"The New ATA"

[jon coqtoestone]

I also pray that my AWA colleagues (not referring to anyone posting here) show y'all more respect that what APA showed TWA.

Dude, if showing respect consists of a warm welcome, professional and courteous behavior, and kindness of spirit (don't forget to throw in a healthy dash of "gentlemanliness" for good measure), then I know of no AWA pilot who wouldn't accord the ATA crews their deserved respect.

If your definition of respect is keeping ATA 4-year captains in the left seat, with all that entitles, while 6-year AWA FO's are still waiting with baited breath for upgrade, they will be disappointed.

Of course, since the age 60 rule will soon morph to age 62, or more, upgrade awards just might not happen much around the cactus plant in the "nearer" future anyway.

Cheers!

 

[TWA Dude]

If your definition of respect is keeping ATA 4-year captains in the left seat, with all that entitles, while 6-year AWA FO's are still waiting with baited breath for upgrade, they will be disappointed.

While I think it's premature to start debating those kind of specifics I'll still reply. What makes you so sure that an ATA captain keeping his seat will slow an AWA FO's upgrade? What entitles an AWA FO to a quicker upgrade just because we bought ATA? A well-thought and reasonable integration will afford protections without any unfair gains. I certainly wouldn't promise that nobody will lose their seat. In the AA/TWA integration if the company had kept growing the fences would've prevented anybody from losing their seat (not to mention their job). Of course when things turned sour it was the ex-TWA guys who suffered the brunt of the pain. We became their furlough-fodder. Unfortunately I can forsee that happening again.

 

[jon coqtoestone]

Dude, I agree with you in that it is premature to debate specifics. What I think is fair is different than what an ATA person would think is fair, which may very well be different than what you consider fair.

I guess my real tune depends on whether this turns out to be a merger or an acquisition. If it is a merger, then I support a relative seniority integration (global, not seat-specific -- ie, 20th% on ATA's total list fits in at 20th% on AWA's list).

If it is an acquisition, then there ought to, at the very least, be real furlough protection for pilots on AWA property prior to the acquisition. A total acquisition may very well lead to furloughs, and I will be less than gruntled if I hit the street again while somebody with only a couple months on the property "lucks" into still being employed as an AWA pilot.

I know full well that life ain't fair, and I'm not waiting for any rose garden promises. If this deal goes down, we'll both be lucky to still have jobs a year from now . . . Now that'll be something to be thankful for!

 

[rudderdog]

If your definition of respect is keeping ATA 4-year captains in the left seat, with all that entitles, while 6-year AWA FO's are still waiting with baited breath for upgrade, they will be disappointed.

Don't exaggerate to try to make a baseless point. There are no 4-year captains at ATA. 6 and 7 year captains, yes.

 

[100LL... Again!]

Don't worry. our lovely ALPA folks would never let anything bad happen to us.

 

[TWA Dude]

I guess my real tune depends on whether this turns out to be a merger or an acquisition.

It really shouldn't matter. Like the expression "career expectations" it's just an excuse to justify whatever the victor decides. I agree that everyone's idea of "fair" will differ which is why the Allegheny-Mohawk provisions call for a neutral arbitrator if talks fail.

 

[jon coqtoestone]

My apologies . . .

Don't exaggerate to try to make a baseless point. There are no 4-year captains at ATA. 6 and 7 year captains, yes.

I heard there were captains at ATA with a hire date of 2000 -- should've checked the accuracy of that.

I'll just stick my head back in the puddle now.

Ya'all take care now, God bless, peace be with you. Ranter out.

 

[Wiskey Driver]

I heard there were captains at ATA with a hire date of 2000 -- should've checked the accuracy of that.

I'll just stick my head back in the puddle now.

Ya'all take care now, God bless, peace be with you. Ranter out.

No need for that JC. Many of us have heard the same thing including some of the union people as well. Is this mis information????

WD.

 

[CaptSeth]

There are no four year captains. Six year, yes, but that's also true of AWA.

 

[Wiskey Driver]

There are no four year captains. Six year, yes, but that's also true of AWA.

AUTHOR UNKNOWN!!!!
So don't go giving me a bunch of s hit over it...




A bankrupt carrier's pilots can be divided into several expectations categories: First off - none of ATA's F/O's should have any expectation of a position on our seniority list except as a new hire. This is obvious having seen what happened at TWA and US Airways. All F/O's were quickly furloughed during bankruptcy. Half of ATA's Captain list should have a career expectation of being integrated as an F/O only based on this same experience. Over 1/2 of TWA's and US Airway's Captains are F/O's after the bankruptcies. The other half should only have an expectation of being junior captains at the surviving carrier. And this is precisely to protect the career expectations of AWA pilots.

Finally, the number of ATA's pilots brought over should be underestimated. This is to protect all pilots on the final integrated list from downgrade/furloughs once the final integration is complete. In other words - we should not bring excess ATA pilots into the fold who will immediately benefit from expansion and integration opportunities. If the current ratio is 10 crews per airplane the limit should be set at a lower number - say six ATA crews per airplane so that all future training opportunities will go to AWA pilots. All future hires should be set aside for the remaining ATA pilots in seniority order - perhaps an immediate furlough is in order with an orderly recall once the integration and training is under control. And of course if this merger is successful, then these pilots will be back on line much more quickly than has occurred during other recent bankruptcy scenarios. To do it any other way would lead to incredible labor disharmony. How do explain to a recent former TWA/U

S Airways bankruptcy/furloughed AWA new hire pilot that a bankrupt ATA pilot is going to displace him/her and put them further down the list or worse - on furlough?

AWA pilots should not be naive to think that the final list will be a straight staple - nor should we expect to see the opposite scenario where ATA pilots facing an uncertain bankruptcy outcome displace many AWA pilots - but this integration is a negotiation - and it is critical that we have a complete understanding of where we are and what strengths we bring to the table.

WD.