USAir/TA10 Award

[BeCareful!]

hahahahaha....you guys are such morons.

I'll post later when I f'ing feel like wasting time on this cesspool. Drvr, you just spout away here on FlightMisInfo all you want. Take GREAT pride in it, young man. Cut/paste and save it for your grandchildren. They'll be so proud of how you sat there, armed only with your keyboard, and fought mightly for that A330 seat that was so obvoiusly not part of your pre-merger expectations.

 

[get2flyin]

hahahahaha....you guys are such morons.

I'll post later when I f'ing feel like wasting time on this cesspool. Drvr, you just spout away here on FlightMisInfo all you want. Take GREAT pride in it, young man. Cut/paste and save it for your grandchildren. They'll be so proud of how you sat there, armed only with your keyboard, and fought mightly for that A330 seat that was so obvoiusly not part of your pre-merger expectations.

I don't think anyone really cares if you think it's worth wasting your time or not. If you have something to post, do so. If you don't, then go look at porn or whatever else you do when you're not spreading drivel.

Drvr, the only reason to save these posts for your grand kids is so they can see how BeCareful refuses to use spell check.

Truthfully, why are we arguing this same crap over and over again? Nobody is going to change anyone's mind and the TA-10 this is West specific, so why do you East guys even care?

 

[PuffDriver]

I believe those loans were paid back by then

Nope. Paid back post merger. It doesn't really matter anyway. The point was that although USAirways was in BK, they were perfectly viable. Although AWA was "perfectly viable", they weren't stellar.

The arbitrator blew it. No doubt, else the company would be completely merged. The old saying is that fairness is when both sides are pissed off. Well, one side was so pissed, they actually garnered the votes to vote out ALPA. Not an easy thing to do.

Both pilot groups can share blame, no doubt, but the majority rests with the arbitrator in an unfair award.

 

[NEDude]

Most of the whining Westies on here are 2005 probation pilots that got hired and then got placed ahead of roughly 800 East pilots. The lottery ticket they thought they had is getting really tough to cash and they are frustrated that they are still stuck out West and now furloughed. AWA is doing roughly 25% flying of former East routes. (PHL-SEA), all the while there flying has gone away. PHX-BDL, RDU are just a few of many many routes they have given up. LAS closed. With out the EAST flying AWA would be toast. The flying and jobs AWA brought to the merger are gone.


Other airlines back in 2005 that was hiring and had many airplanes on order were Skybus,United, ATA and AWA. Airlines like Delta, CAL, NWA and USAIR were downsizing and all had pilots on furlough. So, I guess if you are hiring and have airplanes on order and have a one time profit, that must mean you really are safe.

M

CAL opened their application window in April 2005 and was inviting people to interviews in August 2005.

 

[BoilerUP]

UPS was also hiring in late 2004 and all throughout 2005...over 300 newhires in 2005 alone, IIRC.

 

[TWA Dude]

The point was that although USAirways was in BK, they were perfectly viable.

I'm curious which dictionary you use to define "viable". From m-w.com:
3 a : capable of working, functioning, or developing adequately <viable alternatives> b : capable of existence and development as an independent unit <the colony is now a viable state> c (1) : having a reasonable chance of succeeding <a viable candidate> (2) : financially sustainable <a viable enterprise>

According to most analysts and Doug Parker US Airways was not a viable company in May, 2005. Sure, maybe some white knight could've come out of nowhere and saved it but how often does that happen?

The arbitrator blew it.

Of course by "blew it" you mean didn't rule the way you would've. Such an erudite opinion you have.

Both pilot groups can share blame, no doubt,...

Just for fun I'll go ahead and ask you exactly how the West is to blame for this mess.

... but the majority rests with the arbitrator in an unfair award.

Guess what? When you allow a third part to make a decision there's a risk you may not like the result. That's why you agree IN ADVANCE to make it binding arbitration. That way even if one side isn't happy they can't demand a do-over. Otherwise there's no point in going to arbitration. Do you disagree?

 

[PuffDriver]

I'm curious which dictionary you use to define "viable".

I am not using a dictionary. I am using the FACT that USAirways was not in CH 7. IOW NOT liquidating. You cannot seem to grasp that fact. Exit financing grew on trees in 2005. Everything else is just red herring in order to try and justify an unfair award.

Of course by "blew it" you mean didn't rule the way you would've.

No, you're not listening. He "blew it" not because I think so, but because so many other arbitrations have come out lopsided, unfair, B.S. to one pilot group or another. Yet they grumble, bitch, moan, and continue with their lives. This award actually drove a group to incite a movement, and vote ALPA off of a property.

Just for fun I'll go ahead and ask you exactly how the West is to blame for this mess.

Is the group cohesive? Is the single seniority list in effect? Nope. It takes two to tangle. The west is JUST as hard headed as the east.

Guess what? When you allow a third part to make a decision there's a risk you may not like the result.

Very true. However, there is a difference between not liking the decision, and being so incensed that you resort to the nuclear option.

Otherwise there's no point in going to arbitration. Do you disagree?

I don't disagree, unless there is enough egregiousness in the award that there is evidence of bias, rules not being followed, or some other core. Courts have appeals processes. This is the manner in which one side chose to appeal the process. Some find their actions deplorable. So be it. I happen to not be one of them. Deal with it. Either way, you are where you are. Somebody better figure out something.

 

[usav8r]

Dead horse

What was this thread about again?

 

[Instigator]

What was this thread about again?

CAL going to Auckland. Oh wait...

 

[TWA Dude]

I am not using a dictionary.  I am using the [B]FACT[/B] that USAirways was not in CH 7.  IOW NOT liquidating.[/QUOTE]You should use a dictionary because your definition of "viable" is incorrect.  Even a company not in bankruptcy could be considered nonviable.[quote]Exit financing grew on trees in 2005.[/quote]...yet somehow US Airways was unable to get any.  US Airways hadn't even filed an exit plan let alone lined up the financing.  Your revisionist view of history isn't convincing.[quote]Everything else is just red herring in order to try and justify an unfair award.[/quote]I don't have justify anything.  Unfairness is purely subjective.  Oh, and don't forget that even the East's pilot neutral agreed almost entirely with Nicolau.  Since you're such a good judge of unfairness perhaps United or Continental will choose you to be theirs.[quote]No, you're not listening.  He "blew it" not because I think so, but because so many other arbitrations have come out lopsided, unfair, B.S. to one pilot group or another.[/quote]That's circuitous logic.  You say it's not because you think so but because you think so.  Try again.[quote]  This award actually drove a group to incite a movement, and vote ALPA off of a property.[/quote]Nope, a skewed sense of entitlement drove ALPA off the property.  Most Easties (and you if you're not one) fail to recognize that their careers were ruined by management and bankruptcy courts.  Nicolau didn't make that ruin, he [I]sustained[/I] it.[quote]Is the group cohesive?  Is the single seniority list in effect?  Nope.  It takes two to tangle.  The west is JUST as hard headed as the east.[/quote]My question was how the West was to blame and that's your answer?  That's like Saddam Hussein blaming Kuwait for the 1990 invasion.  The East is the aggressor and the West is the victim.  Nice try blaming the victim.[quote]
Very true.  However, there is a difference between not liking the decision, and being so incensed that you resort to the nuclear option.  [/quote]I tried looking that up in ALPA Merger Policy, the NMB, and the NLRB, and gosh-darn it I just couldn't find it.  Now I know you must be an Eastie since you're making up rules as you go along.  Mr. Seham, is that you?[quote]I don't disagree, unless there is enough egregiousness in the award that there is evidence of bias, rules not being followed, or some other core.   Courts have appeals processes.  This is the manner in which one side chose to appeal the process.[/quote]What in the sam hill are you talking about?  There's no court case against the Nicolau Award and there never has been.[quote]Somebody better figure out something.[/quote]Hey, we're working on it.  Fighting against the tyranny of the majority isn't easy, you know.