AOL update
01-01-2014, 06:48 AM
#2303
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Posts: 405
Flew with a brand new hire F/A last month with an employee number something like 82. They have to reuse the old ones because the system can not accept anything over 5 digits.
C/O F/O only one letter to change in all those thousands of lines of code.
01-01-2014, 10:51 AM
#2304
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2012
Position: Done with that
Posts: 191
Sorry for the slow reply, been busy with family, friends and flying.
I've assumed that you read the MOU. Is that correct? It is basically a 15 page document that replaces the entire US contracts. Plural, as east and west are still under separate ops. Don't be so sure that "plural" means what you think it means. It depends on the definition used. It can be argued one of several ways.
Anyway, the MOU has certain block hour requirements to be maintain and pilot positions. The company has some flexibility to shift flying, but if it honors the contract, it has to maintain certain levels of flying. Depends on the definition of "honors the contract". Whose interpretation of what the contract actually says? How many times has USAPA said a contract says one thing but loses in grievance?
As with much on this board, this is conjecture based on rumors. Before the merger was announced, US was going to do a life extension on the 767 fleet and run them until 2017, when the A350s were scheduled to arrive. After the merger announcement I heard they were going to skip that and retire the US 76 fleet by the end of 2014. When the merger got delayed, the new word was the leases got extended. The aircraft are long in the tooth, the oldest in the US fleet, and kind of small for it's role. My guess is that the new AA would like to replace them.
So, US could retire some 767s and use AA aircraft and pilots on former US routes, but on a limited basis. What does "limited" mean? Using US fleet numbers ten would be a lot. Using AA fleet numbers ten is "limited". How many 767s does USA have?
I'm interested in what you have to say as a person without a dog in the fight, and an attorney. Sometimes I follow you and sometimes I don't. You see the APA walking over things, but we have a procedure pretty much in place. For them to really roll over us, I think they would have to do that prior to the merger. Now things are pretty much set. I think the AA pilots will come out on top, but that is because the majority of them ARE on top now, by the common measurement. They have the most higher paying positions, and history shows that is what pilots go for, no matter what they say about not wanting to fly glorified red-eyes. You think you have a "procedure in place". What do the lawyers making the big bucks think that means? How will it be argued? MB arbitration will be between APA and USAPA and possibly the West class. BUT, the company has an interest and can submit evidence for consideration. If they prove following SLI they would be at a competitive disadvantage the arbitrators can make "adjustments". Just like the CAL pilots got adjusted. ( Some CAL pilots got seniority numbers at their owned regional by contract. It did not live in MB only their time at CAL counted) Just a part of going to arbitration. Reflecting I don't think they could move all WB flying to one side even if it only affected 15% of one group. That might be hard to argue.
The really interesting thing in this merger is the separate representation of the west pilots. Do they represent what they bring to the merger? Did they step in a pile of steaming ds? I mean, they have no widebodies in PHX. Their junior F/Os were hired in 2005. The MOU is clear about the continuation of separate ops. What does an arbitration panel do with all of that?
I've assumed that you read the MOU. Is that correct? It is basically a 15 page document that replaces the entire US contracts. Plural, as east and west are still under separate ops. Don't be so sure that "plural" means what you think it means. It depends on the definition used. It can be argued one of several ways.
Anyway, the MOU has certain block hour requirements to be maintain and pilot positions. The company has some flexibility to shift flying, but if it honors the contract, it has to maintain certain levels of flying. Depends on the definition of "honors the contract". Whose interpretation of what the contract actually says? How many times has USAPA said a contract says one thing but loses in grievance?
As with much on this board, this is conjecture based on rumors. Before the merger was announced, US was going to do a life extension on the 767 fleet and run them until 2017, when the A350s were scheduled to arrive. After the merger announcement I heard they were going to skip that and retire the US 76 fleet by the end of 2014. When the merger got delayed, the new word was the leases got extended. The aircraft are long in the tooth, the oldest in the US fleet, and kind of small for it's role. My guess is that the new AA would like to replace them.
So, US could retire some 767s and use AA aircraft and pilots on former US routes, but on a limited basis. What does "limited" mean? Using US fleet numbers ten would be a lot. Using AA fleet numbers ten is "limited". How many 767s does USA have?
I'm interested in what you have to say as a person without a dog in the fight, and an attorney. Sometimes I follow you and sometimes I don't. You see the APA walking over things, but we have a procedure pretty much in place. For them to really roll over us, I think they would have to do that prior to the merger. Now things are pretty much set. I think the AA pilots will come out on top, but that is because the majority of them ARE on top now, by the common measurement. They have the most higher paying positions, and history shows that is what pilots go for, no matter what they say about not wanting to fly glorified red-eyes. You think you have a "procedure in place". What do the lawyers making the big bucks think that means? How will it be argued? MB arbitration will be between APA and USAPA and possibly the West class. BUT, the company has an interest and can submit evidence for consideration. If they prove following SLI they would be at a competitive disadvantage the arbitrators can make "adjustments". Just like the CAL pilots got adjusted. ( Some CAL pilots got seniority numbers at their owned regional by contract. It did not live in MB only their time at CAL counted) Just a part of going to arbitration. Reflecting I don't think they could move all WB flying to one side even if it only affected 15% of one group. That might be hard to argue.
The really interesting thing in this merger is the separate representation of the west pilots. Do they represent what they bring to the merger? Did they step in a pile of steaming ds? I mean, they have no widebodies in PHX. Their junior F/Os were hired in 2005. The MOU is clear about the continuation of separate ops. What does an arbitration panel do with all of that?
One thing that bothers me. The APA did not tell USAPA the company came calling. That gives them a huge advantage to come up with a plan to benefit them. I remember something about the company changing the 350 order. I wonder if Parker, who has been a Airbus fanboy in the past would consider a change if it got the APA to "play the game". Something like "we have lots of Boeing product on the way. That 350 order is not that big, we would be better served if we changed those to NEO'S and used the 777 and 787 for those routes". If those seats disappeared how would that affect USAPA? Contract agrees to pay WB wage for NB pilot? Or does it? If USAPA agrees to take 350 flying and give the AA fences what happens if the 350 goes poof? You can't cross that fence per your agreement in MB. That is the problem with 15 page contracts in complex situations. Leaves a lot of wiggle the other direction that you don't want. The best way is to always cover every possible permutation. Long and complex and costly. But it gets the job done the client desires. Sorry the hangover is making things cloudy if you don't follow I will try to clear it up before leaving tomorrow.
01-01-2014, 12:16 PM
#2306
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: Window seat
Posts: 5,507
A350-800 order just converted to -900's. If they were planning on terminating the order I doubt they would have converted the order from -800's to -900's. AB looks like it's not going to build the -800 so not converting the order would have left US with 4 -900's on order. That would have been much easier to cancel.
01-02-2014, 07:46 AM
#2308
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
I think the Company (Siegal) will get the West a seat. Just an opinion made without all the facts but this is what I think a MB arbitrators will do. No NIC for the West. No DOH/LOS for the East. East and West will be blended to some ratio. So West 05 hire might be next to a East 89 hire. No fences on USAir WB flying. You have had 7 or 8 years of fence already. The West not getting revenge, the East not getting the West stapled. Time to move on.
One thing that bothers me. The APA did not tell USAPA the company came calling. That gives them a huge advantage to come up with a plan to benefit them. I remember something about the company changing the 350 order. I wonder if Parker, who has been a Airbus fanboy in the past would consider a change if it got the APA to "play the game". Something like "we have lots of Boeing product on the way. That 350 order is not that big, we would be better served if we changed those to NEO'S and used the 777 and 787 for those routes". If those seats disappeared how would that affect USAPA? Contract agrees to pay WB wage for NB pilot? Or does it? If USAPA agrees to take 350 flying and give the AA fences what happens if the 350 goes poof? You can't cross that fence per your agreement in MB. That is the problem with 15 page contracts in complex situations. Leaves a lot of wiggle the other direction that you don't want. The best way is to always cover every possible permutation. Long and complex and costly. But it gets the job done the client desires. Sorry the hangover is making things cloudy if you don't follow I will try to clear it up before leaving tomorrow.
One thing that bothers me. The APA did not tell USAPA the company came calling. That gives them a huge advantage to come up with a plan to benefit them. I remember something about the company changing the 350 order. I wonder if Parker, who has been a Airbus fanboy in the past would consider a change if it got the APA to "play the game". Something like "we have lots of Boeing product on the way. That 350 order is not that big, we would be better served if we changed those to NEO'S and used the 777 and 787 for those routes". If those seats disappeared how would that affect USAPA? Contract agrees to pay WB wage for NB pilot? Or does it? If USAPA agrees to take 350 flying and give the AA fences what happens if the 350 goes poof? You can't cross that fence per your agreement in MB. That is the problem with 15 page contracts in complex situations. Leaves a lot of wiggle the other direction that you don't want. The best way is to always cover every possible permutation. Long and complex and costly. But it gets the job done the client desires. Sorry the hangover is making things cloudy if you don't follow I will try to clear it up before leaving tomorrow.
I just have to ask. If there was no proof that this arbitrator did anything wrong and the sole basis for one parties action are " its not fair" how does the MB panel of arbitrators dismiss the original award?
The LEGAL standard for over turning a binding arbitration award is one party must prove that the arbitrator committed some form of wrong doing. The east claim does not rise to the (legal) standard for which an arbitration award can be overturned, modified or in your comment re ordered. I think by doing so it opens the door for another claim. The panel will have before them basically and undisputed award and based on what you have stated here it does not have a legal reason to dismiss the original award. Plaintiffs will argue that very fact should a panel decide to modify that award without cause.
Lets discuss this further.
WD at AWA
01-02-2014, 10:32 AM
#2310
New Hire
Joined APC: Feb 2009
Posts: 6
I just have to ask. If there was no proof that this arbitrator did anything wrong and the sole basis for one parties action are " its not fair" how does the MB panel of arbitrators dismiss the original award?
The LEGAL standard for over turning a binding arbitration award is one party must prove that the arbitrator committed some form of wrong doing. The east claim does not rise to the (legal) standard for which an arbitration award can be overturned, modified or in your comment re ordered. I think by doing so it opens the door for another claim. The panel will have before them basically and undisputed award and based on what you have stated here it does not have a legal reason to dismiss the original award. Plaintiffs will argue that very fact should a panel decide to modify that award without cause.
Lets discuss this further.
WD at AWA
The LEGAL standard for over turning a binding arbitration award is one party must prove that the arbitrator committed some form of wrong doing. The east claim does not rise to the (legal) standard for which an arbitration award can be overturned, modified or in your comment re ordered. I think by doing so it opens the door for another claim. The panel will have before them basically and undisputed award and based on what you have stated here it does not have a legal reason to dismiss the original award. Plaintiffs will argue that very fact should a panel decide to modify that award without cause.
Lets discuss this further.
WD at AWA
The real question now is did USAPA trick the west pilots into voting for an MOU that did not specifically include the NIC award. 2 out of the 4 NAC members that helped craft the MOU are west pilots. All BPR members recommended a yes vote. Everyone had the chance to read the MOU before voting on it, even the AOL lawyers who recommended voting yes. If everyone was really that fooled then the east USAPA rep.s must be fricking geniuses.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
