flybywire44

We're not even a week from APA's new status as CBA, and AOL has already popped this off to USAPA? This is not realistic. USAPA has long running financial agreements, which it must fulfill. There is also a continuity of civil matters, which USAPA may continue to oppose. I'm afraid for West Pilots. This letter strikes me more as a targeted marketing campaign for fundraising monies, than it is an effective threat.

West pilots may face more exposure in this integration than just losing Nic. I do highly encourage the West Pilot Class to settle with USAPA, APA, and American in exchange for a SLI pre-agreement that guarantees, among other things, that third-list pilots will not be placed above west pilots in this integration. Such an settlement could also vacate the Nicolau award, and establish a West Class Merger Committee.

Please note that I do not advocate that third-list plots should go ahead of any West pilots, but we are getting down to the 11th hour, and everything is on the table. ie. AOL wants Nic, and USAPA may go to great lengths to represent all of the pilots on the "status quo lists."


Cacti, eagle fly has been making a series of accurate posts this week, which is wonderful.

That being said, lets zoom out, and get away from this minutia. The ultimate customer of SLI is American Airlines. The arbitrators would provide a very poor product if upset the majority of pilots (AA+East) by awarding Nic... Don't you think?

Is it reasonable to assume that West pilots would be harmed by the Nicolai award is East+AA pilots collectively burned the house down? Obviously, this would never happen, but arbitrators and company will seek the most mutually beneficial solution.

These underlined statements may be misleading—I'm afraid they may unnecessarily stress some of the less than 500 AA natives whom these statements apply.

I believe you suppose that AE flows with relatively less sweat equity, and who did not hold a recall right may devalue the SLI value of legacy AA non-flow thru pilots who did/do hold a recall right. Is this correct?

AE flows, and any relatively junior AA native recalls will surely be credited their sweat equity, but at this most bottom portion of the seniority list what value did either group's longevity represent? Regardless of longevity, both demographics have the same net bidding power, and I believe arbitrators will take note of this.

How much percentage based movement was there between February 14th, 2013, and December 9th, 2013? Given this question, I am confident that the arbitrators won't devalue AAnatives relative seniority to their more senior AE flows. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the last AA native recall class prior to December 9th, 2013 was November 20th, 2013? This illustrates the net value of these group's seniority value.

I also must point out, as I have in the past, that the Merger Announcement Date is the typical litmus test for delineating Conditional Notice pilots. If this applies to this merger, than the majority of the people you're writing about need not worry about these things.

Furthermore, if West Pilots (against all odds) gain representation they will assuredly demand a Merger Announcement Date Conditional Notice Snapshot for delineating pre/post merger pilots. This method was used in the UAL, DAL, and Nic SLI awards. So for all the arguments AA pilots may have made advocating west pilot representation...you may have devalued a MOU effective date method for inflating system-wide AA pilot relative seniority.

It's ironic, but it's out of our hands, and as a third list pilot I don't really care which snapshot is used as I personally feel that it makes no difference for junior AA/East pilots. The net value of bidding seniority is equally inflated on both sides during the February 14th, 2014 to December 9th, 2013 time frame. Assuming relative seniority inflation between the AA & East groups is constant between MAD, and MOU Effective days than what are we worried about?

I hope my late night thoughts prove constructive.

Respectfully,
FBW

cactiboss

No, the PA specifically says that anything can be negotiated/arbitrated. For some reason you are assuming that the dec 9th 2013 positions are "locked" that is not the case in any way shape or form.

cactiboss

I agree 100% with everything you say here so do our attorneys and AAG's Attorneys

This is where you go off the rails, the position of west pilots has ZERO bearing on any harm to American pilots. USAIRWAYS brings a fixed numbers of positions to the merger, it matters not wether west or east pilots hold those positions, period. Now you want to complicate things? Don't use the nic. because then you have furloughed west pilots flying FO in group 4 airplanes, airplanes which according to your logic senior west pilots cannot fly, it only gets more convoluted from there. Your concerns about west pilots flooding widebodies is completely unfounded, as everyone understands there will be fences and beyond the fences there will be a number of seats comensurate to the aircraft each side brings.Guess what? the west and east share all of usairways widebodies and the circuit breaker there is the "no bump no flush" provisions of the mou. Anyway you look at this, the Nicolau simplifies the US/AA integration and is more "equitable". Sewerpipedriver is a lawyer yet he omits one of the key tenants of law as well as arbitration, what was the "intent" of the contracts that were made? Usairways has been managed as a single company since 2005, this isn't opinion but legal fact, everything that happen after that date is as a single carrier. Now the arbitrators might ignore the Nic but do you honestly believe they will ignore our 2005 merger? Usapa escaped another DFR simply because they never got rid of the nic. for another seniority list, the MOU and PA pushed off the NIc. to the arbitrators since the legal system decided they could not decide. The intent of the MOU and PA both are clear, the arbitrators decide wether or not George Nicolaus arbitration should be used, period. (caveat being if west gets a seat)

R57 relay

USAPA agreed with him. That was one of their big selling points during the CBA election, that the Nic was a product of the ever changing ALPA merger policy.

What will be in front of this panel? If you guys get a seat and propose the Nic, that's not the status quo. It's never been used, and I don't see how you can miss Eagle Flys point.

ackattacker

Stop and think about that for a minute. People say seniority is everything but AGE is a close second. It's the reason some guys are jumping ship from B6 to come here... their Captains are too young and aren't retiring anytime soon. East Captains are very old. AA Captains are very old. West Captains much less so. AGE means the difference between retiring as a 777 Captain or retiring as an A320 F/O and potentially millions of dollars of future income. Hardly "ZERO bearing"! All told, in an ideal world, you want everybody who's senior to you, to be older than you! So they can retire and get out of your darn seat. The Nic would upset that apple cart and don't think APA hasn't noticed!

flybywire44

It's good that you hope obstinately. This is especially important during emergency landings, CAT 3 Approaches, and other critical situations where it all rests on your shoulders! easglefly has grown cold toward the Nic award. Eaglefly may believe Nic is the morally sound course of action, but the PA has objectively changed the landscape. Still you poo poo him.

Cacti, you stated: "what was the "intent" of the contracts that were made?" We live in a world where sometimes contracts are meant to be broken. Sometimes groups of people sign things they will make every effort to eventually renege on. Social security is a great example.

Yes, the airlines US Airways merged with American in 2005. But the then technically controlling US/AMWest TA evaporated with the AA/US MOU.

But what's more important than that may be the idea that arbitrators respond to incentive. (Hang on, we're zooming out again.) There are relatively fewer airlines remaining. It's more important than ever that arbitrators, who are chosen based on prior rulings, be considerate to the fact that companies, and unions often hire them with preference to past performance.

Beyond this merger American, and APA will shop for arbitrators again. It would be out side of an arbitrators best interests to upset American and APA with the Nicolau award.

Does this make sense? Incentives are a fairly simple concept. Ie. you love Nic because it incentives you, not because it was an "agreement." If you were a mid seniority East pilot who has ridden the coat tails of USAPA to fly the a330, and then upgrade on the a319 you'd be anti-Nic too! It's all incentives baby!

Lets hope for a mutually beneficial outcome. We need West, East, and AA pilots to all come out ahead on this one. You hoping for anything else may be more self serving here than you realize. We need a socialized arbitration award, and I full believe we will get one because arbitrators may be incentivized by AMR and APA's desires for social harmonization of labor.

Okay, I'm off to accomplish something tangible! God bless you Cacti.

Hang in there everyone!

Sliceback

The NIC would absolutely have an impact on the AA pilots. Using any method of integration with and without the NIC would show the impact.

eaglefly

Not in the context of excluding the Nic. Let's look at the most likely reality; The West ultimately get a negotiating committee. If and when that occurs, APA gives them the same seniority list info as they gave USAPA based on a status quo date of 12/9/13. I suppose USAPA exchanges seniority list info with the West and technically the West would be required to do the same as per the PA. They then negotiate to trim as many disputes as possible from the list and then meet in arbitration to present their list of remaining disputes and begin the process of arguing their integration positions before the arbitrators.

The West will only recognize the Nic (they're committed to that as to inject optionability now is to essentially admit THEY believe the Nic isn't a requirement) and so any integration position with AA pilots will be based on that list. The East will never recognize the Nic and so their integration position with AA and the West will be based on some other ideal. APA will likely propose a pre-merger career expectation list that minimizes windfalls to any subgroup of pilots at the expense of others. The beauty is that any positions discussed in negotiations between themselves are confidential. The award will be final and binding on ALL pilots.

I think the only guarantee of the Nic NOT reaching arbitral consideration is if the West is not granted a merger committee.

eaglefly

Well, my point is that incorporation of the Nic presents more challenges for the arbitration panel in constructing the ISL that wouldn't be there without it. If the West plops the Nic down as their one list to merge with AA pilots considering it puts many West narrowbody F/O's (to say nothing of captains) in high percentile positions that given the Nic list couldn't be reordered (if accepted) who might end up senior to many AA legacy pilots with more time in seat and making (and expecting future) substantially higher pay, there will have to be compensation factors.

In simpler terms, the Nic benefits the most 1700 pilots that pre-merger (like it or not) were flying for essentially a one domicile LCC operation with top pay substantially below that of AA and whose order/option/retirement schedule in conjunction with the likely reality of remaining in that situation for many years to come would arguably produce a windfall for those 1700 at the expense the other 13,500 and most certainly the 10,000 at AA.

Will the arbitrators put the interests of this 1700 as a top priority at the expense of the massive majority ?

That is the question. Again, personally, I don't think so.


Well, the UAL-CAL CN litmas WAS Merger Announcement Date (MAD), but that was at agreement of the parties. I suppose it could be MAD here, but then why have status quo determined at date of merger consummation ?

I dunno, perhaps by agreeing to the consummation date, it minimizes this issue ?

Remember, my statements are based on the apparent reality that none of the 3 seniority lists (or 2 in the case of the Nic being applied) will be reordered and so as one of the complexities in this SLI, one pilot's relativity at AA (or US Airways) could theoretically lift the tides of some of those presently junior below him (to varying degrees depending on the dovetailing of blocks of pilots or a finer individual dovetailing) or likewise that pilot could sink those presently below him should his longevity (time in seat) be heavily weighed. Since leapfrogging won't occur, groups of junior pilots at all of the carriers may win or lose depending on how this factor is applied. Looking at the lists, this issue doesn't seem to apply to pilots senior to about '98 at AA, in other words it will be an F/O issue for all groups.

This is where incorporation of the Nic really seems to foul things up. If the Nic is used, a narrowbody West F/O could really elevate those junior to him against AA pilots unless they where blocked very junior to AA pilots which would then harm East captains or very senior F/O's junior to him. It's another reason I think the Nic might be more obtainable hadn't this merger occurred, but since it never was implemented (right or wrong) and the REALITY is the consideration now IS relevant to THIS merger/SLI where each pilot group was and not where one group (and extreme minority) SHOULD have been, the dynamics are altered to force the arbitrators to either uphold the Nic for the benefit of this 11% minority whose pre-merger career expectations couldn't hold a candle to those at AA or weigh the interests of the 89% majority (65% @AA) and use a different model more in line with the avoidance of such a windfall.

eaglefly

ANY position can be presented for consideration to the arbitrators and it's their job (if done correctly) to meet a "fair" and most importantly "equitable" standard, i.e., the maximization of pre-merger career expectations and the minimization of windfalls.