More CONFUSION
#91
Banned
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,629
Likes: 0
From: 756 Left Side
Final Post till things settle down-
This is the CAL MEC Blastmail from April 13, 2012..
Pay close attention to the highlighted area.
FROM THE CHAIRMAN
I spend a good deal of time reading about the ebbs and flows of the airline industry as reported by many different experts and analysts. This week an observation made by Bob Herbst from AirlineFinancials.com caught my eye. When looking at legacy airlines’ financial performance for 2011 and through the first few months of 2012, he states that “My analysis of the industry concludes that Delta is by far, the strongest network carrier with the best forward looking business plan. United/Continental –may- become a worthy competitor but they will have to get their labor issues resolved before that can occur.” (Emphasis added.) In one form or another, this is exactly the message we have been telling the press and Wall Street since the merger was first announced. United will not achieve all that it can and their merger will not be considered successful unless and until joint labor contracts are completed. So long as we continue to operate as separate airlines under a holding company, our operations will continue to be disjointed.
This disjointed approach to airline management and mergers has gone beyond the point of frustration. From an operational perspective, we hear our passengers’ complaints and see things we never thought possible. That is saying a lot considering our history. As an example, I heard an incredulous story this week about a crew tracker’s efforts to junior man or reassign a crew. At the end of a crew’s pairing, the crew tracker reportedly did everything short of break down the cockpit door to get to the pilots. He banged so loudly on the closed cockpit door that the captain had to tell him via the interphone to wait in the jetway for them to finish their post flight duties. He then knocked even more aggressively, after which the captain advised him he was on the verge of facing law enforcement intervention. When the crew met the crew tracker on the jetway following completion of their post flight actions, he thrust a printout at the first officer and yelled “you’ve been served.” Imagine how this all looked to our passengers. How can we ever hope to compete with world class airlines if our management feels that they need the services of what have become, for all intents and purposes, crew bounty hunters in order to run their schedule?
That leads to the latest staffing statistics. Over the last few weeks, I have attempted to not just talk about how woefully understaffed the airline is as we approach summer, but also to provide you with data and statistics to back up that assessment. So far I have provided comparative data on year-over-year, block-hour-to-pilot ratios, and in year-over-year comparisons of voluntary junior manning requests. I thought that it might be helpful to now look at involuntary junior manning (IJM). IJM pay hours for this January versus January 2011 were more than double and for March, they were triple – jumping from 94.44 hours in March 2011 to 301.13 hours for last month. February seemed to be the anomaly and was fairly similar this year to last. Given the huge increases in the first quarter, this certainly does not seem to be trending in the right direction. Unfortunately, it is just one more statistic that points to the need for management to address what is an increasingly critical situation.
This week, Capts. Heppner and Moak and I all attended the Family Awareness event in ORD on Tuesday. I want to thank the SPSC teams from both the CAL and UAL MECs. I estimate that there were close to one hundred pilots and family members in attendance. It was good to be able to spend time talking about the goals we share, the similarities we have and even the few disagreements that we must contend with as CAL and UAL pilots and families. As I said to one of the pilots I talked to in ORD, it is not bad that we occasionally find ourselves in disagreement; it is how we settle that disagreement that is important.
Last this week, I am happy to report that a site survey for a Known Crewmember site in EWR is scheduled to be completed, thus getting us one step closer to making pilot access to work at one the largest hubs in served by ALPA pilots a bit easier. I know this project, started by Capt. Prater during his time as ALPA president, has taken longer than any of us would have liked, but it is good to report progress.
Have a good weekend and Fly Safe.
One Union, One Voice
Capt. Jay Pierce
CAL MEC Chairman
6 days before the UAL MEC decided to ask for release unilaterally, the two MEC Chairs were with Lee Moak, the ALPA National President.
Obviously, at this point the UAL MEC Advisory Board must have been in the works, along with the website being designed/built.
The oppurtunity to discuss this was there.
As AxlF16 has stated earlier..
When the book is written on this chapter of the aviation profession (and it WILL be written) everyone will have the benefit of hindsight. Right now we are making decisions based on limited information (such is the nature of the real world), but our decisions and actions will be judged in the cold hard light of day. Yes, your MEC was not consulted in the final stages of execution. Does that beg any questions? Is it reasonable to wonder why? That's for you to decide, but I guarantee that you will eventually be given the 'rest of the story'.
Maybe now some of you will understand the CAL's side of concern. The oppurtunity WAS there.
If history will show that Jay Heppner spoke with Lee Moak, and had his understanding and blessing- then the CAL MEC and Chair probably needs to go into recievership. For at that point, we are no longer part of the plan.
If that holds true, than I will resign my faith to whatever will be.
However, if Jay Heppner did not speak to either side, or was advised by LM to not do it.. then the UAL MEC and Chair have decided to go off the range, and damn everyone else.
And at this point, no matter what the History Books write about it.. neither scenario is a good one.
Good Luck to everyone.. I may be in the IAD Crew room in the coming weeks (working IAD-CDG), if anyone wants to chat, I'll always be open to talk. Of course, paperwork does have to come first~
Fly Safe, Fly The Contract
Motch
PS>
Below is the JNC's addition to the Blastmail
JNC (CO-CHAIRMEN CAPTS. DAVE OWENS (CAL), PHIL OTIS (UAL))
This week, the JNC and management negotiated in Chicago under supervision of the NMB. In attendance for part of the session were the MEC Chairmen and senior management, whose discussions, also under NMB supervision, focused on ways to make the negotiations more efficient and expeditious.
One JNC small group continued their progress with management on resolving open items in the Scheduling sections, including assignments and reassignments, and also began their discussions on duty, rest and the new Part 117 of the FARs. Another small group continued addressing Retirement and Insurance (R&I) sections. While the R&I small group initially made substantial progress in resolving disability issues as we reported last week, management subsequently expressed concern with the potential cost of all R&I benefits with these changes considered. As a result, this small group’s progress ended abruptly with management retreating to their previous table position (which hasn’t changed since the fall of 2010). An examination of our current process ensued with senior levels of management, ending with a commitment by them to reengage on R&I. Small group discussions on R&I resumed on Thursday and are scheduled to continue next week.
Next week, the JNC and management will reconvene negotiations in Chicago. We will continue the multipath, small group discussions on both the Scheduling sections and R&I issues.
As always, please stay connected to the process by reading updates from the MEC and your local council representatives
This is the CAL MEC Blastmail from April 13, 2012..
Pay close attention to the highlighted area.
FROM THE CHAIRMAN
I spend a good deal of time reading about the ebbs and flows of the airline industry as reported by many different experts and analysts. This week an observation made by Bob Herbst from AirlineFinancials.com caught my eye. When looking at legacy airlines’ financial performance for 2011 and through the first few months of 2012, he states that “My analysis of the industry concludes that Delta is by far, the strongest network carrier with the best forward looking business plan. United/Continental –may- become a worthy competitor but they will have to get their labor issues resolved before that can occur.” (Emphasis added.) In one form or another, this is exactly the message we have been telling the press and Wall Street since the merger was first announced. United will not achieve all that it can and their merger will not be considered successful unless and until joint labor contracts are completed. So long as we continue to operate as separate airlines under a holding company, our operations will continue to be disjointed.
This disjointed approach to airline management and mergers has gone beyond the point of frustration. From an operational perspective, we hear our passengers’ complaints and see things we never thought possible. That is saying a lot considering our history. As an example, I heard an incredulous story this week about a crew tracker’s efforts to junior man or reassign a crew. At the end of a crew’s pairing, the crew tracker reportedly did everything short of break down the cockpit door to get to the pilots. He banged so loudly on the closed cockpit door that the captain had to tell him via the interphone to wait in the jetway for them to finish their post flight duties. He then knocked even more aggressively, after which the captain advised him he was on the verge of facing law enforcement intervention. When the crew met the crew tracker on the jetway following completion of their post flight actions, he thrust a printout at the first officer and yelled “you’ve been served.” Imagine how this all looked to our passengers. How can we ever hope to compete with world class airlines if our management feels that they need the services of what have become, for all intents and purposes, crew bounty hunters in order to run their schedule?
That leads to the latest staffing statistics. Over the last few weeks, I have attempted to not just talk about how woefully understaffed the airline is as we approach summer, but also to provide you with data and statistics to back up that assessment. So far I have provided comparative data on year-over-year, block-hour-to-pilot ratios, and in year-over-year comparisons of voluntary junior manning requests. I thought that it might be helpful to now look at involuntary junior manning (IJM). IJM pay hours for this January versus January 2011 were more than double and for March, they were triple – jumping from 94.44 hours in March 2011 to 301.13 hours for last month. February seemed to be the anomaly and was fairly similar this year to last. Given the huge increases in the first quarter, this certainly does not seem to be trending in the right direction. Unfortunately, it is just one more statistic that points to the need for management to address what is an increasingly critical situation.
This week, Capts. Heppner and Moak and I all attended the Family Awareness event in ORD on Tuesday. I want to thank the SPSC teams from both the CAL and UAL MECs. I estimate that there were close to one hundred pilots and family members in attendance. It was good to be able to spend time talking about the goals we share, the similarities we have and even the few disagreements that we must contend with as CAL and UAL pilots and families. As I said to one of the pilots I talked to in ORD, it is not bad that we occasionally find ourselves in disagreement; it is how we settle that disagreement that is important.
Last this week, I am happy to report that a site survey for a Known Crewmember site in EWR is scheduled to be completed, thus getting us one step closer to making pilot access to work at one the largest hubs in served by ALPA pilots a bit easier. I know this project, started by Capt. Prater during his time as ALPA president, has taken longer than any of us would have liked, but it is good to report progress.
Have a good weekend and Fly Safe.
One Union, One Voice
Capt. Jay Pierce
CAL MEC Chairman
6 days before the UAL MEC decided to ask for release unilaterally, the two MEC Chairs were with Lee Moak, the ALPA National President.
Obviously, at this point the UAL MEC Advisory Board must have been in the works, along with the website being designed/built.
The oppurtunity to discuss this was there.
As AxlF16 has stated earlier..
When the book is written on this chapter of the aviation profession (and it WILL be written) everyone will have the benefit of hindsight. Right now we are making decisions based on limited information (such is the nature of the real world), but our decisions and actions will be judged in the cold hard light of day. Yes, your MEC was not consulted in the final stages of execution. Does that beg any questions? Is it reasonable to wonder why? That's for you to decide, but I guarantee that you will eventually be given the 'rest of the story'.
Maybe now some of you will understand the CAL's side of concern. The oppurtunity WAS there.
If history will show that Jay Heppner spoke with Lee Moak, and had his understanding and blessing- then the CAL MEC and Chair probably needs to go into recievership. For at that point, we are no longer part of the plan.
If that holds true, than I will resign my faith to whatever will be.
However, if Jay Heppner did not speak to either side, or was advised by LM to not do it.. then the UAL MEC and Chair have decided to go off the range, and damn everyone else.
And at this point, no matter what the History Books write about it.. neither scenario is a good one.
Good Luck to everyone.. I may be in the IAD Crew room in the coming weeks (working IAD-CDG), if anyone wants to chat, I'll always be open to talk. Of course, paperwork does have to come first~
Fly Safe, Fly The Contract
Motch
PS>
Below is the JNC's addition to the Blastmail
JNC (CO-CHAIRMEN CAPTS. DAVE OWENS (CAL), PHIL OTIS (UAL))
This week, the JNC and management negotiated in Chicago under supervision of the NMB. In attendance for part of the session were the MEC Chairmen and senior management, whose discussions, also under NMB supervision, focused on ways to make the negotiations more efficient and expeditious.
One JNC small group continued their progress with management on resolving open items in the Scheduling sections, including assignments and reassignments, and also began their discussions on duty, rest and the new Part 117 of the FARs. Another small group continued addressing Retirement and Insurance (R&I) sections. While the R&I small group initially made substantial progress in resolving disability issues as we reported last week, management subsequently expressed concern with the potential cost of all R&I benefits with these changes considered. As a result, this small group’s progress ended abruptly with management retreating to their previous table position (which hasn’t changed since the fall of 2010). An examination of our current process ensued with senior levels of management, ending with a commitment by them to reengage on R&I. Small group discussions on R&I resumed on Thursday and are scheduled to continue next week.
Next week, the JNC and management will reconvene negotiations in Chicago. We will continue the multipath, small group discussions on both the Scheduling sections and R&I issues.
As always, please stay connected to the process by reading updates from the MEC and your local council representatives
#92
Since we got together the United pilots have been Charley Brown and Pierce has been Lucy with the football. We end up wondering "what the hell is going on?"
Finally the LUAL MEC decides that JP works for Smisek and take steps to mitigate future damage and all the CAL guys are wondering "what the hell is going on?"
Pierce has been diddling with us since day one and we've had enough. THAT'S where it came from. OK, he yanked the football and got you PS. BFD! That's chump change compared to a good contract.
Time for ALL to toe the line and put the crap in the rearview mirror. UCH is the real enemy as is anyone who assists them in their assault on labor.
One way or another we are moving ahead. Clearly the company was ready to continue the status quo for several more years. I am not. I hope that the majority of the CAL guys feel the same way.
Finally the LUAL MEC decides that JP works for Smisek and take steps to mitigate future damage and all the CAL guys are wondering "what the hell is going on?"
Pierce has been diddling with us since day one and we've had enough. THAT'S where it came from. OK, he yanked the football and got you PS. BFD! That's chump change compared to a good contract.
Time for ALL to toe the line and put the crap in the rearview mirror. UCH is the real enemy as is anyone who assists them in their assault on labor.
One way or another we are moving ahead. Clearly the company was ready to continue the status quo for several more years. I am not. I hope that the majority of the CAL guys feel the same way.
#93
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 122
Likes: 0
From: C172
#94
Regular Guy-
A couple of questions..
You wrote The meeting won't happen because JP required the UAL MEC to drop its grievance on the PS as a requirement.
from the other blog:
"I asked my rep if a condition of meeting was that we drop our PS grievance. He said that was true and the LUAL MEC said NFW!"
Is that coming from a UAL Rep or a CAL Rep? I have not heard that and if that is true, I will question Jay P at the next LEC meeting on that! It's BS as your Grievance is against the company, not the CAL MEC.
And it was also my understanding that the Grievance was also about the amount of your payout.. if I'm correct. If not, please correct me.
Motch
A couple of questions..
You wrote The meeting won't happen because JP required the UAL MEC to drop its grievance on the PS as a requirement.
from the other blog:
"I asked my rep if a condition of meeting was that we drop our PS grievance. He said that was true and the LUAL MEC said NFW!"
Is that coming from a UAL Rep or a CAL Rep? I have not heard that and if that is true, I will question Jay P at the next LEC meeting on that! It's BS as your Grievance is against the company, not the CAL MEC.
And it was also my understanding that the Grievance was also about the amount of your payout.. if I'm correct. If not, please correct me.
Motch
When JP is pressed about the UAL MEC grievance and the TPA legal action, and why those events are an obstacle to him and the CAL MEC attending a joint meeting, he will tell you that it is based on legal advice that he has received.
(He was asked at a UAL FamAware event and this was the answer he gave.)
I believe JP does not want the full truth of his negotiations in regards to the CAL profit sharing agreement to come out.
Hog
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post



