American Eagle pilots finally stand up

[B767]

Frankly, pilots would be a lot better off if the lawyers were calling the shots. But they're not. Instead, lawyers give advice, pilots ignore it, and then the pilots get mad when things don't go well, and they still blame the lawyers who they ignored in the first place.

And why did the lawyers fight for furlough protection in the AE TA instead of fleet plan/CPA/etc. And now that Dougie P comes a knockin' this furlough protection that was VERY heavily touted in selling this TA, is suddenly not worth beans.

ALPA lawyers told our MEC not to talk with US Airways management before the merger announcement, even as all the other unions were getting MOUs with Doug Parker. We didn't. Now he wants another 35 million in concessions from us. Glad we told him to pound sand.

ALPA National sent an email trying to convince our MEC to accept the B Scale offer (and the guy who sent it is an AE pilot too!). Really? A B scale at a regional airline? Even Kit Darby (who I really can't stand) admits regional FO pay is not a living wage. Instead he wants regional FOs to approach this step in our career as a "low paid apprenticeship." What a joke.

Here's the link for you to read. http://www.ainonline.com/comment/3919#comment-3919

Scroll to Pilot Encouragement.

It's not my fault mainline gave away scope which lead to the rising costs at regionals. I'm sure as hell not going to help lower the bar here either.

 

[Seggy]

ALPA National sent an email trying to convince our MEC to accept the B Scale offer (and the guy who sent it is an AE pilot too!). Really? A B scale at a regional airline?

I would like to know how that pilot is 'ALPA National'?

 

[B767]

I would like to know how that pilot is 'ALPA National'?

Does he not sit on the executive council, which advances the objectives and policies established by the board of directors?

 

[Seggy]

Does he not sit on the executive council, which advances the objectives and policies established by the board of directors?

Yeah, but the Board of Directors is made up of the LEC Reps, the ones who told Parker no.

Also the a Executive Council members fly full time lines.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Well why then does it seem as if the language dreamed up by lawyers gets beaten by management every time?

Reference grumblings at Delta Air Lines in regards to TAJVs out of balance etc...

I have no idea what a "TAJVs" is, so I'll withhold comment on that.

But in regard to your first sentence, you seem to have a misunderstanding of how the bargaining process works. ALPA lawyers don't slide pieces of paper across the table and say "here, this is what you're going to accept, management." If it was only so easy! Rather, ALPA lawyers work with pilots (who have the final say on what is proposed or accepted), the pilots make proposals, management makes counter-proposals, and it goes back and forth, usually dozens of times, and sometimes hundreds of times, for a give section. By the time it's done, it nowhere resembles what the attorneys really wanted. It's a compromise. Everything in bargaining is a compromise. That's why it's called bargaining and not demands.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Does he not sit on the executive council, which advances the objectives and policies established by the board of directors?

I sit on the Executive Council, also. Seggy used to. Do you think everything we post here is the words of "ALPA National?" Of course not. Executive Vice Presidents have opinions of their own just like any other line pilot.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

I have no idea what a "TAJVs" is, so I'll withhold comment on that.

But in regard to your first sentence, you seem to have a misunderstanding of how the bargaining process works. ALPA lawyers don't slide pieces of paper across the table and say "here, this is what you're going to accept, management." If it was only so easy! Rather, ALPA lawyers work with pilots (who have the final say on what is proposed or accepted), the pilots make proposals, management makes counter-proposals, and it goes back and forth, usually dozens of times, and sometimes hundreds of times, for a give section. By the time it's done, it nowhere resembles what the attorneys really wanted. It's a compromise. Everything in bargaining is a compromise. That's why it's called bargaining and not demands.

I'm not talking about bargaining, I'm talking about upholding the language in the contract. It seems as if the company (DAL) is at best, skirting the language, at worst, outright violating it. Language that was proposed by lawyers. If that doesn't tell me they are worthless....

Similarly at Pinnacle, they had enough trouble following the JCBA from a company perspective (except for the parts that suck for us), and now they can't even correctly abide by the bankruptcy agreement.

So why is all this language so full of holes? Why is the Alaska Air agreement a sieve with which AAG will fly new aircraft through and give them to contracted groups?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

So why is all this language so full of holes?

Pretty sure I explained that: because every contract is a series of compromises. It's not what you wanted, it's what you were able to obtain. Sometimes what you're able to obtain is very strong language. Sometimes it's not. ALPA, however, is far better at enforcing its contracts than most labor unions. ALPA record in contract arbitrations is about twice as good as the average union.

Why is the Alaska Air agreement a sieve with which AAG will fly new aircraft through and give them to contracted groups?

You can't go from 0 to 100 in a split second. The ALA contract had basically zero scope protections to start with. Going from nothing to something strong can't be done in a single step. At least, not unless you're willing to give up a hell of a lot to get it.

 

[SpiceWeasel]

Pretty sure I explained that: because every contract is a series of compromises. It's not what you wanted, it's what you were able to obtain. Sometimes what you're able to obtain is very strong language. Sometimes it's not. ALPA, however, is far better at enforcing its contracts than most labor unions. ALPA record in contract arbitrations is about twice as good as the average union.




You can't go from 0 to 100 in a split second. The ALA contract had basically zero scope protections to start with. Going from nothing to something strong can't be done in a single step. At least, not unless you're willing to give up a hell of a lot to get it.

Fair answers. However, let's say that your company is making money hand over fist, and it's contract time. What GAINS can be made in a contract without affecting other areas? I say this knowing how much compromise goes in to "keeping a company alive". If we get bent over every time they need financial help, why can't there be straight gains when it is clear a company is doing well? And no - not gains through loosening or removing other sections.

 

[Firebird2XC]

Word is that the new jets offered Eagle with the b-scale condition are now being floated to PSA. I noted previously that 'PSA management was finally making good on their promise to make that happen' was stated... I don't really think they've done anything, I just think that AMR/USAir suits are playing us against each other.

Regardless of where the new jets end up, I hope that it doesn't just go to the low bidder, and we're all aware of why that's important. Now is the time to draw the line in the sand.

They're already yanking Eagle pilots. They've posted a new vacancy bid with 0 captain positions to make the point that there will be no upgrades, and no flows, etc, as there are no new hire FOs, and somehow that's all related to our thumbing our nose at the B scale deal.

*shrugs* Done right, ramen tastes pretty decent. I can wait a little longer. Nope, nope, no junior man calls accepted today, thanks.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Fair answers. However, let's say that your company is making money hand over fist, and it's contract time. What GAINS can be made in a contract without affecting other areas?

In that situation, monetary gains are usually not that difficult to obtain. The NMB will generally be on your side, as long as your proposals aren't outlandish. Work rule improvements are also pretty easy to obtain without giving up anything significant in other areas. Benefits are a bit tougher, but still doable. Of course, the more you want of each, the more difficult it becomes, because the NMB isn't happy when someone comes with a really long laundry list of what they want.

But scope is a bit different, because legally, management has no requirement to even talk about it. They can cross their arms and say "no" all day long about scope, and the NMB will just say "don't look at us, they don't have to talk about it if they don't want to." Bargaining involves mandatory and permissive areas of bargaining, and scope is a permissive area of bargaining. That basically means that you can't strike over it, management can't lock out over it, and neither side can be forced to even discuss it. So if you want improvements in scope, you pretty much have to accept that you'll be giving up something to get it. Because if you aren't willing to do that, then management will just refuse to talk about it, and the NMB will shrug their shoulders and tell you to get back to them when you're serious.

 

[djnk954]

They're already yanking Eagle pilots. They've posted a new vacancy bid with 0 captain positions to make the point that there will be no upgrades, and no flows, etc, as there are no new hire FOs, and somehow that's all related to our thumbing our nose at the B scale deal.

A friend of mine interviewed with AE a week ago. He said that he can't think of anything he did wrong at any point, but still didn't get an offer. He claims no one got an offer that day. Could that be related?

 

[Firebird2XC]

A friend of mine interviewed with AE a week ago. He said that he can't think of anything he did wrong at any point, but still didn't get an offer. He claims no one got an offer that day. Could that be related?

Maybe. But that's happened before when there was no reason for it. I interviewed with two other guys back when Eagle was bleeding FOs to other carriers some years back and they still only took two of us. Our HR folks know what they're looking for.. for whatever reason they just didn't see what they wanted in your friend.

I suppose you could say they turned people away to stop hiring just to mess with us, but that's bordering a bit on paranoid. Who knows? It may be they only plan to shrink the pilot group from here on out.