Age 60 rule, according to Len Morgan

[typhoonpilot]

We're not talking CBAs here, we're talking company financials. Pilot CBAs change every few years. That's why arbitrators don't care about them when doing seniority integrations. But the economic conditions of the carriers at the time of the merger is definitely considered, and very relevant, because it speaks to the career expectations of the pilots in a real way in real time. In our case, AirTran was a growing, profitable carrier. SWA was a stagnant carrier with little hope of growth, and likely contraction.

You're kidding right?

I don't disagree that Air Tran was doing okay, but again, that was going to be a limited time frame until they also hit a speed bump in their growth. SWA has hit that speed bump, I agree, but they are one of the best run airlines of the last 40 years and nothing was indicating they were going to contract.

TP

 

[dustoff17]

Bingo, you understand.

That is one of the main points I am trying to drive at. All carriers need to sign on to a single standard so that pilots have some support when mergers/buyouts happen.
This I am going to have to disagree with to a point. In many cases the highly experienced company employee will be integrated into the combined company at a level commensurate with that experience. If they do get laid off then they might be able to take the experience to another company and start at a mid to executive level position. The same is not true for airline pilots unless they go overseas where direct entry captain positions are available.

TP

This is one of my points: they MIGHT get a position with the new company but the expectation AND the implied "promise" of the job just isn't there. Also, the acceptance of these "integrated" employees almost always considers the existing employees and thier abilities to handle the jobs in question. Rarely will you see the aquiring company "bump" an exisiting employee in favor of a new person.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

QUESTIONS: Why should the employees/union members of B allow the addition/integration to their lineup?

They don't have a choice. Company AA has a contract with its pilots union that is binding on any successor or assign. The company that is looking to purchase/merge with them has no choice but to abide by the terms of the standing labor contracts, which includes merger protections. If they want the merger and the benefits that come with it, then they have to accept the seniority integration process, whether they want to or not.

What grounds do AA employees have to stand on in order to "force" the integration?

Two things:

1. Their own labor contract that is binding on the purchasing carrier; and

2. Federal law

Why should B employees treat AA employees with the same respect they treat their "own" IF the integration is forced upon them?

Well, that's really up to them. Treating fellow employees with disrespect usually only leads to bad things for yourself, so it's really in their best interests to be unified after the integration, but if they want to be a bunch of little girls about it, that's their choice. The law can force an integration, but it can't force people to act like adults.

There is no way the ALPA can be equitable to both sides because they jacked it up to begin with by their lack of standards in initial contract negotiations.

Well, in the case of any merger involving AMR, ALPA has nothing to do with it, because ALPA doesn't represent AMR pilots. In general, though, I disagree with your premise. ALPA does have a standard negotiated into every ALPA contract. That standard is called the Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions, 3 & 13. That standard requires binding arbitration if an agreement can't be reached, and it refers to ALPA Merger Policy for the arbitration, which references several important benchmarks, including career expectations and length of service.

Let's get away from pilots and any ALPA/union involvement here just for a minute. In ANY other industry the employees of a company under bankruptcy, being "merged" with another company, would be thrilled just to keep their jobs! Under merging (absorption) procedures there would be no expectation to keep their jobs let alone be integrated WITH seniority into the lineup of other employees. In the "real" world there are thousands of people that are starting over, not by choice but because it's what happens when companies fail. That's life.........

That's why we have unions.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

You're kidding right?

I don't disagree that Air Tran was doing okay, but again, that was going to be a limited time frame until they also hit a speed bump in their growth. SWA has hit that speed bump, I agree, but they are one of the best run airlines of the last 40 years and nothing was indicating they were going to contract.

No, I'm not kidding. It's just a fact. SWA is in the process of contracting right now, in fact. The total number of firm orders is less than the number of aircraft scheduled for sale and retirement over the coming years. And to make it worse, SWA is already overstaffed with pilots. Forget stagnation, many are worried about furloughs.

 

[dustoff17]

They don't have a choice. Company AA has a contract with its pilots union that is binding on any successor or assign. The company that is looking to purchase/merge with them has no choice but to abide by the terms of the standing labor contracts, which includes merger protections. If they want the merger and the benefits that come with it, then they have to accept the seniority integration process, whether they want to or not.

Two things:

1. Their own labor contract that is binding on the purchasing carrier; and

2. Federal law

Pretty sad. It's situations like this that makes me in favor of the new MI law and the so-called "anti-union" aerospace deal in Wichita. [of course it was only the union calling it this]

Well, that's really up to them. Treating fellow employees with disrespect usually only leads to bad things for yourself, so it's really in their best interests to be unified after the integration, but if they want to be a bunch of little girls about it, that's their choice. The law can force an integration, but it can't force people to act like adults.

Not going to argue this but it seems that the group as a whole aren't acting like adults now. Can't wait to see the integration.....

That's why we have unions.

Yeah, right. I'm sure that's why. Can't have anything to do with the MILLIONS of dollars collected each year? The Union is a business that is IN business FOR the Union. It should be treated like a business in ALL aspects. IMHO

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Pretty sad.

You think it's "pretty sad" that employees have protection from being screwed over?

Yeah, right. I'm sure that's why. Can't have anything to do with the MILLIONS of dollars collected each year? The Union is a business that is IN business FOR the Union. It should be treated like a business in ALL aspects. IMHO

 

[dustoff17]

You think it's "pretty sad" that employees have protection from being screwed over?

By whom? That's the one variable here that remains to be seen......

 

[derg]

Oh let me tell you about flying for a non-union carrier over a beer one day.

You'll love the chapter about why I resigned from th safety council because it as being used to "suspicious purposes" or when I was threatened with termination for not descending below MVA into ESC to have a peek when all of the instrument approaches were out on the word of a romper. Yup, heard that one right!

Am I happy with my union? Oh HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLZ naw, for a number of reasons. But is the answer going non? *giggle*

 

[MikeD]

You'll love the chapter about why I resigned from th safety council because it as being used to "suspicious purposes"

Suspicious and non-related crap that's hidden behind the cloak of "safety" or the safety card being pulled for same?

Never happens. C'mon. That's crazy talk.

 

[dustoff17]

Oh let me tell you about flying for a non-union carrier over a beer one day.

I would love this and I would buy! I would be interested in hearing the "user" side of a contract rather than the "designer" version.

Am I happy with my union? Oh HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLZ naw, for a number of reasons. But is the answer going non? *giggle*

Are there no means to change the things you're not happy about? I know that everyone can't/won't be happy but most of the complaints are common and members seem to be resigned that "it is what it is"...

 

[Seggy]

Are there no means to change the things you're not happy about? I know that everyone can't/won't be happy but most of the complaints are common and members seem to be resigned that "it is what it is"...

Derg can't change anything with his MEC as he doesn't have a military call sign.

 

[pete2800]

I may be a few pages late, but concerning the discussion of cognitive testing... There is a cognitive test in place already.


It's the question: "Do you really want to continue in this insane and abusive industry when you're 66, and could be sitting on a beach somewhere?" If you said yes.... then I'm forced to question your mental fortitude...

 

[derg]

Derg can't change anything with his MEC as he doesn't have a military call sign.

There's a lot of truth to it.

Plus I don't drop names.

"oh yeah, I knew XXX in the guard, we to the Colorado School for Wayward Youth too, yeh we we zombies together! He's a square jaw fast mover type, did SPC and phone tree yup yup derp derp DERRRRRRRRP"

(Then I'd be assigned committee position with no prior experience or expertise, just to get me "on the team")

 

[MikeD]

Derg can't change anything with his MEC as he doesn't have a military call sign.

There's a lot of truth to it.

Plus I don't drop names.

"oh yeah, I knew XXX in the guard, we to the Colorado School for Wayward Youth too, yeh we we zombies together! He's a square jaw fast mover type, did SPC and phone tree yup yup derp derp DERRRRRRRRP"

(Then I'd be assigned committee position with no prior experience or expertise, just to get me "on the team")

Freaking Navy guys. They can't leave that crap behind and in their past. ie- "Skipper" for Captain and all.

 

[Richman]

I always thought that AA's C.R. Smith was the major force behind the rule. Basically, he wanted to kick out the older higher paid pilots and replace them with younger, lower paid pilots.

Interesting observation. Isn't that what we all allowed when we permitted outsourcing to the scooters?

Richman

 

[Richman]

Oh let me tell you about flying for a non-union carrier over a beer one day.

You'll love the chapter about why I resigned from th safety council because it as being used to "suspicious purposes" or when I was threatened with termination for not descending below MVA into ESC to have a peek when all of the instrument approaches were out on the word of a romper. Yup, heard that one right!

Am I happy with my union? Oh HELLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLZ naw, for a number of reasons. But is the answer going non? *giggle*

Couple of life times ago flying the scooters...flying into stations where the airline provided the WX oberservations...

Those jokes write themselves.

Richman

 

[derg]

All of the weather shows IFR on a VFR-only airport, in the soup at MVA... Three attempts, holding, running skosh on fuel, diverted to MQT with the concurrence of dispatch but ramper said he looked up and could see the sky and our diversion cost him his completion status.

Captain got a month off without pay but I got a written warning. Then the chief pilot wanted some help with an issue the "safety committee" was looking at, which I was a member of. But, I resigned before I could "help" with the issue.

That's why we needed a union, folks.