Grievance ruling

[Tim47SIP]

Surplus1

I am suggesting exactly what I said. I beleive I remember your proposal you mentioned and it is probably very close. What I mean about the Delta furloughed guys is that they will take all remaining positions for the RJ deliveries. For them to stay within Delta and protect our interests at ComAsa, there should be a provision to keep the aircraft deliveries to ComAsa only and not other contract carriers. These furloughed pilots will retain their seniority number and thus be senior to all of the ComAsa pilots.
These furloughed pilots will be paid by their DOH at ComAsa rates (i.e. a two year Delta guy will be paid at the 2 year ComAsa rates). I would guess that this plan would slow down upgrades because the expansion would be from all senior guys, thus no movement at the bottom. This is in no way even close to what the US plan is as that is why all remaining RJ deliveries would go to ComAsa. I wouldnt endorse that US deal for anything. This is very simillar to a 100% flow through with the exception of how the furloughed pilots would be brought back which would ensure that no ComAsa pilot would be furloughed.
By "ALPA status quo" I mean continuing with the Ostrich head in the sand routine. Instead of waiting for ALPA to come to their senses and fix the industry (they wont while the big 5 continue to try and manipulate the industry), we should fix our part of it now. I didn't mead to be vague, but remember, this is only some idiots idea and I am sure there are many more great ideas. I just though it was time to start doing something.

 

[surplus1]

Re: Surplus1

Tim,

I'm not against you. The devil is always in the details and I just wanted to be sure of what you meant by what you said.

I am suggesting exactly what I said. I beleive I remember your proposal you mentioned and it is probably very close.

Not the same but that doesn't matter. I'm not the expert, I just want a workable plan. One that stops the fighting without shafting anyone. I don't care whose idea it is or where it came from. If we can do something to help the furloughed Delta pilots, without hurting our own pilots, I'm all for it.

What I mean about the Delta furloughed guys is that they will take all remaining positions for the RJ deliveries.

Understand all FO vacancies in all new deliveries, from date of agreement, go to furloughed Delta pilots. ComAsa stops hiring off the street. Is that what you mean?

For them to stay within Delta and protect our interests at ComAsa, there should be a provision to keep the aircraft deliveries to ComAsa only and not other contract carriers.

Understand (I think). Doesn't seem hard since as far as I know, Delta doesn't buy airplanes for the contract carriers anyway. I would prefer to see all new deliveries and all new route segments in that I think the flying is more important than the equipment. In other words the subcontracting stops and all flying is done by DAL and its subsidiaries. Is that what you mean? That won't be an easy sell to the Company.

These furloughed pilots will retain their seniority number and thus be senior to all of the ComAsa pilots.

Confused. I have no problem with them retaining their Delta number. I don't understand how they will be senior to all ComAsa pilots, if they are flying for ComAsa. If you mean senior at DAL, I have no problem with that. If you mean senior at ComAsa, I could have a big problem with that. Are you talking about "super seniority" for the DAL pilots? Are you talking about their DAL DOH for seniority at ComAsa? (Those two things are different). Please clarify.

These furloughed pilots will be paid by their DOH at ComAsa rates (i.e. a two year Delta guy will be paid at the 2 year ComAsa rates).

No problem with full longevity credit for pay purposes, but no Captain pay rates for pilots flying as first officers. Question? Do you think DAL pilots would go for that (I don't really know how much longevity the furloughed DAL pilots have)?

I would guess that this plan would slow down upgrades because the expansion would be from all senior guys, thus no movement at the bottom.

Confused. The only way I could see it affecting upgrades would be if you are giving the DAL pilot super seniority at ComAsa. Perhaps I am missing something. Please clarify.

This is in no way even close to what the US plan is as that is why all remaining RJ deliveries would go to ComAsa. I wouldnt endorse that US deal for anything.

Glad to hear that. I would not consider that plan either. It's dead in the water at my airline.

This is very simillar to a 100% flow through with the exception of how the furloughed pilots would be brought back which would ensure that no ComAsa pilot would be furloughed.

Confused again. I don't understand the similarity to a flow-through. I hope you're not suggesting that the DAL pilots would come to ComAsa as Captains. If that is your plan it's DOA at CMR. We are not going to put the pilots of another airline on our list as Captains ahead of our own pilots. Never happen, so I hope that is not what you mean. Please clarify.

I also don't see any way for ComAsa pilots to move to DAL in your plan. That is why the similarity to a flow-through escapes me.

By "ALPA status quo" I mean continuing with the Ostrich head in the sand routine. Instead of waiting for ALPA to come to their senses and fix the industry (they wont while the big 5 continue to try and manipulate the industry), we should fix our part of it now. I didn't mead to be vague, but remember, this is only some idiots idea and I am sure there are many more great ideas. I just though it was time to start doing something.

OK, I understand. I agree that it is time to do something. I also have the opinion that national ALPA is not a player in what we do unless they make major changes in their policy which I don't see them doing. Bring them into the picture (as is) and it will kill the deal.

If the Delta pilots have a desire to work directly and exclusively with the CMR/ASA pilots to resolve our differences, I'm all for it. From my perspective, we meet privately, we agree privately and we inform the ALPA of what we have agreed to do, after it is a done deal. Otherwise, it will never come together. There are just too many players in that stew and too many interests that are too divergent from ours. That's just my opinion.

 

[surplus1]

Surplus1,

Granted, it IS a three-step proposal, but the end result is a merger of the seniority lists. The catch is (should this proposal make it to the negotiating table) to ensure that the implementation of each step is carried out sequentially, and that the language in the agreement is ironclad.

The "plan" already is a sequential plan. It sequentially transfers all AE jets to AA, without the pilots. Since there are proposed pay rates for your equipment types in the APA's Section 6 opener, I'd say it has already made it to the "table".

In Phase I - all of the CL-700 aircraft go to American, to be flown by AA pilots. That will displace the Eagle pilots currently flying those aircraft, who will in turn displace other Eagle pilots junior to them. At the end of that phase, a # of Eagle pilots equal to the number flying the 70-seater, will be furloughed off the bottom.

In Phase II - The rest of Eagles jets go to American, once more to be flown by AA furloughed pilots. Not a single AE pilot goes with them unless AA runs out of pilots to fly them. (Then, I suppose, they'll hire more off the street). When they run out of AA pilots, then and only then do any Eagle pilots go. I think they called you the "remainder" in the proposal, isn't that right?

That will displace Eagle pilots, who will displace their juniors, who will downgrade and displace FO's who will then be furloughed. An almost complete flush of Eagle so that they can get your jets. BRAVO!

In Phase III - What ever is left of Eagle (if anything) goes to AA with the pilots. The term used in the APA proposal is that phase III happens eventually (you can translate that to never).

I'm sorry but this is NOT a plan to "merge" your lists. It is a plan to transfer your aircraft to American. They already have a list and of course, all of their pilots are on it, therefore they will have "one list". You just wont be on that list.

There is the unlikely possibility that the agreement would be postponed indefinitely after the first step (transferring on-property RJs to AA). That is one of the primary reservations the Eagle pilots have about this proposal

Unlikely you say. I'd be willing to bet whatever that the instant your last jet has gone to AA (without you) the whole thing will come to a screeching halt and you'll be up the creek without the old familiar paddle.

Just where do you think you'll fit in if in the middle of Phase II AA buys another carrier (like say Alaska) and merges with it? Not to worry, they wont do that.

If you really think the APA has "seen the light" and is doing this because they want unity between you and they welcome you to their list, then I have Ocean-front property in Arizona that I'll sell you real cheap.

Listen friend, if you want to be an AA pilot I have NO problem whatever with that. If you think this "plan" is going to make that happen well, I wont even say it.

(The other being language ensuring that we don't wind up as a furlough buffer for AA pilots).

Why are you worrying about becoming furlough fodder? You've already signed a flow-through agreement that makes you just that. Only reason it hasn't happened is because you never "flowed" anywhere. If you had, you'd be another CALEX.

On second thought I will say it. If this is the kind of stuff you all will buy, then I no longer have any doubts as to why you have a 16-year contract and a flow-through that was never worth the paper it's written on.

The end result of this proposal would be one airline flying every plane from the ERJ-135 up to the B777, staffed by a single pilot group.

Sounds cool and you're right. The only problem is there won't be any Eagle pilots in the "single pilot group" staffing those airplanes. Neet trick. If I were an AA pilot I think that was a great deal too. Sometimes as they say, you should be careful what you ask for. You might get it.

I noticed you didn't mention the turboprops. So what happened to Phase III? And where are all those turboprop pilots (your former jet pilots) going to work? Oh, at Eagle. Such a deal.

ALPA and APA are pretty much on the same sheet of music now- the big hurdle now is getting the company to realize what a business advantage this would give them.

I'll bet they are on the same sheet of music. ALPA wants to merge with the APA so bad they'll sell you down the river in a heartbeat. If you haven't figured out how much ALPA cares about you with the contract you have today (the last "good deal" they helped you get), there is no hope for you.

Looks like your only blessing in disguise is the fact that AMR wont agree to this anyway. Unless you want to be in the bread line, you'd better pray they don't agree.

Nothing personal buddy. just my ramblings. I know you have to make your own decisions and it's none of my business. Best wishes.

 

[publisher]

EagleRJ

EagleRJ

You need to understand the relationship of things.

Employees are their to execute a business plan, not to make it.

That is not a comment on their value or worth. It is basic business 101. If there is an obligation, it is to the shareholders to provide a return on their investment.

This issue we are discussing cannot be conducted in the vacumn of a pilot issue only. Surplus 1 puts forth articulate and intelligent arguments, point by point. Mine is simpler. If you understand the basic tenent's of the regional business, you will know that there are reasons that the majors will not buy off on putting these together. As I said earlier somewhere else, the fact that AA would give up city pairs and take seats out, should have been an indication that this was not even discussable.

 

[skydiverdriver]

Surplus,
Hey, look on the bright side. If the Eagle/APA plan goes through, I'm sure we'll have a big crop of new rjdc supporters. Of course, they will need to find a new job first...

To publisher,
I appreciate you keeping us grounded in the management side of the story. However, as you keep telling us, we are not management. So, you keep accusing us of only seeing the pilot's side of the story, and you are correct. We do know that management has worries and problems, and we have our own. Sometimes they are compatable, sometimes not. But, even if something we ask for doesn't make them more profitable, well, we will still ask. All of our contracts make them less profitable, but if they treated us better from the start, we wouldn't have joined a union in the first place.

So, why do you keep reminding us of the obvious?

 

[Salty Dog]

"the state of the economy, the financial state of the Company, or the relative profitability or unprofitability of the Company’s then-current operations. "

Well, duh. I hate to say it, but isn't that ALWAYS why pilots get furloughed? Business is down and they shrink the business which leads to layoffs. With the above phrase in the contract the whole thing seems pointless to me.

Unless there's a history of Delta laying pilots off just for giggles, which I don't think there is, how does anyone think the language above protected employees from "regular" furloughs, let alone FM?

 

[trainerjet]

Salty Dog,

If you had bothered to read or post the ENTIRE section of the contract, which you selectively posted only a portion of, it would say that these are examples of reasons the company MAY NOT furlough pilots. The language of the contract is very specific. This was negotiated and agreed to by the parties involved. I'm sure the DAL pilots, as well as the other pilot groups that negotiated a no furlough clause in their contract, had to give up something to get this agreed to.

The grievance had to do with the FM clause. So, duh....maybe you need to study a bit more.

What is your reason for posting this anyway? The arbitrator has ruled.

 

[EagleRJ]

Surplus1-

You have some valid points, and believe me- the Eagle pilot group in general is just as leery of what this proposal could do to us. The APA's proposal was just that- it wasn't intended to be a blueprint for implementing the plan. All of the specifics will be worked out at the table, and the Eagle MEC is legally obligated to have a seat at that table since our aircraft are involved.

It's true that the worst case scenario for the Eagle pilots would be the outright theft of the jets, but that's not likely to happen. Figuring in all of the returning furloughees, upgrades, displacements, and backfills, the company would be looking at roughly 6500 long-term training events at AA and Eagle. Never mind uneconomical. That's physically impossible! Any agreement signed by the company will have to include an elaborate array of fences to prevent this, and that will also protect Eagle pilots and junior AA pilots from displacement.

You're right that I didn't mention the turboprops. I don't see the stateside props staying more than another year. We're well underway to getting them out of the Northeast entirely, they're being replaced by RJs gradually in DFW and LAX, and we're steadily flying them out to the boneyard. The only place we will keep turboprops is in the Carribbean, and while I hope it doesn't happen, signs point to the company spinning our operation in San Juan off.

If anything is for certain, it is that we are in the endgame for the Eagle pilots. The number one issue in the APA's Section 6 openers is a solution to scope and the RJ problem, and according to numerous pilots there, it is a strike issue for them. Pardon my optimism, but the career aspirations of the pilots at Eagle now hang in the balance. I just hope we still have a seat when the music stops!

 

[surplus1]

EagleRJ

Thanks for your measured response. I realize I came on pretty strong and I admire a man who keeps a cool head under fire.

Surplus1-

All of the specifics will be worked out at the table, and the Eagle MEC is legally obligated to have a seat at that table since our aircraft are involved.

Strange as it may seem, that's what bothers me as much as anything. The AA pilots have the full support of the APA. The Eagle pilots are on their own. It kind of reminds me of the Middle East. The Palestinians have a "seat at the table" too, but the Israelis have tanks, Apache helicopters, F-16s, and unlimited support from the world's most powerful nation. That stacks up pretty favorably against the AK-47's and some suicide bombers.

It's true that the worst case scenario for the Eagle pilots would be the outright theft of the jets, but that's not likely to happen.

Only because the Company stands firmly against the predator. If the 800 pound tiger of AMR ever changes its stripes, the Eagle pilots are history.

The only place we will keep turboprops is in the Carribbean, and while I hope it doesn't happen, signs point to the company spinning our operation in San Juan off.

I actually wish I could be positive about this whole deal, for your sake. But, I'm a regional pilot. IMO, if the APA is too pushy a LOT more than Executive will be "spun off". That's part of Publisher's reality check and his points are well made.

I can't help but wonder what the game will look like when Eagle starts to put the AE code on American flights, instead of AA putting its code on Eagle flights. That's an interesting and innovative new twist.

If anything is for certain, it is that we are in the endgame for the Eagle pilots. The number one issue in the APA's Section 6 openers is a solution to scope and the RJ problem, and according to numerous pilots there, it is a strike issue for them. Pardon my optimism, but the career aspirations of the pilots at Eagle now hang in the balance. I just hope we still have a seat when the music stops!

One thing about Section 6 and the RLA is the simple reality that the so-called "strike issues" change substantially between opening day and the final Agreement.

Additionally, it is highly improbable that the Government will allow an airline the size of AA to be shutdown by a strike. They will impose a settlement if necessary, particularly if the issue is the type of Scope we're dealing with. In such a scenario we could risk losing ALL Scope, not just the predatory stuff. Don't overlook the fact that the jets that hauled GWB around may have been flown by AA pilots, but they belong to AMR.

I agree that the career aspirations of the pilots at Eagle (whatever they may be and, I don't pretend to know) hang in the balance.

I'm sorry I can't share your optimism. From my point of veiw, the "hangman" is the AA pilot group (ably assisted by the ALPA). Seems to me like you're betting your life and future on the idea that the APA will "find religion" moments before your fall is broken by the tightening of the noose around your neck.

You're optimism seems to hinge on the belief that the APA will cut the rope just in time and the ALPA will be there to catch you. History dictates otherwise. You're far more likely to be thoroughly hung and your "remains" (to paraphrase the APA) gingerly fed to the hyenas.

I'm unable to bet my future on a vision seen through rose colored lenses. I guess I'm a cynic, i.e., "a blaggard, who sees things as they are rather than as they ought to be." (Voltaire)

The only way you will continue to have a seat when the music stops is if you stop giving the AA pilots total control of the chairs.

For the sake of all regional pilots, I hope I'm wrong and things will go your way but I'm hedging all bets.

 

[publisher]

Surplus

Surplus

Wil Rogers said that before he dealt with a man, he walked around behind him and look at the situtation from where he was standing.

The reason I keep reminding you is that someone has to.

 

[surplus1]

Publisher

Do you think my premise is wrong?

I thought that your ideas on the business situation were not too far off. While we may not be on the same page, we're in the same book. Where do you see us as differing?

Your message surprised me a bit. That's why I'm asking.

 

[publisher]

Surplus

Sorry Surplus. That was a response to Skydiverdriver's coment

 

[skydiverdriver]

Publisher,
No you don't. So, tell me, why do people in management always seem to think that line pilots are stupid? You sure talk to us like we are.

 

[TurboS7]

They are, and history has proved it. Unfortunatly I am now one of them, I used to be on the other end. Pilots make bad decisions due to lack of information, or not wanting to get or hear the bad information. Instead of listening and learning they go to name calling and other emotional responses, the board can be a perfect example. If you are in management and you want to see a pilot union make a stupid mistake, just tick them off , and they will fall right into your hands. Yes pilots are stupid in general, they love to fly and will do anything to protect feeding that desire. I don't like to admit it but I am one of them and I have made some very poor business decisions because I wanted to fly, not manage. Will things ever change,,, no, it will be the same as long as airplane have wings, we are an enlightened few, diffrent from our earthbound friends.

 

[publisher]

Surplus

Surplus,

In general, I think you make sense. There really was never any sense in thinking that ALPA could deal fair and equibly with both mainline carriers and regionals.

Let's face it, I do not think any of the original founders of the union movement had in mind $300,000 a year pilots or major league baseball players with $27.0m contracts as the people needing representation.

As I say all the time, it is about money, power, and votes. When used efficiently, these empowerments in the hands of union leadership can wrest management from management.

All these things have to be done however in the place of market economics. We can have a union so strong that they make Airnet pay $300,000 for Aerostar drivers hauling checks. Two problems will emerge from that.

1. The service will become uneconomical for the customers and they will stop paying for the service.
2. Someone else will come along at less price and take the business away.

Now you can say if we are all together we can force that number 2 guy away but you cannot do anything about number 1.

The fact of the matter is that the price of the tickets is not going up with the costs. Only improvements in other areas has made it eeconomical for expansion, things like revenue management programs, fuel hedging, etc.

Southwest has proved it for years. At a certain fare, the market is greatly stimulated and business is excellent. The fact is that this business was there all along. The major carriers had to charge a rate based on their costs that did not stimulate hte market but caused it to stifle. At their fares, people drove, trained, bused, whatever.