US Airways, America West in advanced merger talks - WSJ

[G4G5]

APA Screwed the TWA pilots PERIOD. For you to even suggest otherwise is foolish.

You apparently know very little about ALPA mergers. do a little home work. What the APA did was institute the EXACT same intergration methold that was used when Delta took over Pan Am. Need I remind you that A; this was an ALPA/ALPA merger. B this has been consistanly held up in various courts around the country.
All the APA did was use the exact same intergration methold established by ALPA.

I guess if I was you I would try to defend my actions as well but at this point I think you're better off just keeping your mouth shut.

I think that you would be better off learning the facts. Compton is on record as late as 10/1999 stating that their "was no white knight". Nobody was coming to save TWA. Unless you have some sort of proof/evidence that TWA could have survived beyond/without the Aquisition you are talking out your arse. You would be better off keeping your mouth shut, unless of course you can some how prove to us that TWA could have survived ANOTHER trip to BK court.

Weather your dad likes it or not:
This was an Aquisition , not a merger. TWA was going to go CH11 AGAIN.
This was not ALPA /ALPA this was ALPA and the APA. The 10,000+ pilots at AA pay dues to have their best interests and careers protected by their union.

BTW, my father was one of those TWA captains that you stole 20 years and 2 weeks of seniority from.

Get over it, my father was one of the Pan Am pilots who lost his seat to some DAL pilots.
It is absolutly amazing to me how someone can think that in a Jan/2000 world that TWA was on a level playing field as AA and that just because my dad had 20 years he is entitled to yada yada. Unfortunatly it does not work that way.

The facts are real simple AA was reporting record profits and TWA was going to the BK courts once again. Do some research the pilots at AA did not screw your father. CARL ICAN did.

 

[FDJ2]

never mind

 

[G4G5]

What the APA did was institute the EXACT same intergration methold that was used when Delta took over Pan Am.


Except for the fact that Delta did not take over Pan Am. You are correct though that it was Icahn who ruined TWA.

What DAL did was Cherry Pick the Europen routes and the Shuttle. Offering jobs out of seniority to pilots who were only qualified in the A310 and the 727. Then they fenced them on their equipment until the DAL pilots could replace the A310 with 767's. After the seat robery was complete the Pan Am pilots were intergrated into the DAL list at 1:7 ratio.

Within 12 months the senior ALPA dues paying 747 Pan Am pilots were out on the street. Even if you were a sr 747 fo who could have held Shuttle 727 ca or jr capt A310. All your seniority got you was a pink slip, while pilots jr to you got careers at DAL.

Some ALPA/ALPA intergration, at least the APA offered to take all the pilots in seniority order. In a pre 9/11 all of the TWA pilots would have had jobs under the APA intergration, in seniority order. Supp CC protect those jobs. I can't say the same was true for the screwing the Pan Am pilots took from ALPA and DAL. They had nothing close to sup CC. I know Sr Pan Am line holding A310 pilots who were kicked off the A310 within 2 years and the best that their new 1:7 seniority number could get them was 727 reserve CA. While DAL pilots 10 years their junior (in terms of seniority) wound up flying their routes.

Once again Carl Ican and 9/11 screwed the TWA pilots not the pilots of AA. Let's not forget ALPA, it is absolutly pathetic the kind of representation that ALPA provided to the pilots of TWA during the AA aquisition.

 

[joevollers]

Good Points--
But what does alpa policy say about where USair Furloughees would be in relation to us Junior AWA pilots?

 

[FDJ2]

Some ALPA/ALPA intergration, at least the APA offered to take all the pilots in seniority order.

AMR also bought all of TWA, DAL did not, big difference. DAL only acquired a small part of PAA, did it even trigger the PAA fragmentation policy, did it even trigger a PID? DAL management offered job opportunities to PAA pilots who were current and qualified, which triggered the mad scramble amongst PAA pilots to complete training and get a job with DAL. Some PAA pilots (Duke/Spellacy)brought a lawsuit forward on the integration process, none of it was based on the actions of DAL or the DAL MEC, it was all based on the actions of the PAA MEC. At the end of the day, the Duke pilots wisely settled, and the Spellacy pilots ended up ultimately losing their DFR case.

 

[G4G5]

AMR also bought all of TWA, DAL did not, big difference. DAL only acquired a small part of PAA, did it even trigger the PAA fragmentation policy, did it even trigger a PID?

Yes, it did.
Pan Am was split up because Dal would not take the whole airline. DAL wanted no part of the employees or the complete airline. Compton would not allow this to happen to TWA and subsequently AA purchased the entire airline.


DAL management offered job opportunities to PAA pilots who were current and qualified, which triggered the mad scramble amongst PAA pilots to complete


training and get a job with DAL. Some PAA pilots (Duke/Spellacy)brought a lawsuit forward on the integration process, none of it was based on the actions of DAL or the DAL MEC, it was all based on the actions of the PAA MEC. At the end of the day, the Duke pilots wisely settled, and the Spellacy pilots ended up ultimately losing their DFR case.

Just so I have got this right the DAL MEC had nothing to do with the intergration of the Pan Am pilots, they would have been happy offering all of them jobs and DOH.
Ok, if it makes you sleep better at night. But common sence tells everyone here that you are way off base.
No the TRUTH is that the DAL pilots (being the only union on the DAL real estate) had plenty of say. They told mgt that that they did not want the sr Pan Am pilots, in fact the original plan was to buy the European assets and not take any of the pilots BUT the FAA would not buy off on a turn key operation.

Who do you think came up with just taking the A310 pilots only?
Who do you think came up with the 1:7 merger ratio and the fences? The Pan Am Pilots?

So you still think,
"none of it was based on the actions of DAL or the DAL MEC, it was all based on the actions of the PAA MEC. "

Let me guess you are a Delta pilot. Unfortunatly you have your facts completly wrong (see the below case).
The law suit that you refer to was brought forward by the Pan Am pilots in reguard to a group known as the "dirty thirty" They were 30 pilots (Pan Am mgt and union types ) who were not on the 727 but jumped into a short requal class outside of seniority in order to be current on the DAL required equipment by the DAL required deadline.

 

[G4G5]

For those interested in how an ALPA/ALPA merger works and how you can't trust the MEC you have.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=2nd&navby=case&no=977666

From the above case law:
While in reorganization, Pan Am continued to search for potential buyers of its remaining assets. In early July 1991, the MEC informed Pan Am pilots that Delta Airlines ("Delta") had agreed to buy Pan Am's North Atlantic routes and "shuttle" operation. Under the proposed Asset Purchase Agreement ("APA"), Pan Am would sell its entire fleet of Airbus 310 ("A-310") aircraft and up to 19 of its Boeing 727 ("B-727") aircraft to Delta. In return, Delta would sponsor and fund Pan Am's reorganization as a going airline, purchase a 45% equity stake in Pan Am, and establish a marketing alliance with Pan Am.

DAL created this bogus equity stake a methold of not having to take all of the enmployees. Fully aware that Pan Am had no chance. Where where they planning on flying all of those 747's with No Pacific or European routes?
Pan Am also agreed to supply Delta with nearly 800 pilots who were "current and qualified" on those two planes. A "current and qualified" pilot is one who is trained to fly a particular airplane and has made three takeoffs and landings on that plane within the last ninety days. Delta needed approximately 494 qualified pilots for the A-310 aircraft and 280 for the B- 727. Since Pan Am did not have enough "current and qualified" pilots to satisfy Delta's needs, it needed to train some of its pilots for transfer to Delta. Pan Am and Delta agreed that the transfer of pilots and assets would occur no later than November 1, 1991.

On July 20, 1991, Pan Am's crew chief, Vito Cutrune, presented a proposal to Pan Am, Delta, and the MEC that would allow Pan Am to offer pilot training on a strict seniority basis. He concluded that Pan Am had enough money and flight simulator capacity to complete 120 "long course" training programs for the A-310 and 22 long course programs for the B-727. Long course programs were designed for pilots who had never before flown the A-310 or B-727. Accordingly, since every Pan Am pilot would be eligible for training under Cutrune's proposal, the training would be offered on a strict seniority basis.

The long course training proposal was consistent with the seniority-based methodology by which most Pan Am pilot assignments were determined. The Pilot Working Agreement ("PWA"), the collective bargaining agreement between Pan Am and its pilots, provided that whenever Pan Am projected a major change or "shift" in its flight operations, it announced the change to the pilots and issued a "proffer." See PWA §§ 3, 5. The new flight positions were posted in the proffer and pilots had an opportunity to "bid" for these positions. Pan Am then issued "awards" to the pilots, based on their seniority. See id.

On July 24, 1991, as Pan Am and Delta were finalizing the APA, Pan Am rejected the strict seniority plan. Pan Am explained that it could not accept the long course proposal because: (1) there was insufficient time to train the requisite number of pilots before Delta's deadline; and (2) even if the training could be accomplished in time, training by seniority would decimate the ranks of senior Pan Am captains needed to continue Pan Am's operations after the sale.

The MEC sought to accommodate Pan Am by presenting an alternate plan, entitled the "System Seniority Transfer Plan." Under this plan, pilots could gain eligibility for transfer by training after the November 1, 1991 deadline set by Pan Am and Delta. Upon completion of their training, these pilots would transfer to Delta, thereby bumping to the bottom of Delta's seniority list junior pilots who had transferred on November 1, 1991. On July 31, 1991, Delta rejected the System Seniority Transfer Plan, explaining that training after November 1, 1991 conflicted with its plan for a "turn-key" operation and would result in too many senior pilots being hired, adversely affecting the normal Delta cross-section and profile of airmen.

On August 2, 1991, the MEC met to discuss how pilots would be trained for transfer to Delta. After debating various training and transfer plans, it presented a new plan calling for "short course" training on the A-310. Short course training is a refresher course for pilots who had once flown, but are no longer qualified to fly, a particular airplane. Under the short course plan, only pilots who had previously flown the A-310 were eligible for training. While few Pan Am pilots had experience flying the A-310, four members of the MEC had flown this plane.

The short course plan was supported by Cutrune, Pan Am's crew chief, who told Pan Am executives that his original training proposal, long course training, was simply not feasible. He said that under his "revised analysis," the necessary simulator time for long course training on the A-310 could not be arranged before the date of sale. Cutrune explained, however, that the short course plan could be accomplished. On August 8, 1991, Pan Am and Delta decided to adopt the short course plan for the A-310.

Rather than informing the pilots that a training plan had now been adopted, the MEC told the pilots that Delta was still open to alternative plans. They assured the pilots that Delta would listen to any plan designed to preserve the integrity of the seniority system. The MEC also told the pilots that, rather than deciding which of the competing plans it would endorse, ALPA and the MEC would let an arbitrator decide which plan best served the union's interests. However, since Pan Am and ALPA had agreed in principle on a plan governing retraining on the A-310, the only issue presented to the arbitrator was the B-727 training. The arbitrator recommended a training plan for the B- 727 based on strict seniority.

Following the arbitrator's decision, ALPA, Pan Am, and Delta entered into a formal agreement defining the training for Pan Am pilots. ALPA agreed that the short course training would be used for the A-310, but a strict seniority system would be used to select pilots for B-727 training. The Bankruptcy Court approved this agreement. When Pan Am sold the planes and routes in November 1991, six of the seven MEC members were on the list of pilots to be transferred to Delta. Shortly thereafter, Pan Am went out of business.

30 in total requaled on the 727 in a short requal course that was not put out for bid and not accomplished in seniority order. The folks were refered to as the "Dirty Thirty" and wee taken by DAL as 727 pilots.

Accusing the MEC pilot members of feathering their own nests, two groups of pilots sued ALPA and the individual members of the MEC. The first group, the "Spellacy" pilots, commenced an action in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Dorsey, J. ), alleging that ALPA and the MEC breached their duties of fair representation by adopting the short course training plan. The Spellacy pilots asserted that ALPA and the MEC violated their duties because: (1) the PWA required that training opportunities be awarded on a strict seniority basis and ALPA failed to protect the pilots' contractual rights; and (2) ALPA and the MEC advocated the short course plan so that they could secure pilot positions for themselves.

The second group, the "Duke" pilots, filed an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Weinstein, J. ). These pilots each held a "proffer,"-- i.e. , an offer from Pan Am to be transferred to Delta. These proffers had been given before Pan Am realized that it lacked a sufficient number of qualified pilots to send to Delta. The Duke pilots alleged that ALPA should first have ensured that Pan Am honored the existing proffers before implementing a training program.

Needless to say what the DAL pilots did to the Pan Am pilts was MUCH worse then what the APA ever tried doing to the TWA pilots.

 

[TWA Dude]

G4G5:

You and I are very different people. I don't believe a pilot's worth is contingent on the financial health of his employer and I'm proving it. One might think after my experience with TWA that as an AWA pilot in the catbird seat I would wish to extract my revenge on ATA, USAir, or others. Wrong. The last thing I want to see happen to others is what happened to TWA. There are many at AWA who think as you do so I face an uphill battle on my own turf. So be it. We ex-TWAers at AWA, and there's a bunch, are banding together to lobby our union leadership on the importance of not extracting a windfall from our USAir brethren should this thing come to pass. What exactly constitutes a windfall will be a point of contention and if necessary it should go to binding arbitration. That's the fair way to do this.

Oh, and Pan Am was parted out whereas TWA was bought whole minus several aircraft. Not a relevant comparison, though I agree DAL did not deal with them kindly.

 

[G4G5]

You and I are very different people. I don't believe a pilot's worth is contingent on the financial health of his employer and I'm proving it. One might think after my experience with TWA that as an AWA pilot in the catbird seat I would wish to extract my revenge on ATA, USAir, or others. Wrong. The last thing I want to see happen to others is what happened to TWA. There are many at AWA who think as you do so I face an uphill battle on my own turf. So be it. We ex-TWAers at AWA, and there's a bunch, are banding together to lobby our union leadership on the importance of not extracting a windfall from our USAir brethren should this thing come to pass. What exactly constitutes a windfall will be a point of contention and if necessary it should go to binding arbitration. That's the fair way to do this.

Believe me when I say that I wish your way was the way that things are done. But. I am a realist, I have spent enough time in the corporate sector to realize that my raises are directly tied to the performance of my company, that my long term survival is directly dependant on the companies (and their current mgt) long term survival. Your philosophy and concepts work great in a larger union like the IAM but unfortunatly ALPA in no way mirrors a union like the IAM, ALPA and most of the pilots in commerical aviation act like they work independantly in the private sector. In the private sector if your company takes over an ailing or bankrupt corporation their is little or no change that the employees of that corporation will be merged in to the new corporation in a fair an equitable intergration policy.

Oh, and Pan Am was parted out whereas TWA was bought whole minus several aircraft. Not a relevant comparison, though I agree DAL did not deal with them kindly.

See above, case. The employees of Pan Am were promised that DAL would provide a 45% equity stake in the new Pan Am ( a very similar deal to what LUV has done to ATA). The European routes and the Shuttled were sold by Pan Am under the belief that then cash infusion would keep Pan Am alive for years to come (like the sale of the Pacific routes) and that with DAL as a 45% partner they would now have a chance fo long term survival.

The deal is very similar to the way TWA was purchased, except that Compton was smart enough to make AA take everyone. AA did not want to purchase much beyond the STL base and a few valuable gate and slots in DCA and LGA. The APA (having gone through this in the past with AMR mgt) was fully aware that in very short order AMR would trim down TWA, in a very similar manner to what they did with Reno and Air Cal.

Where did you thik that the APA came up with the fences and the intergration? They just coppied the DAL deal, ALPA set the legal precedence. History repeats it's self time and time again. It reminds me of my first day on the panel, when the instructor told me, "son you are not smart enough to come up with an original miastake, this is aviation someone has already done it" Unfortunalty that's the way I see the AWA/USAir deal going down. Some in ALPA is going to find a previous merger that is court tested and then adapat to the current merger.


Good luck in your efforts. If everyone thought like you this industry would be a much better place.

 

[TWA Dude]

If everyone thought like you this industry would be a much better place.

Unlike you I'm not resigned to a destiny where nothing ever changes.

 

[FDJ2]

Needless to say what the DAL pilots did to the Pan Am pilts was MUCH worse then what the APA ever tried doing to the TWA pilots.

Nothing you quoted supports this conclusion. I correctly stated :
"Some PAA pilots (Duke/Spellacy)brought a lawsuit forward on the integration process, none of it was based on the actions of DAL or the DAL MEC, it was all based on the actions of the PAA MEC."

The entire lawsuit was driven by the actions of the PAA MEC.

Here is the cause of action which you quoted:

"Accusing the MEC pilot members of feathering their own nests, two groups of pilots sued ALPA and the individual members of the MEC.
The first group, the "Spellacy" pilots, commenced an action in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Dorsey, J. ), alleging that ALPA and the MEC breached their duties of fair representation by adopting the short course training plan. The Spellacy pilots asserted that ALPA and the MEC violated their duties because: (1) the PWA required that training opportunities be awarded on a strict seniority basis and ALPA failed to protect the pilots' contractual rights; and (2) ALPA and the MEC advocated the short course plan so that they could secure pilot positions for themselves.

The second group, the "Duke" pilots, filed an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Weinstein, J. ). These pilots each held a "proffer,"-- i.e. , an offer from Pan Am to be transferred to Delta. These proffers had been given before Pan Am realized that it lacked a sufficient number of qualified pilots to send to Delta. The Duke pilots alleged that ALPA should first have ensured that Pan Am honored the existing proffers before implementing a training program."

So what in that lawsuit is a complaint against the actions of the DAL MEC or DAL pilots? Nothing. Your anger is misplaced.

 

[BeCareful!]

G4G5:

You and I are very different people. I don't believe a pilot's worth is contingent on the financial health of his employer and I'm proving it. One might think after my experience with TWA that as an AWA pilot in the catbird seat I would wish to extract my revenge on ATA, USAir, or others. Wrong. The last thing I want to see happen to others is what happened to TWA. There are many at AWA who think as you do so I face an uphill battle on my own turf. So be it. We ex-TWAers at AWA, and there's a bunch, are banding together to lobby our union leadership on the importance of not extracting a windfall from our USAir brethren should this thing come to pass. What exactly constitutes a windfall will be a point of contention and if necessary it should go to binding arbitration. That's the fair way to do this.

Oh, and Pan Am was parted out whereas TWA was bought whole minus several aircraft. Not a relevant comparison, though I agree DAL did not deal with them kindly.

TWA Dude -

I, for one, really appreciate your reasoned tone and realistic expectations. This merger talk always brings out the worst in pilots, and quickly so.

I'm a U furloughee, working as a J4J at PSA. Who knows what will happen with any of us furloughees, but I know of no precedent that would keep us from being recalled to whatever is the surviving entity. If so, I certainly look forward to working with people like you.

This hook up certainly is unique. While most mergers and acquisitions involve a clearly stronger carrier overtaking a clearly weaker one, such is not really the case here. While every keyboard commando here on FltInfo can tell you that U is in terrible financial health, US Airways generates some 2.5 times the revenue of AWA. U has 20 wide bodies flying profitable trans-Atlantic routes. Not exactly chump change when the merger committees look at each other and ask: What are you bringing to the party? Certainly, there's ample opportunity for an AWA pilot to receive a "windfall" in all of this, and I suppose there are a few west coast U pilots left for which a windfall could be viewed as a PHX base for their last four years in this crazy job. Either way, I find all of this chest pounding fairly ridiculous considering the balance that our carriers have in terms of routes and fleets and cash on hand. Nothing that a few fences and some reasonable slotting here and there shouldn't be able to fix. But, then again, there's always Human Nature to factor in.......

 

[m80drvr]

This hook up certainly is unique. While most mergers and acquisitions involve a clearly stronger carrier overtaking a clearly weaker one, such is not really the case here. While every keyboard commando here on FltInfo can tell you that U is in terrible financial health, US Airways generates some 2.5 times the revenue of AWA. U has 20 wide bodies flying profitable trans-Atlantic routes. Not exactly chump change when the merger committees look at each other and ask: What are you bringing to the party?

Dude step away from the crack pipe. U is in its second bankrupcy in as many years, it's costs are still out of control (i'm not referring to pilot pay), they have not come up with a workable exit plan, they are losing money by the second and correct me if I am wrong but U is parking aircraft as it's pilots retire. I believe their fleet plans forcast till 2007 shows about 30 hulls parked.

AWA is receiving new aircraft, making money (all be it a small amount), and has a very competitive cost structure.

I'm confused as to how much leverage 20 trans atlantic aircraft will have in this deal.

Also. who cares it U has 2.5 times the revenue as AWA It also has 4 time the expenses, hence the millions of dollars it loses every day.

Before you flame me be aware I also worked for U and still have many friends there I'm just calling them as I see them.

MD

 

[G4G5]

FDJ2]Nothing you quoted supports this conclusion. I correctly stated :
"Some PAA pilots (Duke/Spellacy)brought a lawsuit forward on the integration process, none of it was based on the actions of DAL or the DAL MEC, it was all based on the actions of the PAA MEC."

G4G5​

THIS IS NOT THE DAL/PAN AM SENIORITY INTERGRATION LAWSUIT, its a different lawsuit

The entire lawsuit was driven by the actions of the PAA MEC.

Here is the cause of action which you quoted:

"Accusing the MEC pilot members of feathering their own nests, two groups of pilots sued ALPA and the individual members of the MEC.
The first group, the "Spellacy" pilots, commenced an action in the United States District Court for the District of Connecticut (Dorsey, J. ), alleging that ALPA and the MEC breached their duties of fair representation by adopting the short course training plan. The Spellacy pilots asserted that ALPA and the MEC violated their duties because: (1) the PWA required that training opportunities be awarded on a strict seniority basis and ALPA failed to protect the pilots' contractual rights; and (2) ALPA and the MEC advocated the short course plan so that they could secure pilot positions for themselves.

The second group, the "Duke" pilots, filed an action in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York (Weinstein, J. ). These pilots each held a "proffer,"-- i.e. , an offer from Pan Am to be transferred to Delta. These proffers had been given before Pan Am realized that it lacked a sufficient number of qualified pilots to send to Delta. The Duke pilots alleged that ALPA should first have ensured that Pan Am honored the existing proffers before implementing a training program."

So what in that lawsuit is a complaint against the actions of the DAL MEC or DAL pilots? Nothing. Your anger is misplaced.

G4G5
I don't have any anger, all I am trying to do is try to figure out where you are coming from. How can you say that DAl purchased Pan Am's European routes and the Shuttle and then say that the DAL pilots had nothing to do with it.

First off the law suite you refer to has nothing to do with the intergration. The Law Suit was bought about by Pan Am pilots who felt that they are not treated correctly by the PAN AM MEC. Once again 30 non 727 Pan Am pilots were able to go down to the school house and get requaled out of seniotity and without a proper bid. 6 out of 7 Pan Am MEC members were on that list and were transferd over to the DAL seniority list. This is after they lied to the Pan Am membership that they were working on an alternative intergration deals(they were not). Subsequently the two pilots the YOU refered to brought forth the law suit.

Their is ANOTHER law suit completly different from the one you refer to, that was the Pan Am pilots suing for their seniority against DAL.

I used this example because YOU brought forth the names as an example.


I will make it real clear.
Delta set the date of intergration NOT Pan Am.
On 7/20/91 the Pan Am CP requested more time for a seniority bid. Delta would not change the date. The pilots being the only union on the property were fully aware that they did not want to let senior pan am pilots bid the A310's. Hence the need for the hard date. DAL mgt was taking a 45% equity share so their time line was flexible.

"Pan Am rejected the strict seniority plan. Pan Am explained that it could not accept the long course proposal because: (1) there was insufficient time to train the requisite number of pilots before Delta's deadline;"


After the Delta pilots said No. Then the Pan Am pilots went back and asked for Date of Hire intergration

On July 31, 1991, Delta rejected the System Seniority Transfer Plan, explaining that training after November 1, 1991 conflicted with its plan for a "turn-key" operation and would result in too many senior pilots being hired, adversely affecting the normal Delta cross-section and profile of airmen.



( I am not yelling I just can not figure out how to make this normal size)
Once again I will ask these simple questions
Who do you think came up with just taking the A310 pilots only?
Who do you think came up with the 1:7 merger ratio and the fences?

At the time the Pan Am pilots were making much less in wages then the DAL pilots. If the Delta pilots had nothing to do with it, then why did it take OVER FOUR YEARS for the Pan Am pilots to make DAL wages? Do you think that they did this to themselves?

At AA the APA fought to get every TWA pilot on to AA pilot wages. I can't quite say the same for the Delta pilots.

Once again, I am only trying to correct your version of History with reality. The Delta pilots had everything to do with the royal screwing the Pan Am pilots got.

 

[BeCareful!]

AWA is receiving new aircraft, making money (all be it a small amount), and has a very competitive cost structure.

I'm confused as to how much leverage 20 trans atlantic aircraft will have in this deal.
MD

That you're confused is obvious. Do you know how many new aircraft US Airways Group has received over the past 18 months? Clue: It's waaay more than AWA has received.

Crack ain't my problem, but perhaps you should ease up on USA Today and the Internet.

 

[TheDonger]

Do the Embraers REALLY count?

 

[PHXFLYR]

Are you counting the Em170's when you talk about new U a/c?


PHXFLYR

 

[BeCareful!]

Do the Embraers REALLY count?

Well, yeah, but a fleet of CRJ's roughly half the size of AWA's entire fleet has also been purchased/leased. That's a lot of $$.

US Airways alledged financial weakness is one of the industry's oldest illusions. It's called: good accounting.

 

[m80drvr]

You have to be kidding me that you are counting RJ's as mainline fleet. Some of the pilots at MDA are Allegheny and Piedmont pilots do they get a number at the new airline, if so are they ahead of you and I because they are currently flying ???????? MDA is a commuter airline NOT part of Mainline USAir. Maybe I should count the Mesa Rj's that are operating under AWA.


It kills me that Pilots count RJ's when it suites them but the rest of the time they loathe them

By the way I got those fleet numbers from the USAir section of the alpa site AND from a current captain at U. I gave up believing USA today years ago.




"US Airways alledged financial weakness is one of the industry's oldest illusions. It's called: good accounting"

Wow dude you have to be kidding me with the above statement. But after reading your last few posts I understand.

MD

 

[FDJ2]

I am not yelling I just can not figure out how to make this normal size)
Once again I will ask these simple questions
Who do you think came up with just taking the A310 pilots only?

I'm not sure what you mean by this question, but first of all I would state that it makes sense that if Delta (not Delta Pilots) only wanted to purchase a limited number of aircraft, then it makes sense that Delta (again not the Delta Pilots) only wanted to take a proportional number of pilots. Again that is an agreement between the managements of PAA and DAL.

Who do you think came up with the 1:7 merger ratio and the fences?

There has to be some semblance of integration, DOH means nothing. It looks like the PAA pilots were integrated into the seniority list. Probably in order to comply with the ALPA merger policy that protects career expectations (what were the PAA pilots expectations) and no windfalls at the expense of other pilots.

At the time the Pan Am pilots were making much less in wages then the DAL pilots. If the Delta pilots had nothing to do with it, then why did it take OVER FOUR YEARS for the Pan Am pilots to make DAL wages? Do you think that they did this to themselves?

Don't you think this might have more to do with management then with the Delta Pilots. You're jumping to conclusions that make no sense what so ever.

At AA the APA fought to get every TWA pilot on to AA pilot wages. I can't quite say the same for the Delta pilots.

At AA they bought all of TWA, that was not the case at PAA. You'll have to do better then come up with an apples to oranges comparison.

Once again, I am only trying to correct your version of History with reality.

No I'd say you have clearly misplaced your anger. Pilots don't make the decision as to who or how much of an airline a company purchaces.

I leave you with the last word.