US Wholly-owned done for

[JetProp]

None of it makes sense. If U is in dire straits, why antagonize the WO's? I think we can do more to help if given a fair chance.

 

[328dude]

We all need to stay strong and not let managment strong arm us into a deal that is bad for our guys and preserve dads livilihood and sends ours into a downward spiral.

Believe it our not, I think all the regionals are watching what is going on at U, and we are defently in the superbowl game of regional versus mainline company's.

Stay strong boys and girls.

 

[328dude]

500: Let me know what Seigals answer was this time when you ask the question in PHL. I'd love to hear it.

 

[Slim]

If one used Siegel's (ill)logic, CMR should never have flown jets when they became the CL-65 U.S. launch customer. Prior to the time the CL-65 arrived on the property, CMR operated SF-340s, EMB-120s, Shorts 330s, EMB-110s and Metroliners. Does that mean CMR pilots were not and should not be flying any jets? I hope one of you asks that question.

The argument Siegel is using is similar to the one APA used when jets were planned for AE. It seems ALPA has Siegel right where they want him.

Good luck wholly owned pilots!

Fly safe!

 

[Vrefus]

500'AGL,

I've noticed one huge money eater for the wholly owneds. If you've been to CLT recently, to me, it seems like the ground ops is terribly over staffed. You walk by some gates on the E Concourse and there are a lot of times 6-8 agents at each podium, plus there is a constant turnover of folks. It was seeming as though every Monday there was a new class of new hires being indoc-ed.

Believe me when I say I know the situatution you're in and I feel for ya all. But this is merely just an observation on my part.

 

[canadflyau]

"If one used Siegel's (ill)logic, CMR should never have flown jets when they became the CL-65 U.S. launch customer. Prior to the time the CL-65 arrived on the property, CMR operated SF-340s, EMB-120s, Shorts 330s, EMB-110s and Metroliners. Does that mean CMR pilots were not and should not be flying any jets?"

Not only that.. look at US Air's history.. where did mainline come from? A bunch of inexperienced turbo-prop pilots... started flying jets... give me a break Siegal!!!!!!!!!

 

[LR25]

They are saying anything at this point to save this sinking ship.

They will most likely survive, but at the expence of alot of good people (regionals) and alot of talking out of both sides of the mouth proving they don't give a hoot about the people that are actually saving this airline, thats right, the WO's.

Hey, when it comes down to saying that an airline is not going to get jets becuase they cant handle them, well , after that what can you believe or take seriously from them.

 

[rightrudder]

USAir wants to cut costs: so, they fire the lowest paid employees in their system (WO fo's) and replace them with crews where each makes CA pay regardless of seat?

That makes lots of sense...no wonder USAir is going down the toilet.

RR

 

[bayoubandit]

328dude

I was just wondering if you had any idea how many AA guys you have over there and how close they are from being furloughed. I'm an AA'er and was just curious about their status. Alot of us have been trying to figure out how many guys have gotten flying jobs since last Oct. Good luck to you guys and thanks for any info!!

 

[BaPilot]

Hey, didn't Seigel Run CO-Ex.

And wasn't CO-Ex all turbo Props.

Now they have JETS and these pilots are doing a great job.

So his comments have no substance.

He's just throwing stones at WO for not caving in to his Bull S**t plan.

Maybe he should offer food stamps next time. The poor gets poorer and the rich gets richer. I guess Seigel's next plan will be to hire Day Laborers. How Low can you go....

Terminated Alg pilot.....

 

[chperplt]

Did anyone at the WOs listen to, or hear about yesterdays Maineline/ALG conference call?

Apparently Seigal said that unless the ALG pilots warm up to the jet idea, they will either be sold, or when the last lease expires, closed.

I heard this from an ALG shift manager who listened in.

 

[FR8mastr]

328 dude, Your correct we need to stick together, tell your MEC to hang tough and not give in to the extorsion that is LOA 81 PDT did and look what its gotten them. check out their code a phone from the 25th. If you need the number private e-mail me.

 

[328dude]

Unfortunatly, I don;t have the numbers of AA new hires that are going back on the street. I'll be back on property for a three day starting Monday. I'll see what I can find out.

FR8, I did listen to it today. Figuares. ....

Actually, I think that mainline managment was betting on us not to agree to the terms of this LOA. The worst thing that mainline managment wants is a wholly owned to agree to all the terms in it. They made this proposal so bad, that they know that none of the wholly owned in thier right minds are going to buy it. By the wholly owned saying no way, we gave mainline exactly what they wanted. So, now Seigal can claim he tried to work out jets for the wholly owned but they all said no. He knew if the deal was bad enough, he could count on us to say no. Now Seigal's in the clear. Now he can do what he wants with us.

I think this whole thing was a setup.

Just my thought, but turn it around and think the opposite. If Seigal never intended to give wholly owned jets, but had to include them for certain reasons, how would you include them in a deal and hope they turn it down? By giving them a deal that was so bad, they we would be stupid to take it. Mainline got exactly what they wanted. The wholly owned to refuse this Jets for Dad deal and Seigal can tell whoever that he tried to negotiate.

We got played guys.

 

[FR8mastr]

I agree it was a scam but not the way you see it. I think they wanted us to sign off on LOA 81 because if we do POT has the right to exist without being sued. Both ALG and PDT have alter ego language in our contracts, I dont know about yours. And it POT isnt an alter ego than nothing is. Seigel has stated he needs to create other companies because the WO cant do it or are too expensive to do it. So there it is a public statement that he is going outside our pilot group to get around our contracts. That is why such hardball they are really trying to break our union and every time a spineless MEC negotiates on this they break us further. It should be obvious from PDT that the only thing U wants is to sign LOA 81 accepting POT and giving up furlough protection. Once that is done so are we. We may be out eventualy anyway but you certainly dont load the gun for your executioner. We need to write to our congressmen also and let them know what is going on here. OUr only hope is to stick together (and not just on the message boards) tell your MEC to quit screwing around.

 

[NCFlyer]

FR8mastr:

Let me add a little more to your ideas if I may. I think that USAirways never intended for the WOs to agree to LOA 81. I also don’t think that you will see anyone sign off of this piece of trash document until the WOs refuse to agree to it. They are waiting to see if by chance any of the WO agree to it then they can make the argument that this is what the WO’s offered the UMEC in order to get jets. That way the UMEC can stand up tall and insist that they didn’t’ force anyone to agree to this document and ALPA National can stand with their head high and insist that they didn’t bargain away any ALPA pilot’s job. (BTW without any of those pilots represented in the negotiations) That way ALPA National, the UMEC, and the recently added CO scabs can all be poster children for what it means to be in our union.

Also in my opinion it prevents any grounds for an alter-ego carrier action by the WO’s.

Why?

Because in our contract (PDT) and I assume ALG’s as well. The alter-ego protection language is between the Piedmont Pilots represented by ALPA and “the Company” defined as Piedmont Airlines, Inc Salisbury, MD. The original POT was started with planes flown by PDT and used many other PDT assets. Key personal at POT were transferred from PDT. PDT did the scheduling, and payroll for POT as well. Making it a much more reasonable argument that POT was created simply to get around the terms of PDT’s contract. Since USAirways isn’t a signature party to our contract they are not prevented from starting 10 more regional airlines if they want to and can afford to do so. Any alter-ego action would have to come from the UMEC, and since they are the ones who came up with this garbage I sincerely doubt there will be any objection from them.

Let me also add, I don’t know what you think that the PDT MEC agreed to. We agreed to the “principle” of LOA 81. We withheld any firm commitment to the document until USAirways, the UMEC, and ALPA National finalize it. We did that to get a place at the table (so to speak), to see the cards that management was holding. I might add that had we at PDT not done so, possibly none of the WO’s would still know what U wanted from us.

 

[FR8mastr]

Now that they know, why are we still in this situation? I dont know how many different ways to define "unified" but prior to this we all agreed to speak as one, that lasted right up to the day Mgnt. said dont do it. It's still not too late. They want your furlough protection, why do you think that is? tell your mec to wake up and do what they promised, Unified WO's . Siegal has allready proven himself a bold face liar, how many more times do we need to be slapped in the face untill we say ENOUGH! It looks as if we are all thru anyway, why help them do it? I dont know about anyone else but if I'm going to be on the street in 6 months or less, I want all my pay untill then. This is union busting 101, our only hope is to stick together.