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

AMR Proposal Highlights

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
Since anything less than the FA's current rates aren't even on the 1113 term sheet, it's unlikely da' Judge would hit them more. However, they did put it in the pilots 113 term sheet for a AA CA to fly the A319 at $139/hour compared to Spirit at $164 and DAL somewhere around $175.

Translation, they want the pilots to eat the cost difference instead of the FA's.

Could be the same objective with the pilot 1113 sheet, "Better accept these crap 319 rates or else the judge will hit everyone else with lower pay." As it stands now there arent any pay cuts for a single existing equip status, correct?
 
Yes, and I'm sure your dysfunctional independent "union" is going to accomplish that. :rolleyes:

No, but if alpa wanted to keep AAA, they would've floated the idea back in 2007 - begin a study of a NSL
 
No, but if alpa wanted to keep AAA, they would've floated the idea back in 2007 - begin a study of a NSL

We've done a study of an NSL time and time again. A new one was just finished about a year ago. It never works, because half the groups are always in favor, and the other half would fight tooth and nail to stop it. As always with pilots, it comes down to selfishness. If you're in a pilot group looking at the possibility of a furlough, then you're adamantly in favor of an NSL. If you're at a carrier that is stable or growing, then you despise the idea. Always been that way, always will be. More realistic solutions are out there, such as portable longevity.
 
Yes, and I'm sure your dysfunctional independent "union" is going to accomplish that. :rolleyes:

The time to accomplish a national seniority list and nation air transportation agreement was decades ago.

Success now is simply not having to pay dues to a supposed national "union" with conflicted interests, representing competing pilot groups, that are now dominated by regional carriers that should have followed JetBlues lead. And of course the cherry on top is you and Rez still squealing like little school girls. :D
 
The time to accomplish a national seniority list and nation air transportation agreement was decades ago.

Success now is simply not having to pay dues to a supposed national "union" with conflicted interests, representing competing pilot groups, that are now dominated by regional carriers that should have followed JetBlues lead. And of course the cherry on top is you and Rez still squealing like little school girls. :D


Speak for your self dude, I happen to like how ALPA is giving us all the flying. I just find it hard to believe the Major Airlines, allow ALPA to do it.
 
Could be the same objective with the pilot 1113 sheet, "Better accept these crap 319 rates or else the judge will hit everyone else with lower pay." As it stands now there arent any pay cuts for a single existing equip status, correct?

Had an AA pilot on the jump seat last week and he indicated no rate reductions but total obliteration of all other things, rigs, vacation, med benefits, and pretty much work to FAA mins.

Biggest beef he had was no min guarantee, i.e. reserve who gets called for 25 hours of flight time in the month gets paid 25 hours, and a block holder has no min guarantee either, i.e. no min to blocks in a line. YMMV
 
Fellow pilots,

APA has repeatedly expressed strong opposition to termination of our defined-benefit pension plan, as have other interested parties, including the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee and most especially the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (PBGC). The APA Board of Directors recently made the decision to support continuation of the A Plan in the form of a “hard freeze.” Your leadership has taken this and other concerns directly to senior management.

I am pleased to report that APA and management have achieved meaningful progress on the issue of our defined-benefit pension plan, which is good news for all of our pilots. In what I would describe as the first breakthrough we have achieved since bargaining resumed on Feb. 7, management has indicated they would work with APA to identify alternatives to terminating our A Plan. Management also informed the APA Negotiating Committee yesterday that they have decided to pursue a “hard freeze” of the other employee groups’ defined-benefit plans, rather than the plan terminations they had originally sought in their 1113(c) proposal.

There are some hurdles to overcome with respect to obtaining a hard freeze of our defined-benefit plan. Our plan is the only one on the AMR property that includes the option of a lump sum and our experts have concluded that attempting to preserve a lump-sum option is not achievable, in that it would lead to a termination of the A Plan. Therefore, before changes to our pension plans can be accomplished, we will need to ballot those pilots covered by Supplement B of the APA-American Airlines Collective Bargaining Agreement. An affirmative vote would pave the way to preventing an A Plan termination by agreeing to a freeze and elimination of the lump-sum option. If the pilots covered by Supplement B do not agree to a freeze, the A Plan will likely be terminated, which would also result in the elimination of the lump sum. By voting to support a freeze, thousands of pilots will preserve their earned annuity benefits by avoiding plan termination and the much lower annuities based on PBGC limitations.

Additionally, we plan to work with management to obtain funding relief from the Treasury Department and the Internal Revenue Service to help secure the frozen A Plan benefit.

In a hard freeze, each plan participant’s earned annuity benefit is permanently fixed at its dollar value at the date of the freeze. If the participant retires at or after age 60, they would receive the amount as a life annuity, adjusted for the form of annuity selected. If the participant elects to retire before their sixtieth birthday, the A Plan’s early retirement factors would apply as they do today.
 
Biggest beef he had was no min guarantee, i.e. reserve who gets called for 25 hours of flight time in the month gets paid 25 hours, and a block holder has no min guarantee either, i.e. no min to blocks in a line. YMMV

Make all the positions salaried and all this goes away.
 
Make all the positions salaried and all this goes away.

Sounds good, but that would require much more staffing... All the line holders would stop picking up trips for extra money and there wouldn't be enough reserves to cover all the flying...
 
PBS alone, will not reduce head count.

PBS definitely reduces head count which is why management wants it. If PBS didn't matter, this wouldn't be an issue for management.

PBS is more efficient than the traditional line building. Instead of allowing a pilot to bid for a line that will maximize his vacation time - where both sides of this vacation time touch trips that get dropped under traditional lines - PBS builds that pilot a line where ONLY his vacation days are days off. He will have assignments on both sides of his vacation.

There are several other PBS 'efficiency tweaks' that come out of the hide of the pilot; I'm just too lazy to do the research on it right now.

AMR currently has a tradtional bidding system in place. If PBS wasn't going to reduce head count, why would they want to spend the money on the program?
 
PBS builds that pilot a line where ONLY his vacation days are days off. He will have assignments on both sides of his vacation.
That doesn't have to be the case. It's all in how you stack your bid. PBS doesn't "do" anything to you...you tell the system what to do and it works with your seniority. You just have to be smarter than the computer...
 
That doesn't have to be the case. It's all in how you stack your bid. PBS doesn't "do" anything to you...you tell the system what to do and it works with your seniority. You just have to be smarter than the computer...

Not under the United Airlines system. Prior to PBS, if you bid a line that had trips touching both sides of your previously awarded vacation time, you got paid for those trips and did not fly them.

PBS wrings the 'inefficiencies' out of the system. Those 'inefficiencies' were improvements to pilots' quality of life.

Simple question: If there isn't any head count reduction for implementing PBS, why do managements spend millions of dollars to switch to PBS?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom