AA pilots will sign a concessionary contract
 

You heard it here first.

The readers digest condensed timeline:

Today - Spring 2010: nothing happens. Union infighting continues.

Spring: Management friendly pilots get voted in to power at APA.

Spring-Summer: Concessionaires whittle contractual demands down to 10 items and a 10% pay raise demand, citing the "fragile state" of the airline.

September : TA is reached. Final product is basically a reshuffling of our current bankruptcy style contract, a 5% raise, PBS, and "loosening of scope language" allowing 70-90 seat E-jets to Eagle. Vote passes by 69%.

Day after TA passes: AMR sends WARN letters to 2000 pilots.

30 days after WARN letters are sent out: Massive displacement announcement.

60 days after WARN letters sent out: AMR furloughs the first 200 pilots of the 2000 that will hit the street.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

The future has never looked brighter. :(

your point is?

No way dude. Stay strong.

Start off by skipping that voting in managent friendly pilots to power in APA part.

Wow...................what a flip !

:confused:

Phallus used to box my ears regularly regarding my comments of the widening future of the large RJ flown by regionals. The error was that I somehow advocated this as opposed to the more realistic truth being that I simply claim it as sad inevitability and as far as AMR anyway, the APA couldn't stop it. Previously according to him (just a few short months ago), the APA was the one entity that was going to show the others how to take back these airplanes and vaporize Eagle into a bad nightmare of the past.

Phallus...............what the heck happened ?

Seriously.

If scope can't be regained my mainline carriers this career will be pointless as a profession. Recovery of scope needs to be a priority in all new contracts if there is to be a future worth sticking around for.

Except the 170/190s will go to RAH, not Eagle. As much as our senior pilots want to balk at scope (not aimed at you, Eaglefly), the truth is that Eagle pilots need AA scope just as much as the MD80 and 737 FOs at AA do. Stay strong APA, keep scope, keep your pensions, get your pay back and keep the flying where it is.

Oh yes, it's true some would indeed likely be placed at the "other" carrier, but most of these would go to Eagle. The reason being is that these aircraft make money (or so AMR believes). AMR desires a whipsaw scenario where everyone but them loses and continually lives on their knees, so I'm realistic about a disturbing future for ALL pilots involved with AMR, not just AA pilots.

I just found it surprising that one of their biggest cheerleaders (and notorious Eagle pilot hater) has suddenly and drastically shifted his outlook from optomistic agression to hopeless dismay.

APA controls scope. If they can't get "All flying performed by APA pilots" They at least need to have "All flying performed by AMR owned carriers." At least this would end the whipsaw from 3rd parties. All revenue would be going to the same pot, and we wouldnt be subsidizing Reverend Bedford and the RAH conglomerate.

I don't like where all this BS is going, but I agree with you there.

One of the very few intelligent and objective posts I've seen on the issue.

I wouldn' bet the farm on anything until the new FAA rules are published.:cool:

Somebody needs to start holing the line on scope or its going to be game over. I dont want bigger jets. I want a better job. If scope continues to be sold out we at the regionals will be the only ones left with jobs and we will have no where to go.

"Tell me again about the rabbits George."

I agree, but it is going to take small steps to regain ground on scope. Eliminating 3rd party companies sends a signal to the industry that outsourcing wont fly (literally) anymore. Each company needs to be responsible for their brand whether it is on the tail of a 777 or a turboprop.

I can't speak for Phallus, but last week the APA Secretary-Treasurer, one of 3 national officers, sent out a blast e-mail to the membership. While the message is too long to post here, the basic context is concessionary. This is a break from the other 2 national officers who are still fairly "hard-line".

Another factoid here at APA, is that out of the last 6 contracts signed since 1983, 5 were agreed upon during an election year, in 2010 all the APA national officers and a good portion of the board are up for election. Politics are alive and well at the APA, and whether it's newly elected "company friendly" leadership, or the old re-elected "gone soft" leadership, I believe Phallus has a legitimate concern.

Whether we find ourselves with a weaker scope clause remains to be seen, but I'd wager we will be flying more, which equals fewer jobs.

The blast definately had a concessionary tone about it; I agree. Personally I do not think APA should give up anything at all. It may be time to go for a shorter term contract than usual, since gettign anything in this economy will be very difficult, so having a shorter term new contract would let the APA ride the storm out a little while the economy recovers.

That being said, I would suggest a short term contract that comes due in 2013 to match the end date of Eagle's pilot contract. It would allow the two groups to work as one.

As others have said, if there is to be a scope concession of any kind, it needs to be rewritten from the language AMR posted. They wanted larger jets at any commuter carrier. A middle ground would be to give AMR the larger jets, but only at Eagle - and in concert with a 2013 contract expiration date.
In an ideal world this wouldn't be an issue, and APA pilots would be doing ALL flying for AMR; and scope would never have been let out of the bag...


If you can get both pilot groups on the same contract schedules you will go a long way toward helpoing them both work together instead of always being at odds with eachother.

Look at it this way; will the APA be better off in 2013 with just the APA and EGL ALPA flying for AMR, or with APA, EGL ALPA, CHQ, CAPE AIR, TSA and Mesa all flying AMR routes and ALL ready to take work from both Eagle and AA at a moments notice... The enemy of my enemy is my friend; it's time APA and EGL started working together...

This plan has merit, but AMR also knows that any short-term contract at AA (for pilots) to coincide with Eagle's amendment date is probably not in their (AMR's) best interest. As it stands now and in the forseeable future, the competition and the economics of this industry will keep airline management in the drivers seat and labor scrambling for lost ground.

Trumpeting this idea is one thing, but forcing it on AMR is another. I don't see what leverage either group has to convince AMR that unity and tighter mutual scope is in the interests of AMR, even if by some outside chance the APA believed in the "mutual interest" concept with Eagle ALPA.

I'm not in your airline(s), but would it be rude to ask how shifting the flying to one particular regional is better than shifting it to another?

I have a feeling APA will cave on scope again… I had one guy tell me all about how strong scope is. Then I reminded him he is in the jumpseat of a 70 seat RJ. How did that happen?

Don’t tell me how tough you are. We all know you will give 500 seat RJ flying to Eagle for a 3% pay increase.

Well--it still remains to be seen. All the company needs is 50% plus 1. If they throw enough money on the table, anything is possible. I agree with your premise, but I think the money will be well north of 3%--absent BK.

Speaking of which--I have to agree with your jump seater. We (and CAL) possess stronger scope than most post BK carriers (save SWA). How tough we are is a relative term. If your backed into a corner with a gun to head (BK), you can be as tough as you want, you'll just be as dead though.

.......the pistoleers at the NMB have filled labor with their fair share of holes recently as well. Jeez, they've turned the APA into swiss cheese over the last several years.

Agreed. However, APA is going to have to define itself. When EGL won their right to a single carrier status, I recall the then APA president Jim Sovich lecturing the memebrship about why we don't want EGL part of APA. While I don't recall a movement inside APA to discourage EGL from going with APA, we didn't exactly encourage their enlistment.

EGL is now part of ALPA, and I don't think ALPA national will concede anything less than than a full seniority integration (regardless of what EGL pilots might want).

Conversely, the debate at the national level is whether APA should negotiate pay rates for RJ's at market levels (carve out a commuter supplement) and offer some 1800 furloughed pilots a chance at that flying, or liberalize scope in exchange for more $$$, or some combination thereof.

Whether it's APA that doesn't want EGL, or EGL ALPA that doesn't want APA is unclear to me. One thing for sure, since APA can hardly remain unified, I don't see any agreement with ALPA over integration with EGL, especially in light of the fact that APA is still coping with 1800 plus furloughs...

Take the RJ's at market rates and get them in house now. At least the 1800 APA pilots will be off the street with some upward mobility. If you loosen scope for more $$$ once the scope is gone some excuse will be made to take the dollars back.

September : TA is reached. Final product is basically a reshuffling of our current bankruptcy style contract, a 5% raise, PBS, and "loosening of scope language" allowing 70-90 seat E-jets to Eagle. Vote passes by 69%.

I'm just taking this comment at face value now.., but, if this is true, As "Mainline Pilots" It seems to me that you've got no one to blame but yourselves if or when this well laid TA turns into a "regional stealing mainline job **** storm." I'm sure there's gotta be more too this. As much as the topic of "SCOPE" is hammered in every conceivable way at this very site, I'm utterly shocked. Oh well nothing like job security right? Question is, for who..., time will tell, hell all we gotta do is look at the very recent past to see where this will ultimately go. Again I don't pretend to have all the facts, just commenting on the post. Best of luck to us all.

The assumption that the APA unilaterally seizing another carriers RJ's and then (again) unilaterally bouncing a majority of that carriers pilots in favor of their own furloughees will never happen, so this scenario will likely do little for those furloughees.

A more realistic scenario would have to occur that at least has SOME chance of occuring.

What "more realistic" scenario do you envision? Sometime ago (late 1998 or 99 I believe) AA put on the table a proposal for a commuter supplement with the stipulation that a tripartite agreement be reached with EGL on seniority. Although I can't say the idea was overly popular with AA pilots, I can say EGL ALPA leadership wasn't overly warm to it. Too bad because that may have been the best opportunity to have fixed this mess.

Fast forward to today: Suppose AMR decides to revisit the sale of EGL? Maybe a public offering in conjunction with an agreement with APA to fly 90 to 110 seater's? After all, if we are to believe the rumors that many EGL flow through pilots no longer want their AA senior numbers, maybe our furloughees want them instead. On the other hand, there are plenty of furloughees that would not come back to an RJ position at current market rates.

Surely this could be a realistic scenario: which would represent a combination of both RJ flying at AA and EGL as a separate entity competing with the likes of RAH.

What are the chances that a modified flowthrough will result from the negotiations underway now over the recent arbitration ruling? Captains were displaced and FO's furloughed, and everyone has suffered QOL/pay issues as a result. What if everyone now at Eagle (including furloughs) was offered a one-time, take-it-or-leave-it option to flow through to AA as a remedy? Ideas?

Anythings possible. At first APA didn't want anything to do with EGL, then when it looked like APA was changing their mind, EGL ALPA didn't want anything to do with APA or AA. All the players have to be on the same page if anything like this has a chance of working--right now they are not and it doesn't appear that they are moving toward it either. Personally, I think all the flying RJ and otherwise should be done by one company. Whether that's EGL merging with AA, or APA doing all of it or most of it.

To me, it seems foolish to spread flying in a single network among several regional affiliates. If you were to believe all the crap pouring from Wall Street financiers and corporate board rooms about the "synergies" of combining airlines, then why would airline managements pursue arrangements which would spread the work over several more departments than necessary? i.e. every airline has it's own dispatch, it's own maintenance, it's own scheduling staff, etc. Even though regional employees don't enjoy the same level of compensation as their mainline counterparts--it's difficult to reconcile having many more lower paid employees than fewer better paid folks doing more work.

Jet Blue doesn't farm out it's 100 seat flying, SWA doesn't even have a regional affiliate--both airlines are fairly successful. Coincidence?

It appears from this thread that some pilots believe that the unions control the seniority list and can merge them at will. That is not true. The seniority list is maintained and controlled by the company. In addition the RLA act forbids many of the things pilots think the unions should do. As a example you can't link negotiations between to different contracts. APA has found out first hand what happens when you mess with the RLA and a judge.

The new rules would only require more pilots...that wont stop the regionals from continuing the trend of bigger and bigger jets with cheap labor. I mean who is to say we wont have 200 seat RJs in 20 years? And everyone will just keep saying...no no no...there will NEVER be 300 seat RJs...they cant replace/compete with the B777s and B747s. Yet their will be a Canadair/Embrarer Jet that carrys 300 seats undergoing flight tests.

AE is a competitor for APA jobs. It's as simple as that. I have nothing in common with AE. They'd steal an AA pilots' job in a heartbeat if they could. AE is no different than Republic, Gojet, CHQ, TSA or any other low-pay outsourcer.

What do you mean COULD? They have been stealing AA jobs for years now and wouldn't hesitate to steal even more. Heck, I'm sure many at AE would happily replace mainline AA routes by flying the 190s for $25 an hour.

......................

That's a joke.


So is this. Last time I checked, all of my management worked for AA. You guys should know that AMR management will do what ever they want, and give flying to whom ever no matter what you, me, or anyone else feels. Some folks are sooo quick to point a finger and say we are or you are doing this and stealing that. Management makes those decisions. Why? Because they can!

It doesn't matter what either group says. It's all a game and we all have to get dressed and play.

I'm not stealing a damn thing! And, no, wouldn't be happy. But thanks........thanks for pointing the finger at me for stealing mainline flying! I guess my reasons for coming to Eagle because I wanted to work for AA were for nothing. I guess I'm not worthy to fly your equipment because I'm an Eagle guy...oh well!

That's another joke!

AMR owns Eagle, the others are outside subcontractors.
By using Eagle the money all stays at AMR, not providing profits to subcontractors who then go out and buy two large plane operators in the same season and are now direct competitors to AMR on several routes...


Does that help explain why subcontractor airlines do nothing to help the industry...

Actually, Id be $38 an hour, no riggs, flying FARs.

That does appear to be the better option... it also paints AMR into a corner with having nobody to whipsaw and threaten APA with; for that reason I think it woudl be a very hard sell to AMR. But I like the idea

Spoken like a true "me" generation sorta newbie pilot...

what does that remedy? except your desire to go to a legacy carrier.

Not entirely true.... one of the USAir express carriers was recently workig on their contract and had representatives of the other express carriers at the table with them...
and there is nothing that says the APA couldn't take a short term status quo contract to get through the recession, and have it end at the same time Eagles ends...

are there some prohibitions; yes... but nothing as bad as you would lead people to think.

a little extreme. They could say the same about AA taking Eagle jobs...
I'm sure you have moticed AMR shift routes back and forth between AA and AE several times over the years.... they do it to try and keep a route profitable. There is no way to run a Mad Dog 4-5 times a day from XNA to LGA for example... there just isn't the load factor to support it... there are enough pax to support a 37-50 seat RJ doign it though...

it keeps AMR in the market, denies full market share to the competitors, and often ends up opening new routes for AA once demand increases to support the larger plane. Reducing frequency to isn't the answer either since the competition will continue to run their 4-5 flight flights a day, and the pax will simply go with the more convienient schedule.

EGL could vanish tomorrow; all that would happen is AMR would subcontract out that flying to several commuter carriers. So, the real question is - since regionals are not going away - woudl you rather work with one wholly owned sister company against AMR; or would you rather work with several outside subcontractors like RAH? Remeber, RAH is the current AMR subcontractor that has made enough money flying for other airlines to go out andf BUY tweo large plane operators within a few months of eachother.... so that RAH is no longer just an outside subcontractor; they are now a direct competitor in several markets. They have also had trhe benefit of working closely enough with AMR to have inside knowledge of how things are done at AMR... and they now have the larger planes to use that information against AMR... while still bleeding a prifit from ARM by flying their subcontracted routes.

Yes my friends; be vary careful what you wish for.