LIOG41

I believe if they accept the counter, then the BoD will pass it. If not, and they go back and forth a couple more times over the next few days, then I think it will go to vote.

FredFlyer

http://www.thestreet.mobi/story/12953703/1/could-it-be-that-delta-enjoys-the-contract-squabbles-at-american.html?puc=yahoo&cm_ven=YAHOO

eaglefly

"Great Package" ?

God, what a fruitcake.

Only a senior captain who couldn't care less about scope or anything but a few extra dollars quicker would think that. He'd be happy to throw anyone else under the bus to feather his few final years. Pilots like that aren't really part of the group and are essentially parasites considering the other pilots his host.

At least we know what road the rock you scurried out from under is.

eaglefly

Agreed. This trolling shill is here only to **** with pllots minds in the hope he'll make a difference. He won't and whether he realizes it or not has ALREADY failed. Fact is, he's essentially just masturbating himself here, because the real influence to the BOD is occurring in direct communication to them from pilots and they're getting the message which is an OVERWHELMINGLY negative response to this proposal.

I encourage ALL AA pilots to communicate their position directly to APA and their chiefs.

R57 relay

You're wrong again EF. I KNOW who he is, and he is not a senior captain.

Sometimes his delivery style gets in the way of his message, as I've TOLD HIM repeatedly.

eaglefly

To all : Again, as I've stated it doesn't matter who Roadkill66 is (I've deliberately referred to him both as a pilot and NOT a pilot to highlight his chamelonism) and his message sucks even without a mack truck. APA today will submit a counter to Parker's feeble proposal and if rejected, arbitration is the likely path as it should be. Personally, I had no illusions about Parker and it's true the majority of AA pilots agreed to the MTA/JCBA provisions and process. This is not section 6, but Parkers proposal and duration is essentially making it a section 6 offer (that's just but one aspect of its con), but a lowball one. So in light of that, I still think we're better off taking what we accepted via arbitration vs. an AWFUL section 6 wannabe and keeping scope the same.

WE will get substantial pay improvements in 2016, no mixing of domestic and international (unless cost improvements for the company are recouped elsewhere by the pilots), no obscene health care taxes (also without corresponding improvements elsewhere), no scope changes and PARKER will get cheaper labor and the former angry, disillusioned employees the old AA had to try and compete with Delta in both good times and bad, so eventually after his financial honeymoon is over we all will likely lose. When it does come time for section 6, we'll have the good old antagonism on steroids relationship AA has always been known for (and whose inferiority has been a resulting byproduct of) to work with. Parker showed his cards and there's now no doubt the new boss is the same as the old. That cannot be changed no matter what at this point as that bridge was bombed.

My guess is they'll want an extension to "consider" the counter and that should be one week maximum. I think they'll then offer some minor sweeteners and then it will be up to APA to decide to accept or reject with no more dancing. Parker gets to choose which AA he wants - a new one or the old one. I know Anderson is hoping for the old one. They'll kill us in the future and they should. Parker may indeed get something (and may not even care) with a crap deal, but he also gives something up and what he gives up may be a bigger component then he thought. Again, I hear from others that "Parker doesn't care". Perhaps, but if that's true, he's stupider then I thought. In the future what he gives up is likely the key ingredient to success and the affected employees will remember how he reneged at this critical juncture and failed to live up to his claims and promises.

R57 relay

I agree EF. Good post.

biigD

With the LUS pilot group, it's not uncommon to be senior in age, but not senior in their seat. Anyone that says that scope is 'irrelevant' clearly doesn't plan to be part of this industry much longer. He also mentions professional pride, and I'd argue that he clearly has none, and he has no problem stepping all over the profession for short term monetary gain.

Saabs

Anyone care to explain why having a domestic and international base on the same type aircraft is good? I would think that not having them separate would give better schedule flexibility, but it's all foreign to me and I'm sure there are reasons that I am oblivious to.

KiloAlpha

APA Committee recommendations do not reference scope in their counter proposal.

It references higher pay rates, 321 group III rates, minimum day, and LOS.

If the company accepts Delta + "x" %, then APA will accept the company's scope proposal?