Grievance ruling

[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.