Does ALPA really care about us?

[OneTuffGuy]

I have to say I am sick and tired of paying ALPA dues and it does nothing for us. Look at the three w/o PSA, Piedmont and Allegheny (sp?) they all pay ALPA dues and then ALPA went and screwed them over and negotiated a way for MESA to get the jets that one of the w/o deserved. Yeah PSA was the lucky one and got some but what about the rest of us? Every time I get paid i feel like the money taken out for ALPA dues is only going to help send my company right down the toilet while others continue to grow. Do you think ALPA national cares? Heck no they don’t, all they care about is what pilot group gives them the most money. ie the bigger you are the more income ALPA national gets. Also maybe I am the only one that thinks this but how can ALPA represent the interest of pilot groups fairly when we are all competing for the same thing? It does not make sense to me. Maybe someone else can either make sense of this or agree with me.

 

[T-Gates]

Just an honest question here, but what did ALPA national do to cause ALG and PDT not to get any of the U RJ order? I thought that was a pure management descision....

--03M

 

[OneTuffGuy]

There is a fund currently set up to collect money to hire a lawyer to sue ALPA national. I wish I had the article that was floating around, it was written by PDT pilots I believe it states how ALPA lied about LOA 83 and hide it from then and also how it violates part of there contract for U to buy RJs and have mesa fly them..... If someone has that letter or knows more about it maybe they can elaborate. What i do know is LOA 83 allowed 70 seat RJs to be flown and a wholly owned carrier 100% mainline but at a contract carrier 50/50. It is all a little confusing. I do know however that you can make anonymous contributions to this fund to help them fight ALPA.

 

[George Jetson]

Go ahead....

Sue your own union, just like some of the Continental pilots did and cost our MEC over one million bucks. Sweet.

Here is a cut and paste from another thread I posted on:

"Those of you guys who are "hooray'ing" the IBT and poo poo'ing ALPA lack the insight to realize that the individual people who negotiate are what is important and not the national union itself. Sure, ALPA has a nice toolbox...the people who insult ALPA also don't realize how ALPA works. If you have gripes with ALPA, complain to your MEC. From what I can tell, ALPA is giving my airline 110% support. Heck, the Director of Representation for ALPA is my "regional" airline's lawyer. How is that for support?"

You have issues with ALPA? Go talk to YOUR MEC. If I read correctly in the ALPA Magazine, Duane spoke out against the fact that US AIR MANAGEMENT gave the jets to Mesa and not the WO's. Have concerns about your dues? Trust me when I say that your MEC is highly subsidized by the higher paying pilot groups. If you think I am kidding, go form your own WO union and see what kind of resources you have available to you. How are you going to pay for those lawyers who will save your job when you get violated? When you get disciplined unfairly? Etc etc.

You are frustrated...go point your frustrations at the right people. MANAGEMENT. Bin Laden. ETC. The world isn't out to get you...or your airline. Like I said...suing your own union is ridiculous. What would you be suing for? What is the remedy? You want change? Go get elected to your MEC and make a difference. Apathy breeds weak MEC's.

Good luck.

GJ

 

[OneTuffGuy]

George you just do not get it do you? See you work for an airline that is not hurt be any of this obviously it is MESA. When LOA 83 was created D. Worth lied and said he had not yet signed it when acutally he already had. When U mainline announced that the 70 seat jets would go to MESA the w/o's had no idea how that was possible because they where led to believe LOA 83 was not signed yet. In fact it was signed and had been signed for a long time. Also and I wish someone could post it there is somewhere and I even think it is in the U mailin restructring agreement, and even PDT contract that ANY plane bought by U mainline must be flown by a w/o. Last time i check MESA was not a w/o and that is where the problem is. U mainline has said they will buy those 70 seat jets and lease them to MESA and that is a violation of multiple things. The problem is most people on this board seem to work for MESA and this benefits all of you so why do you care? However take a good look at the fact that by ALPA allowing LOA 83 to go through and place 70 seat jets at MESA which where purchased by U mainline, you are putting ALG and PDT in the toilet when they could of been flying those planes. Oh and by the way George Jetson I may be incorrect but it is the MECs of the w/o who are pissed about the jets being placed at MESA also.

 

[Dashcaptain]

The great thing is that Allegheny is furloughing 30 on October 1st with more to come. We have been told that we will be down to around 16 planes by the end of next year. We peaked at 47 or so last year. I would like to thank Dave and Duane for helping us out like this!!

 

[NCFlyer]

For those who want to read LOA 83 in its entirety:

Let me define a few things first. The UMEC doesn't refer to regional jets as RJs (like the rest of the world) but rather SJs. And by definition there are 3 classes of SJs:

"small SJ" - 44 seats or less
"medium SJ" - 45-50 seats
"large SJ" - 51-70 seats

Where the issue gets appalling to the wholly owned pilots is that any "large SJ" placed at a contract carried is subject to the previously agreed to J4J 50/50 seat split but if those same "large SJ's" are placed at the wholly owned carriers according to LOA 83 the mainline pilots on the Affected Pilot List (APL) would be entitled to 100% of the seats.

Of course the APL pilots will tell you that for any "large SJ" that they get at the wholly owned an equal amount of "medium SJ" can be placed at the same wholly owned with the wholly owned pilots having 100% of the seats. However they don't want to discuss any issue about a pay difference (with them getting the highest paying equipment), or discuss what happens if in fact no "medium SJ" is placed at the wholly owned while they are getting 100% of the "large SJ" seats. Which would in effect create a situation where every pilot at that wholly owned would have to give up his job to the APL pilots if only "large SJs" were operated at that wholly owned.

Now you think that can't happen!

18 months ago who would have thought that we might have to give up 50% of our jobs to a pilot not even employed by our company. Now they have worked out language where pilots not even in the employment of the wholly owned carrier could eventually have all the jobs at that carrier.

Thank you, ALPA and Mr. Woerth(less)



LOA 83 Accelerated Small Jets
ACCELERATED SMALL JETS LETTER #83

LETTER OF AGREEMENT Between US AIRWAYS, INC. and THE AIRLINE PILOTS in the service of US AIRWAYS, INC. as represented by THE AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL

ACCELERATED SMALL JETS


THIS LETTER OF AGREEMENT is made and entered into in accordance with Title II of the Railway Labor Act, as amended, by and between US Airways, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as the “Company”) and the Airline Pilots in the service of US Airways, Inc. as represented by the Air Line Pilots Association (hereinafter referred to as the “Association”).

WHEREAS the Company has identified opportunities to introduce Small Jets into the US Airways system that would generate accelerated revenue for the Company and accelerated Jets for Jobs for the US Airways pilots, and

WHEREAS these accelerated Small Jets would be financed and operated by Participating Affiliate Carriers, and

WHEREAS the operation of such Small Jets in the US Airways Express system would require certain modifications to the scope provisions of the Restructuring Agreement dated July 1, 2002,
NOW THEREFORE the parties mutually agree as follows:

1. Other than as specifically modified in this Letter of Agreement, all terms and conditions of the ALPA-US Airways Restructuring Agreement effective July 1, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the “Restructuring Agreement”) as modified by the Supplementary Cost Reductions Letter of Agreement (L.O.A. 84), shall remain in full force and effect.

2. The terms and conditions for placement of the Small Jet code share aircraft that are authorized to be placed at other carriers and flown under the US Airways code by the provisions of Attachments B, B-1, and B-3 of the Restructuring Agreement shall be modified under the terms and conditions stated below:

A. Up to 20 “Medium SJs” (50-seat) and up to 30 “Large SJs” (70-seat CRJ-700 aircraft only) may be operated by Mesa Airlines or by any wholly owned subsidiary of Mesa Air Group or Mesa Airlines under terms agreed to between Mesa Air Group and the Association. Such aircraft shall be subject to the Jets for Jobs Protocol and must be placed into revenue operation no later than December 31, 2004.

B. Up to 25 “Large SJs” (70-seat CRJ-700 aircraft only), in addition to the 30 “Large SJs” authorized in Paragraph 2.A. above, may be placed into revenue operation by Participating Affiliate Carriers, provided that they are placed into revenue service no later than December 31, 2004, and provided further that they are subject to the Jets for Jobs Protocol (Attachment B-3 of the Restructuring Agreement). The foregoing does not preclude the placement of Large SJs in MDA in accordance with Attachment B of the Restructuring Agreement as amended by LOA 84.

C. Up to 25 “Large SJs”, specificially limited to the CRJ-700, may be placed into revenue operation at a Participating Wholly-Owned Carrier, other than MDA. All Large SJ positions created by operation of this paragraph shall be filled by US Airways pilots in accordance with the Jets for Jobs Protocol, Attachment B-3 of the Restructuring Agreement. In addition, as an exception to the Jets for Jobs Protocol, 100% of the first 25 Medium or Small Jet positions at the Wholly Owned Carrier where the above Large Small Jets are placed shall be filled by pilots of that Wholly Owned Carrier. Upon completion of the staffing of these aircraft, the 50/50 balance of hiring pursuant to the Jets for Jobs Protocol will be followed.

D. The number of “Medium SJs” and “Large SJs” in paragraphs A, B and C above are incremental to one another but are not incremental to the total number of “Medium SJs” and “Large SJs” authorized by Attachment
B of the Restructuring Agreement.

E. Up to 12 “Medium SJs” currently being operated by Chautauqua Airlines under another carrier’s code may be placed into revenue service by Chautauqua Airlines under the US Airways code, without immediately complying with the Filling of Vacancies provision of Attachment B-3 of the Restructuring Agreement, provided that such “Medium SJs” are placed into revenue operation under the US Airways code by February 29, 2004. For each of the “Medium SJs” specified in the foregoing sentence that is placed into revenue operation by Chautauqua Airlines under the US Airways code no later than such date in 2004, Chautauqua Airlines or Republic Airlines must also place into revenue service at least the same number of additional “Medium SJs”, no later than February 28, 2005 and each such additional “Medium SJ” must be staffed entirely with pilots from the APL, provided however, that no aircraft will be placed into revenue service for Republic Airlines under the US Airways code except with the approval of the Association. If the Filling of Vacancies 50% requirement (by the balance between the Medium SJs specified in the first sentence and the Medium SJs specified in the second sentence of this paragraph E.) is not achieved by February 28, 2005, the Company must either discontinue use of the number of code share aircraft or terminate the contract with Republic or Chautauqua Airlines as required to maintain the Filling of Vacancies 50% requirement.

F. Up to 5 “Medium SJs” may be placed into revenue service by Midway Airlines under the US Airways code, without immediately complying with the Filling of Vacancies provision of Attachment B-3 of the Restructuring Agreement, provided they are placed into revenue operation under the US Airways code by December 31, 2003. For each of the “Medium SJs” specified in the foregoing sentence that is placed into revenue operation under the US Airways code no later than such date in 2003, Midway Airlines must also place into revenue service at least the same number of additional “Medium SJs”, no later than December 31, 2004, and each such additional “Medium SJ” must be staffed entirely with pilots from the APL. If the Filling of Vacancies 50% requirement is not achieved by December 31, 2004, the Company must either discontinue use of the number of code share aircraft that would bring the ratio into compliance with the 50% requirement or terminate the contract with Midway Airlines.

3. MDA shall begin revenue flights on or before December 31, 2004 with no less than two Small Jets (which shall be either “Medium SJs” or “Large SJs”, or both) placed into revenue service.

4. All aircraft authorized by this Letter of Agreement shall be subject to the reporting requirements stated in Attachment B-3 of the Restructuring Agreement.

5. The Company shall seek the agreement of each participating affiliate that it will not discriminate in hiring against any current or former US Airways pilot if a reason for such discrimination is his membership in, or his activities in or on behalf of, the Association. The Company shall require that affiliate airlines recognize the rights of a pilot in respect to this clause. However, the Company shall not assume liability for the violation of the non-discrimination clause by a Participating Affiliate.

6. If it becomes evident to the Company that it or a Participating Carrier may not be able to comply with any of the above dates, the parties agree to meet and discuss alternatives acceptable to the parties.

7. This Letter of Agreement shall become effective on the date of signing and shall remain in effect concurrent with the Restructuring Agreement.

 

[727RedTails]

Is it a factor that U would have a harder time coming up with the financing and capital requirements to by the RJ's, thus limiting the ability for the wholly owned to operate the a/c. Don't get me wrong I don't like whats happening, but this could have been a reason.

 

[OneTuffGuy]

727RedTails that is the problem U mainline still is paying for the 70 seat RJs but have said they will lease them to MESA.

 

[Southbound1313]

Unions have flaws and sometime make unwise, unwanted agreements but I would not like to work without one.