American Merger?
02-16-2008, 03:31 PM
#51
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Posts: 258
Originally Posted by Oldfreightdawg
Interesting. I was told by one our base chairs that APA and CAL ALPA held a strike preparedness meeting together and the power brokers at ALPA national had a cow over it. They didn't like us snooping around their territory...
02-16-2008, 03:43 PM
#52
APC co-founder
Joined APC: Feb 2005
Position: B777
Posts: 5,853
Originally Posted by CAL EWR
Screw ALPA national
What's interesting is that approval of MEC and committee volunteer work at individual airlines is high, although the efforts of ALPA National is not.
02-16-2008, 05:19 PM
#53
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,889
Originally Posted by Fishfreighter
Not to start a flamefest, but what happens if DAL/NWA and CAL/UAL happen? The AA gets involved and grabs, say Air Tran.
Does the same thing to the Air Tran guys, essentially staples them to the bottom of the list.
Does the same thing to the Air Tran guys, essentially staples them to the bottom of the list.
73
02-17-2008, 07:42 AM
#54
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: At the Blue Line
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by aa73
Where do you guys come up with this crap? Unless you've been hiding under a rock, haven't you heard about the new legislation that MANDATES a merger/acquisition to go to neutral third party arbitration? I.e. the unions are cut out of the final say.
73
73
Like I said earlier we set the bar on WHAT NOT TO DO, and now there are laws in place.
02-17-2008, 10:08 AM
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: At the Blue Line
Posts: 244
Originally Posted by aa73
NoWake,
I'm pretty sure an arbitrator would consider adjusting a TWA pilot's DOH so that he doesn't get a double whammy if we ever merge.
73
I'm pretty sure an arbitrator would consider adjusting a TWA pilot's DOH so that he doesn't get a double whammy if we ever merge.
73
02-17-2008, 11:30 AM
#57
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: B-737 Capt.
Posts: 86
Originally Posted by Oldfreightdawg
I probably take liberty with that statement more than I should because ALPA was behind supporting the legislation and APA was not (in fact APA didn't even know about it until it was signed into law). Over at APA, the feeling is that your particular situation may be repeated because it has set precedence among arbitrators. If it becomes unraveled, that may change.
I agree with your assessment of ALPA. The power brokers there only care about preserving ALPA the institution. Good Luck.
I agree with your assessment of ALPA. The power brokers there only care about preserving ALPA the institution. Good Luck.
02-17-2008, 12:22 PM
#58
On Reserve
Joined APC: Jan 2008
Posts: 23
Originally Posted by flyharm
This US Airways-Failed ALPA Merger Policy should never be repeated! The arbitrator was bound to follow ALPA Merger Policy, which he did not do.
Which parts of the merger policy didn't he follow, exactly? Have you even read the Nicolau decision?
The list is in error for many reasons, a huge one due to some pilots being treated as furloughed when they were on property! ALPA lost that lawsuit already.
Factually incorrect.
ALPA has not lost any lawsuit pertaining to the MDA pilots, nor has it offered any settlement of the ongoing litigation.
If USAPA gets voted in, we go back to square one.
No, we don't.
You are familiar with the requirements to overturn a federal arbitration, right? I'll give you a hint- absent any malfeasance or fraud, it just ain't gonna happen.
It appears that APA has not done their homework, or is simply listening to ALPA rhetoric. They were smart to leave ALPA some 40 years ago. The flawed Nicolau "award" is not effective or permanent unless a new TA is voted in.
True statement reference the implementation of the list. A ratified joint TA is required before the list is used, but it is permanent, whether a contract exists or not. That tenet is contained in the Transition Agreement; you know, the one your side signed agreeing to negotiate a new joint contract that you've since decided to ignore.
That seems highly unlikely at this point. ALPA Merger Policy clearly states that there is to be no windfall, and the list to be fair and equitable. The proposed list is the farthest thing from the very tenants that ALPA declares, but does not follow.
In your mind, only. Listen closely; a neutral, third party arbitration panel, that your reps helped select, listened to both parties cases and considered evidence introduced by both sides, then crafted an agreement that they considered fair within the framework ALPA merger policy. Just because you didn't get what you wanted does not make the process flawed or the outcome unfair. Might it be that your idea of fair and equitable (DOH) is not really that fair at all? Nicolau and the arbitration panel told your group numerous times that your "DOH only" position was not going to be the outcome due to the inequities inherent in the two lists. You didn't listen then, and you continue to deny reality now.
It makes as much sense as ALPA giving away our retirement without even letting the pilots vote! Thanks ALPA. I'll never forget you.
Sure it wasn't your own pilots elected to represent you that did that?
Remember the GAG? Did ALPA appoint them, or did you elect them?
Which parts of the merger policy didn't he follow, exactly? Have you even read the Nicolau decision?
The list is in error for many reasons, a huge one due to some pilots being treated as furloughed when they were on property! ALPA lost that lawsuit already.
Factually incorrect.
ALPA has not lost any lawsuit pertaining to the MDA pilots, nor has it offered any settlement of the ongoing litigation.
If USAPA gets voted in, we go back to square one.
No, we don't.
You are familiar with the requirements to overturn a federal arbitration, right? I'll give you a hint- absent any malfeasance or fraud, it just ain't gonna happen.
It appears that APA has not done their homework, or is simply listening to ALPA rhetoric. They were smart to leave ALPA some 40 years ago. The flawed Nicolau "award" is not effective or permanent unless a new TA is voted in.
True statement reference the implementation of the list. A ratified joint TA is required before the list is used, but it is permanent, whether a contract exists or not. That tenet is contained in the Transition Agreement; you know, the one your side signed agreeing to negotiate a new joint contract that you've since decided to ignore.
That seems highly unlikely at this point. ALPA Merger Policy clearly states that there is to be no windfall, and the list to be fair and equitable. The proposed list is the farthest thing from the very tenants that ALPA declares, but does not follow.
In your mind, only. Listen closely; a neutral, third party arbitration panel, that your reps helped select, listened to both parties cases and considered evidence introduced by both sides, then crafted an agreement that they considered fair within the framework ALPA merger policy. Just because you didn't get what you wanted does not make the process flawed or the outcome unfair. Might it be that your idea of fair and equitable (DOH) is not really that fair at all? Nicolau and the arbitration panel told your group numerous times that your "DOH only" position was not going to be the outcome due to the inequities inherent in the two lists. You didn't listen then, and you continue to deny reality now.
It makes as much sense as ALPA giving away our retirement without even letting the pilots vote! Thanks ALPA. I'll never forget you.
Sure it wasn't your own pilots elected to represent you that did that?
Remember the GAG? Did ALPA appoint them, or did you elect them?
Just more USAPA inspired emotional nonsense from a group of petulant children who didn't get their way.
02-18-2008, 08:35 AM
#59
AAmerican Way for AA Pay
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: B-737 Pilot
Posts: 1,617
Originally Posted by Wheels up
Anyone who's company is mentioned in the same breath as AA, should be afraid. Very afraid. AA management has a hideous record of acquiring other companies. The APA knows this and must be rabid about protecting itself. It's not management that suffers when mergers and acquisitions are badly done, it's the APA membership. Even at the time, and especially in retrospect, the APA should have fought the TWA acquisition harder. APA and TWA pilots would be better off now if TWA was allowed to continue towards its own destiny.
Letter of thanks for the debacle can be sent to Don Carty, Gerald Arpey and all the other lemmings in Centerport with the big heads.
Letter of thanks for the debacle can be sent to Don Carty, Gerald Arpey and all the other lemmings in Centerport with the big heads.
Don't forget to put AA unions in the same breath as AA management when claiming 'hideous record of acquiring other companies'. After the TWA buyout, AA furloughed/fired/early-retired 20,000 out of 22,500 TWA employees, thanks in no small part to lobbying and negotiating with AA unions.
As far as 'APA membership suffering', I don't agree. When 9-11 occured and AA furloughed 2890 pilots, only 1100 were AA pilots. 1900 were TWA pilots, and if they were'nt 'furlough fodder' for junior, new-hire AA pilots, all 2890 furloughees would have been AA pilots. Instead, AA summer '99 hires kept working in STL, while 14-yr TWA Captains went to the street.
Gotta be accurate. Count your blessings.
02-18-2008, 08:37 AM
#60
AAmerican Way for AA Pay
Joined APC: Oct 2005
Position: B-737 Pilot
Posts: 1,617
Originally Posted by aa73
I'm pretty sure an arbitrator would consider adjusting a TWA pilot's DOH so that he doesn't get a double whammy if we ever merge.
73
73
NEVER happen. TWA pilots could get stapled twice, believe it!
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
