Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AA Assoc. signs away leverage in latest partial TA

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

av8dv8

Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2002
Posts
7
Apparently Scope is going to be being gutted at AA, it's a fact. And this won't help the rest of the mainline carriers. Apparently the APA MEC chair said in the latest update-

The current "window of opportunity" has not resulted in a (complete) tentative agreement. Management has been looking for scheduling relief in light of the large number of recent retirements and we consistently inform management that relief will be found by successfully concluding contract negotiations.

If the above is true, why did the union negotiators already give away a large amount of leverage that they had previously?

On page two of the .pdf entitled APA's TA regarding bay banding, dated 10-28-2011, there is a caveat that states

-unless the company and union can come to an agreement within 45 days, pay rates of any future deliveries of aircraft will then go to binding arbitration.

How has arbitration worked for APA in the past?-

This portion of the new APA contract shows a disaster in progress.

A valuable piece of the previous APA contract contained a strong piece of leverage that essentially prevented the company from bringing in new aircraft unless the APA agreed to pay rates. With this new TA already signed that piece of leverage will be gone from the next contract.

You would think ALPA would want to prevent a concessionary contract at AA due to the fact that pattern bargaining affects all of us. Wasn't someone from ALPA working for the APA? Was he asked to leave recently or driven out?

If a negotiator observes the engineer on a train doing unsafe things, would he stay on board the train and get a close up view of the wreck about to take place or would he rather hop off?

I examined many pieces of the growing TA at APA, the strategy these pilots have adhered to shows a dangerous practice. They are agreeing to bits and pieces, signing off portions of an agreement as they go. In the negotiator/pilots mind, they think they are storing goodwill in the hopes that management will look at what the pilots have given up already in the already signed TA portions and recognize those gives, and then going forward bargain accordingly in regards to scope and pay, saying, we gave you this in the previous agreements, now you give me something in the next item we are negotiating on. This failed strategy is beginning to manifest itself only now. It appears that some portion of the APA is either compromised or not up to the task at hand.

Does the APA have a message board? Perhaps this should be posted there.
 
Where is the factual info that scope is being gutted at AA? I don't think (or hope) anyone is planning to cave on scope.
 
Apparently Scope is going to be being gutted at AA, it's a fact. And this won't help the rest of the mainline carriers. Apparently the APA MEC chair said in the latest update-

The current "window of opportunity" has not resulted in a (complete) tentative agreement. Management has been looking for scheduling relief in light of the large number of recent retirements and we consistently inform management that relief will be found by successfully concluding contract negotiations.

If the above is true, why did the union negotiators already give away a large amount of leverage that they had previously?

On page two of the .pdf entitled APA's TA regarding bay banding, dated 10-28-2011, there is a caveat that states

-unless the company and union can come to an agreement within 45 days, pay rates of any future deliveries of aircraft will then go to binding arbitration.

How has arbitration worked for APA in the past?-

This portion of the new APA contract shows a disaster in progress.

A valuable piece of the previous APA contract contained a strong piece of leverage that essentially prevented the company from bringing in new aircraft unless the APA agreed to pay rates. With this new TA already signed that piece of leverage will be gone from the next contract.

You would think ALPA would want to prevent a concessionary contract at AA due to the fact that pattern bargaining affects all of us. Wasn't someone from ALPA working for the APA? Was he asked to leave recently or driven out?

If a negotiator observes the engineer on a train doing unsafe things, would he stay on board the train and get a close up view of the wreck about to take place or would he rather hop off?

I examined many pieces of the growing TA at APA, the strategy these pilots have adhered to shows a dangerous practice. They are agreeing to bits and pieces, signing off portions of an agreement as they go. In the negotiator/pilots mind, they think they are storing goodwill in the hopes that management will look at what the pilots have given up already in the already signed TA portions and recognize those gives, and then going forward bargain accordingly in regards to scope and pay, saying, we gave you this in the previous agreements, now you give me something in the next item we are negotiating on. This failed strategy is beginning to manifest itself only now. It appears that some portion of the APA is either compromised or not up to the task at hand.

Does the APA have a message board? Perhaps this should be posted there.


There is no TA as of this date. Anything written and distributed to this date is merely foaming at the mouth. These items as presented will never pass a vote.

X
 
Last edited:
Taking delivery or not of mainline jets is not scope.

Gives away flying to another operator is scope.

BTW, I think it's a dumb move for pilots to have ANY kind of binding arbitration in their contracts. The company will always have the upper hand.

Gup
 
AA is losing 2 million a day and some pilots are more focused about flights to Amarillo than flights to Shanghai. Emirates is coming. Soon we'll find out the unintended consequences of fighting for scope on flying with little to no profit
 
TWA dude says "There's no TA"

According to my sources you are misinformed. Apparently your negotiators are writing pieces of a signed TA with management as they go along. Now that scope and pay are being discussed your "negotiators" are lacking leverage because the previously signed agreements each with some small bit of leverage have been cleared away.

I'm curious dude, what happens to your TWA LEC reps if SLT is negotiated away? Don't the APA LEC reps all have to agree to your complete TA first? If this is so, if the company made a threat that they wanted to close SLT (or SanFran) could those same reps be compromised in some way, thereby creating willing LEC reps who might want to get a deal done in order to save their base?
 
TWA dude says "There's no TA"

According to my sources you are misinformed. Apparently your negotiators are writing pieces of a signed TA with management as they go along. Now that scope and pay are being discussed your "negotiators" are lacking leverage because the previously signed agreements each with some small bit of leverage have been cleared away.

I'm curious dude, what happens to your TWA LEC reps if SLT is negotiated away? Don't the APA LEC reps all have to agree to your complete TA first? If this is so, if the company made a threat that they wanted to close SLT (or SanFran) could those same reps be compromised in some way, thereby creating willing LEC reps who might want to get a deal done in order to save their base?

Put the drink down and go to bed.
 

Latest resources

Back
Top