Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

USAir East West NIC Award Resolution? Very soon!

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web
We will work together as one.

APA Negotiating Committee Update: October 30, 2012

Fellow pilots,

This update will be somewhat longer than normal as we try to give you as much information and perspective as possible regarding the current circumstances.

Sometimes, at the end-game, things tend to get quiet, as the parties struggle to determine whether a deal is genuinely attainable. Dynamics at the negotiating table are an endless emotional rollercoaster. Sometimes things get so contentious that we need to take healthy breaks and park certain subjects and even change up the personalities on both sides to keep things moving forward in a professional manner. At other times, we build momentum and a healthy amount of progress is made.

Suffice it to say that we (the Negotiating Committee, National Officers and Board of Directors) hear you loud and clear. With your vote, you are the final authority in the decision-making process. We are mindful of that fact every day we spend at the negotiating table.

In this current round of negotiations, we have confirmed what many of you believed — that there are improvements to be had compared to management's “last, best, final offer” (LBFO). A number of those improvements have already surfaced at the table. By rejecting the original TA, the membership gave us the tools to be able to go further in the bankruptcy process than any other pilot group has dared to go. Ultimately, we believe management will make the moves they need to make on the remaining key deal points so we can embrace an industry-standard contract and look forward to rebuilding our careers.

Reaching a deal in bankruptcy means we strive to achieve the maximum value possible in a process where an agreement must ultimately be approved by a bankruptcy judge.

Before approving an agreement, a judge must evaluate a number of legal standards and inputs from the debtor and the Unsecured Creditors’ Committee (UCC). On a number of issues, the UCC recognizes our genuine concerns and they continue to confirm their commitment to our 13.5 percent equity claim, as long as an agreement is reached “promptly and such agreement is within reasonably justifiable economic parameters.”

To receive bankruptcy court approval for our claim, we need to reach an agreement approved by the bankruptcy court judge. If no agreement is reached, AMR has the right to impose work rules and we must litigate for our claim. While we may be ultimately successful, this approach carries risks, especially without the weight of the UCC on our side and in light of some difficult case law.

So what are the options ahead?

At the risk of stating the obvious, that "Green Book with Delta Rates" or "Delta Rates on Date-of-Signing With No Gives on Scope" are things we would love to deliver in this process, but not anything we can realistically expect the UCC to support or the bankruptcy judge to approve. The only path to those goals would be to acknowledge that we won't achieve an agreement inside bankruptcy, and that we are willing to accept whatever rocky ride lies ahead and whatever time it takes to reach those goals. That is a potential path, but it carries with it a great deal of risk and uncertainty. We must all decide on our path together.

We should be mindful that our advisers tell us the current market appears to value our equity claim at a level that would provide a six-figure cash payout per pilot on average. Our advisers anticipate that such a payout could be realized at or near AMR’s emergence from bankruptcy for those pilots who elect for a payout at that time. We’re unwilling to accept any deal based solely upon an equity stake, but part of the decision involves weighing the potential "bird in hand" against the "path less traveled" where we would have to litigate for the claim.

Is an industry-standard contract achievable inside bankruptcy? Our opinion is yes. But we don't want to play cute with words or try to spin things, so let's review the surreal process over the past 12 months and examine what "industry standards" include.

When AMR filed Chapter 11 bankruptcy, we were flooded with phone calls and e-mails asking us how much we thought the pay cuts would be. After negotiations with AMR in February and March 2012 failed to produce any results, US Airways management entered the picture and we negotiated a conditional labor agreement (CLA) with them that served several purposes. The CLA preserves a very substantial amount of the Green Book, with nearly half of the concessions accounted for by freezing our defined-benefit pension plan. The CLA is a historic document and puts more tangible pressure on AMR management than any other labor group has ever been able to exert on a management inside the bankruptcy process.

Following a very contentious court process in May 2012, we entered into court-directed mediated talks with AMR. No agreement was reached and we were left with an LBFO to take to the membership for a vote. The overwhelming “no” vote was less about the contents of the potential contract ― and more a collective decision to go down a different path than the one put in front of us. We are now approaching the point where we will need to collectively make another major decision together.

"Industry standard" likely connotes different things to different pilots. Universally, we all seem to agree that we want Delta pay rates—pay rates that more appropriately compensate us for the enormous responsibility we assume each time we sit down in a cockpit. From there, it gets more complex.

The following are elements of the tentative agreement we all recently voted upon that could be fairly characterized as industry standard:

- Green Book duty rigs (close to Delta)
- No night pay (same as Delta and United)
- International override only paid for trips flown (same as Delta and United)
- Frozen defined benefit plan with 14% follow-on plan (vs. terminated plan and 15% at Delta, terminated plan with 16% at United, 9.2% 401(k) match at Southwest)
- Distance learning paid at 1 for 3 rate (same as Delta)
- Sequence protection notification and obligation period (close approximation to Delta provisions)
- Rapid reaccrual limited to hours used (same as carriers who have rapid reaccrual)
- Elimination of 46-hour max sick charge on reserve (other carriers charge for trips missed. Delta has a unique annual sick program)
- Sick sellback at retirement to a health retirement account up to $25,000 (no retiree medical at Delta)
- PBS (Delta, United, Continental, America West)
- 84-hour monthly average line value (same as Delta, lower than United, Southwest, FedEx, UPS, US Airways and America West)
- Active medical cost-sharing approximately 20% (same range as Delta)
- Pay banding (yes at United, no at Delta)
- We were the only pilot group with no contractual sick verification
- Total vacation value at 10-year point and 24-year point, in line with industry average for legacy carriers
- Reserve 18 days for 73 hours (most carriers 18 days or more. Industry average 18.6)
- Scope: 79-seat jets (Delta, 76-seat jets, 86k max MTOW)
- Codeshare: 50% limit of domestic ASMs (Delta fairly restrictive, United must only notify union of code-shares)

Our point is that a pursuit of Delta pay rates must be accompanied by an intellectually honest acknowledgement that many provisions in the Delta contract (and most likely the new United agreement) are concessions from the Green Book. We encourage all pilots to review the Delta Contract Comparison for more details on what constitutes “industry standard.”

So what’s next?

There is potential for an agreement with AMR in the days ahead, but it all comes down to a number of moves management will need to make on key deal points to bring us into the realm of industry standard. If an agreement comes to fruition and is approved by the membership, we would secure the claim. We would also strengthen our position on the UCC to influence strategic alternatives, the selection of future management and the makeup of the reorganized airline’s board of directors. Our advisers have had extensive discussions with large financial creditors that hold substantial unsecured claims and are confident in the alignment of interests around the need for the appointment of a new board of directors at the airline. The board would then appoint management to lead the reorganized company.

We all need to evaluate any agreement on its merits and as something we might live with for some time. We also need to view an agreement as a potential path to the US Airways CLA. Your Board of Directors has given the Negotiating Committee clear guidance on what to pursue at the bargaining table. The onus is now on management to take the conversation where it should have gone a long time ago.

We are proud to represent all of you at the negotiating table in this very challenging process.

Your APA Negotiating Committee
 
We will have enormous strength in numbers through unity.

AA:10,734 / US:5,146 / 15,880 Total
AA:8,481 / US:5,099 / 13,580 Active
AA:1,685 Furlough (650 have yet to be offered recall ) / US:47 (all have bypassed)
 
Noticed how Dug won't negotiate seniority unless he's sure a judge won't slap an injunction halting the process? If you actually read the Silver verdict you'll notice she didn't give Dug the one thing he was asking for: protection. USAPA has nobody to negotiate seniority with!
.

+1......That is exactly right.

You have consistently shown a good grasp on the legal concepts and rule of law.
 
Why am disgusting for quoting Judge Rosyln O. Silver's Words?

I sourced these quotes for a reason—Don't kill the Messenger TWA Dude!

“It is unlikely the West Pilots could successfully allege claims against US Airways merely for not insisting that USAPA continue to advocate for the Nicolau Award.” ( Page 8, Line 12-14)

“USAPA’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty of fair representation provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose.” (Page 9, Line 1-5)

“Seniority rights are creations of the collective bargaining agreement and so may be revised or abrogated by later negotiated changes in this agreement." (Page 7, Line 7-8)

US Airways “must negotiate with USAPA and it need not insist on any particular seniority regime.” (Page 1, Line 23-24)

“There is no obvious impediment to USAPA and US Airways negotiating and agreeing upon any seniority regime they wish.” ( Page 7, Line 4-6)

http://leonidas.cactuspilots.us/Declatory_Relief/Doc193_Order.pdf
 
I disagree with USAirways argument. Sabre rattling cannot be equated with the act of running someone through. USAPA has to actually perform the act to be hld accountable for the action (however they have absorbed millions like a sponge and performed miserably, producing nothing).

Nevertheless, the east feels that throwing money down that rat hole is some sort of investment.
 


The lawyers for USAir are either the most incompetent boobs or the most despicable, conniving, manipulators.

The USAir lawyers are completely ignorant (incompetent) or flatly denying (despicable) the fact that THE COMPANY MUST NEGOTIATE WITH USAPA to bring about a possible JCBA for presentation to the ENTIRE membership for ratification.... NO WHERE did the 9th or judge Silver EVER say that USAPA and the so-called West pilots were expected to negotiate at all about anything. But the 9th and Silver both said that the COMPANY and USAPA must negotiate.. and this foot dragging by DUI and his merry band of bankruptcy paying marauders is way out of bounds.

Sending crap like the excerpt below to the court that told them... the COMPANY MUST NEGOTIATE WITH USAPA... incompetent boobs or conniving manipulators.. either way it is disgusting!!


"the seniority dispute between the West Pilots and USAPA – a dispute which, as demonstrated by the new developments described herein, is impossible to resolve through the negotiation process."
(No ******************** it is impossible for the pilots to resolve this until they have a JCBA to VOTE ON, on that the company refuses to negotiate on, in violation of the 9th order and Silver's ORDER)



"The recent correspondence between the West Pilots and USAPA, exchanged after the Court’s summary judgment decision, makes it abundantly clear that the seniority dispute between USAPA and the West Pilots is intractable, and will not be resolved in the collective bargaining negotiations that have been conducted with USAPA for more than four years without success." (Incompetent boobs or conniving manipulators---The COMPANY has NOT negotiated with USAPA for any amount of time, much less four years. They refuse to come to the table and pretend that USAPA and the West Pilots are the rightful place to negotiate... HOGWASH is for PIGS.)

:D
 
Last edited:
The lawyers for USAir are either the most incompetent boobs or the most despicable, conniving, manipulators.
The latter. Just like USAPA.
The USAir lawyers are completely ignorant (incompetent) or flatly denying (despicable) the fact that THE COMPANY MUST NEGOTIATE WITH USAPA to bring about a possible JCBA for presentation to the ENTIRE membership for ratification....
Um, if they "must" then why aren't we in JCBA talks right now? Hint: because the NMB parked us due to an obvious impasse. Judge Silver's ruling has NOT eliminated that impasse. You've read her ruling but apparently failed to understand its meaning.

When your lawyer Lee Sleazum argued in front of Judge Wake that USAPA was only trying to eliminate a seniority impasse everyone laughed -- because it was obvious that impasse was USAPA's creation. NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE! You may claim USAPA has no fear of a DFR suit but Dug certainly has made a good case for his fear. I needn't quote that part from Silver's ruling, do I?
 
The latter. Just like USAPA.Um, if they "must" then why aren't we in JCBA talks right now? Hint: because the NMB parked us due to an obvious impasse. Judge Silver's ruling has NOT eliminated that impasse. You've read her ruling but apparently failed to understand its meaning.

When your lawyer Lee Sleazum argued in front of Judge Wake that USAPA was only trying to eliminate a seniority impasse everyone laughed -- because it was obvious that impasse was USAPA's creation. NOTHING HAS CHANGED SINCE! You may claim USAPA has no fear of a DFR suit but Dug certainly has made a good case for his fear. I needn't quote that part from Silver's ruling, do I?

Its nothing more than another stunt by DUI and his friends.

If Marty could get the courts to force USAPA to abide by the Nic then Marty would be writing to the courts, but instead he is writing letters to USAPA begging them to capitulate and agree to use the seniority proposal that is preferred by his clients.

Sooner or later a majority of the West is going to realize their lawyer is stringing them along, for crying out loud he isn't even able to get off his knees in USAPA's HQ. He can't even get in the door at a court house.
 
Its nothing more than another stunt by DUI and his friends.

If Marty could get the courts to force USAPA to abide by the Nic then Marty would be writing to the courts, but instead he is writing letters to USAPA begging them to capitulate and agree to use the seniority proposal that is preferred by his clients.

Sooner or later a majority of the West is going to realize their lawyer is stringing them along, for crying out loud he isn't even able to get off his knees in USAPA's HQ. He can't even get in the door at a court house.

You're on crack. The Company knows any list other than the Nic is a DFR. It's absurd that they have to FIRST knowingly break the law and be LIABLE for it before the courts will enforce the law they told them they were breaking. The Nic isn't going away. Ever. If the Company agrees to the slightest change,USAPA created condition or restriction, we are going to sue the living sh@t out of them. Promise. We will win to. It's obvious. They know it. They have to negotiate with USAPA...THEY DO NOT HAVE TO NEGOTIATE SENIORITY.

I wonder how the NMB meeting will go:laugh:

We told you to get real comfortable on LOA93...here's your proof. Choke on it.
 
Sooner or later a majority of the West is going to realize their lawyer is stringing them along, ...
I love it when Easties try to warn us about our own lawyers. It means you feel threatened. (And BTW, remember how we warned you about Lee Sleazum? What happened to him anyway?)

Unlike the extortion money you force us to pay for lawyers working against us, the Leonidas lawyers are supported only through voluntary contributions. As soon as we feel we're not being represented properly the money will stop. Feel better now?
 
You guys need to give it up, it is a pointless waste of time to argue back and forth on here. Go invest your time doing something productive.

The resolution sure as hell is not going to come from FI.COM
 
You guys need to give it up, it is a pointless waste of time to argue back and forth on here. Go invest your time doing something productive.

The resolution sure as hell is not going to come from FI.COM

Yup... The end game is near.

Grab some pop corn and chill.
 
"being “bound” by the Transition Agreement has very little meaning in the context
of the present case. It is undisputed that the Transition Agreement can be modified at any
time “by written agreement of [USAPA] and the [US Airways].” (Doc. 156-3 at 38).
Moreover, USAPA and US Airways are now engaged in negotiations for an entirely new
collective bargaining agreement and there is no obvious impediment to USAPA and US
Airways negotiating and agreeing upon any seniority regime they wish. As explained
by the Ninth Circuit, “seniority rights are creations of the collective bargaining agreement,
and so may be revised or abrogated by later negotiated changes in this agreement.” Hass v.
Darigold Dairy Products Co., 751 F.2d 1096, 1099 (9th Cir. 1985). And a union “may
renegotiate seniority provisions of a collective bargaining agreement, even though the
resulting changes are essentially retroactive or affect different employees unequally.”

...
"it is unlikely the West Pilots could successfully allege claims against US Airways merely for not insisting that USAPA continue to advocate for the Nicolau Award."
 
I don't know why you keep posting quotes you don't understand. Yes, you can negotiate seniority but FIRST you need a) somebody to negotiate with and b) a legitimate union purpose to do so. You have neither. It's like Judge Silver has given you a lottery ticket you can't cash!
 

Latest posts

Latest resources

Back
Top