PilotJ3

Protected pilots are not contractual. Sorry...try again.

Now everything else, yes...but 824 and protected pilots cannot be changed.

eaglefly

The provisions regarding the Preferential Hiring Agreement between the parties to move 824 Eagle (Envoy) pilots was as a result of Arbitration FLO-0108 under George Nicolau. This arbitration included no other provisions for any other pilots. After that, the parties (namely ALPA and both AMR and Eagle management) met to craft the PPA Agreement. My understanding is that this agreement was NOT an arbitral award, but an agreement outside of that prior to the completion of the arbitration and the arbitrator having to make a legal award and as such is contractual and not legal. It was NOT an award by an arbitrator and there is a distinct difference.

At any rate, as I stated that in a consolidation scenario which can be in several forms, willing agreement is what will be sought and almost certainly occur from the various MEC's. Pay to play or be pushed aside.

Do you think present whipsawing was the ONLY reason to shrink Envoy and make them an equal sized partner in the trio of wholly-owneds while the other two were being built up ?

The primary error was the belief they could build the other two while shrinking Envoy fast enough without teething pains. That has not panned out to their expectations and thus the temporary stop-gap moves of reshuffling some flying back to Envoy who PRESENTLY can handle that flying.

AdiosMikeFox

You didn't mention it, but you used phraseology that implied that this is the solution. The Act is the only thing that requires that "no special treatment" be the rule, otherwise anything and everything is up for grabs, including a staple. The Act prevents that and is the only thing preventing a staple other than management "kindness" and what can be negotiated.

Apparently you unwittingly paraphrased the intent of the act in order to sound like your position was based on legal precedent, but I apologize. I was wrong. You just made it all up to sound like you knew what you were talking about.

Regardless, I have read much of the summarized Act and people always refer to "based on career expectation" as a reason for a junior crew member who might be say, holding a line, should be placed on a combined list ahead of a more senior pilot who is still on reserve, or jump in a flow queue ahead of someone else. The Act is much more complex than that and covers special circumstances (likely the 824 and possibly protected pilots would fall under this), longevity, category and status, so anyone thinking that simply shuffling non-Envoy pilots into a Envoy seniority list is going to disrupt these items needs to take a step back. However, the reverse is true, and if a merged carrier had a flow of their own ENY pilots may not be allowed to participate or take cuts.

TL;DR: Get a grip and don't listen to Eaglefly's predictions about seniority list integration between a fictional ENY/XXX merger because he doesn't know what he's talking about.

Cujo665

Here........
First it was 170 flows
Then it was 240 flows
Now it's 300 flows

220 upgrades drops it just shy of the 2011 hires.....

Sorry Eaglefly and RJ; but this next generation hit it right and isn't going to be stuck in regionals for decades. Sucks to be you guys I guess.

eaglefly

You keep using the term "Act" or "The Act" ?

What on God's earth are you babbling about ?

It seems you may again be referring to The McCaskill-Bond Amendment, (or statute) and if so, it is YOU that is absolutely clueless. Go read it.

That Amendments legislation born of the AA-TWA consolidation is a labor-protective provision enacted to define a methodology whereby two parties (airline) in a "covered transaction" agree to integrate seniority lists by provisions stipulated in as per Allegheny-Mohawk sections 3 and 13. Section 3 describes a process of negotiation and if no agreement, section 13 provides for binding arbitration to settle the matter. That's it. It is in place to ensure a fair PROCESS, but makes no guarantees about a fair OUTCOME. What is a "covered transaction" ?

In a nutshell, that requires at least 50% transfer of the value, equity or assets of a carrier to another. News flash kid..............there are multiple abilities for AAG to strong-arm Envoy (or any other AAG regional) into capitulation to ensure a seamless integration of equality. What will Envoy look like when the last of the 824 go in perhaps 12-18 months depending on how aggressive AAG is about the timieline for whatever their plan ?

That's right, 40 E-175's (some not even on line yet) and a boatload of expendable 50-seaters. Suppose for example (and this is just ONE example), they offer your MEC two options.......A. agree to dilute YOUR flow provisions to include pilots from proposed integration carrier X for a complete merge or B. face the transfer of your E-175's including presently qualified pilots (somewhat like the old PAN Am did) and the liquidation of the remaining fleet and assets with only an offer of employment for the remainder of the unqualified pilots ?

Which do you want............bad or worse ?

You can be sure what your MEC will do.

Think that's far-fetched ?

Think again pal and that is simply ONE possible scenario available to AAG and guess what..........that would NOT covered by McCaskill-Bond.

You psycho-babble above is irrelevant and by thoughtlessly belching that, it tells me you are WAY out of your league in having a solid handle on what your future may hold. Stop thinking like you got it all figured out before you get blind-sided .............again. It is my suggestion that anyone predicating their future at an AAG regional NOT listen to the irrelevant claims and information provided by the clearly misguided and uninformed.......unless that is, you also have no problem taking your seat in the bumpy ride of past history as well.

eaglefly

LOL !

I always shake my head at those confident of spending money that is not in their hand, but promised to be enroute in the mail. Even worse, to see those who convince others their check too from the same place is also in the mail and to breathe easy. Obviously, you have no interest in the past history of the entity whose both signature and promises are also on and tied to your enroute check, for if you did, you'd be FAR more cautious about whooping it up with your reckless spending and assurances to others of good times that cannot fail.

Keep trying to kick that football Charlie Brown, Lucy (and me) are having a ball !

AdiosMikeFox

Here you are blathering on about assets when the original discussion was about seniority lists. Your blathering about assets completely sidesteps discussing the provisions I paraphrased from the MBA, one does not relieve you of the other, but if it makes you feel better to talk about how there is no other course of action than for everything to go to hell in a hand skeet, suit yourself.

Keep changing the subject instead of the discussing the original topic.

emb145

Here you go..........says the Cuj. After all, the company typed it up and published, it's written in stone right? In this month's edition of Aero Crew News is a nice fluff piece about Eaglevoy. CAPTAIN Ric Wilson is quoted as saying 2.5/6 is on the way.

The Cuj talks like 220 more upgrades will get them into 2011 hires. That's true, however the latest bid award is the only FACT you have to go from and it shows the most junior CA in the company awarded with seniority of 7 years and 11 months. Where's the much touted 2.5/6? I agree that it's not 8/16 anymore. It's 7.9/15.8.

I'm sorry, Eaglevoy management is just feeding you guys yet another line of bull***t along with an even larger helping of sunshine and rainbows. The Cuj is just pouring it on thick and selling it up like a greasy, oily hair used car salesman.

I learned to never believe their crap or trust them in my years there. Eff the flow. I went looking elsewhere and fortunately was able to bail. Others haven't been so lucky.

eaglefly

That's because the "provisions" you babble about are not only non-existant in M-B, they are essentially irrelevant (perhaps except in your own confused mind) under the likely scenario. Jesus..........gotta be ADD..........simply gotta be. No other explanation. M-B does not define integration methods. ALPA merger policy does, but again, the point of mentioning "assets" is that to force yours or another union to play ball, M-B can be sidestepped as no "merger" occurs, but instead an "asset acquisition with an offer of employment" (see AA/TWA for which M-B was a byproduct of).

Oh what's the use...............you sound hopeless and there is always those who never make it out and are casualties of their own making. A chair of history has your name on it and is waiting. You can (and will) check in, but obviously you'll not be among the ones checking out.

My condolences in advance.

FlameNSky

Sounds like you are just trying to make yourself feel better about the decision.

So far, the only thing that you and eaglefly have to offer in opposition to Wilson's announcement is, "Things Change" and "It hasn't worked in the past." Fact of the matter is for the last 4 years, the flow has been working. I would have liked to see higher numbers, yes but the fact is, over 600 envoy pilots have flowed to AA in the last 4 years. Parker has publically stated that his plan to staff the regionals is by offering the flow. So far, he has done everything that he said he would in that regard. Since he has said that is his plan and he is acting in accord with that plan, I would say the likelihood of 300 envoy pilots flowing next year is a lot more certain than not.