eaglefly said:Surplus, I cannot find any reference to DOH in any of my posts.
My apologies, it was not you it was "laxembfo" (above) and I made the error of transposing the thought. Sorry.
The seniority issue should be negotiated only AFTER the proper protectional language is in ANY agreement. You are right though. I've compared this agreement to our current flow-thru and it is just the promise of an extension, provided we sign over our protections. In fact nothing really changes for AMR but the "owners" of the flying we now do (no loss for them). The APA gets SOME gain by providing temporary jobs, paychecks and health care for their junior pilots in "down" times like now.
I think you're right on target with the seniority issue and pretty much on target with the rest but, as I see it, the whole is even worse than that.
We get ?
A kinda, maybe, we'll see, promise, IF things recover in the future.
IMO, it is not so much what you don't get as it is what you would lose. The APA proposal is essentially a method of transferring Eagle jet flying to AA pilots, at the expense of Eagle pilots. I have argued from day one that that is their intent. That intent is consistent with the efforts of ALL mainline pilot groups.
If that proposal were implemented you would lose all your 70-seat jets and the captain seats in most if not all of your other jets. As your (AE) pilots are progressively displaced to lesser positions while AA pilots take their seats, the "furloughed" will ultimately wind up being at Eagle.
It is almost a given that the Company will NOT agree to a system that effectively places the mainline cost structure at Eagle. Therefore, once you have agreed to the subterfuge, the APA will simply authorize a new "B scale" for you (an their own "juniors") just as they did before. Ultimately you will have given up nearly everything, including a voice in your own affairs, in exchange for little or nothing. It's no skin off the AA pilot's back but it's a very bad deal for AE pilots.
APA may not be ALPA but it this respect, it follows the ALPA policy de jure, i.e., transfer as much of the regional aircraft and flying to the mainline as you possibly can. If that doesn't work, find a way to put mainline pilots into the regional cockpits (Jets for Jobs - AAA) with super seniority. As soon as you have enough on the regional list, they will take over the MEC and vote the rest of the regional pilots out of their jobs. If that still doesn't work, find a way to create a single MEC (CAL/CALEX) that is always controlled by the mainline group. Then you can write all the predatory scope you want and they will not be able to counter it. Next, offer them the flow-through carrot. The seniors that might benefit directly control the regional MEC's and may buy it, thereby contributing to the creation of furlough protection for the "real" pilots. It will also help to silence the objections to predatory scope (the true and principal objective of flow-through). Finally, if all of the above fail, continue the effort to unilaterally "Scope" them out of existence, little by little (DAL/AWA/NWA/UAL).
It's a good plan and it is designed to take full advantage of the naivete of young pilots and the known desire to fly heavy iron for a "major airline". Generally, they are so awed by the glitter of mainline gold, that they fail to see it is "fools gold" and a Trojan Horse in their midst. It's been working well until a group of Comair pilots had the cojones to say HELL NO! That's why the powers that be hate our guts.
Again to ALL, it is absurd to think we should "fall on our swords" to look out for the best interest of others.
You are 100% correct! Not one of the "others" would fall on his sword for your interests. In fact the exact opposite has already been demonstrated more than once.
Although the 16-year Eagle contract has MANY deficiencies, it does have something MOST other regional contracts don't have.
SCOPE AND SUCCESORSHIP provisions.
One should note that even AMR has recognized that these provisions in our CBA (as evidenced by the stipulations in the beginning of their conter-proposal) cannot be unilaterally disregarded.
Thankfully, that means that ANY agreement MUST be acceptable to our MEC and pilot group.
Hopefully you can choose leaders that will not abdicate your few rights by falling victim to the "promises" of external politicians who do not have your best interests as a concern and give away those rights, without a vote from the rank and file. The integrity of your elected leadership is paramount. Choose wisely.
I (and most) Eagle pilots think that it still is in the best interest of ALL three parties (AMR, APA and the pilots of Eagle) that "one list" become a reality.
While I would agree with that statement, the method by which "one list" is accomplished is the key to its value, and by that I do NOT mean how you finally integrate seniority. Relinguishing your flying to the APA is not, IMO, the achievement of one list, no matter what they call it. That is why I argue that the APA proposal was NEVER a real "one list" proposal.
You need a clause that guarantees that not one Eagle pilot will be displaced from his current position or seat as a consequence of the consolidation. Future vacancies can then be up for grabs based on whatever seniority you ultimately agree to.
The APA, AMR and ALPA have to sit down and negotiate this issue TOGETHER.
As long as we are left out, there is little hope to expect us to agree to anything because any two-sided agreement will most likely not meet our minimum requirements.
Please allow me to suggest a slight modification to that idea. If the AA pilots (APA) and the AE pilots can first sit together and agree to whatever proposal will be negotiated with AMR, you've got it. It is no accident that I omitted ALPA from that. While ALPA is the AE union and has to be included, BEFORE you do that you must be absolutely certain that the AE pilot representatives will NOT be influenced by ALPA's agenda and that they have the experience and qualifications to hold their own in negotiations. Remember, ALPA's agenda (on this issue) is no different than the APA's agenda. If given the chance, IMO, the ALPA will forego the interests of AE pilots to further its own agenda. In other words, cover your six.
What would that mean to us if we agreed to any proposals like these, now ? NO upgrades or ANY benefit to US for a long time with the strong potetial to be the future "sacrificial lambs".
Regardless of the APA's response to AMR's counter-proposal, we can't accept this. Unless Carty is bluffing, I don't see how this issue will be resolved within his time frame.
If you accept the concept advanced by the APA, let alone the details, you will indeed become the "sacrificial lambs". That is already their not so thinly veiled objective.
There is perhaps one key element that I think you can use to determine the true intent of the APA and for that matter the ALPA, in a proposal such as this. If and when the other pilot group invites your participation in the process of developing a suitable proposal before it is presented AND, if and when the mainline pilots give your representatives a seat at the table with the Company (with veto power), while this sole element is negotiated, you will know then and only then, that they are acting and bargaining in good faith with respect to your interests.
As long as THEY are willing to determine what is best for YOU, without your participation and consent, you don't have a deal worth taking.
To date, all you have from the APA is an allegation that they have experienced the equivalent of a "jail house conversion". The content of their proposal makes it clear to me that religion (with regard to this issue) is as removed from their thinking as it ever was. Their alleged conversion to a one-list love in with the Eagle pilots is bogus.
Politics is a fascinating avocation and as dirty as ever.
Last edited: