USAir (east) May bid includes 160 recalls

[Lampshade]

Found on another message board.

To All Furloughed Pilots

The Union would like all furloughed pilots to know that the Company has been sending out illegal “recall” notices which are not in compliance with our collective bargaining agreement.

The Company’s “recall” notices state that:
"Your seniority number falls within the range of those who may possible be
recalled in the near future. In order to plan for the orderly return of recalled
pilots to US Airways, we are asking that you indicate your intention to return to US Airways should you be able to hold a position in the upcoming indoctrination class…Pursuant to Section 23, you must notify this office of your intentions to return or decline recall within seven calendar days of delivery of this letter."

In contrast to the Company’s “recall” notice, which deals in the realm of “possible” and “near future,” Section 23 contains very specific mandates that must be included in a recall notice. The relevant portions of Section 23 state:

"A pilot shall be notified by the Company by "Reply-Requested Telegram" or "Certified Letter - Return Receipt Requested" of his reassignment to duty with the Company. After delivery of such notice to the last address on file with the Company, the pilot shall be allowed a period of seven (7) days in which to notify the Company whether or not he intends to return to active duty. "

Note that our Contract refers to “reassignment to duty” not “may possible[y] be recalled in the near future.” Since there is no reassignment to duty, our pilots should have no obligation to respond to the Company. Unfortunately, as is often the case, neither the Contract language nor our discussions with the Company have yet persuaded the Company of the error of their ways, so the Union was forced to file an MEC grievance.

In the meantime, until this dispute over the illegal “recall” notice is resolved either through the grievance process or by an arbitrator at a System Board Hearing, the Company is apparently attaching consequences for failure to respond to their “recall” notice within seven days. Due to the constraints of the Railway Labor Act, to protect your rights to recall and the seniority list, you should respond to the “recall” notice in a timely fashion (i.e. seven days) in order to protect your rights to recall and your seniority.

Under section 23 of the Contract, you have the right to bypass recall, but you must notify the Company of your election to bypass recall. Additionally, the Union recommends that pilots electing to bypass recall do so only for each specific recall notice. The Company will then be required to re-contact you for each succeeding recall of pilots. If you have additional concerns about your “recall,” contact the MEC Grievance Committee or the Representation staff at the Pittsburgh MEC office.

This is probably the fastest way to get guys recalled due to the high number of pilots bypassing. Sending out offical recall notices, waiting the required time for a reply, not getting any takers, start process all over again vs. doing a shout out and see who is interested. Congrats to everyone returning.

 

[Iflewjetz]

A guy in my class 3 numbers ahead of me got the letter, but I didnt. I am a 1/4/99 hire. He had a good quote, "well, somebody had to get the last one". I am going to bypass anyway until the AWA integration goes through, so I can look forward to getting stapled. Click, click.

 

[Iflewjetz]

Scratch That

Disregard my last post. My letter came in the mail today Friday 1/26. I just went to the P.O. to get it. I am going to defer for awhile until I see about the merger with AWA and/or Delta, and also the age 60 rule.

Here is what it says:

US Airways is pleased to notify you that we will once again begin recalling pilots from furlough beginning February 2007. Your seniority number falls within the range of those who may possibly be recalled in the near future. In order to plan for the orderly return of recalled pilots to US Airways, we are asking that you indicate your intention to return to US Airways should you be able to hold a position in the upcoming recall indoctrination class.

We have included applicable excerpts from Section 23 of the US Airways Pilots Working Agreement for your review. You must notify this office of your intentions to return or decline recall withing seven calender days.

It just goes on to say let us know in seven days so they can hurry and do this.

 

[JetMonkey]

If there at the 1/99's then it looks like they still have around 1,000 more names to go through before they start with the "decide now or forever hold your peace" calls.

 

[BenderGonzales]

"If there at the 1/99's then it looks like they still have around 1,000 more names to go through before they start with the "decide now or forever hold your peace" calls."

Not exactly. Remember the furloughees can bypass the E190 indefinitely. Most of us were furloughed in late 01 and 02. So we've been out of the USAir business for half a decade.

The E190 F/O position (with 76 hour guarantee) pays extraordinarily poorly. Most of us can not afford to accept a position on that airplane and will bypass at LEAST until a group II position is available.

 

[JetMonkey]

Ah yes of course, thanks for clearing that up. Flew with someone who had spoke to one of our CPs who mentioned that they may need to gather together some applications. Not too many takers for that kind of pay, I don't blame any of them.

 

[Swaayze]

Bender you get a letter yet? 3rd or 4th hand rumor today is that April '99 hires are getting letters - sounds a little quick to me. If only 20% are accepting for Group 2 or better then they'd better ramp up a hiring dept pretty soon for the 190s. With all the retirements in the next 18 mos prior to a likely change to age 65 there should be significant recalls for attrition (to Group 2 or better I'd think), so 190s should go very junior pretty quickly.

 

[BenderGonzales]

Nope, no letters here yet.

 

[LearLove]

After may it should be easier to see how many will come back based on which way or how the arbitrator rules, and the wait begins.......​

Seniority Arbitration Hearing
​

January 26, 2007

Today’s hearing began at 9:30 am. Before any witnesses were called the AWA pilots distributed several documents to the panel and the AAA merger committee. These included a history of ALPA policy; comments made by ALPA President, John Prater, and a copy of a bill in the Senate, both concerning age 65. Following a very brief discussion of these documents the AWA pilots continued their rebuttal case, calling Dan Akins as a witness. Mr. Akins previously testified for the AWA pilots during their case in chief. This testimony was a return to the battle of the computer models.

He testified about the pilot earning model that the AWA pilots had previously submitted into evidence. He used this model to show total pilot earnings for future years under the AAA proposed list and compared that to each groups projected earnings on a stand alone basis. It is the belief of the AWA merger committee that the AAA pilots gain in earnings, simply by virtue of this merger taking place, is more important than their position on the seniority list. They also make the assertion that their proposed list is the proper one to use because it allows the AWA pilots to increase their career earnings also relative to their stand alone earnings. This is done by the AWA pilots moving to bigger aircraft with higher pay rates than they could have in a stand alone scenario. They assert that under the AAA proposed list only the AAA pilots realize a gain and the AWA pilots lose career earnings.

There are several assumptions built into the Pilot Earning Model that the AWA pilots are relying on that call into question the validity of any result that it produces. These basic flaws came to light very clearly during Dan Katz’s cross examination of Mr. Akins. Some of the flaws revealed include the fact that in order to lower the career earnings of the AWA pilots and to inflate the career earnings of the AAA pilots, respective fleet sizes are artificially changed from reality. Additionally, this model does not move pilots into a new higher paying job as older pilots retire. The model used different wage rates for the merged and unmerged carriers. Also the model only uses a $2.00 differential pay between the Group I and Group II aircraft. The model also added the EMB 190 jobs only to the AAA side of the equation.

During his direct testimony Mr. Adkins entered material concerning the effect of changing the retirement age to 65. When attorney Katz began his cross examination in this area, arbitrator Nicolau interrupted and told Katz not to spend his time on this issue. This was an indication that the arbitrator will not be giving weight to this issue in his decision since it clearly won’t be settled prior to his ruling.

Most importantly attorney Katz showed that nearly the entire career pay differential shown in this model was due to artificial fleet size changes and artificial pay rate changes.

The AWA pilots rested their rebuttal case shortly after 12:00 pm. Mr. Nicolau spoke to the merger representatives and their attorneys after the testimony concluded. Following these discussions Mr. Nicolau advised the committees to be available for another session in February.

This concluded the scheduled seniority integration hearings. Respective counsels will address issues of clarification for the arbitration panel over a period of 30 days. Subsequent to this period, the arbitration panel will deliberate the merits of each respective proposal. They may, or may not, adopt either specific proposal opting for an arbitrated award of their own design - although largely based on issues deliberated during the arbitration hearings. Mr. Nicolau's arbitration award should not be anticipated prior to May 2007.