And so it begins... UAir East pilots protest

[cl65capt]

Or a divorce.

I just got one, they are quite expensive.

 

[TWA Dude]

The issue of whether USAirwas was about to liquidate in 2005 comes up often. I have the definitive answer and the proof is contained therein. The answer is: maybe. As it so happens, this is also the answer as to whether TWA was about to liquidate in January, 2001. Case closed.

 

[FDJ2]

Flashback two years

By William Glanz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
Published May 20, 2005

US Airways Group Inc. announced its long-awaited consolidation yesterday with America West Holdings Corp., a merger that would turn two struggling airlines into one with $10 billion in annual revenue and extensive routes on the East and West coasts.

"We think this is the beginning of something that could change our industry," said America West President and Chief Executive Doug Parker, who will become the head of the new company.

The combination would save US Airways from liquidation, but jobs are likely to disappear locally because the new company will be based at America West's Tempe, Ariz., headquarters instead of at US Airways' Arlington office.

The new airline, which will use the US Airways name, would create the nation's fifth-largest carrier and be funded by $1.5 billion in new equity.

The proposed merger must be approved by U.S. Bankruptcy Court, Justice Department, Transportation Department and America West shareholders.

Mr. Parker said the union of America West and US Airways would create a full-service, low-cost carrier. The new company will try to compete with budget carriers JetBlue Airways Corp. and Southwest Airlines Inc., a bitter rival of both America West and US Airways.

The airlines serve a combined 275 cities, and the companies said passengers will receive credit for all frequent flyer miles they accrue.

US Airways employs about 600 people at its Arlington headquarters, and some US Airways' employees are likely to lose their jobs.

"It's not possible to estimate how many layoffs there may or may not be in D.C.," Mr. Parker said.

The airlines decided to make Arizona its headquarters based purely on economic reasons, US Airways President and Chief Executive Bruce Lakefield said.

"It's much less expensive to be here," he said during a conference call from America West's offices.

US Airways and America West initially discussed merging more than a year ago, but Mr. Lakefield put talks on hold because the company was preoccupied with its ongoing bankruptcy case. US Airways filed for its second bankruptcy in September.

Earlier this year, Mr. Lakefield approached Mr. Parker, indicating his interest in restarting negotiations. By then, US Airways had shed more than $1 billion, mostly through restructuring labor agreements.

America West and US Airways were able to conclude discussions and announce a deal yesterday because they have attracted massive investment. Mr. Parker said four companies will invest $350 million in the combined company and the new airline has access to another $1.1 billion in cash and debt refinancing.

Investors include Airbus SAS and ACE Aviation Holdings, which owns Air Canada.

America West and US Airways owe a combined $1 billion to the Air Transportation Stabilization Board, but their merger could save up to $600 million annually, Mr. Parker said.

The combination ensures that US Airways won't face extinction, said Michael Roach, an airline analyst and co-founder of America West, which began flying in 1983.

"This is clearly in the immediate interest of US Airways. They definitely needed money, and they weren't attracting investors," he said.

US Airways got Air Wisconsin Airlines Corp. and Republic Airways Holdings Inc. to invest $125 million each, provided US Airways agrees to use those carriers as part of its US Airways Express regional fleet.

While US Airways needed money, America West needed a partner. Mr. Parker has said for months that the industry needed to consolidate to reduce overcapacity.

Integrating the airlines' work forces could prove challenging because of their differences.

"Protecting and defending the careers of America West pilots are our top priorities," said J.R. Baker, chairman of the America West unit of the Air Line Pilots Association, the union representing pilots.

While America West is merely 22 years old, US
Airways is 66 years old. In addition, US Airways has twice as many employees as America West. Together, they will have more than 44,000 employees.

The airlines are likely to pare their union work force by comparing seniority lists and letting go of workers with the least amount of experience.

"The guys at US Airways are going to say to guys at America West 'You go to the bottom of the list.' The guys at America West are going to say 'We saved your company, so you go to the bottom.' Some statesmanship will be needed," Mr. Roach said.

"I hope the integration is seamless. The devil is in the details, but if this provides job security, it's going to be great," said Alin Boswell, president of Council 41 of the Association of Flight Attendants, which represents 420 Washington-based flight attendants at US Airways.

The new company will operate a fleet of 361 planes, down from their combined fleet of 419 at the beginning of the year.

The new airline will be governed by a 13-member board, including six members from the current America West board and four members from the current US Airways board.

 

[Fly-n-hi]

Oh brother.

And, for the record, the *possibility* exists, when age 65 ruling gets passed, if the widebody aircraft are moved, only the top 517 pilots are protected in the East. I can't find ANY mention that the rest of the East pilots are protected if the aircraft are moved to a different domicile.

You said guys are going to get bumped out of their seats. In fact, as I proved in my earlier post, you've said this several times. Can you cite me a source of this info or not?

If widebodies move to Phoenix why should I not be able to fly those? People like you say that US Airways should keep this flying since AWA had no widebodies. Then we say US Airways wasn't going to exist without us. Then you say we needed each other 'cause AWA was going to be in trouble.

Ok...If we needed each other to survive why should the US Airways guys get exclusive rights to widebody flying. Why should they get all the upgrades? If we needed each other shouldn't there be more sharing?

So, if they're moved, it goes to the new seniority list for bidding rights onto them. Bids that pilot #518 and below on the UAir list believed they'd be moving into.

It doesn't matter what you believe you were going to fly in x amount of years. Do you even know if US Airways was going to have widebodies in 5 years? If I can't say that US Airways was going out of business then you can't say that anyone had any kind of bright future there.

I've read the explanation, and I believe it proves he lacks enough knowledge of the industry to make some of the claims he made. If he used an outside aviation consultant to come up with those numbers, I would be more inclined to believe his base assumptions, but I failed to see him reference one, if it existed.

This arbitrator, Goerge Nicolau (Spelling?) has arbitrated something like 20 MLB issues, the NYC transit workers, 3 or 4 airline disputes, and several others. I believe he's 82 or 83...something like that. I think it's safe to say that he and his research staff know what they are talking about.

It's pretty easy math. The "average" AWA pilot is someone who still has 20+ years left to their career. Most of you do. Therefore you will, in all likelihood, see widebody command with your seniority integration, and be able to hold it for several years.

That pay is higher than your existing narrowbody pay scale. Only by $22 now, but probably closer to $30+ by the time it's done. Times 80 hours a month is $2,400 a month, $52,500 a year, for the last 10 years of your career is over half a million bucks. And that's just the existing post-bankruptcy pay rate and doesn't include 401k matching (B-fund, whatever) as a percentage on top of that.

Get the math, yet?

It's not the math...it's your logic that's the problem. Where did you get your crystal ball? I'd like to get one.

You do realize that they have only 9 A-330s right? This international piece of the pie is almost a non factor.

So what about the fact that all 737 and A-320 pilots, which are the bulk of US Airways, will be getting a substantial raise just by going to the AWA rates? How much better do you think they would have fared on their own?

BTW, there were 3 guys in my new hire class in their 50's and 5 or 6 more in their 40's.

No, you haven't called me out, you've insulted me. There's a difference.

Post legitimate questions, you get legitimate answers.

Previously, in here and in other threads, I've asked you to cite sources of info. I also asked you if you read the award. These were not legitimate questions?

And yet you DON'T have any solid facts.

You've asked a bunch of questions in this thread, and stated your "beliefs" without referencing specific sections of the award, nor have you posted any proof to the contrary regarding the age of East pilots and their proximity to retirement, versus West pilots.

Without referencing specific sections of the award? No solid facts? Are you freaking kidding me? Here's an example from another thread that proves you wrong:

According to the arbitrator about 300 postitions were not realized on the West side because the 19 Airbuses that we were going to get before the merger didn't arrive. That would have created about 300 new positions out west.

Read the arbitrator's integration explaination:

"In addition, at the time of the merger, America West had already taken delivery of 3 A-320's and had firm orders for 19 others, all of which were to be delivered by January 2007, and which, along with attrition, would have produced 300 new America West pilots."

Also:

"Though US Airways was to return 25 aircraft as of the merger date, only 15 were removed from its fleet, the remaining ten taken from the West. US Airways also expanded its international flying, aquired three more B757's, and was taking on more Embraers. These factors, together with a relaxation of consessionary work rules, have brought the first US Airways recalls since 2001, with 300 having returned and more to follow. When a combined contract, now in negotiation, is finally achieved, those returnees, aswell as those presently flying the A320 and B737, the bulk of the combined fleet, will recieve substantial wage increases even if that contract does no more than continue the present America West rates for those aircraft."

And:

"Odell, who expected, based on what went before, a reasonable career progression, is still on the bottom of America West's list, while Colello, the junior active US Airways pilot at the time of the merger, now has 300 working pilots behind him."

I think you need to get new reading glasses. Don't ever tell me that I don't cite my sources.

Don't disparage me for not providing "facts" when you've provided none of your own.

So you're saying that all of the times that I quelled your argument by referencing and quoting the actual arbitration explaination...these were just my opinions?

In any event you haven't provided any facts so I don't see your point.

I don't keep mentioning him. Other people bring him up and keep slamming me with it. Use your reading skills. I only respond with that when addressed with that.

How did they know your dad used to work there? Obviously you brought it up. And my guess is you thought it would make you sound more credible or something. BTW, it doesn't.

Demanding proof when having none of your own is a very feeble argument.

Then you go on to say:

Proof, proof, proof.

PROVE to me that UAir was "grasping to hold on to those leases". PROVE to me, in writing, with proof that a lender had called the leases or was shopping them.

These last couple of sentences show you to be a hypocrite.

As for the leases, I don't have the specific numbers but it is a fact that we recently lost an airplane (AW335) to an airline overseas because that airline was willing to pay higher leases. AWA has also been informed that the lease rates are going up on several planes because overseas airlines are willing to pay more for them. Do a search on Googe and you'll find this info.

I never said that US Airways was grasping...I said they probably were.

Your LACK of proof for YOUR claims makes YOUR assertions here no more or less believable than mine.

Which claims are you talking about? I know that many AWA people, as well as AAA people, are making "claims." I have not been making claims when addressing you. I have refuted your comments by explaining to you the Arbitrator's decision.

No, you have YET to post ONE VERIFIABLE FACT. You've done plenty of slamming of me while referencing the award, but have yet to quote the award to PROVE me wrong. THAT would be a FACT.

Scroll up a little bit. Also, what have I said that was not verifiable?

Everything else is simply your OPINION. Maybe you should learn the difference.

You're telling me that the arbitrator's explaination isn't a verifiable fact?

If you do, better be prepared to back them up with FACTS that are verifiable, from a third, independent source, that we can check.

Otherwise, I'm going to continue believing the way I do, based on the award and the career expectations the West now enjoys that they had no reasonable expectation to prior to the merger.

How do you know that? You jump down other people's throats when they say that US Airways was going out of business then you tell me that I had no reasonable career expectation? You're a hypocrite.

I'm not saying anyone is a "bad" person at AWA for that; I'm simply saying the arbitrator's ruling was wrong and a bunch of guys in the East are now screwed, many close to the end of their career with no options, and it's very unfortunate and sad to see guys who had been beat to death get beat a little harder, then even sadder to see guys on here acting self-righteous about it. uke:

Wow! These guys wanted to staple me to the bottom and and totally stall out my career. And you think I'm self righteous?


Bring it on.

 

[Lear70]

You said guys are going to get bumped out of their seats. In fact, as I proved in my earlier post, you've said this several times. Can you cite me a source of this info or not?

You are saying it yourself in the next paragraph.

If widebodies move to Phoenix why should I not be able to fly those?

My point exactly.

A PIT based aircraft gets moved to a West domicile. That pilot can't go with it. He gets bumped out of his seat.

Get it yet? Jeez, man... talk about talking out of both sides of your mouth.

People like you say that US Airways should keep this flying since AWA had no widebodies. Then we say US Airways wasn't going to exist without us. Then you say we needed each other 'cause AWA was going to be in trouble.

Whoa there, fella, you're putting words in my mouth.

I never said AWA was going to be in trouble. I simply said AWA didn't have any widebodies and had no realistic expectation to be getting any in the foreseeable future.

If you're going to quote me, do it accurately.

Ok...If we needed each other to survive why should the US Airways guys get exclusive rights to widebody flying. Why should they get all the upgrades? If we needed each other shouldn't there be more sharing?

Absolutely. You guys get fenced into the aircraft you were slated to have delivered and your own attrition.

They get fenced into theirs.

Continuation of pre-existing expectations.

Why is this such a hard concept to grasp?

It's not the math...it's your logic that's the problem. Where did you get your crystal ball? I'd like to get one.

A crystal ball has nothing to do with "logic". How does someone's clairvoyance and their ability to logically think go hand in hand?

Where do you come up with this stuff?

You do realize that they have only 9 A-330s right? This international piece of the pie is almost a non factor.

So what about the fact that all 737 and A-320 pilots, which are the bulk of US Airways, will be getting a substantial raise just by going to the AWA rates? How much better do you think they would have fared on their own?

Actually, I think they would have fared quite well, given that every other major carrier is also gearing up for a large take-back of the concessions they had rammed down their throats.

It's going to be an interesting next couple of years.

BTW, there were 3 guys in my new hire class in their 50's and 5 or 6 more in their 40's.

Good for them. What's the AVERAGE age of an AWA new-hire over the last 5 years?

Previously, in here and in other threads, I've asked you to cite sources of info. I also asked you if you read the award. These were not legitimate questions?

They're perfectly legitimate questions. But that's NOT what you said. You said you had provided PROOF. You haven't on this thread, and I stopped watching the other ones days ago... reference the last post I made on the other threads saying I was done debating and had deleted my thread tracking on it, as it was the same old stuff rehashed over and over again.

I have better things to do with my time.

Without referencing specific sections of the award? No solid facts? Are you freaking kidding me? Here's an example from another thread that proves you wrong:

Again, I'm not tracking the other threads anymore. Sorry I missed your posts, wasn't around to respond.

Incidentally, that portion of the award smacks of a lack of understanding of the industry and the large increases that ALL of the legacy carriers are going to see. Nicolau just doesn't understand that, with no bankruptcy protection, the next negotiating session was always going to be a large push to recoup lost wages, ESPECIALLY with the huge profits UAir has been raking in.

Like I said... something is very flawed in the way Nicolau understands the dynamics of the industry.

I think you need to get new reading glasses. Don't ever tell me that I don't cite my sources.

I'll tell you whatever I witness, and quoting from another poster on here isn't exactly the Gospel.

Don't post something on a thread for me when I say I'm no longer watching it; or maybe you need to get new reading glasses.

So you're saying that all of the times that I quelled your argument by referencing and quoting the actual arbitration explaination...these were just my opinions?

Again, where have you done that, except the one excerpt above that does nothing but show Nicolau's ignorance of aviation contracts?

In any event you haven't provided any facts so I don't see your point.

And I fail to see yours. We're probably going to have to agree to disagree and move on.

How did they know your dad used to work there? Obviously you brought it up. And my guess is you thought it would make you sound more credible or something. BTW, it doesn't.

I guess you need reading glasses again.

I brought it up in my first post to point out that the link through my dad was the ONLY one I had with UAir and, with him retired, it proves I don't have a dog in the fight.

If you had been paying attention, you'd already understand that. I wasn't trying to gain credibility in a post where the only point I was making was of this ruling's moralistic value, or lack thereof.

Personally, I don't care if you find me credible or not; it doesn't change the fact that a large portion of the UAir pilot list who thought they would upgrade before they were forced to retire now won't. I personally find that to be extremely unfair. Again, in case you missed it the first 3 times, I don't blame the West pilots for that at all... It simply sucks for the East.

These last couple of sentences show you to be a hypocrite.

You evidently don't know the meaning of the word.

I spoke out about the ethical implications of the award. People such as yourself claimed that UAir would have died without the merger, therefore you're ENTITLED to that award and see it as being completely fair.

I asked for PROOF of your assertions.

People have been able to provide none.

My point required no "proof", it was a personal ethical standpoint.

Do you get it now, or do I need to continue to spell it out?

I never said that US Airways was grasping...I said they probably were.

Oh, OK. So that makes it alright to use in a debate? Maybe I should use the word "probably" more often so I can waffle around a bit...

Which claims are you talking about? I know that many AWA people, as well as AAA people, are making "claims." I have not been making claims when addressing you. I have refuted your comments by explaining to you the Arbitrator's decision.

Oh please,,, there you go, talking out of both sides of your mouth again.

Reference above paragraph where you "claimed" that UAir was grasping... oh wait... "probably" grasping at holding onto their leases.

Is that not a claim?

What was that about being a hypocrite?

How do you know that? You jump down other people's throats when they say that US Airways was going out of business then you tell me that I had no reasonable career expectation? You're a hypocrite.

That's not what I said.

Use those reading glasses again. I said that West pilots had no reasonable expectations OF OBTAINING WIDEBODIES WITHOUT UAIR.

You're throwing around that 'H' word a lot, considering you closely resemble your accusations.

Wow! These guys wanted to staple me to the bottom and and totally stall out my career. And you think I'm self righteous?

You are the EPITOME of self-righteousness. Calling someone a hypocrite while displaying the very core of that word's definition... yep, that would qualify you.

Again, I'm not saying they were right, never have, which is a FACT you keep on trying to avoid addressing.

I simply said that Nicolau's award isn't fair to both parties.

That's what I said, that's what I'm going to continue to say. I'm going to give you the last word, because I have other things to do. I'm going to read your next post, then I'm going to unsubscribe from the thread without responding, as we're obviously never going to convince each other, so make it a good one.

 

[Green]

Lear70,

For someone who isn't involved with the two airlines you sure do spend a lot of time debating this issue? Why? Seems like a waste of time considering there is absolutely nothing anybody can do to change it.

 

[eaglefly]

I don't see what to argue anymore.

BINDING arbitration has settled the matter.

AW pilots did O.K. and U pilots got porked in the bunghole.

Now, U pilots can throw out ALPA, spit at the Starbuck's girl and do any number of other sabre-rattling moves, but NONE will result in the fantasy of a change in this ruling.

It happened with AA/TWA and any hope of change there is dead as a stone.

My advice for "east" pilots is accept the unpleasant and get on with your lives in or out of the new U.

You're dreaming if you think this will change (never has before in any merger) and will just remain bitter in the remainder of your careers unless you move on.

Life is full of defeats and dissappointments.............you do have choices.

 

[Fast43]

I don't see what to argue anymore.

BINDING arbitration has settled the matter.

AW pilots did O.K. and U pilots got porked in the bunghole.

Now, U pilots can throw out ALPA, spit at the Starbuck's girl and do any number of other sabre-rattling moves, but NONE will result in the fantasy of a change in this ruling.

It happened with AA/TWA and any hope of change there is dead as a stone.

My advice for "east" pilots is accept the unpleasant and get on with your lives in or out of the new U.

You're dreaming if you think this will change (never has before in any merger) and will just remain bitter in the remainder of your careers unless you move on.

Life is full of defeats and dissappointments.............you do have choices.

How can you say that AAA took it in the bunghole??

If we had asked to staple them to the bottom as they did us and the list turned out like it did, would we have then taken it in the "bunghole"????


This was nothing like AA/TWA

TWA pilot were told to pound sand. Remember this was the deal where 15+ year TWA Capts were furloughed and 2 year AA pilots were not.

Why is it that all of the sudden it is terrible that an 18+ year AAA FO is still an FO

Lets have some perspective plz