ASA closer to a strike

[John Pennekamp]

again, I agree with all that with the exception of alpa payrates being a roadblock. they are simply too high and alpa has not budged on them. those rates WILL NOT FLY. come off those and drop the retirement bs for better 401k match and IMO we'll get a deal done sooner rather than later.

So what do you propose? Shall we undercut Mesa and secure ALL of the DCI flying just to "get' er dun"?

 

[ASADriver]

So what do you propose? Shall we undercut Mesa and secure ALL of the DCI flying just to "get' er dun"?

I didn't get that from OhPlease. I don't believe he said "lets undercut Mesa". Why do you ALPA types label anyone who wants to be more reasonable as wanting to take a paycut and undercut Mesa? The current managment proposal on payrates is higher than Mesa, so I don't think anyone is advocating taking less that that - but keep saying it if it makes you feel important Mr. ALPA.

 

[John Pennekamp]

The company asked the union if they would allow the pilots to move aicraft that wanted to move (to avoid a displacement bid), and the union said no. The union wanted the company to follow the contract to the letter, and run the displacement. It is in the union's best interest to cause the company to have a displacement bid because it makes the company management look like the bad guys...

Thanks ALPA! Chalk another one up for the union doing what is in our best interest boys! Man, am I glad that I'm a member, and paying my 2%!!!!!!

That's a pretty obtuse and self serving statement. I question how you think "the union" (and what's that mean? We ALL are "the union") would do this to screw the company.

Look at the seniority of the MEC. Zerberini is a mid level -200 CA, losing line quality. Utley's a senior SLC -700 CA being displaced to ATL. He will have to commute to ATL from DFW now. Newhouse is a senior -200 CA. He will lose line quality to more senior -700 CAs coming down. Mohr is a mid seniority ATR CA, he won't be affected that much... until he tries to go back to the jet. Farruzi is a junior ATR CA who is probably getting cut in the next displacement to ATR FO. Him being the resident bigmouth of the MEC, I doubt he would do something that screws him, just to screw the company. Yet he posted on the ALPA message board that he supports it because it's what's best for the pilot group as a whole.

So you can see that this will effect every member of the MEC in some way. I don't think they are acting in spite of the company as you suggest, but rather trying to play cards with a really crappy hand that was dealt to them.

 

[John Pennekamp]

I didn't get that from OhPlease. I don't believe he said "lets undercut Mesa". Why do you ALPA types label anyone who wants to be more reasonable as wanting to take a paycut and undercut Mesa? The current managment proposal on payrates is higher than Mesa, so I don't think anyone is advocating taking less that that - but keep saying it if it makes you feel important Mr. ALPA.

So then, Mr Company, if not undercut mesa, what figure should we land on? Tell it to us in a percentage, as in Skywest-2%? Mesa +2%? Tell us what they should settle for!

 

[Turkey Shoot]

I am growing tired of this finger pointing about some pilots being self serving, blah, blah. Isn' this what this contract is being held up about? A few senior CA's that want that retirement and to keep getting pay raises even though they've been at ASA for over twenty years? They've got their 19 days off a month and are able to pick their lines instead of bidding and hoping. Wouldn't it be better if they took it for the more junior end of the pilot spectrum?

I hope one day that I can say.....

Wow, I'm famous. I finally made it into someone's signature line. Guess Mr Big Shot First Officer wouldn't like flying with me. And yes, it IS MY aircraft. I earned it, I signed for it, and it's my butt on the line if something gets screwed up!

 

[John Pennekamp]

I am growing tired of this finger pointing about some pilots being self serving, blah, blah. Isn' this what this contract is being held up about? A few senior CA's that want that retirement and to keep getting pay raises even though they've been at ASA for over twenty years? They've got their 19 days off a month and are able to pick their lines instead of bidding and hoping. Wouldn't it be better if they took it for the more junior end of the pilot spectrum?

I hope one day that I can say.....

It's not about a few senior captains wanting retirement, or a few junior FOs getting screwed on reserve. It'a about what's best for the majority. All we seem to hear from here are the fringe special interest groups that all want their slice of the pie.

 

[Turkey Shoot]

It's not about a few senior captains wanting retirement, or a few junior FOs getting screwed on reserve. It'a about what's best for the majority. All we seem to hear from here are the fringe special interest groups that all want their slice of the pie.

But too frequently it appears that some of those fringe elements are finding a voice in the MEC.

This is what concerns me most over how unions are run. Take the phone poll that I took a few months ago. The way some of those questions were worded, there was a desired answer for them.

I wish I had a good answer but I don't on this one. There are aspects where a union is beneficial such as safety and rest issues but so far as the pay and QOL, I'm not so sure anymore. If the market was allowed to work, the influx of new pilots would be decreased drastically because the pay and bennies would go down the toilet. But once the companies needed to keep their pilots or attract new ones, they would have to make changes in pay and QOL.

But I'm on my soapbox with that quote. But this way of life will continue with the contract fights and bitter people for another decade or so. The only reason I say this is because we are still emerging into a new business plan with deregulation. It takes a very long time for a market to correct when it's being hamstrung by forces not allowing it do so. And while the unions do buck these trends, the market force will win in the end. What we have then is what we’ll all have to live with.

 

[John Pennekamp]

But too frequently it appears that some of those fringe elements are finding a voice in the MEC.

What do you mean by this? Seems to me that our current MEC does pretty good representing the majority. If JB (Joe Merchant) and LJ (Voice of Reason) win the election this fall when all of the "anti-alpa-ites" vote for them we'll truly have a special interest MEC.

 

[ohplease!]

So then, Mr Company, if not undercut mesa, what figure should we land on? Tell it to us in a percentage, as in Skywest-2%? Mesa +2%? Tell us what they should settle for!

well Mr. KneeJerkreactionist. Allow me to answer that. IMO a modest increase in pay for the majority of pilots here along with improved 401K for ALL the pilots here and some type of "job protection language" and QOL improvements with trip/duty rigs would do very nicely and would "get 'er done" as you like to say (trying to be funny I suppose).

Now, if that means that the upper 5% takes a little less than they want/need, I guess thats what happens when you join a "group" (alpa) for the betterment of the whole. And, if that means IPs have to work a little harder or more, well, bid back to the line.

you want me to afix some mythical % to that? Not possible. that has to be something very "fluid" as they NEGOTIATE with ASA.

In a nutshell, of corse neither I nor anyone else here really thinks we should take "less than mesa" or anyone else for that matter BUT, ALPA HAS TO GET MORE REAL AND FLEXABLE for this to get finished.

In the mean time, we are going to continue to lose planes, bases (new), QOL and pay that we will NEVER get back.

 

[John Pennekamp]

well Mr. KneeJerkreactionist. Allow me to answer that. IMO a modest increase in pay for the majority of pilots here along with improved 401K for ALL the pilots here and some type of "job protection language" and QOL improvements with trip/duty rigs would do very nicely and would "get 'er done" as you like to say (trying to be funny I suppose)...

In the mean time, we are going to continue to lose planes, bases (new), QOL and pay that we will NEVER get back.

OK, what you propose is reasonable, but how will you get the company to offer it? They haven't even put you mention on the table!

And I'm glad you have an inside track that the downsizing is permanent. Care to name your source? To me it looks like typical threats and intimidation to bust a union. I've seen it many times before.

 

[fam62c]

It's unfortunate, but in the modern world of the National Mediation Board (NMB) and the current political climate the ASA pilots have very little leverage. In the last few years the NMB has has decided that the intent of the Railway Labor Act was solely to prevent strikes. The traditional balance between insuring that interstate commerce is not interrupted while still allowing for the possibility that a deal may not be reached and mediation must end has been disrupted. The NMB has introduced the concept of "endless mediation." Nowdays you sit in mediation forever and if the talks aren't progressing the NMB simply puts the talks on hold and no meetings get scheduled. This is really the opposite of what the NMB is supposed to be doing; they are supposed to mediate the negotiations and push the parties hard for a deal through intense negotiations. If a deal can't be reached and mediation is not working they are supposed to release the parties to seek self-help. This additional pressure often results in deals because both parties tend to make their best efforts when faced with a work stoppage. Recently airline managements have been taught that it's no longer necessary to actually work to produce a deal because the union no longer has any credible strike threat. The management teams hold all of the cards and they know it.

The new reality for the unions is that negotiations will end when the union argees to a deal that is acceptable to the company. If this doesn't happen mediation will go on forever and there will be no possibility of release. The only way a release will happen is if the company initiates the request because it thinks it can replace striking workers and bust the union (NWA mechanics). The current administration is all about protecting corporate America and strikes are not good for corporate America. The government has the ability to make sure that unions in the airline industry can never strike so from their viewpoint; why would they possibly allow a strike to happen if it can be prevented?

 

[ohplease!]

OK, what you propose is reasonable, but how will you get the company to offer it? They haven't even put you mention on the table!

And I'm glad you have an inside track that the downsizing is permanent. Care to name your source? To me it looks like typical threats and intimidation to bust a union. I've seen it many times before.

get them to offer it by making moves to meet them in the middle, something that IMO ALPA isn't doing right now. Like I said before, over and over, drop the huge payraise % and drop the retirement fund that isn't worth sh!t anyway (see story after story on this subject) in exchange for "some" control over PBS, which we are going to get sooner or later, and QOL/job protection language.

Never said I had ANY inside track on anything (well, maybe scheduling ). I can look at what IS happening NOW (SLC, 70s transfered, 90s diverted) and look at past history and figure out what that light down there at the end of that tunnel is....Nothing is permanent. If you've been around as long as you claim and been through this before, then you know that. Todays boom can be tomorrows bust. I've been through Eastern and Northwest. Sticking our heads (alpa) in the sand and saying "its mgmt. using threats and intimidation" is going to lead to bad places that we don't need to go. There ARE other alternatives that can appease BOTH groups.

BTW, you and I are much more alike than you would like to ever admit. You just have to be less kneejerkreactionary and more open to objective thought. Those black helicopters are not followoing you. Trust me.:beer:

 

[CFIT]

It's unfortunate, but in the modern world of the National Mediation Board (NMB) and the current political climate the ASA pilots have very little leverage. In the last few years the NMB has has decided that the intent of the Railway Labor Act was solely to prevent strikes. The traditional balance between insuring that interstate commerce is not interrupted while still allowing for the possibility that a deal may not be reached and mediation must end has been disrupted. The NMB has introduced the concept of "endless mediation." Nowdays you sit in mediation forever and if the talks aren't progressing the NMB simply puts the talks on hold and no meetings get scheduled. This is really the opposite of what the NMB is supposed to be doing; they are supposed to mediate the negotiations and push the parties hard for a deal through intense negotiations. If a deal can't be reached and mediation is not working they are supposed to release the parties to seek self-help. This additional pressure often results in deals because both parties tend to make their best efforts when faced with a work stoppage. Recently airline managements have been taught that it's no longer necessary to actually work to produce a deal because the union no longer has any credible strike threat. The management teams hold all of the cards and they know it.

The new reality for the unions is that negotiations will end when the union argees to a deal that is acceptable to the company. If this doesn't happen mediation will go on forever and there will be no possibility of release. The only way a release will happen is if the company initiates the request because it thinks it can replace striking workers and bust the union (NWA mechanics). The current administration is all about protecting corporate America and strikes are not good for corporate America. The government has the ability to make sure that unions in the airline industry can never strike so from their viewpoint; why would they possibly allow a strike to happen if it can be prevented?

Watch your back Fam, you just pulled the cork on the ALPA balloon.....

 

[SKYWRJGUY]

Um, if you guys suggested arbitration, isn't that implied to mean you'll abide by the arbiter's decision, even if it goes against what you want? Doesn't it take the sting of a strike possibility away?

 

[TOOL CRIB]

Um, if you guys suggested arbitration, isn't that implied to mean you'll abide by the arbiter's decision, even if it goes against what you want? Doesn't it take the sting of a strike possibility away?

No, it means both ALPA and the company must agree to the arbiter's contract. If neither of us agrees, then the 30 day cooling off period starts and the frantic negotiations begin.