Baron50

''The first thing we do, let's kill all the lawyers,''... William Shakespeare

Let's hope the New Year brings peace and resolution...or at the least, fewer nabobs of discontent.

R57 relay

That's interesting about what is taking so long. I'm not an attorney, but I'd agree that Judge Silver is worried more about her corner of the world than our merger.

As for the rest, the APA is going come out smelling like a rose no matter what. They don't have to do anything devious. Looking at the most recent SLI methods, they all favor AA in a merger with US. They bring the most high paying seats.

I don't see the "winning all WB flying" thing. Maybe most, and with the MOU a lot could be shifted to them pre SLI. But US(east) did have some widebody flying (like I said about 15% of the east fleet, and almost all of the flying has at least 3 pilots, some 4) and I expect that will move some US guys a little higher than if we had none.

I do agree with you that USAPA's dysfunction gives the APA an even bigger advantage. How will going into this as two groups turn out? Did the west know what they were really getting? You are correct, that whole thing was the company's idea. I first heard it from Parker a long time on a crew news session.

We'll see.

SewerPipeDvr

Thank you for ignoring the fluff and replying. My next question is will the flying be separate ops for a couple of years meaning training and procedures from each company continuing or would training and procedures combine into one? If separate would the company claim excessive expense to run both and ask for a single APA side do all that flying? With the much larger WB international ops logic would say move all WB to APA. And I am sure APA would like that flying for their members. A split USA union would not be much of a speedbump for them to roll over. I think the arbitrators in MB would make such a move if the company and the APA asked for it. Seems logical and reasonable for a large savings vs. only 1/8th of the East flying and it affecting only 2/3rds of the US Pilots. I would not think the third or fourth pilots assigned would factor much as I would think they have rather low seniority numbers and would be far away from the right seat of a WB. Another question is would MB arbitrators consider the seven year fight "enough fence" and open WB to the West? I have read several that think a fence should start now and last 5 or more years? I don't see that happening but interested in your thoughts.

Sliceback

W/B lineholders on 4 man trips can usually hold 767 Captain slots. Even the FB and FC's. They are not "rather low seniority numbers".

US/AA mgt isn't going to take all the US w/b flying and give it to the AA pilots. It will run as two operations until a consolidation (SOC) at some future date.

ackattacker

Sewer has no idea what he's talking about (in more ways than one). The MOU language specifically prevents the company from transferring the Widebody flying. It does this in several different ways, the most important of which is that it maintains a requirement for a minimum of 291 Widebody Captains and 475 Widebody F/O's on the US Air side. The current numbers are 329 and 555. So they can't simply transfer the flying "for efficiency". As for the SLI itself, the language and process of McCaskill-Bond would prevent a dramatic windfall such as giving all the widebody seniority to AA pilots. Exploiting East/West dysfunction may give them a slight upper hand during negotiations, but ultimately the list is either going to be negotiated with USAPA agreeing to the negotiated list, or it's going to be arbitrated. No panel of arbitrators would "arbitrarily" give all the widebody spots to APA pilots, it's against all precedent and common sense, and wouldn't even save the company a dime. Would cost them more, in fact, due to more training events.

What utter drivel.

R57 relay

Have you read the MOU? As ack says, there are restrictions on who flies what prior to integration. The company has some wiggle room and I think they will trade around some flying, but not the pilots. I think they may get rid of the US 767 fleet a little earlier than planned, but not the wholesale shift you envision.

The company is going to "adopt and go" and they say that means we will do things the way the bigger side does it. That means US Airbus procedures and AA Boeing. It would actually be more expensive for the company to do it the way you envision it.

You are wrong about the 3rd and 4ths on the A330. Almost all of the guys on it have 25+ years, with quite a few F/Os could hold captain seats on it.

As what the arbitration panel with do with a split east/west list, I have no idea. My previous posts were a bit of cage rattling, I will admit. It was to say "Did you really think out this 3 way, separate rep thing?" Will they deal with what each side brings to the table today? If so the west pilots bring no widebodies and their bottom F/Os were hired in 2005. The east brings the 31 widebodies and our bottom F/Os were hired in the last month. But we would also bring the smallest aircraft. The MOU is pretty clear to me on what happens. If a federal judge doesn't order the Nic to be used, will an arbitration panel? And if they don't, why would they use anything but what we bring to the merger? I have no idea what they will do.

SewerPipeDvr

The QUESTIONS were asked of R57 not one of the third graders. If you cannot even recognize a question you should really wait for someone more intelligent like R57 to reply then perhaps you can figure out what is being discussed. And the above statement is among the dumbest I have read on this thread and there have been many. Common sense? What would common sense have to do with a legal finding? You don't even know what arbitrators are capable of. A Federal Arbitrator can make just about any changes they want. The MOU will be modified in the process. And you will not get it overturned. R57 has given educated replies to my questions. Note he does not get histrionic like a elementary student. I would like him to explain this statement a bit more.
"I don't see the "winning all WB flying" thing. Maybe most, and with the MOU a lot could be shifted to them pre SLI."

Finally, I read a lot of whining about the company not following the last contract, we lost in grievance, the company won't pay us, blah blah blah and now the company is not following the MOU blah blah. You folk don't understand anything and don't learn anything. Ask a person on the street what two plus two is. Four. Ask a lawyer what two plus two is and he will say "what do you legally want it to be?" Get the picture? What you "think" or "common sense" does not matter. Only what the words legally say. And remember what is given in one place can be taken away in another. I left flying for a living in 83' for law and never looked back.

Gallifrey

I wish sewer would leave the forums behind and go jib jab with other hot shot lawyers elsewhere. Then again i left law in 83 to be a pilot and never looked back. i bet sewer is cacti or wd in disguise.

Wiskey Driver

You would be incorrect but then again what else is new with you people? Dont like someone or the conversation just do what the east does and insult your way thru.

Oh BTW if you left the law in 83 to fly planes that tells me that you were one sorry ass attorney! Some of us have a superior grasp of the law and some of have no clue at all.

WD at AWA

Sliceback

Parker recently emphatically clarified what he meant by 'adopt and go'. It was related to systems(ie IT). As far as policies and procedures they'll look at all of them and decide.