AOL update
05-15-2013, 08:58 AM
#901
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
When one is looking toward the moon, one can always wish upon a star while his mind is in the neighborhood though...........
05-15-2013, 10:50 AM
#902
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2006
Position: Bigg Bird!!
Posts: 599
Agree absolutely, I just thought it funny that he would actually advocate such nonsense as something the APA should agree to outside of arbitration. That's what resulted in the Nic in the first place, i.e., absurdly unrealistic expectations.....well, in that case it was a demand.
When one is looking toward the moon, one can always wish upon a star while his mind is in the neighborhood though...........
When one is looking toward the moon, one can always wish upon a star while his mind is in the neighborhood though...........
Besides, most of the pilots on the east and west lists, with the 3rd listers as an exeption, are more senior than you..
Last edited by LittleBoyBlew; 05-15-2013 at 11:13 AM.
05-15-2013, 11:39 AM
#903
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Just remember the "failing carrier argument". APA used it on the TWA SLI...And it worked for them. Last I checked. AA is still in BK. Besides LCC has twice the attrition than AA in the next 5 years. I know its difficult for someone of your stature to comprehend, but DOH with C&Rs might be a better gamble than to trust the FINAL and BINDING McBond..
Besides, most of the pilots on the east and west lists, with the 3rd listers as an exeption, are more senior than you..
Besides, most of the pilots on the east and west lists, with the 3rd listers as an exeption, are more senior than you..
Anyhoo, as for the rest of your argument that the APA should agree to USAPA's dream of DOH, that's pure propwash. It's a non-starter that ain't going to happen even in arbitration and if you're hoping this arbitration panel decides to vendictively punish AA pilots for APA's past decisions regarding TWA, I think you'll end up empty-handed in that respect as well.
05-15-2013, 01:26 PM
#905
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2009
Posts: 1,577
WOW!! It's good to see the AArogance is quickly coming back. Not even out of bankruptcy. Bravo to you eaglefly.
I'm aware of that argument and I'm confident it won't apply. First of all USAPA would have to present that as a means to gain in the AA/U arbitration. Then, to capitalize on that, they'd have to make a compelling argument that AA is indeed a "failing carrier" in and of itself and convince the arbitration panel it was a valid argument (good luck on that). Quite frankly, I bet the APA could make an even better argument that ultimately US Airways is a failing carrier as without hitching their cart to AA, they're the most likely to founder in the future, being neither fish (a global legacy) nor fowl (an LCC) and solo, would be a divided carrier and crippled in many ways as such. TWA had perhaps 300 million in operating cash, had been through multiple bankruptcies and was steadily being stripped of its assets by Icahn who was down to the point of burning the furniture to heat the house. AA on the other hand didn't file bankruptcy out of necessity, but out of convenience. It was simply a methodology of this management to finally gut labor across the board and although they met that goal, they slit their own throats in the process. They had 6 billion and simply needed to flush their debt, that being primarily the pension funds and retiree medical obligations. Free of those with their global brand name and presence, AA was quite valuable and would have had financiers falling all over each other to get in on the action. TWA on the other hand was begging for help and although rumored to have SOME interest, that hasn't been proven conclusively that even if it was valid, would have saved the carrier that unknown to everyone would soon have to face 9/11 solo. With TWA, it could be argued the parts were worth more than the whole and post 9/11 it would have been overly ripe for fragmentation or liquidation.
Anyhoo, as for the rest of your argument that the APA should agree to USAPA's dream of DOH, that's pure propwash. It's a non-starter that ain't going to happen even in arbitration and if you're hoping this arbitration panel decides to vendictively punish AA pilots for APA's past decisions regarding TWA, I think you'll end up empty-handed in that respect as well.
Anyhoo, as for the rest of your argument that the APA should agree to USAPA's dream of DOH, that's pure propwash. It's a non-starter that ain't going to happen even in arbitration and if you're hoping this arbitration panel decides to vendictively punish AA pilots for APA's past decisions regarding TWA, I think you'll end up empty-handed in that respect as well.
05-15-2013, 02:27 PM
#907
Weekend workaholic
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Position: A320 CA
Posts: 669
I'm aware of that argument and I'm confident it won't apply. First of all USAPA would have to present that as a means to gain in the AA/U arbitration. Then, to capitalize on that, they'd have to make a compelling argument that AA is indeed a "failing carrier" in and of itself and convince the arbitration panel it was a valid argument (good luck on that). Quite frankly, I bet the APA could make an even better argument that ultimately US Airways is a failing carrier as without hitching their cart to AA, they're the most likely to founder in the future, being neither fish (a global legacy) nor fowl (an LCC) and solo, would be a divided carrier and crippled in many ways as such. TWA had perhaps 300 million in operating cash, had been through multiple bankruptcies and was steadily being stripped of its assets by Icahn who was down to the point of burning the furniture to heat the house. AA on the other hand didn't file bankruptcy out of necessity, but out of convenience. It was simply a methodology of this management to finally gut labor across the board and although they met that goal, they slit their own throats in the process. They had 6 billion and simply needed to flush their debt, that being primarily the pension funds and retiree medical obligations. Free of those with their global brand name and presence, AA was quite valuable and would have had financiers falling all over each other to get in on the action. TWA on the other hand was begging for help and although rumored to have SOME interest, that hasn't been proven conclusively that even if it was valid, would have saved the carrier that unknown to everyone would soon have to face 9/11 solo. With TWA, it could be argued the parts were worth more than the whole and post 9/11 it would have been overly ripe for fragmentation or liquidation.
Anyhoo, as for the rest of your argument that the APA should agree to USAPA's dream of DOH, that's pure propwash. It's a non-starter that ain't going to happen even in arbitration and if you're hoping this arbitration panel decides to vendictively punish AA pilots for APA's past decisions regarding TWA, I think you'll end up empty-handed in that respect as well.
Anyhoo, as for the rest of your argument that the APA should agree to USAPA's dream of DOH, that's pure propwash. It's a non-starter that ain't going to happen even in arbitration and if you're hoping this arbitration panel decides to vendictively punish AA pilots for APA's past decisions regarding TWA, I think you'll end up empty-handed in that respect as well.
Don't worry, whatever the outcome of the seniority integration process, they'll abide to what ever agreements they made going in as long as they think the outcome is fair when the ruling comes out....which is to say the outcome is unencumbered DOH. The majority of the East pilots will try to distance themselves by telling you, "I never thought that was reasonable and I told my rep but I guess that just the way the cookie crumbles, right?" Maybe somehow they'll be forced to come off that pedestal and will make a "more than reasonable" offer...DOH with conditions and restrictions which IS STILL DOH. They'll be shocked when you tell them to pound sand...call you "unreasonable". Welcome to the party.
Versus what, USAPA getting all they're "entitled" to? So far, APA has tried to give the impression to everyone involved that they're willing to follow current legal process to achieve a resolution. The East are still muttering DOH and hoping it will gain some traction. Insanity: Doing the same thing over and over expecting a different outcome.
05-15-2013, 02:44 PM
#908
Banned
Joined APC: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
- The idea that APA (or AA pilots) should accept the request of USAPA for a negotiated DOH based SLI is unacceptable and unlikely.
- The beliefs of what occurred with TWA in 2001 has no bearing on the upcoming AA/U SLI.
- Any hope of emotional retribution in the arbitration of AA/U is highly unlikely.
If that makes me arrogant, ..........guilty as charged. Personally, you sound like someone with an ax to grind against APA or AA pilots, so I have to question your objectivity and thus credibility.
05-15-2013, 05:28 PM
#909
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2007
Posts: 1,353
This statement is meaningless without specific reasons why. I believe (and stated) that :
- The idea that APA (or AA pilots) should accept the request of USAPA for a negotiated DOH based SLI is unacceptable and unlikely.
- The beliefs of what occurred with TWA in 2001 has no bearing on the upcoming AA/U SLI.
- Any hope of emotional retribution in the arbitration of AA/U is highly unlikely.
If that makes me arrogant, ..........guilty as charged. Personally, you sound like someone with an ax to grind against APA or AA pilots, so I have to question your objectivity and thus credibility.
- The idea that APA (or AA pilots) should accept the request of USAPA for a negotiated DOH based SLI is unacceptable and unlikely.
- The beliefs of what occurred with TWA in 2001 has no bearing on the upcoming AA/U SLI.
- Any hope of emotional retribution in the arbitration of AA/U is highly unlikely.
If that makes me arrogant, ..........guilty as charged. Personally, you sound like someone with an ax to grind against APA or AA pilots, so I have to question your objectivity and thus credibility.
. Many heard that statement too and I don't have to tell you that each and every one is still around. ALPA tried to get us to bend and we would not the 9th tried to get us to bend and we would not and now Silver would like to see some bending but that just ain't gonna happen. There is simply no way out of this arbitration unless a party decides that it will give up its rights. The east made sure that couldn't happen the minute they voted in usapa. There is no mechanism by which the west can give up anything now because the east decided one goal one voice or that's what they thought. Now all that's left is next week and force the court to do that which is really doesn't not want to do and that is make a decision. Now going against the west totally undermines the arbitration process in this county opening the door to massive litigation from all walks of life.
This is far from over but keep in mind that the new company could always pay us off. Calculate the number of years left by the new rate and most of us would bolt. Parker could raise that amount of case should only be 2 billion or so that's nothing when you consider it will the east babies happy.
WD at AWA
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
