AA/US ISL question

[ALGFLYR]

Um, they made a public announcement that there's an impasse. JCBA prep talks are certainly in progress so it's not like all contact broke off. I don't think anything of consequence took place regarding the SLI.
Don't forget I'm an APA member and I frequent their message board. Not a peep about this.

Like everyone else they're just waiting for the NMB ruling to end the USAPA nightmare.

The fact there is not a peep on the APA message board probably means that they honor the confidentiality agreement... Not a bad thing.

I'll agree with you in that the end of this nightmare is close. I doubt anyone will miss any of this crap. I'm beyond ready to move on...

 

[Carl S.]

Everyone is ready to move on from the cancer of East lead union politics that have gotten nothing but delay for 9 years. All that will be left is the taint of your dirty politics and thuggery, APA is going to show you how the majority can be a bully sometimes. If a "global" anything is agreed on I would be shocked...enjoy the weekend.

 

[TWA Dude]

While it's too early to tell, I see this as a positive development. It will be interesting to see these actual documents.

I let yesterday's USAPA update simmer for a day to make sure y'all had read it. Here's the first paragraph:

"From our P4P feedback, we have heard there may be some confusion when pilots read the BPR Resolutions from the BPR Special Meetings of April 23 and April 28. There is not yet any approved Protocol Agreement with the APA, but the upshot of the Resolutions is that the BPR has approved a set of proposals that have been sent to APA."

So what they're triumphantly saying is how proud they are that they've agreed on what proposals to send to the APA.

Wow! Impressive work.

In other words, nothing's changed vis a vis the stalled SLI process, nothing's changed vis a vis the APA, and USAPA is full of feces as usual. The NMB can't end this embarrassment soon enough.

 

[ALGFLYR]

I let yesterday's USAPA update simmer for a day to make sure y'all had read it.

Thanks for that. Some of us read kinda slow down here in the South ya know...

I don't think anyone mistook the resolution as a signed agreement with the APA. But the APA and USAPA have both admitted to have been negotiating the seniority integration issue. I doubt the USAPA NAC just made stuff up and showed it to the BPR. Whatever the proposal was, I would bet the APA is was involved in the discussions that ultimately produced the "proposal". Now the "proposal" is in the APA's hands. They look at it and either approve it or make changes and send it back to USAPA. It's a funny thing how negotiations work... Will it be approved? Your guess is as good as mine at this point. However, if the APA or USAPA took a very hard line on certain issues, I doubt we would have seen this put before the BPR. That tells me they are working it out. I have a feeling they are getting close... Just a gut feeling.

 

[TWA Dude]

I don't think anyone mistook the resolution as a signed agreement with the APA.

The first line of the update indicates otherwise.

But the APA and USAPA have both admitted to have been negotiating the seniority integration issue.

Once again, no word from the APA, only USAPA. It's unclear exactly what took place but for the reasons I stated a few posts ago there is zero impetus for the APA do anything other than wait for the NMB to rule. 30 days later and poof, no more USAPA.

I doubt the USAPA NAC just made stuff up and showed it to the BPR.

You got me there. The BPR (minus the PHX reps) is fully capable of making up its own bullcrap. The NAC only adds to the bullcrap.

I have a feeling they are getting close... Just a gut feeling.

Let's compare the results of our respective gut feelings in a little while, shall we?

 

[ALGFLYR]

The first line of the update indicates otherwise.Once again, no word from the APA, only USAPA. It's unclear exactly what took place but for the reasons I stated a few posts ago there is zero impetus for the APA do anything other than wait for the NMB to rule. 30 days later and poof, no more USAPA.You got me there. The BPR (minus the PHX reps) is fully capable of making up its own bullcrap. The NAC only adds to the bullcrap.Let's compare the results of our respective gut feelings in a little while, shall we?

You know what? you win...

Based on your screenname, I'm sure you trust the APA 100%.

So I will not post again on this until the APA puts something out and we get another view on what is really going on... Good luck...

 

[TWA Dude]

Lesser of two evils.
When the choices are "bad" or "worse" you choose "bad".
You get the picture.

 

[Guppiedriver]

USAPA Update

From our P4P feedback, we have heard there may be some confusion when pilots read the BPR Resolutions from the BPR Special Meetings of April 23 and April 28. There is not yet any approved Protocol Agreement with the APA, but the upshot of the Resolutions is that the BPR has approved a set of proposals that have been sent to APA.
On April 23, the BPR passed the following resolution requiring BPR input and approval prior to presenting any proposed agreement to APA:
WHEREAS the BPR is interested in obtaining the best possible seniority integration for all US Airways pilots,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT the BPR directs that the Merger Committee and their Merger Counsel shall be responsible for the Protocol, Transition and Settlement agreements in consultation with the President and the General Counsel.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the proposed agreements must be presented to the BPR for their input and final approval prior to presentation to the APA
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT all negotiations with APA regarding the (3) three documents shall occur exclusively between the Merger Committee and Merger Counsel, in coordination with the President and General Counsel.
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT any tentative agreement(s) obtained between the APA and USAPA are subject to final approval by the BPR.
On April 28, the BPR passed the following resolution that approved "the proposed Protocol Agreement" in accordance with the requirement from the April 23 resolution shown above.
BE IT RESOLVED THAT the Board of Pilot Representatives approves the proposed Protocol Agreement and Settlement Agreement as presented by the Merger Committee,
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED THAT the Board of Pilot Representatives approves the proposed Merger Transition Agreement as amended.
On Tuesday, April 29, the 3 proposed agreements (proposed Protocol Agreement, proposed Merger Transition Agreement and proposed Settlement Agreement) were sent to the APA. APA can either accept our proposals, or modify them and pass back to our Merger Committee for consideration. Should they pass a modified proposal back to us, the BPR would once again have to approve them before acceptance. Since we are in negotiations, we cannot provide any more information at this time on the agreements; however, we do expect a timely response from the APA.
USAPA Communications

If the APA was working with uSAPa on these proposals, why would they need to modify them?

 

[St. Nic]

If the APA was working with uSAPa on these proposals, why would they need to modify them?

They sent the final draft to APA for approval and if APA wants to do any last minute changes they will send back to the BPR for final approval. This protocal is just about done and the Nic is gone buried and dead forever. Get used to it.

 

[Bringupthebird]

From our P4P feedback, we have heard there may be some confusion when pilots read the BPR Resolutions from the BPR Special Meetings of April 23 and April 28. There is not yet any approved Protocol Agreement with the APA, but the upshot of the Resolutions is that the BPR has approved a set of proposals that have been sent to APA.

IOW, "we got caught lying so here are so more lies to confuse you. Just go about your duties. We are serious men with serious business that we'll get to just as soon as we figure out how to hide the money from the membership"

 

[Turtle21]

If the APA was working with uSAPa on these proposals, why would they need to modify them?

As I recall, the MOU (the merger MOU that became effective 9 Dec 13)... That MOU was negotiated primarily by APA and Parker, but it was passed to USAPA in order to approve it first...

If I remember correctly, USAPA had to have membership ratification before any other party voted to approve the MOU... Hmmmm.

For sure AMR did not approve it till after USAPA.

 

[Guppiedriver]

You know what? you win...

Based on your screenname, I'm sure you trust the APA 100%.

So I will not post again on this until the APA puts something out and we get another view on what is really going on... Good luck...

Well, the APA put something out. It looks like they have rejected your unions proposals. LOL

Late Friday, May 2, 2014, the APA and the Carriers filed motions to compel arbitration and stay litigation in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. Both motions seek (1) to compel USAPA to arbitrate MTA Dispute # 5, pursuant to Paragraph 20 of the MOU, and (2) to stay the litigation, including discovery, until an arbitrator has ruled on MTA Dispute No. 5. The APA specifically asks the court to schedule oral argument on their motion.
All documents linked below are posted in the Legal Library>McCaskill-Bond Injunction Action.
USAPA Communications

 

[Turtle21]

Well, the APA put something out. It looks like they have rejected your unions proposals. LOL

Yeah, looks like their lawyers felt left out and there is extra cash in the legal fund.

 

[Bringupthebird]

No, it sounds like USAPA is back to playing their favorite party game Cow Patty Twister. "Spin the spinner, call the shots..."

 

[Turtle21]

To the extent APA multiplies their hostility toward USAPA, they magnify both the prescience and the necessity of MB.

It's like pulling Gs in a spiral dive.. Pull harder and the spiral will get tighter.

 

[Guppiedriver]

To the extent APA multiplies their hostility toward USAPA, they magnify both the prescience and the necessity of MB.

It's like pulling Gs in a spiral dive.. Pull harder and the spiral will get tighter.

The APA's hostility toward uSAPa?.....that's funny right there, I don't care who you are.

If uSAPa would just honor its agreements, we would not be in this predicament.

 

[Turtle21]

The APA's hostility toward uSAPa?.....that's funny right there, I don't care who you are.

If uSAPa would just honor its agreements, we would not be in this predicament.

If the APA had no hostility toward the federal statute that they helped spawn they wouldn't be asking a federal judge to repudiate his authority to decide its applicability, and instead to compel an arbitrator to decide the issue that properly belongs exclusively to the court.

 

[Bringupthebird]

It sounds like the "hostility" is only in the eyes of a portion of USAPA. I guess they don't understand the limitations of being in the minority.

And yet that same portion continues to fund a failed strategy. No wonder APA (and every other stakeholder) doesn't take them seriously.

 

[Turtle21]

It sounds like the "hostility" is only in the eyes of a portion of USAPA. I guess they don't understand the limitations of being in the minority.

And yet that same portion continues to fund a failed strategy. No wonder APA (and every other stakeholder) doesn't take them seriously.

If you mean to imply the APA and other stakeholders are advocates of Federal Statutes, then why are they requesting a Federal Judge to abdicate his own exclusive authority to apply MB, to whatever extent is appropriate, and to instead compel an arbitrator to carry that burden?

And if the strategy is so failed, why are you guys selling $20 ties for $675?

 

[Bringupthebird]

Why has USAPA not returned $1 in value for dues since it's ill-conceived inception? All your money came from ALPA and APA.

Are your ersatz leaders still advocating "no plan-B" strategy? I guess oversight never caught on out east.