X Rated

And you forgot the operational income that Worldspan brought to AA prior to the sale.

X

aa73

This discussion can go round and round for years without proving any significant points. We will be forever debating the pros and cons of the deal. However, L&G, the fact remains that what's done is done and we seriously have to move on in committing to a new contract that benefits EVERY AA pilot, regardless of background.

Management absolutely drools over our infighting. We should know better. I constantly fall victim to it despite knowing better.

Let's not constantly hijack any thread that has to do with AA. Looking at the title of this thread, it deals with management's presentation of current contract negotiations. We can all thank FliFast - AS USUAL - for turning this into the usual AA-TWA trash talk. All you had to do, FF, was inquire as to the possibilities of making furloughees whole, and it would have evoked a professional and courteous response from your fellow AA coworkers on the progress so far. Instead, you open with, and I quote, "I missed you mention that they furloughed 1900 TWA pilots too after the 2003' contract. Most of which are still on the street 5-7 years later." And then you wonder why we respond somewhat defensively.

Nobody can dispute the fact that many of our coworkers got royally screwed out of this deal, the majority being TWA folks that enjoyed good seniority at their carrier. Nobody can also dispute the fact that many of our AA coworkers also got furloughed out of this deal, while folks who remained employed fell victim to further stagnation due to said deal. Obviously, all points are relative depending on one's misfortune - a furloughee will never relate to the complaints of someone who remained employed.

But one thing we all possess is some level of diplomacy. I ask you all to use it before posting, myself included. Remember folks - management is always watching, undoubtedly on these message boards as well. Why not show them we can stick together as a group in trying to secure an industry-leading contract instead of all the infighting.

Rant off, gotta go board my commuting flight.
73

X Rated

Yes, I'm sure they do. This could have easily been avoided years ago. Now tell me aa73, just what do you think created this infighting? Could it have been an imposed integration? Who insisted on that?

Again, it's how it was done--not the fact that it was. Sure there were nAAtives who were hurt in the whole resizing of the airline. Would they have been gone if the TWA deal hadn't of happened? The bottom is the bottom.

You'll never show management unity amongst the pilots while you continue to confine the TWA pilots to Supplement CC and one domicile in which to realize the only beneficial part of CC. I hate to say it, but the APA gets what it deserves in this regard. It's interesting that more TWA pilots being recalled will only increase the dissension within the pilot group.

You want support from the majority of TWA pilots then treat them as if they're equals. As long as you've contractually stripped them and marooned them to one domicile I doubt you'll see as much support as you'd like.

X

Rotorhead

WOW! Was that pay time or block time?

X-rated, well said. Just got bought by DAL myself. The first day after the list was out I went over to talk to some DAL pilots, shake hands, etc., they walked away as I approached. I am sure our legacy will be no differenct.

NoWake200

Thanks... for the intel.

aa73

X, we´ll just have to agree to disagree on a lot of issues. I respect your opinion. Right now, the primary focus of the APA - with or without TWA support - is to get an industry leading contract that benefits everyone, regardless of background. I think they will succeed.

As far as your comment regarding pilot dissension with further TWA recalls, its surprising to note the number of TWA recallees who have joined the good fight at APA. I´ve met a few of them, and they are definitely on board in restoring this profession.

Regards,
73

Cipollini

Wow! Interesting gyration in response to my post. Maybe I should have put a disclaimer on my post for the slower readers... Caution the following post will use a little bit of irony and a touch of humor to make a point. I could then perhaps further simplify it for others in need with a side note, for example - (hey aa73, this post is another way of saying isn't it a little silly to complain about the hardship of having to listen to people who are in an actual hardship?)


Additionally, not sure where you decided that I was continually posting ("whining") about the past and the great aal in a manner which was such a burden for you to bear. I believe in fact the post you were referring to was my first ever on a forum even mentioning aa.

Finally it has been my experience that if you have to point out how professional and civilized you are, that you may not be as effective as you think you are at either. This forum can be a good source of info in between the mud slinging sessions


ok sling away.

X Rated

Thank you. I have a differing opinion with the APA's outcome--I think it will be good but I believe that it won't be anything near what you see advertised now. I support the goal but "will believe it when I see it."

The TWA recallees who have returned are fortunate enough to have some nAAtives junior to them in STL. When there are more recalls and you run into the situation of a nAAtive sitting in a STL seat (to which they never should have expected) the attitude of the TWA pilots will most likely change.

When STL posts a "no vacancy" and has more former TWA clamoring to get in to utilize their Supp CC rights (and enjoy a drive to work instead of an airborne commute) you can expect more of that same attitude. Factor in those who were coastal based in the TWA days and their future on long term reserve and I think the attitude tanks.

Watch, wait, and see.

X

p.s. Why won't the APA support any of the TWA pilots' Supp CC grievances? They haven't supported any to date--even the one that would have brought back a few hundred nAAtives in the process...

aa73

Care to list those grievances? I never heard of one that would "bring back more natives." The only one I've heard had to do with vacation accrual, and that one was never even a part of CC. I do know that APA fully supports LOS for all furloughees.

Most natives I know that are still in STL are scrambling out every month, including yours truly (last year.) I enjoyed my time there, as well as working with those folks. However, there is no future in STL for natives, as it is a protected TWA base.

Regarding your beef with being confined to STL... hey, I didn't write the integration, nor did I vote on it. Had I had my way, I would have figured some formula for TWA pilots to have remained in TWA's old bases. But I do know for a fact that the whole integration was crafted with the help of an arbitrator's guidance and opinion on what would have transcribed had it been arbitrated. Obviously, it was deemed passable by the courts and the judge. Does it make it fair, depends on who you ask. But integrations are never crafted on fairness, they are crafted on what will stand up in court. This has always held true in all mergers/acquisitions, because so many folks will have a different idea on what "fair" is.

I will never change your opinions on this subject, nor will you ever change ours. All that's left out of this deal is a bunch more employees, a diminished amount of airplanes, and everyone talking smack at each other about their own personal opinion on what should have happened. When you stop and think about it, what does that really accomplish? Nothing, other than bitterness. In other words, the typical result of a merger/acquisition. In the end, the fact remains that you are now all AA pilots, and for those of you who choose to come back when recalled, you will be AA pilots working under a (hopefully) industry-leading contract brought to you by the hard work of APA, regardless of whether you join or not. Those are the facts. The rest is just talk.

X Rated

There was a grievance relative to the computation of Supp CC allowed (TWA) Captains that—at the time due to recalls being done “in the ratio”—would have required that 100 more TWA pilots have been recalled to Captain, forcing recalls to bring the other ratioed nAAtives with them.

The other pertains to Supp CC and the TWA pilots’ rights to having SEP and Vacation bidding priority over nAAtives in STL. This is explained in the APA’s own “Explanation of Supplement CC”. Instead, TWA pilots don’t have the right to bid SEP and Vacation in STL ahead of the nAAtives—unlike monthly bidding.

Both grievances were unsupported—if not vehemently opposed—by the APA.

There’s nothing in Supp CC to force the nAAtives out. While TWA pilots are fenced into STL, not all nAAtives are fenced out.

Supp CC has never been tested in court. What was tested—based on the information available at the time—was APA’s duty of fair representation to the TWA pilots. The TWA pilots didn’t endorse Supp CC—unlike the OZ/TWA integration or, say, Morris and Southwest. Reading Bernard v. ALPA is a good start.

I disagree with your assertion of integrations being “crafted in fairness”—the Delta/Northwest arbitration yielded what I view as a very fair integration. Similar arguments could be made for USAir and America West. APA has their scope and successorship clauses crafted to avoid these very outcomes—to a predatory advantage. So much so that now there’s legislation to avoid such an advantage.


You’re right—our opinions will differ. Being an AA pilot would mean that there’s no separate Supplement to abide by. Until then, there are AA pilots and former TWA pilots who wear the same uniform in STL.

I do hope that recallees are made whole with the new contract but I'm not holding my breath. I suspect it will be dealt away for something else of value to the APA Negotiators. Can you cite the last Section 6 contract where recallees were made whole? Or was it done during the acquisition of another carrier?

X