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.
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.