Sponsor Message:
Civil Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Pilots' Unions At Odds In American Airlines Merger  
User currently offlinepsa188 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 507 posts, RR: 18
Posted (4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 6149 times:

So says the headline to this post:
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-T...t-Odds-in-American-Airlines-Merger

Sounds as if APA and USAPA cannot agree on seniority issues at the merged carrier. Since these flight crew integration issues were never settled at US/HP, one wonders if they'll ever get settled at US/AA?

41 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline777Jet From Australia, joined Mar 2014, 1429 posts, RR: 1
Reply 1, posted (4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 6018 times:

What a surprise to see the headline "Pilots' Unions At Odds In Merger"...  


DC10-10/30,MD82/88/90,717,727,732/3/4/5/7/8/9ER,742/4,752/3,763/ER,772/E/L/3/W,788,306,320,321,332/3,346,388
User currently offlineFlyingSicilian From Italy, joined Mar 2009, 1303 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 5952 times:

Dallas Morning News article:

http://www.dallasnews.com/business/a...airlines-us-airways-become-one.ece



Ciao Windjet mi manchi
User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2053 posts, RR: 1
Reply 3, posted (4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 5867 times:

The US East pilots are afraid that APA will do to them what they have done, and intend to do again, to the US West pilots. USAPA has had a huge problem with ethics over their history.

User currently offlinepsa188 From United States of America, joined Aug 2000, 507 posts, RR: 18
Reply 4, posted (4 months 1 week 10 hours ago) and read 5837 times:

So, where are the US West pilots in this dispute? And, did they ever resolve the HP/US issues. And if not, why didn't Dougie Parker see this coming a mile away?

User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2353 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5713 times:

Quoting psa188 (Reply 7):
So, where are the US West pilots in this dispute?

I was wondering the same thing. As a group, can they (HP Pilots) break off from USAPA and just sign with APA?



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19419 posts, RR: 58
Reply 6, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5691 times:

Can you name me a merger where the pilots unions didn't have issues?

User currently offlineflyfree727 From United States of America, joined Jul 2007, 658 posts, RR: 0
Reply 7, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5616 times:

NOW we have a topic a.nets will like!
the ones about smooth intergration and AA making big profits is SO boring

  

AA ORD


User currently offlinetoltommy From United States of America, joined Dec 2003, 3288 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5539 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 9):
I was wondering the same thing. As a group, can they (HP Pilots) break off from USAPA and just sign with APA?

No, there will not be two unions on the property. Eventually there will be a representation vote. USAPA was formed by the former East group, who did not like the results of the seniority agreement they had agreed to as ALPA members. By forming another union they basically said "we never agreed to this". They had the majority of votes in the combined HP/US pilot group, so the HP pilots has no choice but the join USAPA. The west pilots probably won't need much motivation to join with the APA members in a representation vote. But it won't solve the seniority integration issue.

Quoting psa188 (Reply 7):
And if not, why didn't Dougie Parker see this coming a mile away?

I'm sure he did too. And as others have said, he doesn't care. As long as they are fighting each other, they can't be unified in order to get the contract they want. Being able to whipsaw each group against the other keeps costs down. "Who wants the shiny new plane? Who's contract is cheaper? You get the shiny new plane. Good pilot."

I would have to imagine the legacy AA pilots are very leery of making any kind of deal with the East pilots. They've shown that they will reject and agreement if it doesn't come out their way. Why would now be any different? Might be easier to eventually merge AA and the West, and do any future hiring on that side. Fence off the old East pilots, and shrink that airline as they all retire. Kinda like how WN is "retiring" AirTran.


User currently offlineazjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3895 posts, RR: 28
Reply 9, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5481 times:

Quoting psa188 (Thread starter):
Sounds as if APA and USAPA cannot agree on seniority issues at the merged carrier. Since these flight crew integration issues were never settled at US/HP, one wonders if they'll ever get settled at US/AA?

Well here's the surprise of the century! Let's hope both sides can work constructively towards an agreement. After all, an arbitrators ruling isn't always the best outcome. Just ask the US guys as well as Mesaba and Pinnacle pilots!


User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2558 posts, RR: 53
Reply 10, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5482 times:

How is this different from the binding arbitration that originally happened between the HP and US pilot groups? The US pilots simply ignored it, and now more than eight years later, they still aren't combined.

HAL

[Edited 2014-03-27 00:41:34 by SA7700]


One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5208 posts, RR: 4
Reply 11, posted (4 months 1 week 9 hours ago) and read 5459 times:

Quoting HAL (Reply 16):
How is this different from the binding arbitration that originally happened between the HP and US pilot groups?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought that USAPA went their separate way before McCaskill-Bond came into force?



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlineTW870 From United States of America, joined Jan 2013, 221 posts, RR: 0
Reply 12, posted (4 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5406 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting HAL (Reply 16):
How is this different from the binding arbitration that originally happened between the HP and US pilot groups? The US pilots simply ignored it, and now more than eight years later, they still aren't combined.

Because of McCaskill-Bond, which passed in 2008. It is now federal law that both unionized groups submit to binding arbitration if they cannot voluntarily agree on a "fair and equitable" integration process. McCaskill-Bond ultimately re-established the old Sections 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions that the CAB used to enforce during regulation.

http://afaonevoice.org/images/McCask...xplanation%20FINAL%20for%20WEB.pdf

It is true that in the 1980s, parties to binding arbitration began violating binding decisions. Management - and not unions - started that trend (if I recall correctly the case was at Maine Central Railroad). The difference here is that the parties would also be violating federal aviation regulation. From my understanding of the law, if the new union fails to observe the arbitration, then both the grieved pilot and the airline can sue the violating union for damages. Any lawyers on here care to clarify?


User currently offlineEASTERN747 From United States of America, joined Oct 2006, 518 posts, RR: 0
Reply 13, posted (4 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5406 times:

I think it would be interesting to have these pilots talk to career veterans from BN EA PA on and on and on. Maybe they could
possibly work together and move on. What a shame, what a pity.


User currently offlinesilentbob From United States of America, joined Aug 2006, 2053 posts, RR: 1
Reply 14, posted (4 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5342 times:

Quoting HAL (Reply 16):
How is this different from the binding arbitration that originally happened between the HP and US pilot groups? The US pilots simply ignored it, and now more than eight years later, they still aren't combined.

The only way that USAPA has been able to avoid implementing the Nicolau award is by not signing a new contract. They have continued to work under a bankruptcy era contract while the company has made record profits rather than risk not being able to take advantage of the West work group. The new MOU that USAPA signed agreed that the new contract will come before the seniority integration, that will prevent them from playing the same ratification game. Long before then, APA will become the sole bargaining agent and USAPA will go away.


User currently offlineDualQual From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 758 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (4 months 1 week 8 hours ago) and read 5215 times:

Quoting HAL (Reply 16):

US East pilots are also out numbered and out gunned by AA this time around. They had numbers on the West for the ALPA booting/USAPA formation that they won't really have this time. AA is the larger group. My take through mergers is the larger group wins. It doesn't mean they're right, just winning.


User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9297 posts, RR: 14
Reply 16, posted (4 months 1 week 6 hours ago) and read 4879 times:

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 19):

  oh goodness, let's calm down just a little bit.
First, you and anyone else here would be fighting just as hard(unless you hate money and having a better QOL)
Second, this shouldn't even come remotely close to bringing the airline down.


Not only that but it will keep the unions away from a better contract when that time comes.
And finally, I bet most employees of famous strikes (EA,NW etc) don't regret it one bit. Just FWIW.

Exactly. Overall it is better for the company if the pilot groups are one, but Doug has proved he can operate the airline without that.

Having said that, Delta and United had(has for other UA unions) issues also. It will be worked out, IMO, well before binding arbitration

[Edited 2014-03-27 00:47:04 by SA7700]


yep.
User currently offlinelightsaber From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 12905 posts, RR: 100
Reply 17, posted (4 months 1 week 2 hours ago) and read 4284 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 7):
Can you name me a merger where the pilots unions didn't have issues?

   Pilots unions are rather famous for it. Since the pilots' unions will not do their jobs... It is rather amusing watching management take advantage of the situation. There is no advantage to AMR bringing this to a close quickly.

Quoting EASTERN747 (Reply 16):
I think it would be interesting to have these pilots talk to career veterans from BN EA PA on and on and on. Maybe they could
possibly work together and move on. What a shame, what a pity.

   They would do better in the long run to sit down and come to a fair compromise. It will happen eventually.

Quoting EA CO AS (Reply 21):
Hey, when your opponent is busy trying to destroy himself, it's best to stay out of the way and let him.

Exactly. It will be interesting to see how the court cases go. But with binding arbitration looming, I suspect this will be settled within 3 or 4 years.


Lightsaber



Societies that achieve a critical mass of ideas achieve self sustaining growth; others stagnate.
User currently offlineapodino From United States of America, joined Apr 2005, 4234 posts, RR: 6
Reply 18, posted (4 months 6 days 23 hours ago) and read 4095 times:

I have talked to people with knowledge of this situation. This story is being way overblown by both the media and a.net. The pilots unions are actually a lot closer than we are led to believe and according to my sources who have talked to Gary Hummel directly, this situation is only about a couple of minor differences and will be resolved pretty quickly. Hummel is about to hand the keys to USAPA over to APA leadership.

User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8416 posts, RR: 3
Reply 19, posted (4 months 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 3829 times:

I think it should be settled by a manly fight, held in Klingon. But actually both unions are friendly to the merger, and know it is the luckiest thing that ever could have happened to them. These are the happy days.

User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6449 posts, RR: 9
Reply 20, posted (4 months 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 3165 times:

Quoting Byrdluvs747 (Reply 5):
As a group, can they (HP Pilots) break off from USAPA and just sign with APA? The HP pilots are not members of USAPA, so they can't break off. Not positive, but I believe they belong to ALPA











User currently offlineByrdluvs747 From United States of America, joined Jul 2004, 2353 posts, RR: 1
Reply 21, posted (4 months 6 days 14 hours ago) and read 3037 times:

Quoting toltommy (Reply 8):
Might be easier to eventually merge AA and the West

How would you do that? I though you said that there is now way to separate the West from USAPA.



The 747: The hands who designed it were guided by god.
User currently offlinelaxboeingman From United States of America, joined Mar 2008, 538 posts, RR: 0
Reply 22, posted (4 months 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 2311 times:

Why can't they just combine the lists and go by the date in which the pilot started flying with their respective airline?


The real American classics: LAX and Boeing.
User currently offlinepar13del From Bahamas, joined Dec 2005, 7075 posts, RR: 8
Reply 23, posted (4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1995 times:

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 22):

Why can't they just combine the lists and go by the date in which the pilot started flying with their respective airline?

If you worked for HP that may be fine, but since they do not exist and US is the survivor, the strong get to add more restrictions.
No different now that AA is the major player in terms of numbers, even if US management are running the operations, due to numbers the AA pilots can cause more harm, so a new circle in labour relations has started.

Best of luck to all of them, they were warned, but getting rid of AA management was more important.


User currently offlineMir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 21530 posts, RR: 55
Reply 24, posted (4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 1993 times:

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 22):
Why can't they just combine the lists and go by the date in which the pilot started flying with their respective airline?

Let's say you're the #1 pilot at US, and you started there in 1985. Under your system, if there were 20 pilots at AA who had been hired there prior to 1985, you'd suddenly be #21, and would lose the ability to select the exact schedule that you want - a decrease in quality of life. You'd probably argue for a zipper combination - one from AA, then one from US. That would end up with you being at worst #2, but then you'd be pushing all the AA pilots that have been at their airline longer than you've been at yours much further down the list.

Obviously there's no way to do it that doesn't screw anybody over, and date of hire is a reasonably fair way to do things - I'm just showing how opposition to it would arise.

-Mir



7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3392 posts, RR: 4
Reply 25, posted (4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2052 times:

least suprising news about the AA-US merger... in the history of the merger.

User currently offlineseabosdca From United States of America, joined Sep 2007, 5333 posts, RR: 4
Reply 26, posted (4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2031 times:

Quoting apodino (Reply 18):
I have talked to people with knowledge of this situation. This story is being way overblown by both the media and a.net.

The OP's source is certainly one that has every incentive to play up any and all union-related issues. I'll wait until any union fight blows into the open before I make any judgments.


User currently offlineca2ohHP From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 954 posts, RR: 1
Reply 27, posted (4 months 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 2084 times:

Quoting silentbob (Reply 3):
The US East pilots are afraid that APA will do to them what they have done, and intend to do again, to the US West pilots. USAPA has had a huge problem with ethics over their history.

Agreed.

The East pilots never saw the Nicolau decision that came down and have done everything in their power to stop it's implementation. Regardless if anyone agrees with it, both sides agreed beforehand to abide by his decision. I imagine the majority of "West" pilots are onboard with APA given their feelings towards USAPA.


User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9297 posts, RR: 14
Reply 28, posted (4 months 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 2023 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
Pilots unions are rather famous for it. Since the pilots' unions will not do their jobs... It is rather amusing watching management take advantage of the situation. There is no advantage to AMR bringing this to a close quickly.

Its not fair to toss pilots under the bus. Heck ask united who is the problem right now, they wont tell you pilots. Also DALPA had a deal long before Delta could even get a vote fro the AFA and IAM.

USAPA gives the pilots a much bigger black eye than they should get. Oh and the APA's dirty tricks with the TWA pilots.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
I suspect this will be settled within 3 or 4 years.

It wont take that long.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
They would do better in the long run to sit down and come to a fair compromise. It will happen eventually.

they wont sit down and do it, it will end up getting put on an arbitrators desk. (more than likely)

and, IMO, it will look much like what happened at Delta and IIRC United.

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 22):

because, someone is going to get screwed, thus it is the job of the union that will have its members screwed the most to fight for them. Don't think for a minute that both sides would be more than happy to staple the other guys on the bottom of the list if they good.
The APA has done it before.

Quoting Mir (Reply 24):
Let's say you're the #1 pilot at US, and you started there in 1985. Under your system, if there were 20 pilots at AA who had been hired there prior to 1985, you'd suddenly be #21, and would lose the ability to select the exact schedule that you want - a decrease in quality of life. You'd probably argue for a zipper combination - one from AA, then one from US. That would end up with you being at worst #2, but then you'd be pushing all the AA pilots that have been at their airline longer than you've been at yours much further down the list.

exactly. Outside looking in it is easy to say go DOH and be done. Unless your the guy at Us or AA who gets shafted because of DOH then you want another agreement.

This was a big problem for Delta and DALPA/NWALPA. Delta's number 1 was pretty junior to the NW number one and that is why they went with the, IIRC 1 for 1 route.

Matter of fact I believe UA and CO also did something like this. I can't really think of a resent merger that did true DOH, WN/FL maybe?

Quoting ca2ohHP (Reply 27):
I imagine the majority of "West" pilots are onboard with APA given their feelings towards USAPA.

If US employees don't think the APFA and APA will toss their asses right under the bus then they need a history lesson.



yep.
User currently offlineokie From United States of America, joined Jul 2003, 2989 posts, RR: 3
Reply 29, posted (4 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1949 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 28):
they wont sit down and do it, it will end up getting put on an arbitrators desk. (more than likely)

and, IMO, it will look much like what happened at Delta and IIRC United.

Exactly, the arbitrator will decide.
Then the different parties will appear to be representing their members.
The arbitrator will be the bad guy.

No matter what set of circumstances, short of stapling one list on the bottom of the another, that are used to integrate the pilots about the only thing that could be said is that there will be only one pilot in the #1 position will be unaffected the rest will move down the seniority list.
Everyone else is going to go further down the list no matter what.

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
Exactly. It will be interesting to see how the court cases go. But with binding arbitration looming, I suspect this will be settled within 3 or 4 years

There is no incentive for the unions to get this resolved any time soon.
Parker wins.

Okie


User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9297 posts, RR: 14
Reply 30, posted (4 months 6 days 7 hours ago) and read 1878 times:

Quoting okie (Reply 29):
No matter what set of circumstances, short of stapling one list on the bottom of the another, that are used to integrate the pilots about the only thing that could be said is that there will be only one pilot in the #1 position will be unaffected the rest will move down the seniority list.
Everyone else is going to go further down the list no matter what.

yep. and every body under number 1 is going to fight like hell to be number 2.

hell two people at least will be fighting about number 1! List merging is ugly. I feel for the poor bastard that get to be the one who figures it out. (though he/she will be paid nicely for it)

Quoting okie (Reply 29):
There is no incentive for the unions to get this resolved any time soon.
Parker wins.

pretty much.

and the funny part is he doesn't really give a crap about it.
IMO he hopes it will last before it becomes contract time again so he has something to hold over their heads or gets another company positive contract because of the union in-fighting.



yep.
User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2558 posts, RR: 53
Reply 31, posted (4 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1853 times:

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 22):
Why can't they just combine the lists and go by the date in which the pilot started flying with their respective airline?

Let's say you fly for a relatively new and fast-growing airline. You may have been hired early in its existence, and started with lower wages and limited benefits to get the airline going. Then it becomes successful, makes money, and hires a lot of pilots. Your efforts helped pave the way for that success, maybe five or ten years after it was started.

Now, because of your success, someone wants to buy you (or, like AWA, you buy another airline like US). That airline has been stagnant with little growth for decades. Someone who is flying the same type of aircraft and is at the same relative seniority as you (for instance 15% from the top of the 737 Captain list) was hired 33 years ago, compared to your 7 years. Your airline is successful, theirs is not. They haven't hired in 10 years.

Since that other airline is 'bigger' though, do they get to dictate the terms of seniority list merger? If they go by date of hire, then you are suddenly junior to every single pilot on their list, including some who may have been on furlough for years.

You are suddenly placed on that date-of-hire list and go from a senior Captain to junior co-pilot with a reduction in pay and loss of benefits like choice of days off. And all because you helped make your airline successful enough to buy/merge with someone. Is that fair?

From the perspective of that 33-year Captain at the bigger airline, he's resentful that if the merger happens on a relative-seniority basis, he'll have to be placed next to (or just below) the 7-year pilot who just happened to pick an airline that grew fast.

This is the stuff of nightmares when it comes to seniority list integration.

HAL



One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineazjubilee From United States of America, joined Apr 2000, 3895 posts, RR: 28
Reply 32, posted (4 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1718 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
Pilots unions are rather famous for it. Since the pilots' unions will not do their jobs... It is rather amusing watching management take advantage of the situation. There is no advantage to AMR bringing this to a close quickly

Mgmt could generally care less about what the seniority list looks like. This is why they're not involved in coming to an agreement with one. What they care about is longevity because that translates to $$$ when applied to the contract. Mgmt does however, enjoy bickering and fighting amongst work groups, because it weakens their resolve. Claiming the unions "aren't doing their jobs" is ridiculous. Each side is out to get the best deal for their respective pilots. that IS their job in negotiating an integrated seniority list. It's natural that there are disagreements and conflicts in the matter because seniority is a touchy subject that defines the basis of ones career at an airline.


User currently offlineXT6Wagon From United States of America, joined Feb 2007, 3392 posts, RR: 4
Reply 33, posted (4 months 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 1726 times:

Quoting lightsaber (Reply 17):
Exactly. It will be interesting to see how the court cases go. But with binding arbitration looming, I suspect this will be settled within 3 or 4 years.

you think the liquidation of assets for AA-US will be that soon?

I could see it depending on the number and length of strikes vistited opon the combined airline in the years ahead, but I'm not sure that the labor issues will break out like that and instead just rot this airline from the core as it was doing to AA for decades.


User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2241 posts, RR: 9
Reply 34, posted (4 months 6 days 5 hours ago) and read 1645 times:

[/quote]

Quoting laxboeingman (Reply 22):
Why can't they just combine the lists and go by the date in which the pilot started flying with their respective airline?

Not so simple as you think. There were guys hired at US before HP existed that were on furlough. Your example would take a US guy on furlough, and let him throw an HP guy out of a Captain slot. How is that fair? Had the merger not taken place, the HP guy could have expected to remain a captain, and the US guy could have expected to never fly at US again.

"Relative Seniority" is the closest thing to fair possible. Arbitration usually results in this. The US guys agreed to binding arbitration, then renigged on their agreement. Real men of integrity there, eh?



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlineRyanairGuru From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 5208 posts, RR: 4
Reply 35, posted (4 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1608 times:

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 33):
I could see it depending on the number and length of strikes vistited opon the combined airline in the years ahead

That won't happen, POTUS (neither this one nor any other) will allow AA workgroups to go on strike. It'd take something like 25% of domestic capacity out of the sky.

Quoting XT6Wagon (Reply 33):
just rot this airline from the core as it was doing to AA for decades.

And they're still a going concern  

There is less than an ice cubes chance in hell that AA will liquidate over labor. Even if the situation really was that dire, they'll take a nice bath in Ch11 long before they get to that point.



Worked Hard, Flew Right
User currently offlinedeltal1011man From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 9297 posts, RR: 14
Reply 36, posted (4 months 6 days 4 hours ago) and read 1598 times:

Quoting SPREE34 (Reply 34):
and the US guy could have expected to never fly at US again.

well...maybe.


but I don't know why the is needed. "without XXX you wouldn't have a job!" Ahem, clearly the other company had value or they wouldn't have merged with them.


and just for the record, Its not like HP was some profit making great thing. One BK and probably two if it wasn't for a bailout from the ATSB..... so I don't think any HP employee needs to be tossing stones.

But I don't agree with what you say at all. I believe in true DOH. I think its is the fairest way. (and IMHO if you were the guy on the streets at US you would feel the same way)



yep.
User currently offlineHAL From United States of America, joined Jan 2002, 2558 posts, RR: 53
Reply 37, posted (4 months 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 1398 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 36):
but I don't know why the is needed. "without XXX you wouldn't have a job!" Ahem, clearly the other company had value or they wouldn't have merged with them.

Yes, they had some value to HP, more than doubling their size with a minimum of cash. But on their own, US wasn't going anywhere. At the announcement of the merger, they had six days of operating capital left, with no other sources of cash other than HP. Without the merger, all US employees would have been on the street in a week.

And yes, at the time HP was a profit making machine: Buying airplanes, hiring, expanding. The ATSB loan was several years in the past. Doug Parker made his bet on one deal that promised huge expansion overnight. While it worked out well overall, for the HP pilots it was much, much worse.

HAL



One smooth landing is skill. Two in a row is luck. Three in a row and someone is lying.
User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2241 posts, RR: 9
Reply 38, posted (4 months 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 1106 times:

Quoting deltal1011man (Reply 36):
I believe in true DOH

Only within an existing company. Please explain how merging two groups/companies, then disenfranchising one is fair.

I wasn't a US furloughee, so won't assume to know what I would feel in that position. I do know assuming the right to someone else's seat , who is gainfully employed while I am not, is nothing short of theft. MB, Relative Seniority, fences, and many other measures protect everyone and preserve career expectations. Straight DOH outside of one's own company could only, IMHO, be considered anywhere near fair were there a national seniority list. Even in that scenario, the list would only apply within a specified bargaining unit such as ALPA.

Quoting HAL (Reply 37):
Yes, they had some value to HP, more than doubling their size with a minimum of cash. But on their own, US wasn't going anywhere. At the announcement of the merger, they had six days of operating capital left, with no other sources of cash other than HP. Without the merger, all US employees would have been on the street in a week.

And yes, at the time HP was a profit making machine: Buying airplanes, hiring, expanding. The ATSB loan was several years in the past. Doug Parker made his bet on one deal that promised huge expansion overnight. While it worked out well overall, for the HP pilots it was much, much worse.

  



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
User currently offlinebobnwa From United States of America, joined Dec 2000, 6449 posts, RR: 9
Reply 39, posted (4 months 5 days 12 hours ago) and read 944 times:

We are forgetting the basic pilot mantra. "The main purpose of an airline is to give pilots an aircraft to fly."

User currently offlinenewhaven From United States of America, joined Nov 2013, 236 posts, RR: 0
Reply 40, posted (4 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 845 times:

Quoting psa188 (Thread starter):
Sounds as if APA and USAPA cannot agree on seniority issues at the merged carrier. Since these flight crew integration issues were never settled at US/HP, one wonders if they'll ever get settled at US/AA?

Now THERE's a big shock !

So much for all the AA/US cheerleaders on here who are making posts about how easily and well this integration is gonna go because "everyone is so happy with it .." and who are focusing more on the silly, frivolous, cosmetic parts of this big mess ... like painting the planes, which color seat fabrics are being picked out, the inflight menu's being coordinated, etc

Get ready folks, this is gonna start getting GOOD now !!


User currently offlineSPREE34 From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 2241 posts, RR: 9
Reply 41, posted (4 months 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 803 times:

Quoting newhaven (Reply 40):
Get ready folks, this is gonna start getting GOOD now !!

I doubt it. The USAPA will be the usual childish group they are, right up until they no longer exists. Even if they manage to drag it out in court, Doug Parker has already shown he can run a decent operation with split pilot groups. If you read some of the latest court docs from the US/HP SLI debacle, and US/AA merger MOU, you'll see even the court has about had it with USAPA. They are out of friends.



I don't understand everything I don't know about this.
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Pilots, Unions & Steenland In New DL/NW? posted Fri Feb 8 2008 22:25:21 by Centrair
Employement In American Airlines... posted Sun Jul 4 1999 16:05:06 by Blue_Angel
Staff At American Airlines Pilots Union Protest Th posted Tue Apr 22 2008 09:25:42 by Fxra
American Airlines Stuck In The Snow At DEN posted Wed Dec 20 2006 21:48:33 by Graphic
American Airlines 9651 - MD80 In ROW? posted Mon Mar 17 2014 17:03:46 by jetsetterusa
Equity Investment In The New American Airlines? posted Mon Dec 16 2013 07:29:52 by EricR
American Airlines Boeing 737-800 At St. Louis STL posted Sat Aug 31 2013 18:47:39 by max752
Israeli Pilots In Foreign Airlines posted Mon Aug 5 2013 08:41:39 by 777way
American Airlines Only 58% On-time In September posted Fri Nov 9 2012 08:32:55 by readytotaxi
Changes In Capacity At DL-NW Hubs Since Merger posted Sat Oct 13 2012 14:57:28 by neveragain