND we choose the days we want off. If you are senior, you can hold both, the best trips and the best days off.

Even if you are junior, you can usually get the days off you need for Mom and the kids, the Guard, etc. but you might have to eat some crappy trips to do it. Under our old "Line of Time" bid sheets, the lines were built by crew schedulers, without regard to consistency in days off or trips, they just built lines that fit the mold.

Even if you were the most senior pilot in your category, you might not be able to find a single pre-published line that had both the trips you want, and all the days off you need. :rolleyes: You then had to hope you could swap some trips for the days off you really need, etc.

When our PBS first runs and builds your line, there are still caps, but they could only be as high as about 82 hours. We left some loopholes open as far as swapping a low time 1-2 day trip for a high time 4-6 day trip, after the bids are awarded. That's how guys can be awarded a line with say, 77 hours initially, then they can swap up to the FAR max of 100hrs. in 28 days. :eek:

If we had kept that one loophole closed, Delta would have had to start hiring years ago, instead of just last year. There are a few other loopholes too, all of which lead to more flying, less hiring.

BUT...some pilots LOVE it and don't ever want those loopholes closed.

psw757
01-06-2015, 01:18 PM
One thing I like about PBS is, you build your own line (seniority permitting of course). Under our system (and they are all different from what I've heard) we chose the trips we want to fly AND we choose the days we want off. If you are senior, you can hold both, the best trips and the best days off.

Even if you are junior, you can usually get the days off you need for Mom and the kids, the Guard, etc. but you might have to eat some crappy trips to do it. Under our old "Line of Time" bid sheets, the lines were built by crew schedulers, without regard to consistency in days off or trips, they just built lines that fit the mold.

Even if you were the most senior pilot in your category, you might not be able to find a single pre-published line that had both the trips you want, and all the days off you need. :rolleyes: You then had to hope you could swap some trips for the days off you really need, etc.

When our PBS first runs and builds your line, there are still caps, but they could only be as high as about 82 hours. We left some loopholes open as far as swapping a low time 1-2 day trip for a high time 4-6 day trip, after the bids are awarded. That's how guys can be awarded a line with say, 77 hours initially, then they can swap up to the FAR max of 100hrs. in 28 days. :eek:

If we had kept that one loophole closed, Delta would have had to start hiring years ago, instead of just last year. There are a few other loopholes too, all of which lead to more flying, less hiring.

BUT...some pilots LOVE it and don't ever want those loopholes closed.

Pbs from a past airline for me was great and as you described above. Build your line, add or drop trips with easy, only required to fly 65 hours if I recall correctly.

It all comes down to the specific language built into it and having Union over sight when trips are built.

We don't know any of these details and probably won't for a while but I would venture to say it won't be the doom and gloom that is constantly brought up here.

Heck they make it sound worse than some of the worst regionals.

PurpleTurtle
01-06-2015, 01:22 PM
Pbs from a past airline for me was great and as you described above. Build your line, add or drop trips with easy, only required to fly 65 hours if I recall correctly.

It all comes down to the specific language built into it and having Union over sight when trips are built.

We don't know any of these details and probably won't for a while but I would venture to say it won't be the doom and gloom that is constantly brought up here.

Heck they make it sound worse than some of the worst regionals.


Mesa has "Caledar day pay". Just sayin..

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 01:23 PM
I've talked to one of the guys working the PBS implementation. He's a line pilot and he thinks we'll like PBS once it gets up and running and everyone gets trained on how to use it...and once we absorb the "efficiencies" it'll produce. It will probably slow seniority progression a bit but with the attrition we're seeing and will see, we'll still move on up the ladder, albeit a bit slower.

I'm looking forward to PBS, honestly. Hopefully it'll make me a line holder faster. I think a lot of the crappy lines that AA sees (like the A319 in DFW...wow, those are some ugly lines) will probably get better. Those schedules are pretty inefficient and pretty much just wastes your time away from base. I've been told PBS will help "fix" that to some degree, although not to the degree that min calendar day will.

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 01:24 PM
Delta PBS guarantees a contractual 13 days off in a 30 day bid period and 14 days off in a 31 day bid period. At AA, PBS will only be required to honor your 10 day off contractual minimum. That's the reason delta has been largely successful with PBS, because their contract limited the amount of days away from home.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 01:27 PM
Welcome to what arbitration will be

Really ?

Hmmm.......

Well, before I comment, perhaps you could elaborate on how valuation will impact arbitration ?

Clearly, you thoroughly understand that and I'd like to learn something.

inline five
01-06-2015, 01:33 PM
Really ?

Hmmm.......

Well, before I comment, perhaps you could elaborate on how valuation will impact arbitration ?

Clearly, you thoroughly understand that and I'd like to learn something.

The No voters rationale is they want to sell HBT and dom/intl in arbitration.

The union comes up with a value and the company comes up with a value and the arbitrator determines their "true" value.

Nothing at all from the APA has told us what the value of HBT and dom/intl is...we could be getting a much better deal this time around yet we don't even know it.

We don't have any of the information to make an informed decision.

If we are making an extra $85 mil a year in compensation but giving up $30 mil in concessions, we're coming out way ahead in a cost neutral JCBA process.

It's sickening to me that Delta gets 13/14 days off, min day, etc. Even my commuter had 12/13 days off for lineholders and reserves, min day, duty and trip rigs, etc.

But we're handcuffed by the MTA.

Face realty.

psw757
01-06-2015, 01:33 PM
Mesa has "Caledar day pay". Just sayin..

I think the discussion was regarding pbs language

Timbo
01-06-2015, 01:34 PM
Delta PBS guarantees a contractual 13 days off in a 30 day bid period and 14 days off in a 31 day bid period. At AA, PBS will only be required to honor your 10 day off contractual minimum. That's the reason delta has been largely successful with PBS, because their contract limited the amount of days away from home.

One drawback to the Delta system is, the ability to swap up to FAR max flying. That's the part that eliminated jobs, as I said above, for every three guys doing it, that's one less pilot you need in category. If we had closed some of those loopholes there wouldn't have been so much stagnation.

Another drawback is, if you are junior, you are going to fly both the crappiest trips, on the worst days (weekends and holidays). Under our old line of time bidding, if you were junior, you might get lucky and find a good trip over the holidays, or have to fly a bunch of crappy trips...but be able to get Christmas off.

Now...no way. The good trips will all be sucked up by the senior pilots, all that's left when the computer gets down to the bottom line holders, is crappy trips, every weekend and every holiday.

That's why guys now bid to be as senior as possible in category, because PBS makes Seniority matter more. Being senior got better, but being junior sucks more.

psw757
01-06-2015, 01:37 PM
Not sure how the lines are at AA but on the US side I can't say I've ever seen a line with 10 days off. I may be wrong though.

ghilis101
01-06-2015, 01:37 PM
One drawback to the Delta system is, the ability to swap up to FAR max flying. That's the part that eliminated jobs, as I said above, for every three guys doing it, that's one less pilot you need in category. If we had closed some of those loopholes there wouldn't have been so much stagnation.

Another drawback is, if you are junior, you are going to fly both the crappiest trips, on the worst days (weekends and holidays). Under our old line of time bidding, if you were junior, you might get lucky and find a good trip over the holidays, or have to fly a bunch of crappy trips...but be able to get Christmas off.

Now...no way. The good trips will all be sucked up by the senior pilots, all that's left when the computer gets down to the bottom line holders, is crappy trips, every weekend and every holiday.

That's why guys now bid to be as senior as possible in category, because PBS makes Seniority matter more. Being senior got better, but being junior sucks more.

This is true Timbo. Imagine the kind of trips junior AA pilots are about to be subjected to with only 10 days off, and no min calendar day to serve as a credit buffer to prevent a piling on of low credit trips. They will have no backstop.

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 01:39 PM
Not sure how the lines are at AA but on the US side I can't say I've ever seen a line with 10 days off. I may be wrong though.

I've seen a few secondaries with 17-18 days of flying, but that's about it. Most of them run around 15-16 days of flying.

There are some AA lines (particularly on the Airbus in DFW and MIA) that are running 18-19 days of flying. I'm not sure why that is...but the trips don't look particularly efficient in any case. Hopefully PBS will help out in that arena.

Timbo
01-06-2015, 01:40 PM
Yeah...we just got our mid day up to 5:15, but now the company is building some 5 day trips, they say it's more efficient...

Think about flying 5 on, 3 off! Ouch!

psw757
01-06-2015, 01:43 PM
Mesa has "Caledar day pay". Just sayin..
Oh and the they don't get paid jack sh%# and there schedules still suck and they get 10 days off on rsv.

Really comparing this to Mesa?

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 01:45 PM
This is true Timbo. Imagine the kind of trips junior AA pilots are about to be subjected to with only 10 days off, and no min calendar day to serve as a credit buffer to prevent a piling on of low credit trips. They will have no backstop.

DFW A319/I had 12-day off lines with a 2 on/1 off cadence. Many of the MIA I Widebody reserves get 30 house out of domicile and effectively end up with min days off.

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 01:50 PM
DFW A319/I had 12-day off lines with a 2 on/1 off cadence. Many of the MIA I Widebody reserves get 30 house out of domicile and effectively end up with min days off.

I'm wondering if the DFW A319 lines suck that bad because it's a new jet and it's still being worked into the schedule...the CLT and PHL A319 lines are no where near that bad, with the exception of a few secondaries.

psw757
01-06-2015, 01:53 PM
DFW A319/I had 12-day off lines with a 2 on/1 off cadence. Many of the MIA I Widebody reserves get 30 house out of domicile and effectively end up with min days off.
are you junior on that equipment?

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 01:53 PM
The No voters rationale is they want to sell HBT and dom/intl in arbitration.

Never heard this. Besides, that is outside the scope of arbitration. Any "trades" would have to be negotiated between the parties and not the arbitrators and then YES, the arbitrators could allow that between the parties (even with a mediator), but arbitrators cannot themselves go outside the scope of the MOU provisions.

The union comes up with a value and the company comes up with a value and the arbitrator determines their "true" value.

Nothing at all from the APA has told us what the value of HBT and dom/intl is...we could be getting a much better deal this time around yet we don't even know it.

We don't have any of the information to make an informed decision.

If we are making an extra $85 mil a year in compensation but giving up $30 mil in concessions, we're coming out way ahead in a cost neutral JCBA process.

It's sickening to me that Delta gets 13/14 days off, min day, etc. Even my commuter had 12/13 days off for lineholders and reserves, min day, duty and trip rigs, etc.

But we're handcuffed by the MTA.

Face realty.

You are enmeshed in misguided fantasy and rationalizing your position with what you want the arbitration to be as opposed to what it is. This makes it easier to convince yourself voting for this TA is the best option.

Again, this is all erroneous. You are confusing THIS arbitration (which is not like most due to the specific provisions of the MOU) with NEGOTIATION. Even IF an opportunity to negotiate should occur during the arbitral process, it just means we have MORE leverage because the arbitrators hands are tied from unilaterally crafting tit-for-tat valuation trades. That's actually a BETTER place to negotiate then what has occurs so far.

Might I suggest you contact the source, that being APA legal and talk to EJ yourself for a better understanding of the arbitration situation ?

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 01:55 PM
are you junior on that equipment?

No, just have spent time perusing various bid statuses from time to time to examine different lifestyles for potential bid considerations in the future. I've done that periodically with every bid status at legacy AA.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 01:56 PM
I'm wondering if the DFW A319 lines suck that bad because it's a new jet and it's still being worked into the schedule...the CLT and PHL A319 lines are no where near that bad, with the exception of a few secondaries.

Not sure if they're still that bad, but they were. I haven't done a bid status tour in awhile. C & R has plenty of whining about various schedules and reserve treatment though. Not too many picnics out there right now. :cool:

R57 relay
01-06-2015, 01:57 PM
Yeah...we just got our mid day up to 5:15, but now the company is building some 5 day trips, they say it's more efficient...

Think about flying 5 on, 3 off! Ouch!

Yeah, they giveth and they taketh away. That's just it, a lot of guys are saying "Well, look at how much this trip would pay with the 5:15 calendar day!" without considering that the pairing optimizer will not just run the same trip and pay us more. It puts a penalty on soft time and will try to build the most efficient trips. You won't have a CLT-LAX-CLT red eye now paying 15:45, those legs will be incorporated into other trips. I think the 5:15 calendar day would be better, but not millions of dollars better.

A couple of other things to think about. The MOU had a 1:-3.25 trip rig for trips with a greater than 24 hour overnight. Not great, but would have added over 5% to my line this month. The APA gave it away! What did that tell the company?

And finally, I got an answer to my question of why the 10 reps voted against sending the last offer to the company, from one of the 10. He said that the APA and company were close to closing out the contract and he felt we could have gotten, at a minimum, the 5:15 calendar day had we not asked for too much. Hmmm. They were about to give it to us last week before the ask, but after they wouldn't with the BOD offering to pass it without a vote, and no other asks, on the 3rd. Doesn't add up, so that leads me to believe the company is not scared of arbitration.

The kicker to al

inline five
01-06-2015, 03:02 PM
Never heard this. Besides, that is outside the scope of arbitration. Any "trades" would have to be negotiated between the parties and not the arbitrators and then YES, the arbitrators could allow that between the parties (even with a mediator), but arbitrators cannot themselves go outside the scope of the MOU provisions.



You are enmeshed in misguided fantasy and rationalizing your position with what you want the arbitration to be as opposed to what it is. This makes it easier to convince yourself voting for this TA is the best option.

Again, this is all erroneous. You are confusing THIS arbitration (which is not like most due to the specific provisions of the MOU) with NEGOTIATION. Even IF an opportunity to negotiate should occur during the arbitral process, it just means we have MORE leverage because the arbitrators hands are tied from unilaterally crafting tit-for-tat valuation trades. That's actually a BETTER place to negotiate then what has occurs so far.

Might I suggest you contact the source, that being APA legal and talk to EJ yourself for a better understanding of the arbitration situation ?

I'm not sure if you're intentionally missing the gist of what I'm trying to get through to you or not.

I disagree that it's a BETTER place to be. At this point, my gut says we are getting a contract VALUE that is overall higher than the present one.

If we go to arbitration we lose the overall higher value and end up with status quo. Regardless of what we trade, it's going to end up being cost neutral which as an overall value is much lower than what is currently on the table, IMO.

We need the APA to provide relevant details and costs involved with everything as well as the language...

AFRES Bum
01-06-2015, 04:24 PM
I don't want to give anything up and can live with what the MTA offers... I think they will come back and offer more negotiating over the next few years... if i am wrong, so what; Delta will have a stronger negotiating position with us going to arbitration ( we are willingly offering a lower total compensation and lower QOL issues then Delta through 2020 if this is voted in )

we vote this down, see what the company offers and then make a better deal in 4-5 years with Delta and United making more than if we undercut them with this deal.

inline five
01-06-2015, 04:30 PM
I don't want to give anything up and can live with what the MTA offers... I think they will come back and offer more negotiating over the next few years... if i am wrong, so what; Delta will have a stronger negotiating position with us going to arbitration ( we are willingly offering a lower total compensation and lower QOL issues then Delta through 2020 if this is voted in )

we vote this down, see what the company offers and then make a better deal in 4-5 years with Delta and United making more than if we undercut them with this deal.
We will be undercutting them regardless of what we do.

Has there been a fact checked document showing the value of the MTA contract and this proposed JCBA? Without it no one can make a firm statement one way or the other.

AFRES Bum
01-06-2015, 04:35 PM
We will be undercutting them regardless of what we do.

Has there been a fact checked document showing the value of the MTA contract and this proposed JCBA? Without it no one can make a firm statement one way or the other.

I will concede I have no firm numbers more than you or anybody else... I know I don't need the extra money and don't want to fly to Europe with 2 pilots for a 50 hour layover 16 days a month for 76 hours like what the company is offering.

The guys I work with in the military have shared what they have at Delta and United and it is much better than this offer from the company minus an hourly pay rate...

Jetdriver7
01-06-2015, 04:44 PM
We will be undercutting them regardless of what we do.

Has there been a fact checked document showing the value of the MTA contract and this proposed JCBA? Without it no one can make a firm statement one way or the other.

Saying we will be undercutting no mAtter what we do is a flat out distortion of reality.
Second you say you need numbers and arguing valuations. No one is arguing that the company offer isn't worth more. Majority of us are looking down the road rather than to next month. This is detrimental to your "dollar valuations" taking into account the big picture for the future. Ie. state of industry, future negotiations, precedents, and not to mention that we get a raises with our current agreement without giving anything up.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 05:57 PM
I'm not sure if you're intentionally missing the gist of what I'm trying to get through to you or not.

I disagree that it's a BETTER place to be. At this point, my gut says we are getting a contract VALUE that is overall higher than the present one.

If we go to arbitration we lose the overall higher value and end up with status quo. Regardless of what we trade, it's going to end up being cost neutral which as an overall value is much lower than what is currently on the table, IMO.

We need the APA to provide relevant details and costs involved with everything as well as the language...

Got your gist, but I'm not sure you're getting my vibe of tragedy. To wit, with arbitration we still retain items Parker wants and very likely will try to again negotiate for (just like a Envoy). With this TA, he has everything but scope and the cheapest pilots in all contractual aspects essentially forever. With no contractual weapons of leverage, we're left with putting it all on the line in 2020 or likely years later and let's face it......if we can't do it now, we don't do it in 5-10 years when we're all older and more risk adverse.

Game over.

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 06:07 PM
"Tragedy"

You use this word a lot. A tragedy is watching Enron employees lose everything.

Meh, whatever. Get back to rowing Parker's slave ship, Eaglefly!

inline five
01-06-2015, 06:32 PM
Got your gist, but I'm not sure you're getting my vibe of tragedy. To wit, with arbitration we still retain items Parker wants and very likely will try to again negotiate for (just like a Envoy). With this TA, he has everything but scope and the cheapest pilots in all contractual aspects essentially forever. With no contractual weapons of leverage, we're left with putting it all on the line in 2020 or likely years later and let's face it......if we can't do it now, we don't do it in 5-10 years when we're all older and more risk adverse.

Game over.

You're still ignoring the fact that the dom/intl and HBT really isn't worth all that much. In dollar terms.

Parker gets his either way - either he gets the pilots to agree to do away with the above or he keeps pay rates lower and that compensates for the lack of efficiency created by not getting his wants.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 06:41 PM
"Tragedy"

You use this word a lot. A tragedy is watching Enron employees lose everything.

Meh, whatever. Get back to rowing Parker's slave ship, Eaglefly!

I do use that term. That's because I'm watching a shipwreck and can't look away, but it's the yes voters begging to man the oars on the S.Y.O. (ScrewYouOver) Parker.

Not to worry. I plan to stock my lifeboat in 2020 and row myself away before she rolls over on down to Davy Jones' locker. :)

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 06:53 PM
You really should quit flying here and go write soap opera story lines.

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 07:00 PM
You're still ignoring the fact that the dom/intl and HBT really isn't worth all that much. In dollar terms.

Parker gets his either way - either he gets the pilots to agree to do away with the above or he keeps pay rates lower and that compensates for the lack of efficiency created by not getting his wants.

You are right. Neither HBT nor the combination of divisions really amounts to much dollar-wise. It's not much of a QOL give, if you can call it that. There's as much upside as down, it really depends on which angle you focus on most. It could mean a net reduction in headcount, but potential for growth which could ultimately grow headcount. Overall even APA valued all of the company's requests at around $120 million over the life of the contract.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 07:02 PM
You really should quit flying here and go write soap opera story lines.

In 2020, you may want to yourself. My condolences in advance.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 07:03 PM
You're still ignoring the fact that the dom/intl and HBT really isn't worth all that much. In dollar terms.

Parker gets his either way - either he gets the pilots to agree to do away with the above or he keeps pay rates lower and that compensates for the lack of efficiency created by not getting his wants.

You'll always think I'm ignoring that until I agree with you.

I'm sorry, but you have a looooong wait ahead of you on that.

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 07:04 PM
In 2020, you may want to yourself. My condolences in advance.

I doubt it. Unlike you I actually like my job.

eaglefly
01-06-2015, 07:10 PM
I doubt it. Unlike you I actually like my job.

Yea sure, I hate my job. :cool:

Too funny.

I see no purpose in pointlessly wasting my time with you. Congrats on your yes vote and say hi ! to your idol for me at the next P conference.

Hueypilot
01-06-2015, 07:12 PM
Well based on your posts, it sure doesn't sound like you like working here.

80ktsClamp
01-06-2015, 07:16 PM
Yeah...we just got our mid day up to 5:15, but now the company is building some 5 day trips, they say it's more efficient...

Think about flying 5 on, 3 off! Ouch!

FWIW- the company has never stopped building 5-day trips.

Looking at the credit, I don't think it's due to 5:15. Other than the 777/744 fence, it was the final holdout from the merger that hadn't cross populated. It was either do away with them, or keep them- and enough guys ask for them to where around 10% each category is what they are doing.

(sorry for the DL invasion, AA guys- just wanted to clarify)

Route66
01-07-2015, 01:40 AM
I doubt it. Unlike you I actually like my job.

I'm with you. Of course, EF will now qualify you as "anti-union" for going against him.

nwa757
01-07-2015, 07:25 AM
Min calendar day or no way.

Why do you think they are offering so much money upfront? It's because they want HBT and int/dom. If you think they are offering this much money for no reason other then out of the goodness of their heart and you need to rethink this.

We have leverage lets use it and get min calendar day. There is no reason that in this profitable environment we should be working more days than Delta and United pilots for less money.

eaglefly
01-07-2015, 07:36 AM
Min calendar day or no way.

Why do you think they are offering so much money upfront? It's because they want HBT and int/dom. If you think they are offering this much money for no reason other then out of the goodness of their heart and you need to rethink this.

We have leverage lets use it and get min calendar day. There is no reason that in this profitable environment we should be working more days than Delta and United pilots for less money.

Look a little beyond that. The APA gang of 10 (the crowd who wanted to send the first version of Parkers ultimatum to the pilots for vote) acknowledges in their attack against the gang of 12 that their move resulted in Parker balking when value was still on the table. So, in other words Parker could give more, has it, but out of spite, simply spit in our face for insulting him with a fair offer that he disliked. He blew another loogie in our faces when ALL the reps came together held out an olive branch to secure MCD.

Is this the guy you want to reward for this behavior ?

Is this the guy you expect to be any different in 2020 ?

I repeatedly hear how stupid APA (and AA pilots) was for trusting Parker to do this or that, yet now we ALL will capitulate to him to guilty of exactly that error, apparently having turned our backs on the past. We ALL now are AA pilots who will inherit the permanent title of "enablers" for Parker's tyranny.

This is our last opportunity to change the reality of this history.

Absolutely mind-boggling if we screw this up now.

texaspilot76
01-07-2015, 10:41 AM
APA should have fought for that calendar day from the start. But instead, they worried too much about furlough credit, disability, etc, i.e. stuff that doesn't affect most of us.

inline five
01-07-2015, 10:50 AM
APA should have fought for that calendar day from the start. But instead, they worried too much about furlough credit, disability, etc, i.e. stuff that doesn't affect most of us.

They also focused way too much on hourly pay. Typical AA. Hopefully by the next time we start talking those guys have been booted out or retired and we can get some fresh blood in the leadership.

nimslow
01-07-2015, 10:51 AM
APA should have fought for that calendar day from the start. But instead, they worried too much about furlough credit, disability, etc, i.e. stuff that doesn't affect most of us.

Until the day that stuff does affect you. Then it's going to be pretty important.

psw757
01-07-2015, 11:00 AM
Until the day that stuff does affect you. Then it's going to be pretty important.

I think the point he was trying to make is, APA really seemed to put their focus on pay during this process, even in their two counter proposals it was mainly about pay. I truly think this is what they thought would be of most value to the pilots.

Now it seems everyone is saying screw the money we want the work rules but problem is it is too late for that. They could have countered with no pay raises but lets get a 5:15 day and better disability or just 321 as group iii and that's it. But then everyone would be *****ing about the substandard pay.

Typical pilot bull%$#@, never happy no matter what.

Whole situation is a real shame and they could have done better for us and the previous poster is right, when this is all over there will be a push for some new blood in this clown show of a union.

PurpleTurtle
01-07-2015, 11:07 AM
Well based on your posts, it sure doesn't sound like you like working here.

Oh, the you aren't happy you should just quit routine. :D If Parker doesn't like pilots that demand he keep his word to pay like Delta when we make Delta profits, then he should just quit. :cool:

Delta makes more, is home several days more each month, and gets paid two extra months pay each year. Parker needs to quit.

PurpleTurtle
01-07-2015, 11:11 AM
I'm with you. Of course, EF will now qualify you as "anti-union" for going against him.

You told us you don't even belong to the union, and you blame EF. Join and pay your dues. Dead beat. Just sayin' :D

Route66
01-07-2015, 12:53 PM
I think the point he was trying to make is, APA really seemed to put their focus on pay during this process, even in their two counter proposals it was mainly about pay. I truly think this is what they thought would be of most value to the pilots.

Now it seems everyone is saying screw the money we want the work rules but problem is it is too late for that. They could have countered with no pay raises but lets get a 5:15 day and better disability or just 321 as group iii and that's it. But then everyone would be *****ing about the substandard pay.

Typical pilot bull%$#@, never happy no matter what.

Whole situation is a real shame and they could have done better for us and the previous poster is right, when this is all over there will be a push for some new blood in this clown show of a union.

Ditto.

You told us you don't even belong to the union, and you blame EF. Join and pay your dues. Dead beat. Just sayin' :D

The fact is, I didn't say. But does it really matter? Many of the guys I talk to out on the line is they are voting for it. I didn't say how I would vote.

P.S. I still think the APA is a "chicken$h!t" operation.

eaglefly
01-07-2015, 01:54 PM
APA should have fought for that calendar day from the start. But instead, they worried too much about furlough credit, disability, etc, i.e. stuff that doesn't affect most of us.

One day you may need disability and then you'll understand how critical it is. You sound VERY myopic and short-sided in your thinking. Your impending bribe will dissolve quickly once your Obamacare premiums are factored in.

eaglefly
01-07-2015, 01:55 PM
They also focused way too much on hourly pay. Typical AA. Hopefully by the next time we start talking those guys have been booted out or retired and we can get some fresh blood in the leadership.

Like that's going to make a difference. You're screwed, you just refuse to understand that yet. You will.:cool: