Eagle: FAQs for AIP
02-07-2014, 04:52 PM
#1
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 201
Eagle: FAQs for AIP
February 7, 2014
MEC Newsblast – FAQs for AIP
Fellow Pilots:
Please review the document attached to this email, FAQs for AIP, a Word document containing questions that were mostly obtained from emails and feedback from the pilot group. This document is also available on the ALPA app for Android and iPhone. Click on the “MEC” button and then the “Documents” button to access FAQs for AIP. The document is also uploaded to the ALPA MEC website.
As with all other available information, we urge you to study this document and use it to refine your position relative to the AIP. If anyone has questions they would like answered beyond those in this document, please email them to me or you status reps. We will be adding to the FAQs in the future, and we will continue to use pilot feedback and communication as a source of additional questions.
Thank you all for your engagement and participation – keep the communication coming. Discuss the situation with your fellow pilots and other employees, but make sure to keep the discourse civil and productive at all times. Most importantly, maintain cockpit professionalism and job discipline. Stay unified and fly safe.
John Gardner, Chairman
ALPA EGL Communications Committee
[email protected]
MEC Newsblast – FAQs for AIP
Fellow Pilots:
Please review the document attached to this email, FAQs for AIP, a Word document containing questions that were mostly obtained from emails and feedback from the pilot group. This document is also available on the ALPA app for Android and iPhone. Click on the “MEC” button and then the “Documents” button to access FAQs for AIP. The document is also uploaded to the ALPA MEC website.
As with all other available information, we urge you to study this document and use it to refine your position relative to the AIP. If anyone has questions they would like answered beyond those in this document, please email them to me or you status reps. We will be adding to the FAQs in the future, and we will continue to use pilot feedback and communication as a source of additional questions.
Thank you all for your engagement and participation – keep the communication coming. Discuss the situation with your fellow pilots and other employees, but make sure to keep the discourse civil and productive at all times. Most importantly, maintain cockpit professionalism and job discipline. Stay unified and fly safe.
John Gardner, Chairman
ALPA EGL Communications Committee
[email protected]
Last edited by rickair7777; 02-08-2014 at 07:11 AM.
02-07-2014, 04:57 PM
#2
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 201
FAQs concerning the AIP/TA/negotiations
Why didn’t we go before the bankruptcy judge?
The bankruptcy judge and the contract process that was engaged in as part of the bankruptcy really are irrelevant here. Yes, we did negotiate a concessionary bankruptcy contract as part of the process. This is a demand from the company that is completely independent of that process. Had we never entered bankruptcy as a company, and the merger completed without that process, the new management could still be demanding the same terms in order to refleet.
We have a contract – why are we talking to them?
This isn’t about whether or not we have a contract. We did just ink a new contract during the bankruptcy process making American Eagle on a level playing field with the rest of the industry. That much was stipulated in writing by all parties in the bankruptcy. The new management came to us with an offer to refleet American Eagle and in exchange for this offer we would need to meet their terms as outlined in their presentation of December 19, 2013. It isn’t harmful to listen to any presentation the company makes, and with their stated threat of making us “Comair II” it is only prudent that we listen to them. The subsequent negotiations were requested by the MEC to identify the company’s bottom line regarding the concessions they have demanded. However, the Company cannot make changes to our contract unless ALPA ratifies them.
Does the “170 aircraft” commitment guarantee end at the amendable round, or the 10 year duration of the AIP?
The language of the AIP states that the commitment is through the 10 year duration of the agreement.
What exactly does the “170 aircraft” enhancement of the AIP guarantee?The AIP was enhanced after the company’s first offer to include a minimum guarantee of “hulls” (their word for aircraft) for the duration of the agreement. In short, it guarantees 170 aircraft minimum active fleet size for the 10 year agreement. The language ensures that these aircraft are active, crewed aircraft and not aircraft in storage. The enhancement does not specify which aircraft fleet or what aircraft type in any way, shape or form. Simply 170 “hulls”.
What will happen to the CRJs?
The short answer is that we do not know what will happen to the CRJs in either a yes or no vote. We have been told at times that they “want” to keep the CRJs on the property. We have also been told that the new management would like one fleet type at each regional for obvious cost savings benefits. We have been told that if there is a “no” vote, the CRJs will be aggressively transferred to PSA. There is the new offer about American Eagle’s fleet guaranteeing a minimum number of “hulls” of 170 aircraft, and the language concerning the addition of 60 EMB 175s and the options for 90 more EMB 175s under certain circumstances. The company is under no obligation to keep the CRJs on our property under the terms of the AIP any more than under our current agreement.
What stops the company from coming to us a year from now asking for more?
Nothing whatsoever. This demand from the company comes to us when there is no requirement to negotiate with them. This is why the company needed to assign a threat, in order to force us to bargain. They have what they see as an opportunity to ask us to voluntarily renegotiate our agreement and lower their costs. A large difference between the AIP and the agreement we ratified last year is the inclusion of a guaranteed fleet plan. If the company tries to force us into negotiating additional concessions, during the term of the AIP, they won’t have the current threat of transferring our aircraft to another carrier and “Comairing” us. They will be obligated to satisfy the requirement to maintain a minimum fleet.
Does the C&BL allow us to engage in concessionary negotiations without cause from the company?
The short answer is, yes. We can engage in any negotiations the MEC decides they wish to enter. In this case, the company is asking for concessions in exchange for a fleet plan and enhanced flow thru; that is not in dispute. They are also insisting that if we do not reach an agreement with them, they will shut the company down. In light of the seriousness of their threat, the MEC agreed to negotiate in order to determine the company’s bottom line. In the event that the MEC chooses to send the language out as a Tentative Agreement, then the final language and the TA will be available to the pilots and a pilot ratification vote will take place.
What happens with PBS in the event of a “no” vote?
Is it true that the company believes they will be able to take a 5% pay cut from us immediately?If the AIP is ratified, PBS is “suspended” until the delivery of the 61st EMB-175 aircraft. Within 30 days of that delivery date, the parties will begin conferences to reconsider the existing PBS LOA, and agree on any necessary modifications. If they do not reach an agreement on PBS, the Company is entitled to recoup the $8.6 million dollar cost savings from the pilot group under the terms of the PBS Letter of Intent (LOI). The Company has indicated that they believe a 5% pay cut would approximate that savings figure. However, under the terms of the PBS LOI, if the AIP is not ratified OR if the AIP is ratified, but the parties cannot reach agreement on the terms of the PBS LOA, the manner in which the cost savings is recouped from the pilot group is subject to arbitration.
What does the language about career opportunities at mainline USAir mean?
The company is offering us interview opportunities at mainline USAir in addition to, and independent of the flow through agreement. The interviews are virtually the same as interviews given to pilots off the street. The number offered is based on class size, and our interview offers will be 50% of each new hire class, minus the interviews offered to PSA and Piedmont as part of their agreements with AAG. For example, if USAir is hiring 20 pilots in a new hire class, the agreements in place with PSA and Piedmont would require they receive 7 interviews, so Eagle would be offered 3 interviews in that class. The mechanism for Eagle pilots to utilize these opportunities has yet to be determined. This mechanism is only relevant until the single operating certificate is in place and all hiring for AAG will go through AA.
What is the “true up” process in the Flow Through?
The Flow Through language in general states that 50% of the new hire classes at AA will consist of pilots from the American Eagle Flow Through. Currently, the company may “meter” the amount of pilots sent to AA to a number less than the 50% requirement if they have made “every effort” to not need to withhold. The AIP requires that at least 50% of every new hire class be Eagle flows. The AIP also contains language that will ensure that a minimum rate of 30 Eagle pilots flow per month by setting 360 pilots as the minimum to flow in any calendar year during which AA hires at least 720 pilots. The company may still send only 50% in classes of new hires less than 60, but if the overall hiring is at least 720 pilots during that year, a minimum of 360 Eagle flows need to be sent to AA. If the situation exists where at the end of the year, AA hired 720, but the company hasn’t sent 360 Eagle flows, they need to “true up” the number of Eagle flows to at least 360, even if that means they are filling classes with all Eagle pilots, and/or sending Eagle pilots when they are not needed at AA. The “true up” does not apply to 2014, it first becomes effective in 2015. With the “true up” provision, it will be to the company’s benefit to send 30 or more each month so they do not need to make large staffing changes at the end of the year.
Example – AA hires 50 per month for the first 8 months for a total of 400 pilots. They then hire 100 per month for the last four months. Total AA hires for that year are 800 pilots. They are required to send at least 360 Eagle flows. If they sent only 50% for that first 8 months, that would be 25 per month for a total of 200 flows. During the last four months, they would need to ensure they reach the 360 target for the year. They could send 40 per month for four months (160), or they could send 30 per month for three (90) and then send 70 in December (160) to “true up” to the 360 minimum. Any method with which they achieve 360 minimum would be acceptable under the language of the AIP.
What exactly are the enhancements/changes to the Flow Through?
Right now the Flow Through includes two groups of pilots - the pilots in the 824 group, and the Protected Pilot Group. The Protected Pilots are those pilots after the 824 who were on the property as of October 11, 2011. The 824 will go over to AA under the terms in the current agreement - . Presently, for the members of the Protected Pilot group 35% of the AA new hire classes must be those pilots. The AIP increases that minimum to 50% under the terms explained in the question above. The AIP also extends the Flow Through to all future American Eagle new hires. For pilots hired after October 11, 2011, the only significant change is that if they have an active Advisory Letter or pending disciplinary action, that Letter or action would need to be resolved before being allowed to flow. The AIP contains language that provides for an expedited resolution process to be available to the pilots in order to resolve issues prior to their flow date.
The company has violated provisions of the contract in the past as they have chosen. What would make them abide by these new provisions and can we put penalties into the contract language?
It is true that there are provisions of the contract that the company has simply not abided by and so, the grievance process and the federal court system are the backstops to the contract. The grievance process of course takes significant time and so in many cases has not been help for us in the short term while we “fly now, grieve later”. It is for every pilot to decide if the final language is sufficient to prevent the company’s ability to circumvent the negotiated intent.
During negotiations did we demand the company tie the flow through to the concessions?
We approached the company about tying some of the 12/4 cap language to the flow through provisions. The negotiating committee developed and presented four different methods to tie the flow through to the longevity caps. In one example, Pay Step 17 would not disappear until all Step 17 captains had flown through. Therefore, if the flow through were to stop, pilots would still be able to achieve Pay Step 16. The company representatives refused to entertain any concept of tying the flow through to the longevity step reductions.
Is it true that no one’s pay on the property is going to go down?
The argument can be made that no one’s pay, dollar for dollar, will go down under certain circumstances. If the flow goes as planned based on projected AA hiring, and if the new aircraft arrive as planned, then the pilots who are on property now will not see their dollar for dollar pay decrease in comparison to what they would receive under the current contract. If the flow stops, the pilots here will earn less dollar for dollar than they would under the current agreement. Of course, some of the other concessions such as the per diem freeze and the increase in health care costs will cut our overall compensation under the AIP.
Are the other regional carriers having difficulty finding qualified pilots?
Every regional carrier in the industry is having a difficult time attracting and retaining qualified pilots. The idea that any other carrier is aggressively expanding is absurd.
What is the company’s stated intention in the event we fail to agree to their concessions?
The company has made it clear that they intend to shift our flying, and the refleeting aircraft to other carriers. Attrition will shrink Eagle to a size to a point where it is cheaper to shut down the airline entirely.
Under the terms of the AIP, for how long will the company be required to maintain a minimum fleet size of 170 active aircraft?
The language states that “…until at least the amendable date of the Eagle ALPA Collective Bargaining Agreement…”. That date is defined under the Railway Labor Act as the end of the term of the agreement. The amendable round of 2019 does not relieve them of their obligation under this provision.
Does the name change to “envoy” relieve the company of any obligations with regard to our Collective Bargaining Agreement, given the fact that the agreement refers to “American Eagle Airlines”?
No. If changing a name could relieve a company of contractual obligations, companies would do it all the time.
When a pilot flows through to AA, what company seniority or longevity transfers with them?
Under the terms of the arbitrator’s 824 award, any 824 pilot flowing will transfer with their company years of service for pass privileges, vacation accrual, sick accrual and other areas where longevity is a factor. Pilots who transfer to AA after the 824 do not transfer any seniority or longevity and start at AA virtually the same as a street hire.
Will the company have to park aircraft in order to satisfy the flow through obligations if it is necessary to do so?
Yes. The language states that if necessary, the company will reduce block hours in order to satisfy flow through obligations.
What happens if the flow through makes the company unable to maintain the 170 active aircraft minimum fleet?
They are obligated to do both – maintain the minimum fleet size of 170 aircraft and meet flow through obligations. There is no language that allows them to go below the minimum fleet size, or relieve them from any of the obligations defined in the flow through letter.
Why didn’t we go before the bankruptcy judge?
The bankruptcy judge and the contract process that was engaged in as part of the bankruptcy really are irrelevant here. Yes, we did negotiate a concessionary bankruptcy contract as part of the process. This is a demand from the company that is completely independent of that process. Had we never entered bankruptcy as a company, and the merger completed without that process, the new management could still be demanding the same terms in order to refleet.
We have a contract – why are we talking to them?
This isn’t about whether or not we have a contract. We did just ink a new contract during the bankruptcy process making American Eagle on a level playing field with the rest of the industry. That much was stipulated in writing by all parties in the bankruptcy. The new management came to us with an offer to refleet American Eagle and in exchange for this offer we would need to meet their terms as outlined in their presentation of December 19, 2013. It isn’t harmful to listen to any presentation the company makes, and with their stated threat of making us “Comair II” it is only prudent that we listen to them. The subsequent negotiations were requested by the MEC to identify the company’s bottom line regarding the concessions they have demanded. However, the Company cannot make changes to our contract unless ALPA ratifies them.
Does the “170 aircraft” commitment guarantee end at the amendable round, or the 10 year duration of the AIP?
The language of the AIP states that the commitment is through the 10 year duration of the agreement.
What exactly does the “170 aircraft” enhancement of the AIP guarantee?The AIP was enhanced after the company’s first offer to include a minimum guarantee of “hulls” (their word for aircraft) for the duration of the agreement. In short, it guarantees 170 aircraft minimum active fleet size for the 10 year agreement. The language ensures that these aircraft are active, crewed aircraft and not aircraft in storage. The enhancement does not specify which aircraft fleet or what aircraft type in any way, shape or form. Simply 170 “hulls”.
What will happen to the CRJs?
The short answer is that we do not know what will happen to the CRJs in either a yes or no vote. We have been told at times that they “want” to keep the CRJs on the property. We have also been told that the new management would like one fleet type at each regional for obvious cost savings benefits. We have been told that if there is a “no” vote, the CRJs will be aggressively transferred to PSA. There is the new offer about American Eagle’s fleet guaranteeing a minimum number of “hulls” of 170 aircraft, and the language concerning the addition of 60 EMB 175s and the options for 90 more EMB 175s under certain circumstances. The company is under no obligation to keep the CRJs on our property under the terms of the AIP any more than under our current agreement.
What stops the company from coming to us a year from now asking for more?
Nothing whatsoever. This demand from the company comes to us when there is no requirement to negotiate with them. This is why the company needed to assign a threat, in order to force us to bargain. They have what they see as an opportunity to ask us to voluntarily renegotiate our agreement and lower their costs. A large difference between the AIP and the agreement we ratified last year is the inclusion of a guaranteed fleet plan. If the company tries to force us into negotiating additional concessions, during the term of the AIP, they won’t have the current threat of transferring our aircraft to another carrier and “Comairing” us. They will be obligated to satisfy the requirement to maintain a minimum fleet.
Does the C&BL allow us to engage in concessionary negotiations without cause from the company?
The short answer is, yes. We can engage in any negotiations the MEC decides they wish to enter. In this case, the company is asking for concessions in exchange for a fleet plan and enhanced flow thru; that is not in dispute. They are also insisting that if we do not reach an agreement with them, they will shut the company down. In light of the seriousness of their threat, the MEC agreed to negotiate in order to determine the company’s bottom line. In the event that the MEC chooses to send the language out as a Tentative Agreement, then the final language and the TA will be available to the pilots and a pilot ratification vote will take place.
What happens with PBS in the event of a “no” vote?
Is it true that the company believes they will be able to take a 5% pay cut from us immediately?If the AIP is ratified, PBS is “suspended” until the delivery of the 61st EMB-175 aircraft. Within 30 days of that delivery date, the parties will begin conferences to reconsider the existing PBS LOA, and agree on any necessary modifications. If they do not reach an agreement on PBS, the Company is entitled to recoup the $8.6 million dollar cost savings from the pilot group under the terms of the PBS Letter of Intent (LOI). The Company has indicated that they believe a 5% pay cut would approximate that savings figure. However, under the terms of the PBS LOI, if the AIP is not ratified OR if the AIP is ratified, but the parties cannot reach agreement on the terms of the PBS LOA, the manner in which the cost savings is recouped from the pilot group is subject to arbitration.
What does the language about career opportunities at mainline USAir mean?
The company is offering us interview opportunities at mainline USAir in addition to, and independent of the flow through agreement. The interviews are virtually the same as interviews given to pilots off the street. The number offered is based on class size, and our interview offers will be 50% of each new hire class, minus the interviews offered to PSA and Piedmont as part of their agreements with AAG. For example, if USAir is hiring 20 pilots in a new hire class, the agreements in place with PSA and Piedmont would require they receive 7 interviews, so Eagle would be offered 3 interviews in that class. The mechanism for Eagle pilots to utilize these opportunities has yet to be determined. This mechanism is only relevant until the single operating certificate is in place and all hiring for AAG will go through AA.
What is the “true up” process in the Flow Through?
The Flow Through language in general states that 50% of the new hire classes at AA will consist of pilots from the American Eagle Flow Through. Currently, the company may “meter” the amount of pilots sent to AA to a number less than the 50% requirement if they have made “every effort” to not need to withhold. The AIP requires that at least 50% of every new hire class be Eagle flows. The AIP also contains language that will ensure that a minimum rate of 30 Eagle pilots flow per month by setting 360 pilots as the minimum to flow in any calendar year during which AA hires at least 720 pilots. The company may still send only 50% in classes of new hires less than 60, but if the overall hiring is at least 720 pilots during that year, a minimum of 360 Eagle flows need to be sent to AA. If the situation exists where at the end of the year, AA hired 720, but the company hasn’t sent 360 Eagle flows, they need to “true up” the number of Eagle flows to at least 360, even if that means they are filling classes with all Eagle pilots, and/or sending Eagle pilots when they are not needed at AA. The “true up” does not apply to 2014, it first becomes effective in 2015. With the “true up” provision, it will be to the company’s benefit to send 30 or more each month so they do not need to make large staffing changes at the end of the year.
Example – AA hires 50 per month for the first 8 months for a total of 400 pilots. They then hire 100 per month for the last four months. Total AA hires for that year are 800 pilots. They are required to send at least 360 Eagle flows. If they sent only 50% for that first 8 months, that would be 25 per month for a total of 200 flows. During the last four months, they would need to ensure they reach the 360 target for the year. They could send 40 per month for four months (160), or they could send 30 per month for three (90) and then send 70 in December (160) to “true up” to the 360 minimum. Any method with which they achieve 360 minimum would be acceptable under the language of the AIP.
What exactly are the enhancements/changes to the Flow Through?
Right now the Flow Through includes two groups of pilots - the pilots in the 824 group, and the Protected Pilot Group. The Protected Pilots are those pilots after the 824 who were on the property as of October 11, 2011. The 824 will go over to AA under the terms in the current agreement - . Presently, for the members of the Protected Pilot group 35% of the AA new hire classes must be those pilots. The AIP increases that minimum to 50% under the terms explained in the question above. The AIP also extends the Flow Through to all future American Eagle new hires. For pilots hired after October 11, 2011, the only significant change is that if they have an active Advisory Letter or pending disciplinary action, that Letter or action would need to be resolved before being allowed to flow. The AIP contains language that provides for an expedited resolution process to be available to the pilots in order to resolve issues prior to their flow date.
The company has violated provisions of the contract in the past as they have chosen. What would make them abide by these new provisions and can we put penalties into the contract language?
It is true that there are provisions of the contract that the company has simply not abided by and so, the grievance process and the federal court system are the backstops to the contract. The grievance process of course takes significant time and so in many cases has not been help for us in the short term while we “fly now, grieve later”. It is for every pilot to decide if the final language is sufficient to prevent the company’s ability to circumvent the negotiated intent.
During negotiations did we demand the company tie the flow through to the concessions?
We approached the company about tying some of the 12/4 cap language to the flow through provisions. The negotiating committee developed and presented four different methods to tie the flow through to the longevity caps. In one example, Pay Step 17 would not disappear until all Step 17 captains had flown through. Therefore, if the flow through were to stop, pilots would still be able to achieve Pay Step 16. The company representatives refused to entertain any concept of tying the flow through to the longevity step reductions.
Is it true that no one’s pay on the property is going to go down?
The argument can be made that no one’s pay, dollar for dollar, will go down under certain circumstances. If the flow goes as planned based on projected AA hiring, and if the new aircraft arrive as planned, then the pilots who are on property now will not see their dollar for dollar pay decrease in comparison to what they would receive under the current contract. If the flow stops, the pilots here will earn less dollar for dollar than they would under the current agreement. Of course, some of the other concessions such as the per diem freeze and the increase in health care costs will cut our overall compensation under the AIP.
Are the other regional carriers having difficulty finding qualified pilots?
Every regional carrier in the industry is having a difficult time attracting and retaining qualified pilots. The idea that any other carrier is aggressively expanding is absurd.
What is the company’s stated intention in the event we fail to agree to their concessions?
The company has made it clear that they intend to shift our flying, and the refleeting aircraft to other carriers. Attrition will shrink Eagle to a size to a point where it is cheaper to shut down the airline entirely.
Under the terms of the AIP, for how long will the company be required to maintain a minimum fleet size of 170 active aircraft?
The language states that “…until at least the amendable date of the Eagle ALPA Collective Bargaining Agreement…”. That date is defined under the Railway Labor Act as the end of the term of the agreement. The amendable round of 2019 does not relieve them of their obligation under this provision.
Does the name change to “envoy” relieve the company of any obligations with regard to our Collective Bargaining Agreement, given the fact that the agreement refers to “American Eagle Airlines”?
No. If changing a name could relieve a company of contractual obligations, companies would do it all the time.
When a pilot flows through to AA, what company seniority or longevity transfers with them?
Under the terms of the arbitrator’s 824 award, any 824 pilot flowing will transfer with their company years of service for pass privileges, vacation accrual, sick accrual and other areas where longevity is a factor. Pilots who transfer to AA after the 824 do not transfer any seniority or longevity and start at AA virtually the same as a street hire.
Will the company have to park aircraft in order to satisfy the flow through obligations if it is necessary to do so?
Yes. The language states that if necessary, the company will reduce block hours in order to satisfy flow through obligations.
What happens if the flow through makes the company unable to maintain the 170 active aircraft minimum fleet?
They are obligated to do both – maintain the minimum fleet size of 170 aircraft and meet flow through obligations. There is no language that allows them to go below the minimum fleet size, or relieve them from any of the obligations defined in the flow through letter.
02-07-2014, 05:25 PM
#4
Line Holder
Joined APC: Dec 2005
Posts: 47
"Are the other regional carriers having difficulty finding qualified pilots?
Every regional carrier in the industry is having a difficult time attracting and retaining qualified pilots. The idea that any other carrier is aggressively expanding is absurd."
This seems like a pretty important statement.
Every regional carrier in the industry is having a difficult time attracting and retaining qualified pilots. The idea that any other carrier is aggressively expanding is absurd."
This seems like a pretty important statement.
02-07-2014, 05:36 PM
#5
Banned
Joined APC: Mar 2009
Posts: 562
Originally Posted by buddies8
selling the aip in a forum other than the normal process.
VOTE NO so you can look at yourself in the mirror.
VOTE NO so you can look at yourself in the mirror.
02-07-2014, 05:56 PM
#8
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Sep 2013
Posts: 109
Originally Posted by buddies8
we can clearly assume that the person who started this thread is a yes voter, must be a union volunteer. that's code word for eagle management lackey.
02-07-2014, 07:16 PM
#10
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2010
Position: Reverse Cowgirl
Posts: 545
Originally Posted by smooth50
Umm if you read it or work for AE you would see that he is the communication chair... Puts it on eagle lounge as well. He is just doing his job trying to get the info out there.
Looks neutral to me.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
