The bell tolls for AA

[Flopgut]

This is not flame bait, I am just very confused as to why you would call a Regional guy a scab?

CAL pilots didn't sign off on Skywest getting our flying. Just because we're merging with UAL doesn't mean they get to either. We had to go to arbitration to defend it, and we did. Now, there was no shortage of regional (and other) pilots who were sure that CAL would lose the arbitration because they feel entitled to take our flying. Right now, mgt wants to hurry up and get a SOC so they can term ALL flying as "UAL" and resume violating my contract. And again, there are no shortage of those pilots set to benefit, who agree with mgt. We will go back to arbitration if we have to. And if we win this time, because we are in contract talks and mgt has done just about everything you can to cause a strike, it could happen.

So I guess I'm confused. Are you saying it ought to be ok for a pilot to do my work if I'm on strike?

 

[Sherpa]

I don't think many pilots join the regional ranks with that being their career goal. With a bad economy and the age 65 rule the progress towards a major has been fairly stagnant and scope relief only delays movement towards a professional career in the majors or cargo, etc. Most regional pilots (I know this is an assumption but common...) don't want scope relief and they probably would like to get a seniority number going after theirs is nullified in the slog to the majors.

Scope isn't good for any pilot with career aspirations.

 

[slaquer5]

CAL pilots didn't sign off on Skywest getting our flying. Just because we're merging with UAL doesn't mean they get to either. We had to go to arbitration to defend it, and we did. Now, there was no shortage of regional (and other) pilots who were sure that CAL would lose the arbitration because they feel entitled to take our flying. Right now, mgt wants to hurry up and get a SOC so they can term ALL flying as "UAL" and resume violating my contract. And again, there are no shortage of those pilots set to benefit, who agree with mgt. We will go back to arbitration if we have to. And if we win this time, because we are in contract talks and mgt has done just about everything you can to cause a strike, it could happen.

So I guess I'm confused. Are you saying it ought to be ok for a pilot to do my work if I'm on strike?

Flop

No way do I think it is right for anyone to do ur flying if u strike

I thought mgt was shifting flying from Ual over to cal.?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

 

[xjhawk]

Dan R, Gup, and The General-make this threat classy and show what fellow pilots should think of other pilots careers-while others show the bad side and are drooling at other pilots airlines tough times. Some show class, while others show their true side.

 

[Flopgut]

Flop

No way do I think it is right for anyone to do ur flying if u strike

I thought mgt was shifting flying from Ual over to cal.?

Sent from my DROIDX using Tapatalk

Mgt is moving all kinds of flying around. They are negotiating in extraordinarily bad faith, and overall conducting themselves like they are working for Lorenzo. They ignore the arbitrator and the mediator. All the ingredients are in place for a strike at the new UAL. All the same goes for American IMHO. I don't think its too soon to manage expectations and aire a bit of social enforcement.

 

[Draginass]

There is zero chance that the APA will ever send a scope-gutting TA to the membership and management knows it.

And there's even a less than zero chance that if they did, it would pass.

 

[Twisted Mind]

there are no shortage of those pilots set to benefit, who agree with mgt.

What you are saying is it is OK for you to screw them over, but not ok for them to screw you over.

 

[Twisted Mind]

Draginass,

What would happen if management said the senior pilots at AA can keep their pensions if they give up 100 seat scope. I think it would pass very quickly.

 

[tomgoodman]

What would happen if management said the senior pilots at AA can keep their pensions if they give up 100 seat scope.

How many pilots, senior or junior, would believe such a promise by management? Bankruptcy's whole purpose is the legal breaking of promises.

 

[Juniority]

Bankruptcy's whole purpose is the legal breaking of promises.

This statement is very true of bankruptcy's recent history (last 10 years or so).

While bankruptcy used to mean the death/dismemberment of a company, during the late '90s and through the first decade of the 2000s it turned into a one-sided game with management holding the upper hand. The financial realities (unrealities?) of that decade somehow changed bankruptcy into a relatively safe management shellgame of screwing old investors while simultaneously lining up an eager new group of investors.

What the labor groups thought or did in these circumstances just wasn't an important consideration to management.

Maybe in the current finacial environment, where there's not tons of crazy money being thrown around by investors who can't imagine any downside, bankruptcy will again become a serious matter for management.