Polar Arbitration III(a)

[L-38]

Polar Arbitration of remaining 40+ FE furloughs (Holden) to be heard this week. . . Dec 11.

(I know top dog mod, - lock er up)

[CR2]

I give up....

Let us know what happens.

[CR2]

Just post on topic and nothing will be deleted.

[WhaleFR8]

What you are talking about is a “remedy” case pending before the Holden System Board. In that case, ALPA previously obtained an award in favor of the Polar pilots. This award held that the Company was in violation of the Polar CBA’s scope clause when it furloughed and downgraded pilots during the time period that Atlas was performing Polar flying – flying Polar cargo for Polar revenue – pursuant to an “Alliance Agreement” between the two airlines. The Holden Board concluded that the Company was contractually precluded from furloughing while this subcontracted flying was occurring and ordered the Company to reinstate and/or upgrade the affected Polar pilots and make them whole for their loses. The Company complied with the Award by pay protecting the affected pilots in the positions they would have held but for the violation. The Atlas MEC has no quarrel with either that claim or remedy.

The Polar MEC did not appear to care, nor did they complain, about the failure to actually recall or upgrade Polar pilots while they were being pay protected. On or about June 2007, the Company cancelled the Alliance Agreement and Atlas stopped flying Polar cargo for Polar revenue. When it did that, the Company apparently concluded that it could then furlough and downgrade the excess Polar pilots, because those furloughs and downgrades were not the result of flying under an Alliance Agreement. The Polar pilots disagreed and ALPA went back to the Holden Board to complain about the Company’s conduct.

It is at this point that Polar's arguments and requested remedies are seriously out of line and improperly impinge on Atlas pilots. We recognize that Atlas is flying a small number of contracted charters for Polar such as the "maintenance spare" flying that Atlas has historically done for many airlines. Nevertheless, it is undisputed that Atlas is no longer regularly flying Polar cargo for Polar revenue. Polar is asserting that certain flying that Atlas is doing, carrying Atlas cargo for Atlas revenue on Atlas Aircraft, is really Polar flying because this flying just happens to be between city pairs that Polar had served at one time in the past, or is a type of flying (i.e. military charter) that Polar has also done in the past. In other words; even though the flying at issue is flying Atlas is entitled to do between city pairs it is entitled to serve; and is flying cargo consigned to Atlas that produces revenue for Atlas, Polar is asserting that this is really their flying because they once flew similar routes or similar cargo.

As astonishing as this assertion is, the Atlas pilots would have no objection to Polar making that claim were it not for the remedy Bobbrobin is seeking. This unprecedented remedy would order the company to transfer Atlas flying – flying cargo consigned to Atlas for Atlas revenue – to Polar in sufficient amount to result in the upgrade of 37 Polar First Officers to Captain. That result, were the Holden Board to order it, would almost certainly require Polar hire additional First Officers both to replace the upgraded FOs and to fill the additional FO positions required to staff the added aircraft. The aircraft required for that flying will necessarily come from the Atlas fleet which of course will result in the furlough of Atlas pilots. As you might guess, the Atlas MEC is strongly opposed to any remedy that results in the furlough of Atlas pilots even if it is limited to a transfer of flying sufficient only to protect the allegedly “injured” Polar pilots (who are far fewer than 37).

The remedy Polar is seeking is a punitive remedy against the Company, but – in truth – the only entity or group that would be “punished" were the Holden board to order such a remedy is the Atlas pilots who will be furloughed when Atlas aircraft and Atlas flying is transferred to Polar. It is outrageous for Polar/ALPA to advance a remedy that will result in the furlough of Atlas pilots so that Polar can promote FO’s to Captain who were never Captains prior to the violation addressed by the original Holden remedy. A remedy such as Polar is seeking would also result in hiring at Polar even while furloughs would be happening at Atlas. These new hire Polar pilots would be pilots who were obviously not even on the property when the violation occurred.

Is THAT the arbitration you are talking about?

[rob rilly]

Shut it down, these Atlas boys just love to pick fights !!!:ugh::mad:

[WhaleFR8]

Lets see - when the truth comes out Atlas is picking a fight. When you are posting the half-truths and innuendo (like the one that started this thread) then it is ok. hmmmm..... Some of you even want Atlas pilots to argue your point of view for you. What I posted above is simply the truth - and the feelings of the ATlas MEC. If you don't like it then don't read it! Or you could always level your empty threats at the PPRUNE mods again.

[WhaleDriver]

God forbid we post facts...something the Polaroids are devoid of, and bored with. If it conflicts with their fairy tale, oh well, you know.

[CR2]

I see nothing wrong with WhaleFR8's post. Instead of closing this thread, how about someone posts a counterpoint? I'm sure there are two sides (at least) to every issue.

I would like to re-iterate my previous comment about staying on-topic. In this case that means:

Polar Arbitration of remaining 40+ FE furloughs (Holden) to be heard this week. . . Dec 11.

[rob rilly]

Quote :God forbid we post facts...something the Polaroids are devoid of, and bored with. If it conflicts with their fairy tale, oh well, you know.


Rebut: Guess we just sit back and let the Altoids Spew. That ought to be fun. You always like to kick Polar, but never sweep your back porch. You proved my point about picking. Thanks.:ugh::mad::eek:

[WhaleFR8]

Post a rebuttal then. What in my post is untrue? Or are you embarrassed that the industry might actually find out what your MEC is really doing?



http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[cptvac]

Whale

What you actually "said"...

1) The Polar Pilots (and Engineers) are indeed being injured, 2) The Polar flying has been re-labeled, 3) The Company claims it will have to injure the Atlas Pilots to make this right (and you are in bed with the Company and anti-Polar so you adopt this claim), 4) The Polar Crewmembers are directed to bleed (and like it) when it benefits you, 5) The Polar MEC is damned if they do and damned if they don't (by you-and your MEC). Always.

New day, same garbage.

[WhaleFR8]

1) The Polar Pilots (and Engineers) are indeed being injured Quite possibly - but your MEC forced this issue
2) The Polar flying has been re-labeled, So just because Polar flew between two city pairs in 1985 you think this should be your flying? Just like you think because you had a minor code-share agreement with another airline that should be your flying too - get a clue. This is simply business and the Polar MEC cannot dictate to the company how to do business.
3) The Company claims it will have to injure the Atlas Pilots to make this right (and you are in bed with the Company and anti-Polar so you adopt this claim),No one said the company claimed that. With the dearth of -400s in the market that is simple reality. As far as being in bed with the company, if that is how you describe having meaningful dialog and being able to negotiate on behalf of 700 crewmembers then I guess you are right.
4) The Polar Crewmembers are directed to bleed (and like it) when it benefits you,Your MEC took this battle to its conclusion - furloughs are furloughs. We have all been through them. The PFEs could have stayed on furlough, gotten their ratings, gotten some flight time and been first in line for re-hire. Bobbrobin blew that up with the Holden Arb
5) The Polar MEC is damned if they do and damned if they don't (by you-and your MEC). Always.As I have said before - not true. But when they tell half truths and innuendo, and try to tell an arbitrator that Atlas has no scheduled route authority, as well as telling him that ANY city pairs that Polar used to serve were "Polar flying" it borders on the ridiculous. This is all Bobbrobin trying to prove that the battle they won was the entire war. Post some decent rebuttal material Vac.

Those five points do not even come close. Tell us that the relief you are requesting is not what I posted. Tell us where in the world you came up with the 37 captains that were harmed. Simply put, your math is as whacked as your idea of a strike or your idea that any city pairs you used to serve are to be considered "Polar" flying. I guess you probably STILL think Revenue is better than profits.

Whoo boy!

[rob rilly]

Thanks WhaleFR8, you proved my point too. Section VIII, anyone ?:ugh::mad:

[WhaleFR8]

Oh please. Your section VIII is an empty threat - bring it on. This is way off the topic but since you brought it up and since I am pretty sure you don't even work for Polar any more - and most probably are not even an ALPA member, it would be hard for you to initiate.

But by all means go right ahead. Nothing I have posted is untrue. It can all be substantiated by others who were in the same room or negotiations. So lets get it all out in the open there guccijet. Better yet lets continue this on the ALPA site. There is a thread there that would probably be a better venue for your section VIII threats. See you there.... :)

[fuegolibre]

I second that since this is really an ALPA to ALPA issue. Everyone can go over there and complain using their real names if they have the cojones to do it.

Looking at who has posted over there so far, it would be a one sided argument. Only one ex-Polar guy and a Polar ex-MEC Vice Chairman so far from that side and a number of Atlas guys.

[L-38]

No whale, that is not the arbitration that I am talking about.

Tomorrow's arbitration simply revolves around Polar's flight engineers and that of no other (FE furloughs due to AAWW's violation of scope's intent, FE furloughs out of order - from a "one"/pilot seniority list, ect).

Your disputant invective (admittedly well written) appears to mainly detail the controversy over the many downgraded Polar captains who continue to suffer seat loss due to the perceived and continuing theft of Polar's work (how these scope violations are conjured should be covered over at the ALPA site).
While the "seat pay loss" arbitration was combined with that of Polar's Flight Engineer's during October/November of 06, it is my understanding that this time they have been separated (seat pay loss to be arbitrated early in 2008, FE's on Dec 11/12, 2007).

When all is said and done whale, I'm sure it is safe to say that tomorrow, no Polar flight engineer will displace an Atlas airman.

[fuegolibre]

(how these scope violations are conjured should be covered over at the ALPA site)

Let's make that the ALPA National Boards. Not AAI or PO individual council boards so we can have dual access and debate among our union peers. I noticed on a quick search that Polar is mentioned rarely their except on the recent ADR issue.

[uncle bobo]

Nevertheless, it is undisputed that Atlas is no longer regularly flying Polar cargo for Polar revenue. Polar is asserting that certain flying that Atlas is doing, carrying Atlas cargo for Atlas revenue on Atlas Aircraft, is really Polar flying because this flying just happens to be between city pairs that Polar had served at one time in the past, or is a type of flying (i.e. military charter) that Polar has also done in the past.
Now ain't that just simply astonishing. Polar customers, Polar freight, on Polar scheduled service one day and then with a flick of the magic wand, SHEZAMM, out of the smoke and mirrors, the same freight just magically arises out of the dust cloud as Atlas freight. Just frigging amazing.
But what would one expect out of Atlas ACMI. After all, that is your business by definition, isn't it? Showing up on other airline and operators property and flying their freight. Their crews, jobs, and upgrades be damned, especially if they don't have scope protection in their contracts to protect them from scavengers.
To all the other operators out there, you might want to pay attention, cause Atlas crews have no beef at all showing up on your doorstep and flying your freight, but then afterall, according to Atlas crews it wasn't really your freight to begin with, ITS ALL THEIRS, their just doing their jobs.

[Earl]

This one is getting a little hard to follow.
Did Atlas and Polar not merge?
Both are Alpa?
Then why was the Polar F/E's not merged with the company according to hire dates.
Must be missing something here.

[742]

Must be missing something here.

Just a simple power struggle. Now there are two MECs, after the merger there will only be one.

[rob rilly]

Spot on Uncle !:mad:

[WhaleDriver]

Ahh, the point of view you have heard from your leadership, so it must be true??
Let's see. Ask the folks at China Airlines. They had no cargo operation before we showed up, or Qantas, or Emirates or Air New Zealand or China Southern. All company's that didn't want to mess with all cargo until Atlas gave them an option to put their toes in the water without major investments. China now operates a large fleet of 747-400's on their own, all owed to Atlas showing them how. Emirates now has an order in for their own 747-8's to run their own operation. Qantas just extended their contract out six more years. Not TAKING a single pilot job because they never had a all cargo operation to begin with.
As far as taking jobs, normally when we show up, the company is trying new markets that they normally wouldn't try. We give them the ability to test markets before spending huge capital for maybe a dead end.
As far as flying other peoples freight, look no further than Polar. Someone was flying between your city pairs before you showed up, so the cargo is actually theirs (by your way of thinking), so your doing the same thing. Freight forwarders go between carriers all the time. Deal with it....
When Polar took the first bribe to extend your contract for 18 months for 3 1/2 %, the whole process was set in motion. Cato and company knew they had us where they wanted us.....again, deal with it.

[Intruder]

Now ain't that just simply astonishing. Polar customers, Polar freight, on Polar scheduled service one day and then with a flick of the magic wand, SHEZAMM, out of the smoke and mirrors, the same freight just magically arises out of the dust cloud as Atlas freight. Just frigging amazing.
What's so amazing about it? That's simply the way Scheduled Service works: An airline offers a service to Freight Forwarders. The Freight Forwarders consign freight to the airline to be moved. Until that consignment, the freight "belongs to" the Freight Forwarder, not the airline. It wouldn't matter if you replace "Atlas" with "Kalitta" or "Southern" -- the airline doesn't "own" the freight until it is consigned by the Freight Forwarder; the airline doesn't "own" the route unless it has been given exclusive rights to the city pairs by the countries involved.

So, Polar withdraws from a market. Atlas gets the appropriate approvals and enters the market. The Freight Forwarders consign their freight to Atlas. The ONLY "magic" thing about the deal is that "Polar" and "Atlas" happen to be the same people at the top.

[rob rilly]

Funny how Atlas never thanked Tower for getting them started ! Funny how Evergreen has had a Quantas contract for over 16 years ! Polar has had a Quantas contract for over 8 years. Now ask Bournputo to give you some truths. :ugh:

[WhaleDriver]

How does who did our proving runs have to do with anything, and just how are we suppose to thank Tower and you to thank the original Southern?

The deal Polar had with Qantas was a space block agreement. Or were you ACMI for Qantas? I have no idea about Evergreen. Haven't seen one of their planes in Sydney in years. If they were so what, it's called competition. Are you proposing that a carrier can never change who they go with?

[uncle bobo]

Just a simple power struggle. Now there are two MECs, after the merger there will only be one.>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>
Thats what the Atlas MEC wants you to believe. The merger has not happened and whether it ever happens is currently in the hands of an arbitrator to decide. The entire question comes down to whether or not Polar's scope clause in their currrent contract will be honored and complied with. Nothing more, nothing less. Polar wants their contract to be abided by and Atlas wants to strip Polars scope clause out, merge and get the seats out of the projected DHL windfall.

[fuegolibre]

Getting pretty thick.

I've worked for Evergreen and Atlas. Flown the same customers QF, BA , NZ routes and flight numbers at both places. Back and fourth depending on who was screwing up at the time or cheaper. If any of it touches Polar whether through block space, charter or ACMI then everyone after Polar is subsequently taking "Polar" freight and flying the way it sounds here. Not very realistic.

I guess DHL USA and Europe better look out. All of their freight becomes Polar freight by devine right under that logic.

Now ain't that just simply astonishing. Polar customers, Polar freight, on Polar scheduled service one day and then with a flick of the magic wand, SHEZAMM, out of the smoke and mirrors, the same freight just magically arises out of the dust cloud as Atlas freight. Just frigging amazing.

Polar crews didn't seem to have a problem with taking Atlas A/C and customers resulting in Atlas furloughs while Polar hired off the street when the company was making a negotiating point to the Atlas union.


http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[WhaleFR8]

Just a couple of points.

The first is that Polar had a code-share agreement with Qantas not block space and not ACMI. They were ill equipped to do what Atlas is doing now which is to open up markets that Qantas would not have access to.

Secondly, Polar NEVER would have gotten started themselves if it were not for Southern Air Transport.

Next is the fact that the original Polar was never designed to make money. It was designed to generate revenue from some old clapped out lease returns to Polaris leasing which was part of GE capital. Old Jack Welch decided to put the airframes to work instead of letting them rot in the desert.

Another point of fact is that NO non-integrated cargo carrier has ever made money unless they were also heavy into ACMI which Polar never was and which the Polaroids think is terrible (unless of course they want it).

Finally, as a stand alone Polar was within a month of bankruptcy when Atlas bailed them out - the Polar pilots have had jobs for the last six years that they would not have had and they haven't thanked Atlas - so why is it they want Atlas pilots to thank Tower?

Just another example of the whacked out thinking coming from Green Turtle Key.

Uncle Bobo Wrote:The merger has not happened and whether it ever happens is currently in the hands of an arbitrator to decide. Not true. The merger is GOING to happen. Whether the Polar pilots will be a part of it is in the hands of the arbitrator
The entire question comes down to whether or not Polar's scope clause in their currrent contract will be honored and complied with. Nothing more, nothing less. Actually not true either. The ENTIRE question rests in the definition of complete operational merger. The Polar scope clause says nothing about certificates - so the arbitrator gets to decided what is a complete operational merger. To date Atlas has combined virtually every aspect of the operations with the exception of the pilots. I would say that is a complete operational merger.

Polar wants their contract to be abided by and Atlas wants to strip Polars scope clause out, merge and get the seats out of the projected DHL windfall. The Atlas pilots want nothing of the sort. If you make it to the combined seniority list the windfall will be yours also. Also keep in mind that the DHL contract was negotiated by and for ATLAS AIR Worldwide Holdings. As far as I know no Polar management official was even involved. Why - oh yeah that whole complete merger thingy. Sorry Bobo - you lose this arguement.

[CR2]

Ask the folks at China Airlines. They had no cargo operation before we showed

They did actually; think it was 3 -200 full freighters.

[WhaleDriver]

You are right about China Airlines, I stand corrected.

[layinlow]

Whale

FYI Polar was started by Ned Wallace (ex Flying Tiger).
The way it was explained to me by those who were there at the beginning, Ned originally wanted to keep the name Flying Tiger and Fed Ex said no; then he tried Polaris but there was a company already named Polaris. He finally settled on Polar and the call sign was originally "Polar-Tiger" and later the Tiger was dropped.
GE didn't become involved until many years later.

[L-38]

Beg to differ, layinlow.
GE was a partner (49%) with Uncle Ned from the beginning - thru a partnership with Polaris Leasing, a subsidiary of GE.

Because FedEx was moving in a different direction with their acquisition of Tiger's at the time, Ned then tried to copy old Flying Tiger's with every detail inclusive of routes ect - right down to their logo (he used a a rope circle "P" instead of the Tiger's rope circle "T"). . . . Uncle Ned defaulted on a loan back in 98, and that's when GE took over 100%.

(Trivia - I am told that Polar's "circle P" logo was an initial insult to some Japanese with WWII remembrance, because of it's design similarity which mimicked occupied Japan's POW logo that was printed on the uniformed shirt backs of many Jap detainees).

[CR2]

So, what about the arbitration?

:hmm:

[Earl]

Yes what happened with the arbitration.
Does Atlas have a few new F/E's?

[rob rilly]

Cato and company had meeting delayed till Dec. 19..........

:= Not having that x CR2

[layinlow]

L-38

I stand corrected. Thanks, after 7 years since basic indoc, the mind goes fuzzy, especially at 63!

[L-38]

I understand that Polar's FE arbitration had actually gone it's distance over the scheduled two days, however the company then requested a third day - Dec 19.

Any thoughts?

[layinlow]

To be honest, I haven't a clue. I would hope they are trying to work out a compromise.

[WhaleFR8]

What would be a compromise in your mind?

[rob rilly]

Is a compromise any of your concern ?! I really didn't think so. But go ahead and make up your own. Seems like that always happens.:ugh:

[fuegolibre]

you too can sign your own posts even on this forum. Or did your Mama name you Whale?

This is pretty childish, as I have learned to expect from you and your cadre. You, rob rilly and LANCEDVR have this infatuation about Atlas crew members signing their names to posts here when you and yours have not done so yourselves. Done so on this thread and others while petitioning for it from the Atlas side. Hopefully this is not how you negotiate with the company, but I doubt it.

The Atlas crew side has at least gone onto the ALPA National Boards in which their names are in full view of all ALPA members. That cannot be said of the Polar side. Only an ex-Polar guy who has now withdrawn after realizing his misinformation and an ex-Polar MEC Vice Chairman to say he knew nothing after the ALPA board ruling on Polar's filing of false charges showed up and quickly withdrew after his excuse of ignorance. Log on and use the search function for "Atlas" or "Polar".

As to the arbitration being put off till the 19th, that had a lot not mentioned of the events. I won't go into myself since you will not like the answer, which it will only prolong this thread. You should be more interested in what the ALPA Executive Board is going to say in January.

交渉することを学びなさい。あなたのある議長を信じてはいけない。

http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[CR2]

Good grief :ugh::ugh:

Arbitration was the topic. If you want to have a mud throwing competition, go do it on someone else's bandwidth.

:*

[Miami Freight]

It was nice of the Atlass MEC to send a lackey to testify on behalf of the company at the arbitration about furloughing PFE's out of seniority this past week. I'm sure he was going to tell the arbitrator about how the Atlass crewmembers were being hurt by the Polar MEC. "we cant' get rid of Standsted, AABO, our work rules suck, etc." Fact is the Atlass crews have a most junior unfriendly contract. They have multiple classes of crewmembers; Gateway/No Gateway. They have not shown solidarity among themselves, now they demand it from a Polar pilots while reveling in the demise of Polar. All the while they sell each other out for the almighty dollar (outbasing). Poor Paul. What a no win situation for him. Testify and not help the company and he is screwed. Testify and help the company he is a scumbag to his fellow pilots. Unfortunately for him, he has to actually face his fellow pilots. Couldn't any of the two semi retired MEC members make it? You know the guys who don't even remember what the cockpit of a 747 looks like. Too busy with their outside interests? When are you going to understand that Scope is the lifeblood of a union? That is what this whole thing is about. Without the protections of scope all of the work rules, pay and benefits are meaningless. Are you going to take the word of Cato, AAWH, and DHL that everything will be Okay? Check out the history of these entities then look at this link http://allaboutfrogs.org/stories/scorpion.html. You are the frog and Cato is the scorpion.
Everyone wants a new contract, better pay, work rules etc. What you have failed to learn is that sacrifices must be made. It is hard to get what you want in this environment. Labor has few tools since the RLA is very management friendly. These arbitrations are not fun for anyone. But they are the only tool that labor has to leverage their position.
Blast away merc, looking forward to your spin on what happened this week, I'm sure you will post it as soon as Cato feeds it to your MEC.

[WhaleDriver]

Not wanting to speak for anyone, but maybe the Atlas MEC was responding to the attention the Polar MEC gave to the ALPA Sponsored scab list ADR. BTW, ALPA National has certainly noticed.

Here was Polars chance of a lifetime to show the world the tons of evidence the Polar MEC said they had against the Atlas crew members. One Polar guy shows up with hearsay. So much for integrity!

Again I say, when the average line Polaroid finds out how much they've been lied to, there's going to be a lynching. That may be some of the motivation for delays? BTW, scope is just the latest delay. When and if they were to get the scope they want, then there will be something else...trust me.

[Heilhaavir]

<<Couldn't any of the two semi retired MEC members make it? You know the guys who don't even remember what the cockpit of a 747 looks like.>>

Just out of curiosity, have the 2 Bobs seen one lately?

[JohnGalt]

Can anyone tell me why the Chairman of the Atlas Air Negotiating Committee, who was to testify as a witness for AAWH against the Polar union, was at the Polar F/E furlough arbitration hearing this past week?????? :confused: :confused: :confused:

To me, it says a lot about union solidarity for all pilots at Atlas Air. :O :O :O

[fuegolibre]

Can anyone tell me why the Chairman of the Atlas Air Negotiating Committee, who was to testify as a witness for AAWH against the Polar union, was at the Polar F/E furlough arbitration hearing this past week?????? :confused: :confused: :confused:

My first guess would be to protect the interests of the Atlas crewmembers, if he was to testify at all. There has been a long documented history of the Polar council making gains at the expense of other union council brothers/sisters.

To me, it says a lot about union solidarity for all pilots at Atlas Air. :O :O :OPolars filing of false Article VIII charges to fraudulently defame all the Atlas crewmembers and the 160 named says a lot about union solidarity for all pilots at Polar. I could go on with a couple of volumes of Polars lack of council to council union solidarity. The ALPA site ADR below is a fine example.

https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=41172

[layinlow]

I don't think so fuegolibre. Polar has been hanging on due to the excellent representation of our MEC. If any Atlas crews have been hurt, it is through your management. I suggest you read Miami Freight's excellent posting. It says it all. The union only wants the CBA followed and the MEC is fighting tooth and nail to make it so. What is wrong with that? If he succeeds, then fantastic, but if he fails, we all know the MEC did their best and that is all that can be asked for. You should be so lucky with your council.

[WhaleDriver]

There was suppose to be a hearing yesterday? Let me guess, delayed again?

[L-38]

No word out yet.

[fuegolibre]

They didn't get all the witnesses done by both sides. I think the trouble now is getting everyone's schedules to match for a couple of days to finish the cross examinations (management, arbiter, and the Polar group).

BTW, the Atlas pilot rep was not there to testify despite what you have been told by Hair and Henderson.

[JohnGalt]

"fuegolibre" says the Atlas pilot rep was not there to testify...

So the Atlas Chairman of their Negotiating Committee was not there at the Polar F/E furlough arbitration hearings (this week in Washington and last week in NY) to testify for AAWH against the Polar union--------then what the h.ll was he there for?????? He was obviously sanctioned to be there by the Atlas MEC.

As "fuegolibre" says further, "...I guess to protect the interests of Atlas Air crewmembers..." from the bad guys at Polar. My, My, My. Can you imagine a Delta senior union official showing up at a Fedex union arbitration against Fedex and saying I'm here just to make sure, you the Fedex pilots union, don't do something to screw up our relationship with Fedex mgt and cause us harm. Pitiful!!!:yuk: Absolutely pitiful!!!!:yuk::yuk::yuk:

Many allegations have been made against the Atlas MEC concerning their being in bed with Cato and AAWH mgt. Merc, fuego, and his fellow echoers say no and where is the evidence to support such an allegation.

Well-----the Atlas Negotiating Committe Chairman's attendance at a Polar-AAWH arbitration hearings speaks volumes as to the Atlas MEC incestuous relationship with their mgt.

What gives the right to the Atlas Air MEC to be a "butinsky" in someone else's interests. Obviously, Atlas Air negotiating committee chairman would not be there if it was not allowed by Cato/AAWH mgt. He was there. Cato/AAWH mgt/Atlas MEC said ok. Evidence.

[WhaleDriver]

First, I have no inside info on why he was there.

But, if he was there because he was present at previous proceedings (merger negotiations) that are of importance to this arbitration, why not. What, you don't like it because he may actually curtail some free wheeling spin of the truth (lying) by the Polar MEC at this and other proceedings? If he's there to maintain some semblance of truth, bravo.

BTW, Atlas/Polar is just a wee bit different that your FedEx/Delta example, but don't let that stop the spin......

[fuegolibre]

I know everyone would love to think that there is some really deep conspiracy between the Atlas union and management, but there isn't. The Polar MEC and Robin Hair just want their membership to believe it that way.

The simple fact is, the presence of the Negotiation chair of the Atlas membership is to see first hand what can affect the Atlas crewmembers again as a result of this arbitration. Anything less would be irresponsible to the Atlas membership. It also falls very - very short of the Polar MEC crashing uninvited Atlas council meetings, phone conferences, Global Pilots Alliance Meetings with DHL, and a few others uninvited. Besides, the arbiter had no problem with the chairman's attendance.

One of the Polar council demands (#4 of 5) of remedy in this arbitration is the retaking of Atlas flying and A/C again to upgrade 37 and the rehiring of the furloughed F/E's. Which of course would mean possible stagnation at the Atlas crews council if not a possible furlough again. #4 noted here in an excerpt of Polars demanded remedy:

http://cptaudio.com/polararb4.png


The contract customers and A/C mentioned are the same exact flying that was taken originally from the Atlas crews during their initial contract negotiations and then given to the Polar council as a negotiation tactic by the company against the Atlas council resulting in about 170 Atlas furloughs. Noted on slide 11 on this Click Here For Flash Slide Show (http://cptaudio.com/merger/Oct31ADRPanel.swf)(opens a new window - click on each image for next slide).

So essentially, it is like a thief that got caught stealing - went to jail and then gets out only to sue you for what he stole from you (though for a short time) to begin with in this arbitration.

I would say there is an interest in the Atlas council sitting in to listen in on what is going on. I'm kind of surprised that the Polar council has taken such a view, unless they go into the "say anything" mode again to win.

My statement on my previous post pretty much stands despite how much you don't like hearing the truth.
http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpost.php?p=3775147&postcount=47

BTW, does anyone want the full list of demanded remedies in this arbitration that the arbiter has agreed to address in this?

[WhaleFR8]

I do have insight why he was there. He was there to represent the Atlas Pilots and to make sure that the hearings were conducted honestly and with integrity. Something that the Polar MEC should understand as they claim that is what they do for the Polar Pilots.

[L-38]

"So essentially, it is like a thief that got caught stealing - went to jail and then gets out only to sue you for what he stole from you"

Wow, what an analogy! . . . . I had thought it was more like Polar being almost bankrupt, cold and hungry, brought in from the rain, offered shelter and then raped.

An Air Force reservist friend of mine who fly's C5's into DOV, RMS and KWI had told me that now and then he hears a Polar call sign on the field. When he looks, it's always another Atlas airplane. . . Historically, Polar has flown a lot of AMC flying, and today they fly almost zero of it.

- - - - - MR. Arbitrator - Give unto Polar what is Polar's! - - - -

[JohnGalt]

(1) WhaleFR8 says…..”I do have insight why he was there. He was there to represent the Atlas Pilots and to make sure that the hearings were conducted honestly and with integrity….” [Sounds a little like Alexander Haig after Reagon was shot in 1981----I’m in charge]

(2) WhaleDriver says….”What, you don't like it because he may actually curtail some free wheeling spin of the truth (lying) by the Polar MEC at this and other proceedings? If he's there to maintain some semblance of truth, bravo….”

My, My, My….What idiotic, moronic, and insane statements!!!:yuk::yuk:

Can you imagine how the arbitrator would react to such statements? To be told that he is incapable of managing a fair and impartial hearing is beyond belief.

The arbitrator is an esteemed and well regarded professional who has conducted 100’s of arbitrations over the past 30 years. To imply that this gentleman cannot preside over a fair arbitration on the matters at hand is totally freaking nuts. Says a lot about intellect and creditability of WhaleFR8 and WhaleDriver.

(3) fuego says…..”The simple fact is, the presence of the Negotiation chair of the Atlas membership is to see first hand what can affect the Atlas crewmembers again as a result of this arbitration. Anything less would be irresponsible to the Atlas membership.

A fair statement. If I were the Atlas MEC, I would want to know everything possible that could affect my pilots. My problem would be one of ethics. If I could cut a deal and get in bed with AAWH mgt to gain this insight, I would have to weigh the pros and cons of such a decision. The upside is I get info. The downside is that I would be negatively viewed by my union brethren in the industry for interfering in somebody else’s business. The Atlas MEC chose to get the “info” and the Atlas Negotiating Committee Chairman chose to be the Alger Hiss. :=:=

The Polar union objected to the presence of the Atlas Air Negotiating Committee Chairman at these hearings. The arbitrator agreed that this was a fair challenge and asked AAWH why this “third party” was present. Jim Cato, AAWH mgt, then piped up and said that this mole, sorry, I mean individual, was to be a witness and testify on AAWH’s behalf. The arbitrator ruled saying that if this was so, then the “third party” could stay.

So it really boils down to ethics. The Atlas MEC and the Atlas Negotiating Committee Chairman should ask themselves these questions:

--- What price do I sell my soul for?
--- How low do I stoop to obtain my objectives?
--- Can I look myself in the mirror?
--- How much do I value my word and integrity?

[Christian Polyp]

What is the date of the next scheduled arbitration hearing?

[Miamfreight]

"I do have insight why he was there. He was there to represent the Atlas Pilots and to make sure that the hearings were conducted honestly and with integrity."

Isn't that the arbitrators job?

[Best Angle]

Is it true that Jim Cato had an Atlas Union member speak in behalf of AAWH?

If this is not "in bed", I don't know what is.

[WhaleDriver]

Give us a date, time and place, or are you guys spinning BS again?

[Christian Polyp]

Mega dittos WhaleDriver. I just can’t understand why people make derogatory remarks about Mr. Cato.

[L-38]

The FE arbitration now seems to resume again in February.

I suspect it's result may somehow integrate with the closely re-scheduled merger arbitration. A logical arbitrator remedy (if Polar is forced to merge) would be to back pay Polar's FE's again, and dissolve the "no bump no flush" clause as pertains to Polar FE's returning on the FE merge list.

Such conclusion would almost certainly peak Atlas MEC interest.

[WhaleFR8]

Cool - dissolve the "no bump-no flush" and we can dissolve the whole list. Then the Atlas Pilots can take their rightful seniority.

Just out of curiosity, how many more times are the Atlas pilots going to catch one of the Polar MEC trying to call in to one of their quarterly meetings? Or catch one of the Polar pilots trying to attend in person? The Atlas negotiating chair was merely at the arbitration to observe. Regardless of what Bobbrobbin are telling you he was not there at the Behest of the company. I doubt the company cares, or would need, an Atlas council person there to testify on their behalf. You guys are really whacked. Better than half of you do not even still work for Polar.

[fuegolibre]

It appears that the Polar MEC (Bobb) and Robin Hair are losing control of their little house of cards or this is just getting under their skin. Looks like a full court press of disinformation is going on again to cover themselves. So I see that Bobb and Robin have been making the usual calls and emails to the normal Polar crowd resulting in the previous posts with seeded lies. They like that since it is not a public disclosure they can be held to. Using select members to spread what they want heard - not what is the truth and then deny that they ever said it to anyone.

You have to sit back and think about who has the better track record of honesty, the Polar MEC or the Atlas council. Just one fine, recent, and more publicly obvious example of typical Polar MEC and council behavior is found here with the alternative dispute resolution here https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=41172 in which the ALPA President Captain Prater had to apologize on Polars behalf for their actions of falsely accusing Atlas and 160 named as "scabs". These lies were also encouraged by the Polar MEC/council prior to the Polar strike and continue to this day without remorse for over two years. Since Polar,by majority action, seems to have no moral principles, then it is not much of a leap for more lies to enter here on this thread.

Another note on the attendance of one of the Atlas council observing. Bobb and/or Robin didn't mention that the arbiter was willing to sequester the Atlas crewmember outside the hearing. That would have put the Atlas member outside the hearing to sit around waiting for any leaked info or just go home. The arbiter then said if he did that, he would have to sequester the Polar members not directly engaged or testifying in the hearing until called from outside also. I guess Bobb and Robin didn't want that. Maybe they didn't get a chance to rehearse everything they wanted them to say, needing them to hear the previous persons testimony before giving their own.

But as a the devils advocate. If the Atlas member was to testify (which he was not there for that - just to observe the proceedings since its results may affect the Atlas council), just what could he say but the truth and facts? Is the Polar case that weak?

As to being in bed with management. Polar has a lot to answer for themselves when they were willing to fly struck A/C and freight as denoted HERE in the ADR Presented Evidence (http://cptaudio.com/merger/Oct31ADRPanel.swf) (Flash Slide Show-Click on each image to forward).

In all, the transcripts will come out at some point down the road. At which time the Polar contingent will care less if we caught them lying again. Just like in the alternative dispute resolution above along with the other cases.

http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[cptvac]

Actually Whale, I just finished reviewing the transcripts:

When Paul's presence was objected to, the Company attorney (Siegel) indicated that Paul's function was as a Company witness.

In Solidarity,

[WhaleFR8]

....and who objected? The Polar attorney? (is it Katz?) Bobb was OK with it - as he really doesn't have anything to hide. Robin on the other hand was royally PO'd (makes one wonder what kind of machinations he actually was planning).

Katz and Siegel were sparring and anything that Katz didn't want Siegel did.

I would think that you would know better than to believe ANYTHING an attorney says in the heat of battle.

Only took two days to argue about what to argue about - delay delay delay.


I thought you had a life and weren't going to post here until after Christmas. And here you are reading arbitration transcripts. hmmmmm.....

[fuegolibre]

Transcripts, so early? Do put them up like the Atlas guys have done in the past or should we just go on your word?

It would be refreshing to hear what actually happened, in whole, instead of just what Robin and Bobb wants everyone to hear. As an example, Bobb's VARS message of 12-22-2007 in which he chose selectively only certain parts to emphasize vs the whole story which says it all. I can pick apart most of that VARS. As can ex-ALPA President Duane Woerth to what really happened as he did in the ADR hearing against Polar.

If the present ALPA President has to apologize for a councils actions (Polar), that in itself says it all for that councils character and morals.

[cptvac]

Whale

The Company attorney stated to the arbitrator that Paul Alves, the Chairman of the Negotiating Committee for Atlas Air's Crewmembers was present at a Polar vs. Company arbitration as a Company witness. Paul arrived with the Company, sat with the Company, and left with the Company while Polar Flight Engineers suffer...

I made a special exception to bring you the truth, Whale.

[fuegolibre]

Here is the Atlas MEC statement on the Polar arbitration and the remedy sought by the Polar council. Has a link inside to a PDF of the requested remedy Polar is seeking. Also touches on why Paul was there.

https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=41286

In RealMedia Audio Click Here (http://cf.alpa.org:4080/ramgen/mec/aai/vars/aaimec993.rm?usehostname)

[joetommy]

My prediction for 2008 is the polar union will win its merger arbitration and then polar air cargo will be sold off. Then the rest of us can get back to business as usual.
Merry Christmas to everyone.

[Lowrider2]

Paul Alves was the Atlas crew member that was fired for not crossing the Polar pick line at the training center.

[fuegolibre]

Paul Alves was the Atlas crew member that was fired for not crossing the Polar pick line at the training center.

Just another fine example of how any good deed for the Polar Council never goes unpunished. Paul now faces accusations that he is in bed with management from the Polar side despite his previous proof of union solidarity.

Like those Atlas crews that walked with Polar on their picket lines and found themselves charged with Article VIII's and named as "Scabs" for their efforts. Spending over two years clearing their names. Just recently cleared in the Alternative Dispute Resolution.

I see a pattern here!

And everyone wonders why we can't get along.

[layinlow]

And a true gentleman he was.

[v1andgo]

Joetommy
Fact for 2008 remains the same as for 2007, AAWH is the majority shareholder of PACW with 51% and 75% of PAC certificate due to foreign ownership regulation. Why would AAWH after years of having PAC on live support sell of the golden goose with a recovery in sight. Furthermore, in writing to BB, Randy Clark strongly supports the merger. Both AAWH and DHL want the merger. Also, don't you think if any realistic legal chance existed to stop this from happening that UPS and FedEx would send their lawyers?
I wish both Pilot groups prosperity and growth for 2008 which is realistically, possible, and achievable - TOGETHER.

[whaledriver101]

V1

You said PAC is on "life support" and the "golden goose" all in one sentence(you must be a democrat). Dont kid yourself,, If PAC lost so much money year after year DHL would not have bought half the thing.

Your damn right the lawyers of ALL the airlines are going to be running to this arbitrator if he's stupid enough to rule against an iron clad scope clause in a contract. If I were UPS management I would be at his desk the next day wanting my pilots scope thrown out as well.

I as well wish growth and prosperity for both companys in 08. But not together.

[BELOWMINS]

whaledriver101
The companies will not be together in 2008. Only the pilot group will be one entity. The single pilot groups (to be) negotiated contract will be linked to what? PACW?, ATLAS AIR?, AAWH?. No one knows and thats the rub. If the contract is linked to AAWH, then the single pilot group
has exclusive rights to all the flying done by AAWH. WHICH IS NONE.

[v1andgo]

whaledriver
at 24 to 26 cent a pound, which is the based on a 65% load factor at a 40 cent per pound market rate as published, PAC did hardly cover its operational costs.
DHL made an investment into PACW because of the China and Japan routes. This business transaction creates a Block space/ ACMI hyprite for the next 20years worth several billion dollars. The new rate under this contract is 50 to 60 cent per pound with a load guarantee. Hence the comment. AAWH had PAC on life support for years now the potential golden goose is showing signs of recovery.

[v1andgo]

Belowmins:
The contact will be with AAWH and cover all certificates of the holding.
Look at the MESA or Republic Airways Holdings. Their single CBA states that all flying done by any certificate owned by the holding will be done by Pilots on the single seniority list.
Asked the ALPA lawyers. This is a much better solution than having two separate lists and CBAs owned by one holding company.
Example:
Trans States Holdings GoJet and Trans States Airlines. Playing one group against the other.

[EJetCA]

As someone who has significance with RAH, let me interject some differences.

RAH started out as one company that became 3. There was always one pilot group. The sole addition was in the addition of the Shuttle America Certificate, which brought about 90 pilots into the group of about 1200 at the time. This is significantly different than acquiring a second airline intending to merge it into one, then, changing mid-course and desiring to maintain the separate certificates.

Even thought the RAH group is under one contract, that does not mean a unified pilot group. There are pilots from each company that won't speak because "grey is gay" (meaning the S5 pilots ID colors) and "red is dead" (CHQ ID) and alot of pilots at RW won't speak to anyone because a lot have a "holier-than-thou" attitude since they are J4J captains. Also, the way the contract is worded, and the IND FSDO's inability to read the 8400.10, it is far more difficult to transfer certificates than you think.

As someone who's operated under both circumstances, it matters not whether there are 2 independant airlines or 1 under an umbrealla. What really matters is that pilots look out for other pilots. In fighting is exactly what the management wants. The problems that exist now would not be any different than if a merger were to come to pass. There will still be fragmented groups. Even if there is one list, but still two certificates, inspite of what is being sent from the Pulpit in Purchase, you will be tied to one certificate or the other for a long, long time. The "seamless" transition does not exist yet (at least at RAH or MESA). I'm well studied in the subject matter from an academic side as well as personal experience.

Until both groups quit acting like school kids fighting over a pile of dirt, we can have one carrier, one certificate and one list for a long time before anything changes. What MGT is proposing is unique to the industry. It is unlike any previous merger, and it would be wise for us to debate on here all the angles, whether one list is the best or two lists with protected CBAs are best. Don't forget what we do WILL have many future impacts. Right now, I bet ATA-World-NorthAmerican MGT is watching what happens here so they can manipulate their groups.

There's a reason 49% Equity and 25% control was sold to DHL. Polar is a hedge fund proposal away from being sold. Don't forget the institutional investors don't give a rat's ass about "operational integrity" or anything else. They care about ROI. If some rich Harvard kids can make a case to buy if from AAWH, guess what's going to happen? They will buy it then "contract" services from AAWH to run the show

[v1andgo]

Dear EjetCa:
I support your notion to debate and discuss the issue like adults 100%.
Indeed the long-term ramification of our action today are critical for our future. Hence, the Union leadership from both sides needs to engage into meaningful dialog with each other and not against each other.
Unifying, the groups is not a matter of one seniority but rather a lengthy process after the single CAB is in place and may take years. But the process will never start unless we have one seniority list and one CBA. Otherwise operating two independent pilot groups with two CBAs under one umbrella organization will make contract negotiations for either party more difficult.
Isn't it true that after the Atlas/Polar transaction, either side accuses the other of undermining their respective CBA negotiations. Atlas in 00/01 and Polar in 05.
Followed by aircraft transfer and furloughs, in both directions. EjetCa correct me, this will not happen at RAH or Mesa under their one seniority and one CBA.

On the other hand, I do not believe you will operate a Polar flight and tomorrow fly an Atlas airplane nor will we ever have these groups sing together cumbyja. But the childishness needs to stop and we need to look forward. Matter of fact, you never have a 100% unified love all pilot group.
For 2008, I can only hope we can engage into a meaningful exchange of ideas on this board. Let's discuss concerns, possibilities, real opportunities and real threads ( no imaginary ).

[L-38]

EJetCA -
"Even thought the RAH group is under one contract, that does not mean a unified pilot group . . .There are pilots from each company that won't speak. . . . The problems that exist now (Atlas/ Polar) would not be any different than if a merger were to come to pass. . . and - Don't forget the institutional investors don't give a rat's ass about "operational integrity".

V1andgo -
"Unifying, the groups is not a matter of one seniority but rather a lengthy process after the single CAB is in place and may take years."

These are all very pertinent and very astute comments. Human nature, being what it is, will not make the Atlas/Polar situation promising after a merger. A few pilot generations must pass after unification. History dictates so - ie Northwest/Republic.

We are our own worst enemy!

[fuegolibre]

I believe even ALPA President Captain Prater stated that the final outcome of the combined carriers as planned would be like the Air Micronesia (?) - Continental scenario. Two certificates and one pilot group. Which was fine with Polar up until the "follow the flying" didn't happen for Polar. Then all of a sudden there was "no merger" from the Polar camp.

Yes, it will take a thinning of the ranks over time to get rid of the animosity.

The current arbitration being discussed is a further example of "getting mine" council mentality, forgetting those that originally lost jobs to the others benefit in the beginning.

http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[Pil0tsGirl]

I'm Wondering

Can’t Atlas management just decide to get rid of polar?

I don’t mean sell it or declaring bankruptcy. I’m wondering if management can just say that they are stopping all polar Air Inc. operations.

I don’t know of any law that requires a company to stay in business if that business is losing money. Wouldn’t it be a wise business decision to terminate a losing proposition before being forced to declaring bankruptcy?

That way, Atlas Air World Wide can use those freed up airplanes for money making customers at their other operations.

I think the stock holders would like that.

?

[trashhauler]

Ahhh. there's the rub. AAWH says Polar is losing money and a lot of people buy into it; hook, line, and sinker, particularly some of the Atlas people. The problem is the books are closed. DHL wouldn't buy into a company just for the routes because if it was losing money, the routes wouldn't matter.
There is something going on and the managemnt is keeping it close to their greedy little vests. But what ever it is it is the crews that will take it in the shorts.

[EJetCA]

This whole "making money" and "losing money" argument is tiring. I'll bet the only thing that can be proven is AAWH is making or losing money. AAWH hires accountants and tax lawyers to show what they want to show. Through special "one-time" writeoffs or credits, and many, many other devices, AAWH can show each subsidiary as "making" or "losing" money. I'll bet the end of the 1Q they'll show a 1-time writeoff for the 3 Classics being parked, and claim 5Y is posting a loss.

The real deal will begin when foreign ownership is allowed and DHL buys the remaining 51% of PO.

My $.02

[layinlow]

You are exactly right!!!

[atlast]

"The real deal will begin when foreign ownership is allowed and DHL buys the remaining 51% of PO."

DHL don't have 49% of PO.
They have 49% of Polar Air Worldwide Holdings.
PAWW have no airplanes, no aircrew and no problems.

When Criss Angel plays the shell game, he doesn't do it as well
as AAWH Management can, but the result is the same and it's a
MINDFREAK!

[EJetCA]

PAWW is the successor to PO, no? So the PO CBA and operation belong to PAWW.....At least that's the way AAWH MGT explains it.....

[L-38]

Yes, for the short term they do explain it that way , however mngmt simultaneously professes that the PO CBA and operation is intended to be merged.

Perhaps mngmnt placed the cart before the horse.

[EJetCA]

L-38,
The funny thing is it will not be merged operationally. They do have a "future provision" in the DHL agreement to provide the "crews". Right now 5Y only provides Maintenance and Insurance, Aircraft and Crews are provided by PO(the agreement is, I believe the first link.). They anticiapte providing crews when the SCBA is effective. Making it, in their words, a CMI agreement. Must be where they get the "ACMI-like" phrase from they constantly spout.

At RAH, each airline still has its own operational control facility.

The only merger that can be proposed under the current set-up (keeping 5Y and PO certificates to satisfy DHL), will be administrative, seniority list and CBA. Each certificate will STILL be required to have all required Part 119 positions. So, PO will still have A DO, DOM, CP, dispatchers, schedulers, certain MX positions, it's own ID's and airplanes that say "Operated by Polar Air Cargo" somewhere by the door.

Please don't take my word for it, do your own research, as I can be as wrong as can be. Look up Part 119 and required personnel, as well as requirements for maintaining operational control. Bear in mind that maintaining 2 certificates will have to meet required staffing. Certain things can, and will be combined, but those functions are already combined. Right now, sans pilots bidding back and forth, the company is as integrated as it will be, unless they merge certificates.

A definition of PACWW's relationship to PO. From the 30 JUN 07 10Q "Holdings is the parent company of two principal operating subsidiaries, Atlas Air, Inc. (“Atlas”), which is wholly owned, and Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc. (“Polar”), of which Holdings has a 51% economic interest and 75% voting interest as of June 28, 2007. On June 28, 2007, Polar issued shares representing a 49% economic interest and a 25% voting interest to DHL Network Operations (USA), Inc. (“DHL”), a subsidiary of Deutsche Post AG (“DP”), (see Note 10 for additional discussion of the transaction). Prior to that date, Polar was wholly owned by Holdings and was the parent company of Polar Air Cargo, Inc. (“Polar LLC”). Holdings, Atlas, Polar and Polar LLC are referred to collectively as the “Company”. The Company provides air cargo and related services throughout the world, serving Asia, Australia, the Middle East, Africa, Europe, South America and the United States through: (i) contractual lease arrangements in which the Company provides the aircraft, crew, maintenance and insurance (“ACMI”); (ii) airport-to-airport scheduled air cargo service (“Scheduled Service”); (iii) military charter (“AMC Charter”); and (iv) seasonal, commercial and ad-hoc charter services (“Commercial Charter”). The Company operates only Boeing 747 freighter aircraft. "

Some addtional reading: http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1135185/000095012307011097/y38085exv10w3.htm
http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1135185/000095012307011097/y38085exv10w1.htm

[DHC2 Driver]

For lack of a better place to put this, I heard that Atlas just bought 2 more 747-400Fs (well one is a conversion) and there are two more coming? Any truth to that? One wonders why they didn't go to the Polar side if Polar is doing so well. Also heard the former Polar MEC chair may have resigned. Anyone? Beuhler? Also heard that since this board is now owned by a US company that there is a subpoena in the works to force them to reveal the identity of the "scab announcer."

I've been away for a while so someone clue me in please.

[nitty-gritty]

The Atlas Council side came out with this. Wasn't sure where to put it since it covers a little of the arbitration to compel Polar to merge and how the recent ALPA Executive Board decision ordering Polar to start negotiating might be entered as evidence in it. A few other things also.

Looks like the "Battle Stars" came through from ALPA National reinforcing the ADR that the Polar MEC thumbed their nose at in their message. One side of this equation is losing a lot of support and allies..


Good evening fellow crewmembers, this is MEC Chairman Dave Bourne with a VARS message for Monday evening, January 21, 2008.

Last week we met in Washington with the ALPA Executive Council and today report back to you with two very important announcements.

First, the Executive Council has ordered Polar to immediately begin the Joint Negotiations process with us. This order by the council means that the Polar MEC has been ordered to have their Negotiating committee meet with the Atlas Negotiating committee to begin the process of a joint opener. As you know the company has filed a grievance to compel the Polar MEC to meet its obligations to complete the merger. ALPA's directive does NOT start the 270 day clock for negotiating a new CBA but does make Polar begin preparations for a merger with Atlas Air. This of course is contingent on the outcome of the grievance. We thank the Council for taking this step and look forward to the beginning of negotiations.

The second decision by the Council validated not only the report of the independent ADR Board selected by ALPA President Captain Prater, but tells the world what we've all known all along. The Executive Council approved ALPA "Battle Stars" for all Atlas crewmembers who were on the property during the Polar strike. The battle star signifies that we went on strike...in our case the first and only successful secondary strike in ALPA's history. We were able to get some to take to the Miami base meeting and will be coordinating with Herndon to get them out in the mail very soon.

The preliminary results from the first round of Wilson polling are now in. We will post the data in a few days on the Council web page for you to download.

On Thursday, we travelled to Miami to meet with crewmembers and the instructors and check airmen to discuss various issues and the concerns of the check airmen going forward for the training department. We believe that there are some valid issues to discuss with the company and met with and look forward to continued meetings and open discussions with the new Director of Training Resources Richard Rolland as we go forward.

The base meeting in Miami was very informative; the company is continuing to make steps to secure business and grow for our company with the goal of ensuring job security for the long term. The addition of the two new 400's, increased growth and new customers for both the 400 and the new 800's that are coming to Atlas all point to a strong and diversified business model that will be good for each of us. We were also advised that due to the early filer status of the company with the SEC, we might see the profit sharing come out early, probably in late March.

Thanks again to everyone who came out to meet us, it was great seeing you and we look forward to the next council meeting, which will be in LA in late March.

Until the next update, thanks for calling.

Fly safe.

[rob rilly]

Sure if you want to believe the Bourne-Caputo Spin. You hear a different messege from both sides. If you are an outsider, you have to keep your eyes open to see what really happens. Polar and Atlas are always 180 degrees out in their VARS. Go figure! Not taking sides, just stating the facts....All Crewmembers were sent a letter from Capt. Prater saying the whole problem is with Management (ie J.C.)! DUH !

[nitty-gritty]

I know what you mean.

If nothing else, they did pass out the ALPA issued "Battle Stars" at the last council meeting in MIA.

Just got this pdf file from Pres. Prater on the Executive council resolution to start negotiating despite the company arbitration scheduled later this month.

https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=41658

You'll have to cut and past it into your browser since I've noticed the mods have been yanking posts with active links on them. Don't know if you can upload a file here..

Correction Note....

Select persons are now required moderators approval before posting. I hope I'm not the only one.

[WhaleFR8]

Not that I think PPRUNE will allow this to be posted to anyone as they have censored most of the Atlas guys but here goes...... January 23, 2008
Dear Atlas and Polar Crewmembers:

I am writing pursuant to the instruction of the ALPA Executive Council last week “that the President report to the AAI and PAC pilots on 2007–2008 developments including the terms of this resolution.” The full Executive Council resolution (https://crewroom.alpa.org/DesktopModules/ALPA_Documents/ALPA_DocumentsView.aspx?itemid=12191&ModuleId=8609&Tabid=452) is attached to read at your convenience. This letter will review with you the activities of the Association over the past year involving the many issues facing your groups, the most recent action taken by the ALPA Executive Council, and my view on where things go from here.

Early last year, after the announcement of the complex DHL transaction involving Polar, ALPA worked with both MECs and negotiating committees to craft a joint transition proposal to the Company. This proposal included significant scope enhancements to address this new corporate structure, as a framework for the negotiation of an integrated collective bargaining agreement and an interest arbitration process for the resolution of contract issues on which the parties could not reach timely agreement.

This was done after management indicated that it would consider scope as well as bargaining framework issues as part of reaching a merger transition agreement. Unfortunately, these good-faith efforts were derailed when management changed its position and refused to consider bargaining over scope. My staff and both MECs met with company management several times to try to work out compromises that would jump-start the bargaining process, but management remained steadfast in its refusal to consider scope negotiations, except to indicate a willingness to assure that the current scope protection in both agreements would be a baseline for scope provisions to be included in the integrated collective bargaining agreement. This about-face on the part of management, combined with management’s legal tactics, has impeded and delayed ALPA’s ability to bring this process to a conclusion.

On the legal front, management further complicated matters by filing grievances against ALPA under both collective bargaining agreements, attempting to force joint bargaining and interest arbitration to proceed on its terms, without first addressing scope improvements. Management then filed a lawsuit to attempt to force the Polar management grievance on that issue to proceed on an expedited basis, over the objection of the Polar MEC, rather than having this determined by System Board arbitration. The result of the lawsuit was a consent order providing that the System Board arbitrator would determine how soon the grievance would be heard. That was done, and the hearing on the merits of that grievance, which will determine whether the post-DHL financial investment and corporate structure of your carriers constitutes a merger within the meaning of the Polar CBA, is scheduled in late March. I think it is fair to say that it is the view of all sides that the result of that key arbitration, which should be known by mid-year, will go a long way to bring resolution to the merger issue.

It is also unfortunate that these events have been accompanied by differences between the Atlas and Polar MECs. The ALPA Executive Council has sought to resolve these differences, passing a resolution in October 2007 urging the MECs to meet to work out their differences and report to the Council this month. Per the Executive Council resolution, I convened several discussions with representatives of both MECs, my Executive Administrator, general counsel, ALPA staff, and other national officers.

Last week, after hearing from both MECs that an agreement had not been reached, the Executive Council directed the MECs to meet and work together on negotiations preparations, without prejudice to the position of the Polar MEC in the pending arbitration, and to report on the results at the April 2008 Executive Council meeting, or at an earlier date if I believe that appropriate. You should also be aware that, over the past 12 months, the Executive Council has approved approximately $673,000 to support your two MECs in finding solutions and resolving their differences.

The Council and I believe that this process has taken far longer than it should have, for a variety of reasons, but regardless of the outcome of the Polar System Board arbitration and whether the two groups end up in joint contract bargaining or separate Section 6 negotiations, it is critical that the bargaining processes begin promptly. It is my and the Council’s expectation that the time over the next few months will be used wisely by both groups for negotiations preparations, so that regardless of the outcome of the legal dispute on the merger issue, our members at both Atlas and Polar are timely and well served with new, improved pay rates and working conditions.

The pilots who serve on the Executive Council and I fully understand that issues emanating from corporate transactions, strikes, mergers, arbitrations, and litigation can create problems among our members. But, as union officers, it is our responsibility and our sincere desire that the open issues that divide you be addressed and resolved face to face in the very near future. That is the reason for the Executive Council’s resolution, which allows the Polar MEC position on the merger question to be arbitrated and directs that the two negotiating committees simultaneously prepare for submission of their contract opener(s). In unity,

John H. Prater
President

AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL
101ST REGULAR EXECUTIVE COUNCIL MEETING
January 15-17, 2008
SUBJECT
AAI-PAC Merger
SOURCE
President John Prater (10/07 EXCL, AI #37)

BACKGROUND INFORMATION
In October 2007, the AAI MEC adopted a resolution requesting the President to present the AAI/PAC merged seniority list (the Harris Award) to Atlas Air, Polar Air Cargo, and Atlas Air Worldwide. They further requested that joint contract negotiations with the PAC MEC commence no later than December 14, 2007.

In November 2006, the Executive Council established a program with respect to the AAI-PAC merger and has continued to review the status of developments with respect to the merger.

At the October 2007 meeting, the Executive Council stated its desire to consider whether management would take constructive action to assist both pilot groups in resolving their differences through a negotiated transition agreement which protects the legitimate interests of both pilot groups. They determined that the AAI MEC and PAC MEC should be provided with an opportunity to resolve their differences. Barring resolution, both MECs could appear before the Executive Council before it considers whether additional action is appropriate.

The Executive Council restated its request that the AAI MEC and PAC MEC confer with respect to resolving their differences, with the assistance of the Executive Administrator, and if so directed by the President, report at the January 2008 Executive Council meeting.

FINAL RESOLUTION

WHEREAS the Executive Council on November 30, 2006, established a program with respect to the AAI-PAC merger, and

WHEREAS the Executive Council, at its October 2007 meeting, restated its request that the AAI MEC and PAC MEC confer with respect to resolving their differences, and report at the January 2008 Executive Council meeting, and

WHEREAS the Executive Council has received reports from the respective MECs and considered the issues arising from the inability of the MECs to resolve their differences, and

WHEREAS the Executive Council has determined that the best interests of the pilots will be served by working together on negotiations preparation, without prejudice to the position of the PAC MEC in PAC System Board proceedings concerning the merger,

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the AAI and PAC negotiating committee members, together with the Executive Administrator, jointly convene as soon as possible and prepare for negotiations, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the President report to the AAI and PAC pilots on 2007-2008 developments including the terms of this resolution, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the AAI and PAC MEC Chairmen report to the Executive Council at its April 2008 meeting, or at an earlier date if so directed by the President, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this resolution and the action taken pursuant to its directives shall be without prejudice to the positions of the PAC MEC in pending System Board proceedings and shall not be introduced into or referred to in any way in pending System Board proceedings.

[EJetCA]

Prater's play nice letter. He must have read our pprune discussions :}

Cheers and beers :ok:

[whaledriver101]

ALPA is not in a postion to order anything.

The two MEC's have already sat down and talked and negotiated a couple years ago. Atlas threw in the towel when they didnt want to agree on a "time line fence" for the purchase of PAC. Prater knows this. He sat in on the talks himself.

Again and again and again(for all the pee brains out there) Polar has an iron clad scope clause TIED TO A CERTIFICATE and we expect it to be honored. It really doesnt get any more simple than that.

Atlas,,,, good luck on your future section 6 neg.

[free at last]

i donot what universe you live in, scope clause means nothing, ask ur self an old timer, and anybody that has lost senority, jobs, retirement, :)

[WhaleFR8]

101 - you must have missed the several dozen posts that say that it is not the "certificate" that is in question. What IS the question is whether this is a "complete operational merger." And indeed it is. Every aspect of the company has been merged with the exception of the pilot groups. Your version of the talks between the two MECs is also quite simply wrong, and there have been many many posts that contain the actual facts that refute your statement. It is pointless to continue to spout your disingenuous rhetoric.

[pilotgeek]

"complete operational merger." "with the exception of the pilot groups. "

?????????????????????????????????:confused::confused::confus ed:

[BELOWMINS]

Every aspect has been merged except those required to maintain two certificates .

[L-38]

"i donot what universe you live in, scope clause means nothing, ask ur afterall,self an old timer, and anybody that has lost senority, jobs, retirement"

A scope clause should mean at least something. It's part of a contract and after all, it does show intent. If the scope is proven worthless, then a big sorry woe be unto all of labor!!

[mustangsally]

I don't know why I get a kick out of these two groups? Kind of like two seven year olds fighting in the back seat. And one of them yells, Mommy he's on my side! And the other yells, she hit me!

The two cerificates under FAR 121/119 each require appointed and approved management positions. Such as a Director of Operation, Director of Maintenance, Chief Pilot, etc... There is no reason why John Jones could not be the DO for "A" and "B" airline and the same for the other approved positions. All the manuals could be the same maybe even having both logo/company names on the header of each page. The aircrews could also all come from the same group or for that matter a third crew providing company. No where in the FAR's does it direct an airline to even have a seniority list. It is as simple as each seat must be trained for that seat.

The reason for maintaining two certificates has more to do with route awards than anything else and maybe brand idenity.

The longer the two groups keep throwing rocks at each others window, the long it will take to have a cohesive group. Grow up guys and gals and you both will be way ahead at the end of the day.

[BELOWMINS]

mustang
Better reread 119.65 (a). All those positions mentioned must be full time.

[mustangsally]

Below,

Don't really want to join all this BS. I'll give you the credit for FAR 119.65. The positions are "full time." With that said, both the Atlas and Polar corporate sites, list a Mr. Kelly as Director of Safety. So one man, one position the same at both companies. Since this is the case, then why not the other required positions?

With in the FAA oversight how many POI's or PMI's oversee the company?

If it is so bad, why not move on? Life is just to short to be behaving badly.

:=

[nitty-gritty]

Hmmm,

I believe that Pres. Prater and his legal staff made a statement to the combined Atlas/Polar MEC that the Atlas/Polar merged model will mirror the Air Micronesia and Continental (two certificates - one pilot group) model. Not unexpected since many of the upper Atlas management that initiated the Atlas/Polar merger are from Continental and Eastern.

So I would say there is some basis to the merger already in place despite our resident experts opinions.

[iahtexan747400]

Exactly! Lets move on already.

[EJetCA]

Atlas Profits
Atlas Air Worlwide Holdings is flying more profitably thanks to its scheduled freighter service but the carrier says it plans to put more of its aircraft into its core ACMI business. emphasis added
The parent of Atlas Air and Polar Air Cargo showed a $32.4 million net profit in the third quarter, a four-fold improvement over last year, and revenue grew nearly 10 percent to $395.9 million.
Most of that improvement came in Polar's forwarder-focused scheduled business, as well as a big jump in commercial charters.more added emphasis Revenue from ACMI operations was down nearly 12 percent in the first nine months of the year and makes up only about 22 percent of AAWH's overall revenue.
But Atlas says six 747-400s coming to the carrier through DHL's $150 million investment in Polar will take a role in the ACMI business. WTF, over? Six coming?

"(The 747s) will migrate from the scheduled service platform they are operating in today to a platform that will generate a profit contribution more consistent with our traditional ACMI operations, while mitigating traditional scheduled-service risks such as fuel," said Atlas President and CEO William J. Flynn.

Just so I understand: The big improvement was in Polar's scheduled service, and they are going to move airplanes from this "profit center" to (C - if we get hosed)MI service to get a profit margin more consistent?:ugh:

[LANCERDVR]

Scope is the most valuable aspect of any labor contract. Without scope a labor contract is worthless. Polars crewmembers faught hard for its labor protective provisions, calling a strike in 1999 to get it and a fair quality of life contract. Cato and AAWH want nothing to do with such a contract and have worked diligently to pit these two pilot groups against each other. Prater and the Atlas MEC have no business mettling in the Polar pilots rights. Shame on them. The Atlas MEC needs to get some coconuts and fight for a respectable contract on there own and stop kissing managements bums. An piece of the Polar scope provision follows and seems very clear.

D. LABOR PROTECTIONS.
1. In the event of a complete operational merger between the Company and another air carrier (i.e., the combination of all the assets of the two carriers), the following seniority-integration procedures will apply:

Polar remaining Polar and Atlas remaining Atlas does not constitute a "complete operational merger".

[WhaleDriver]

I'll try and work thru this, but it is with limited knowledge and some assumptions.



Atlas Profits
Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings is flying more profitably thanks to its scheduled freighter service but the carrier says it plans to put more of its aircraft into its core ACMI business. emphasis added
The parent of Atlas Air and Polar Air Cargo showed a $32.4 million net profit in the third quarter, a four-fold improvement over last year, and revenue grew nearly 10 percent to $395.9 million.

First, both Atlas and Polar have scheduled service now. Atlas's has a good profit with theirs because the US government usually pays to get the plane to HKG or ICN, so very few loads of unpaid sailboat fuel to Asia. Polars profits are there because it has been trimmed to just a few better margin cities, but the loads back to Asia are limited. This is where the DHL deal is huge. They will be a fixed amount of pallet space paid for by DHL, used or not. Kinda like ACMI, paid for no matter what.



Most of that improvement came in Polars forwarder-focused scheduled business, as well as a big jump in commercial charters. more added emphasis

It does not say, "The big improvement was in Polars scheduled service". Read it again. "Most of that improvement" was Polar AND big jump in commercial charters.




Revenue from ACMI operations was down nearly 12 percent in the first nine months of the year and makes up only about 22 percent of AAWH's overall revenue.

Only one -200 doing ACMI now. Used to be more.



But Atlas says six 747-400s coming to the carrier through DHL's $150 million investment in Polar will take a role in the ACMI business. WTF, over? Six coming?

"(The 747s) will migrate from the scheduled service platform they are operating in today to a platform that will generate a profit contribution more consistent with our traditional ACMI operations, while mitigating traditional scheduled-service risks such as fuel," said Atlas President and CEO William J. Flynn.

When the Polar planes start flying for DHL, they won't be considered schedule service anymore? The six are the Polar -400's and maybe they will be considered ACMI (ref. the first quoted sentence) once DHL pulls the strings, using Polars landing rights? Atlas got China Airlines into a lot of US cities, because Atlas was a flag carrier, that CAL's could not have gotten into as easily on their own.

This has been said before. The ACMI -400's are the big money makers. The pure scheduled service -400's, don't clear the profit the ACMI planes do, so by guaranteeing loads with DHL, the scheduled service planes (now ACMI) will be making closer to the ACMI ones and have less risk than scheduled-service with fuel prices, as an example.

[WhaleDriver]

Scope is the most valuable aspect of any labor contract. Without scope a labor contract is worthless. Polars crewmembers faught hard for its labor protective provisions, calling a strike in 1999 to get it and a fair quality of life contract. Cato and AAWH want nothing to do with such a contract and have worked diligently to pit these two pilot groups against each other.


Scope, I don't disagree. Let's see. A strike in 1999. Yep, for a couple hours. Your right. But, you were dealing with a management that knew they were going to sell you pretty soon. That was tough? We on the other hand were dealing with an anti-labor management and a guy named Cato, post 9/11, and had some folks talking about flying our planes. Yep, our contract ended up with nice pay, s**ty work rules.


Prater and the Atlas MEC have no business mettling in the Polar pilots rights. Shame on them. The Atlas MEC needs to get some coconuts and fight for a respectable contract on there own and stop kissing managements bums. An piece of the Polar scope provision follows and seems very clear.

I think Prater is paying the bills, so yes, he has some rights. If Polar was paying assessments, I bet the Polar MEC would work a little harder at making deals vs going to arbitration on everything. I believe he mentioned that the Polar/Atlas stuff was over $670K. BTW, how are your sec. 6 negotiations going? Your contract has been open for amendment now for almost a year?

[L-38]

With regards to Polar's scope - I recall a negotiating committee member explaining it back in 99 when he had exclaimed - "Gentleman, we may not have acquired the wage improvements that we were aiming for, however be assured that our new scope agreement is about the best in the industry, big boys included". . .
I also recall his exuberant exclamation "I can't believe that management had accepted it".

It's this same scope that is under fire today. Jagernaught Cato and company may think they have discovered the Northwest passage around it, however they have yet to sail.


Also, unless Polarioids have actually experienced / lived through "Atlas eyes", it would be impossible for them to fully understand what Atlas crewmember's have historically been going through.

[LANCERDVR]

Yes Polar went on strike in 1999, for 4.5 hours, and refused to fly airplanes as ordered under threat, to achieve a reasonable first contract. The Atlas MEC on the other hand flinched and accepted a lousy contract. The Atlas MEC then tried to place the blame on a group of pilots who were understaffed to fly there own 15 airplanes and somehow going to fly 30+ additional aircraft inorder to undermine the Atlas strike. It was never going to happen, the Polar crew force was counting on the Atlas MEC to achieve an industry leading contract to be piggy backed on by Polars own upcoming bargaining. You really need to give up blaming Polar for the Atlas MECs weak actions.

The Polar pilot group is a solid, staunch, unified group. Not one Polar pilot has ever crossed a picket line and never will. If the Atlas MEC ever gets the nuts to pull the trigger the Polar pilot group will be standing shoulder to shoulder with them to ensure success.

To answer your question on Polars section 6 preparations. They are well under way. The group has been surveyed and the openers are being prepared. The Atlas negotiators, under the direction of the Atlas MEC and JC have refused to actively participate with the Polar negotiators. The smart thing to do would be to prepare identical openers and stand strong together. The Atlas MEC would rather merge to make it easier, not realizing that the company will just aquire another airline and start the same game all over again. The Atlas MEC needs to step down and allow a strong, uncomprimised MEC to take the lead. Great gains are to be had when these two bozos (DB and JC) step aside.

Two more things Whale, how is it you seem to know who or what entity is making money. You don't have a clue. And as for Atlas scheduled service, give me a break, a huge amount of scheduled service Polar was doing is now being flown by Atlas. Markets that Polar have been in since its inception in the early 90s are now being flown on Giant call signs. Atlas does not even have a scheduled frieght sales team. The frieght is being aquired by Polar and shipped on Atlas in numerous markets, they haven't even changed the flight numbers. This is copied and pasted from the companies own Q@A board:


Title: SUB Flights? </B>

Item Number: 3735</B>

Updated: 1/24/2008 11:55:00 AM</B>

Question: Just looked on AIMS at the flight schedule for a particular day, and noticed that there are many flights (Polar)that don't have a tail number assigned to them, but the word SUB next to those flights, who's operating these flights???? </B>
Response: The "SUB" fleet is the modification to AIMS that allows Crew Scheduling and Travel to see and list Atlas crew on Polar flights and visa versa.

I hope you enjoy your profit sharing checks made off the back of Polars business. Spend them proudly with your battle star stuck in your chest. Funny, I walked the line in LAX for three weeks and never saw one Atlas pilot walking beside me. Saw an awful lot of Atlas aircraft flying by me though. The Atlas MEC changed its position by the minute throughout the Polar 05 strike. I don't blame the Atlas pilots for the Polar strike failure, I blame the Atlas MECs lack of backbone and solidarity. I and every other Polar pilot have thrown there battle stars in the recycle bin where they now belong. I thank the few Atlas pilots that did stand with Polar, you have my deepest respect and appreciation, its the rest I pity.

Praters latest actions, in conjunction with the Atlas MEC and executive board, are sickening. It's not about what's right, wrong or contractual. It's all about the amighty dollar. It cost $673,000 so far to enforce the rights of the Polar contract, better to just ignore the contract and save the money, isn't that what you (whale), the Atlas MEC, and ALPA national are saying?

[iahtexan747400]

Lance, Now I know you are full of %&#$.
John Prater has had to force the Polar NC to cooperate w/ the Atlas NC, not the other way around. No one at Atlas would ever believe the Polar pilots would stand "Shoulder to Shoulder" with them. If that is the case why not just merge the list and fight for an industry leading contract together? But this is not about unity in your eyes, it's greed and selfishness.

[WhaleDriver]

Title: SUB Flights?

Item Number: 3735

Updated: 1/24/2008 11:55:00 AM

Question: Just looked on AIMS at the flight schedule for a particular day, and noticed that there are many flights (Polar)that don't have a tail number assigned to them, but the word SUB next to those flights, who's operating these flights????
Response: The "SUB" fleet is the modification to AIMS that allows Crew Scheduling and Travel to see and list Atlas crew on Polar flights and visa versa.

OK genius.....the "SUB" are just on AIMS for the Atlas schedulers to see the POLAR flights for the option to DH ATLAS crews on them. Duhhhhh.

I assume all Atlas's flights are shown on Polar AIMS for the same reason, so your schedulers can easily see Atlas flights for DHing Polar crews. DID you really think each sub was your flights that we were flying, boy your gullible? Take a look at departures out of DXB. Are those "SUB" EK flights yours as well?

BTW, you might not want to make a habit of posting company rumor board posts in public forums.

[LANCERDVR]

You are Whale. I notice you have no good answers for my post so you take to some kind of stupid threat, get real. By the way, that is how little you know about Polar Pilots. The day the Atlas MEC gets a backbone is the day this entire mess will move forward. Neither group has anything to gain by merging they have everything to lose. Don't you understand that the day AAWH gets both groups under there crew leasing scheme will be the day they start hiring contractors to fly all of our aircraft. There will be nothing to stop them from doing what they have already demonstrated in Stansted.

Atlas pilots have everything to gain by going it alone, and the same goes for Polar pilots. Polar pilots have nothing to gain by Atlas accepting sub par contracts and vice versa. You just don't understand solidarity. We can stand together without sleeping together. AAWH is going to have to drag Polar pilots away with clubs from our scope clause. If the arbitration goes against us, the Atlas MEC and JC will have won and enslaved us all. Wake Up already!!!

[WhaleDriver]

Lance, your post was so full of holes, that have been gone over again and again, I just chose the latest attempt at BS, with the "sub" flights.

Another example is that Fell agreed to fly SIX not 30, planes. They were on the China Air contract, our ace in the hole! Four extra days by each Polaroid could have covered it. It was very regular scheduled flying.

The 2005 strike was as much a lockout as a srike. All Polar planes were parked, so of course you had 100%. Kinda like a whore bragging about giving up sex but not mentioning she had moved to a deserted island.

Your MEC might want to actually invole your vice-chairman and hear what the FO's really think. They might disagree with "The Polar pilot group is a solid, staunch, unified group." Most are "afraid " to say anything, or don't have a clue about what is taking place.

NOONE at Atlas or Polar is or will ever be enslaved....:bored:

This thread has lost direction again....sorry.

[CR2]

This thread has lost direction again

Arbitration or something like that wasn't it? :hmm:

[LANCERDVR]

Doesn't really matter, none would have flown. Funny how you make this stuff up to fit your responses. No Polar pilot would have worked one extra day to fly an Atlas aircraft... Again you don't seem to get it, it was in all of our best interests for you to have won an industry leading contract.

Now I see in your latest post you are adapting JCs tactics, lets split the group. (FOs not being represented) Your insinuations are total BS, as usual. We just had an MEC meeting, many FOs were present, none objected to the MECs position and direction. Infact everyone was encouraged and onboard. Polars group is 100% behind there MEC chairman.

You state that none will be enslaved, so are you saying JC is above subcontracting out our jobs?? You have some crystal ball. If you are correct then why would the company not agree to negotiate scope prior to proceeding down the path of a single CBA? I suppose you are going to say it was the Polar MECs fault again.

As for your stupidity as to why no Polar pilot crossed a picket line. 99.8% of Polars pilot group voted to strike if necessary. None of the aircraft flew because no one would fly them and management knew better than to even ask.

Now for the upcoming arbitration. The arbitrator will decide our fates, unfortunately arbitrations are always a flip of the coin. Polars case is strong, hopefully the arbitrator rules based on a legal interpretation of the CBAs scope protection. Personally I'm all for a merger, with job protections. Without job protections there will be no more jobs. Again you Whale, just don't understand the gravity of the situation and most likely have fallen unders JCs spell like your MEC. They buy you every year with there profit sharing checks, doesn't matter that you end up spending all the money on divorce lawyers, while watching your kids grow up on skype. I don't expect you to answer any of my questions, as you have not previously. Take all the shots at me you want, you just solidify my views.

[L-38]

Back on track . . . Polar's FE arbitration is scheduled to resume this Thursday (January 31). Best of luck to all of Labor !!

[whaledriver101]

Whaledriver

Just answer a couple easy questions. 1) How does this merger benefit Polar crewmembers? 2) What operating certificate will the merged pilot group operate under, Polar cert. or the Atlas cert.???

[joetommy]

WHALE-I always agree with you. Till now. From what I know from talking to the polar pilots, you would have to put a gun to their heads to get them to work four extra days a month. The polar pilots tell me the whole point of their first strike was to work less days per month. According to what they tell me a line holder only works a max of 16 days. A
reserve line holder 19 days, if extended. These guys laugh at how many days the Atlas pilots are out.

[rob rilly]

JoeTommy, Thanks for pointing that out to WhaleDriver once again !:ugh::ugh::ugh::mad:

[WhaleDriver]

Just answer a couple easy questions. 1) How does this merger benefit Polar crewmembers? 2) What operating certificate will the merged pilot group operate under, Polar cert. or the Atlas cert.???

1) I don't have an answer because I don't know the issues at Polar, that a merger may resolve or improve. I'll try. Merged, you would have more choices on basing, where you fly, and when you fly (more patterns, more destinations). The combined contract offers the ability to improve pay, and with a single voice, we may make other gains. No more transferring of planes back and forth. There may be shifting, but we wouldn't care since we would be flying them anyway. More planes and contracts to absorb the downturns in the market, and the different markets, ie, a downturn in one area could be moved to an upturn in another area (military, charter). Your in one area, and just a few cities. An Asia contagion could hurt, where merged, they could increase military bidding, or take on charters, shifting planes where the profit is greater. The growth could be spread out, where Polar's future appears attached to DHL, which, if you hadn't noticed is having issues with USA, ABX and Astar. The DHL plan "may" be to keep Polar as a six airplane airline just servicing the landing rights you hold so dear, and DHL can ACMI the rest to Atlas. Growth on Atlas side, stagnation on Polar's side?

Another advantage would be all the spare time we'd have not giving each other crap on the boards....:D

2) I believe the current plan is under the Atlas cert.

[WhaleDriver]

WHALE-I always agree with you. Till now. From what I know from talking to the polar pilots, you would have to put a gun to their heads to get them to work four extra days a month. The polar pilots tell me the whole point of their first strike was to work less days per month. According to what they tell me a line holder only works a max of 16 days. A
reserve line holder 19 days, if extended. These guys laugh at how many days the Atlas pilots are out.

So, you believe that if Polar and the Polar MEC told the Polar pilots (all strong ALPA members, 100% behind their MEC) that it was alright to fly the six new planes, just transfered to their cert, and that Polar needed some short term extra help, they would not have taken it on, even with a very nice bump in income? They would have been told that it was not Atlas's cargo, but China Airlines, so it was not scabbing. I believe in hindsight, they can say they wouldn't have, but I bet the planes would have moved, one way of the other. We'll never know, and neither did our MEC, with less than an hour to decide. BTW, the Polar MEC kept all this to himself, not giving the Atlas MEC any heads up or warning. It was a bombshell. BTW, orchestrated by good ole Cato.

For the more than 10 years I've been at Atlas, I average just less than 14 days a month away from home.

[EJetCA]

The fact that there are going to remain two certificates creates other downline issues. 1) Pilots WILL be assigned to either the PO or 5Y certificate.:8 So when you do that, should you choose PO, you will belong to a 6 jet fleet flying the Asian shuffle. If you bid 5Y, you will fly the same 5Y flying as now. 2) What happens when a furlough strikes? If 5Y reduces flying, and the most junior pilots are on the PO cert do you think JC will furlough the Junior pilots and issue a new system bid with countless training events, or are the more senior 5Y pilots going to get the axe?:=

These are more issues to be defined in any SCBA. There really needs to be ALOT of strategy and foresight whether there are separate CBAs or a BSCA, err, SCBA :D

[WhaleDriver]

Nope, the plan is to interfly between the certificates. One day flying a Polar flight, next day a Giant flight. Just one big happy family :uhoh:

[EJetCA]

Nope, the plan is to interfly between the certificates. One day flying a Polar flight, next day a Giant flight.

Can't be done, unless I missed something in the regs....Unless they can figure a way around 121, the 8400.10, and PRIA/Drug Testing, it will only remain a way to give hope to the "merger". Unless there is some exemption that I don't know about. I'm not sure how (if) CAL works it that way. I know no other "holding company" with subsidiaries does it that way, even the ones with "ONE list".:eek: Maybe someone from CAL could let us in on if they DH from IAH to fly micronesia....

[joetommy]

14 days a month, that is great. I wonder what the average is. I wonder what it is for the most junior. I hope our new contract treats everyone equally.

[WhaleFR8]

Can't be done, unless I missed something in the regs....Unless they can figure a way around 121, the 8400.10, and PRIA/Drug Testing,Actually quite do-able. It is done under something called MOCT. Multiple Operating Certificate Training. There is nothing in 121 or 119 that precludes a pilot group being trained to operate two certificates. It only involves having the ops specs, FOMS, and training manuals similar enough. Each certificate has to meet the requirements of pt. 119 and have the systems and manuals in place, but nothing keeps them from having the same operating manual, ops specs, training etc. The PRIA and Drug testing comment is BS as both or either can be accepted by both certificates. You are not being told the whole story. Call Chris and ask him. He knows.

As I said before the airlines have been completely operationally merged already. All of the manuals and procedures are virtually the same as are the senior management, scheduling, payroll, admin, etc etc. The only thing left is the pilots. There is a merged seniority list arbitrated by Harris and hated by all. It is only waiting for Bobb and his group to finish their delaying antics so both groups can get to a merged CBA.

The real advantage to the Polar pilot is that they get to keep a job. Does anyone really think that AAWWH is going to put a 5 Billion dollar 20 year contract in jeopardy for 150 pilots?

[EJetCA]

Actually quite do-able. It is done under something called MOCT. Multiple Operating Certificate Training. There is nothing in 121 or 119 that precludes a pilot group being trained to operate two certificates. It only involves having the ops specs, FOMS, and training manuals similar enough. Each certificate has to meet the requirements of pt. 119 and have the systems and manuals in place, but nothing keeps them from having the same operating manual, ops specs, training etc. The PRIA and Drug testing comment is BS as both or either can be accepted by both certificates. You are not being told the whole story. Call Chris and ask him. He knows.

It's kind of funny how you "know" all of this. I've been through this process in a previous life, have you? I don't need to call anyone here, because I was involved with this previously. If all you said was correct, how come it hasn't been set up for 5Y guys can't hop out of an Atlas Bird and then fly a GSS bird immediately after? That'd add 3 airplanes and a ton of efficiency, right?

While you are absolutely correct about they can have the "same" manuals, etc. in place. How come it's been over seven years and they don't have the paperwork all ironed out yet? If they did that, it would show in good faith that there was to be a merger.

[WhaleFR8]

have you? Yep Three times albeit pt 135 but the procedures are virtually the same. I don't need to call anyone here, because I was involved with this previously. You obviously do need to call someone as your post reflects a real lack of knowledge of how this all works and even about the structure of the holding company. I urge you to Call. Chris is a good guy and will have no problem explaining it too you.
If all you said was correct, how come it hasn't been set up for 5Y guys can't hop out of an Atlas Bird and then fly a GSS bird immediately after?Because GSS is a foreign company and is not wholly owned by AAWWH - once again a lack of knowledge about the holding company that controls your future.

While you are absolutely correct about they can have the "same" manuals, etc. in place. How come it's been over seven years and they don't have the paperwork all ironed out yet? How do you know it is not all "ironed out?" It is all in place and in fact most of the Atlas manuals have been changed to reflect a lot of the combined procedures. The ops specs have both been changed to put them more in line with each other as have other manuals and procedures. This will make the transition easier.

But how do you figure they could put everything in place before the combined group starts flying the airplanes. It just doesn't happen that way. Plus, if you think about it there is no reason to incur the expense to put all the Atlas guys through the retraining required by the MOCT if the Polar guys are going to be gone. The company is waiting for the arbitration rulings just like the rest of us.

[iahtexan747400]

As an another example. Every new hire in the recent past has a 6 digit polar employee number.

[nitty-gritty]

Just got word that the arbitration has been pushed into April for the Company's side of their arguments or something like that.

Also have some letters on the back and fourth between Pres. Prater, MEC Chairman Henderson and MEC Chairman Bourne on the arbitration. Kind of looks like the PAC Chairman has been ignoring the ALPA Pres. Curious if that has something to do with the Atlas Battle Stars awards, the Atlas council ADR win on "The Scab Issue" or Pres. Prater / Executive council ordering of the PAC committee to the merger negotiation table with the Atlas Council.

Here

https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=41800.

[Whale Rider]

I told you guys its all BS! THERE IS NO MERGER!!!! They just keep pushing things back and back and back and BACK! First it was March, now its April, we've heard this broken record before!

[WhaleDriver]

Who is they? The only people delaying the merger process is Polar. The only way we're gonna find out if it's BS or not is to complete the process and see. If it's BS, then we take the combined CBA's and walk into AAWW and start from there, with a united stand between the pilot groups.

The continued delay tactics by Bobb and Robin (not the Polar MEC, mind you, ALPA nor anyone else has heard from the other elected MEMBERS of the Polar MEC in over a year) only feed into the company's plan, if the plan is indeed to fake the merger to the last minute. The sooner we get it done, the sooner we'll know and can move on....pretty simple.

Standing in the corner having a temper tantrum accomplishes nothing....

BTW, which of the arbitrations was extended? I thought it was the FE one, having nothing to do with the merger.

[nitty-gritty]

My bad. It is on the FE and downgraded captains one that took place Jan 31 and Feb 1. Now the remainder of that is scheduled for April as I have heard. Didn't get the specific dates yet.

If there is no merger as "Whale Rider" announcement as his MEC, then Atlas management has done a fine job of fooling the Atlas council and ALPA National. Then again, maybe the Polar MEC has done the same with their vision of things to their membership.

Of course the Polar MEC and crews were also convinced that it would be a cold day in He!! before Atlas got Battle Stars, a public apology for Polars actions from ALPA National on "The Scab Issue", and received those two new A/C. So I'm more inclined to put my money on the merger happening despite Polars efforts to delay or stop it.http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[EJetCA]

Good post nitty-gritty. The way I read the chain of letters, I pulled the following "executive summary":

Polar wins a grievance, the Atlas supports the win. There is no problem righting the ship. The original 37 individuals affected may not still number 37, but this affect's Atlas' position (I do not have the award, does it read the 37 names, or the 37 positions?). During this time, AAWH, ends the alliance flying by changing it from PO sked service to 5Y sked service. The same holding company makes the profit, but does a paper shuffle with the tags and airbills. 5Y in the mean time recieved work that PO lost. 5Y and PO were 100% owned by the same people at the time, yes?

Now, 5Y and a "controlling" majority of PO are owned by AAWH?

Did I miss anything?

BTW, anyone wonder why Southern and Connie are growing leaps and bounds, and the AAWH fleet is stagnant? One would figure they'd find work for all the old PO birds + the 5Y birds and order more for everyone!!!

OB Light rocks!!:rolleyes:

[WhaleFR8]

Just to clarify a few points....

It reads 37 Captain Positions - and it is not an award it is Bobbrobins proposal to the arbitrator.

Doesn't sound to me like Atlas is stagnant - now the scheduled service might be stagnant but the Atlas business model is growing. (see the news item below)

AAWWH (Atlas Air WorldWide Holdings) already owns and will continue to own a "controlling" majority of Polar. That has not changed and will not change until the USDOT regs change.

AAWH has already ended the alliance flying. Atlas is not doing any flying for Polar that is not available to Connie or SATinc. It only makes sense for another partner in the holding company to take up the Polar slack when they have MX issues etc - or would you rather that go away too just to satisfy your anti-Atlas sentiments.


Purchase, NY - February 4,2008 --
Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc. (AAWW) (Nasdaq: AAWW), a leading provider of global air cargo services, today announced that its subsidiary, Atlas Air, Inc. (Atlas), has closed on a $270 million financing facility in connection with pre-delivery deposit payments (PDPs) on five next-generation Boeing 747-8 wide-body freighters scheduled for delivery to the Company between February and July 2010.

Required PDPs on the five aircraft, including amounts already paid, total $311 million, with $202 million scheduled to be paid in 2008. The latter figure represents more than 80% of Atlas’ total 2008 PDP requirements on its firm order for 12 747-8F aircraft. Principal amounts outstanding under the PDP facility are to be repaid in tranches upon delivery of each aircraft to Atlas.

Six 747-8Fs are scheduled to be delivered to Atlas in 2010, with six additional deliveries scheduled in 2011. The 747-8 Freighter will represent the largest and most efficient heavy freighter in the market, providing the lowest ton-mile cost of any freighter alternative. The 12 freighter aircraft, along with options and rights to acquire up to an additional 14, anchor a fleet strategy that focuses on the Company’s customers and reinforces AAWW’s position as the most advanced, most efficient, and most reliable provider of leased freighter aircraft and outsourced air cargo services and solutions.

“We are very pleased to achieve PDP financing for our first 747-8s that complements our launch-customer pricing on the aircraft,” said William J. Flynn, AAWW’s President and Chief Executive Officer. “The financing community has been very receptive to both the Company and the asset. The -8s will represent the most fuel-efficient and cost-effective heavy freighter alternative in the market.”

He added: “In addition to the inherent economic and operating advantages of the -8s, the aircraft financing community also recognizes the relative scarcity value the -8s will have when they enter operation and our first-mover advantage as the only outsource provider with -8s on order. Furthermore, our strong operating performance, balance sheet, and prospects for growth – combined with our premier international customer list and our long-term contractual relationships – leverage the attractiveness of the asset.”

Norddeutsche Landesbank Girozentrale, a leading aircraft financier, underwrote the PDP facility and will serve as the lead bank and facility agent. Funds drawn under the facility will bear interest at Libor plus a margin.

According to Boeing generic assumptions, the 747-8 Freighter is capable of flying a maximum structural payload capacity of 140 metric tons (154 short tons) while offering 16 percent more revenue cargo volume and equivalent range when compared to than the 747-400F. The 747-8 Freighter upholds its predecessor’s legendary efficiency with equivalent trip costs and 16 percent lower ton-mile costs than the 747-400F. The 747-8 Freighter will enjoy the lowest ton-mile costs of any freighter, giving operators unmatched profit potential.

About Atlas Air Worldwide Holdings, Inc.:
AAWW is the parent company of Atlas Air, Inc. (Atlas) and the majority shareholder of Polar Air Cargo Worldwide, Inc. (Polar). Through Atlas and Polar, AAWW operates the world’s largest fleet of Boeing 747 freighter aircraft.

[EJetCA]

Just to clarify a few points....

It reads 37 Captain Positions - and it is not an award it is Bobbrobins proposal to the arbitrator.

Doesn't sound to me like Atlas is stagnant - now the scheduled service might be stagnant but the Atlas business model is growing. (see the news item below)

AAWWH (Atlas Air WorldWide Holdings) already owns and will continue to own a "controlling" majority of Polar. That has not changed and will not change until the USDOT regs change.

AAWH has already ended the alliance flying. Atlas is not doing any flying for Polar that is not available to Connie or SATinc. It only makes sense for another partner in the holding company to take up the Polar slack when they have MX issues etc - or would you rather that go away too just to satisfy your anti-Atlas sentiments.

Thanks for the clarification of the proposal. Now, I must take you to task for being a hot-head.

First, and most important, you need to pay better attention to what is written, and not what you want to read.

Second, I'm not anti-Atlas, however YOU are anti-Polar. I want EVERYONE to have successful, stable careers. YOU want Polar pilots to disappear. That's a true shame wishing ill on a fellow professional.

Right now I don't work but 16 days a month. If on RSV, I can be extended to 19. I have no issues bustin' my hump when I'm out. I want to make my company money. Those days INCLUDE travel. Then I'm home. There are airlines without unions, and CBA's that are on the road an equal or lesser amount than Atlas.

It is well-established that AAWH owns 5Y and a "controlling" majority of PO. I never disputed that. What you may have missed was the sarcasm of "controlling" (tone of voice never carries well when typing). Just like Virgin America, Astar, ABX and whoever else has a "minority equity stake" in a US airline, the practical test is independence. What do think would happen if AAWH moved all of the PO flying to, say, CGN and ran Europe routes? Do you think DHL would shrug and say, "Ah vell, vee are only minority owners?" Honestly?

I did see the news item today, thankyou. That's great the first five Ochos PDP's are financed. Now, they claim 5Y put up the money. Is there a secret 5Y account somewhere that AAWH doesn't control? I'm pretty sure the folks in Purchase put the deal together, not the 5Y pilot group.

As far as the stagnant comment, I really needed more detail. I meant the fleet. There's an order for 5 Ochos that got financed today. Those are coming in, what, 2010? They are parking 3 Classics (-3) are looking for 2 -400s (+2) making one less airplane (-1) total. Further, our Dear Leaders in NY say that the intial Ochos are to replace classics. Since PO has 1 classic, and zero (0) in the DHL agreement, I don't think we'd need 5 Ochos to replace our RJ.

Again, the alliance flying....We all know it ended, but what happened to it? Did AAWH just let all those customers jump to Southern, Connie and the Zone? That wouldn't be right. I'll bet they kept the customers, and routes, then as contracts renewed, changed the name from Polar to Atlas allowing them to end the alliance flying. Just a guess.

Hopefully that clears up my positions. If you need more information, just let me know :ok:

Happy Contrails

[WhaleFR8]

Ejet
Not anti-Polar at all. Just tired (as are many of us) of getting screwed by the Polar MEC (this one and the past). We could bullet point all of the reasons yet again, but they are many, and have already been covered numerouse times by Merc, as well as myself, and others.

What we are tired of RIGHT NOW, is the delaying tactics of Bobbrobin. Your MEC is costing all of us (Atlas and Polar) a new contract and a pay raise. And the untruths, half truths, and general disinformation posted by most of you on this board, and others, deserves a response.

If you think that makes me a hot-head then so be it. You mention your 16 days a month and your RS days etc etc. Atlas pilots have not even had a chance to get to that point because your MEC has been delaying this whole thing, including the Atlas pilots contract. In some peoples opinion, this could be because Robin made a statement to Cato that he would "never wear an Atlas uniform." If this is true, it is just one more element in the screwing of the Atlas crewmember by an MEC that has admitted it thinks all ACMI carriers are scabs. It sucks that one man's pride is having a such a huge impact on 750 crewmembers at Atlas.

[WhaleDriver]

Second, I'm not anti-Atlas, however YOU are anti-Polar. I want EVERYONE to have successful, stable careers. YOU want Polar pilots to disappear. That's a true shame wishing ill on a fellow professional.

That may be the case now, but it's because of misplaced trust and screw jobs that have now evolved into the current state of affairs. Day one of the purchase, we thought it would be a good mix. Talking to Polaroids, I knew then, they were not happy about being purchased until they heard that the combined group was going to be named Polar. Then I couldn't hear enough of it. Now, the plan being named Atlas, it's gone the other way...interesting.



I did see the news item today, thankyou. That's great the first five Ochos PDP's are financed. Now, they claim 5Y put up the money. Is there a secret 5Y account somewhere that AAWH doesn't control? I'm pretty sure the folks in Purchase put the deal together, not the 5Y pilot group.

Yep. just about as much as the PO pilots had in getting the Japan and China landing rights that we have to hear about over, and over and over again.

[WhaleDriver]

They plan to maintain two separate operating certificates. This is fact. You will bid which company you would like to fly at. How is this a merger? It is simply a plan to negate Polars hard won work rules and keep both pilot groups away from negotiations for as long as possible. Your statement about the Atlas certificate is not very well thought out. Do you really think AAWH is going to risk losing Polars routes. Not a chance. The Atlas MEC has been buying into JCs plan for far to long. Wake up!

You guys must think a lot of your contract. AAWW would go to all this trouble just to negate a contract that only has 150 pilots.

They will fly both certficates thru one pilot group, plain and simple. Nowhere have they said otherwise, regardless of what BobbRobin is telling you. He's hanging on for dear life to his 100 hr a month job. We will fly both certs, with one set of manuals. Fly Polar one day. Atlas the next. What is so difficult about that. This plan makes since, your vision of things doesn't. This is where the savings is. Much less DHing and positioning of crews. That is why their doing this in the first place.

Hard won, by your less than three hour stike with a company that knew they were going to either sell you or shut you down in the next year or so....wow.

[nitty-gritty]

I find it somewhat two-faced or hypocritical in the recent arbitration involving the Polar FE's furloughs and Capt downgrades.

Those Polar positions were gained at the expense of about 175 Atlas crewmembers and 5 A/C when Atlas crewmembers were in their initial contract negotiations with no section 6 protections. That resulted in management moving those A/C and jobs over to Polar as an exercise in pressuring the Atlas crewmembers to cave during negotiations.

Now Polar seems to deem that all military airlift which was most of the aforementioned flying and A/C as theirs forever since they touched it at one time despite who had it before (at the expense of Atlas crewmembers jobs btw) or competes for it. Now they have the audacity to cry foul when the same happens to them. That nasty Atlas Air ACMI company then starts scheduled service flying Atlas route authorities that Polar enjoyed flying at the expense of more Atlas jobs.

What is the phrase I'm looking for here, is it "Pull the ladder up I got mine"? It looks like that works two ways and it has come full circle.

Personally, I think it would be better to work together and use the best parts of both our contracts merged together into a merged company. That way the company can't play us off each other any more. Then again, we can continue down this road as it exists now and not get anywhere or further downsized depending on which end of the negotiations cycle our sides are on.

[rob rilly]

Nitty?

It's already too late for either of these groups to get along! Too much has been said here and on the ALPA main board, by T.H. and K.M. It will never work out in the Cockpits. The same thing happened at EverZone in the early 90's.

Please educate yourself where the Military flights come from, ie FedEx ! It is part of a group award and FedEx heads it up.

How come Atlas uses more Polar call signs, than Polar uses Giant ?:=

[WhaleDriver]

How come Atlas uses more Polar call signs, than Polar uses Giant ?

Gee, thats a tough one. Let's see, Polar planes are fully scheduled hauling scheduled cargo. Atlas is in the ACMI/Charter business. Planes available when other can't. When one of your -400's broke at NRT for two weeks, we covered some of your flying... I still have not seen any Polar call signs elsewhere. BTW, didn't your Atlas colored -400 do some military flying in November/December, leading to the Atlas plane using Polar call sign story?

[WhaleFR8]

It's already too late for either of these groups to get along! Too much has been said here and on the ALPA main board, by T.H. and K.M. It will never work out in the Cockpits. The same thing happened at EverZone in the early 90's. You don't seriously think that only two Atlas pilots are responsible for ALL the animosity between the two groups do you? How Naive a statement that is. What about D.W. (Mr Scab Announcer himself) who is no longer at Polar? What about M.H. (Capt Vac.) and the myriad of others that were Bobbrobins mouthpiece. What about your former MEC chair who no longer works at Polar - the actors in this soap opera are many and are on both sides. I think if you were to step back and objectively look at things, you would see that the Atlas pilots who post on this board only post in response to Polar untruths, half-truths, and obvious attempts to distort reality.

Please educate yourself where the Military flights come from, ie FedEx ! It is part of a group award and FedEx heads it up. Actually this is called CRAF flying and the consortium that is called the FedEx group has many members. Perhaps you think (or Bobbrobin think) that this makes them all Polar flights? Do you want to take all the military flying from the rest of the FedEx CRAF airlines too?

I have read the Polar suggested dispute resolution - have you? In that resolution they attempt to tell the arbitrator that ANY military flight should be a Polar flight because Polar used to do military flights. Point of fact is that Polar no longer has the aircraft to do both the military flights and the scheduled service flights they are currently doing. AAWWH made the decision to park the old antiquated MX intensive Polar classics and at one point Polar was given some of the Atlas classics in an attempt to bolster the scheduled service. As I have said before, the more Polar flying that was done the more money the company lost - and it would be even greater in todays fuel economy. So those aircraft are back where they can make some money. And just because at one point Polar had four or five Atlas aircraft Bobbrobin now think they belong to the Polar group? You don't seriously think AAWH would transfer aircraft back from the lucrative ACMI flying over to Polar just so Polar could do the military charters do you?

Point of fact is that the absolute best thing that could happen to the Polar group is to complete this merger. Then both groups would be able to fly ALL the holding company's aircraft on whichever business model is most lucrative at the time.

e Atlas uses more Polar call signs, than Polar uses Giant ?:= Because Polar has neither the aircraft nor the pilots to fly anything but their current routes. I would expect to hear SAT or Tradewinds using a Giant call sign before I would expect to hear a fully allocated Polar aircraft on an Atlas Charter. Polar scheduled service is unprofitable enough without taking aircraft off line to do a charter. You obviously need the education - not nitty.

[nitty-gritty]

rob,

I've noted the posts on the ALPA national boards of TH and KM. Posting the ADR findings that Polar was wrong and the public apology by Pres. Prater for Polars actions of false charges and creating their scab list. It was required by the ADR findings. It was supposed to be posted on PPrune if they allowed it per the ADR. Also noted that only one currently employed by Polar posted back on the ALPA National boards. An ex-Polar MEC guy saying he didn't do anything and not to blame him. The finding and apology for Polars actions is also shown on the front page of http://www.alpa.org in the lower right side. So I guess ALPA is at fault also if we follow your logic. In a way, they are for their lack of earlier action. Maybe one group needs to reflect on why that finding was ruled on for the Atlas group.

One of the earlier posts addresses the FedEx part. So World, Evergreen, and Atlas who participate under that are all taking work from Polar? When is Polar going to file that grievance?

[whaledriver101]

You didnt do any flying out of NRT whaledriver. Your not even allowed into NRT. Not under a Polar callsign anyway.

[WhaleDriver]

You didnt do any flying out of NRT whaledriver. Your not even allowed into NRT. Not under a Polar callsign anyway.

I didn't say I did. We were covering the transpacific section of the flying, ANC-ICN. I'm assuming the -200 was bringing stuff from NRT to ICN?

[L-38]

"Atlas uses more Polar call signs, than Polar uses Giant?" . . ."Because Polar has neither the aircraft nor the pilots to fly anything".

Then give those flights Giant call signs. . . otherwise gear up to the bid award, put the furloughed back to work, and give Polar what is Polar's.

Perhaps I too should be allowed to post here under the name of WhaleFR8, perhaps also eat WhaleFR8's meals. After all, what's in a name?. . .specifically a Polar name that has specific labor contract rights attached to it.

[rob rilly]

L-38, Point well made !

Whalefr8, should write the Spin for Rudy ! Oops, sorry Rudy dropped out.
T.H. & K.M. can spin all they want, but the real Airlines out there know what and who they are. Airlines get confused all the time with Atlas tails, using Polar calls. Good thing they have Gateway, or it might be impossible to get to work.:rolleyes:

[WhaleFR8]

"Atlas uses more Polar call signs, than Polar uses Giant?" . . ."Because Polar has neither the aircraft nor the pilots to fly anything".
Might be an idea to use the full quote there L38. I said ....anthing but their current routes.

Then give those flights Giant call signs. . . otherwise gear up to the bid award, put the furloughed back to work, and give Polar what is Polar's. Yeah like the pilot groups have ANY sayso in that. BTW what would you say is "Polar's?" NONE of it belongs to either pilot group. And your childish "blame game" towards the Atlas pilot group is remeniscint of 8 year old girls after mommy takes one of their dollies away. That is not the point of this whole thread anyways. Typical of you guys. You have to find someone to blame for the consequences of your poor choices. Atlas pilots are just convenient whipping boys. Atlas pilots would rather you just say thank you - and let us all get on with our job flying flights of the combined business.

I don't believe you have any furloghed Pilots left. Do you?

Perhaps I too should be allowed to post here under the name of WhaleFR8, perhaps also eat WhaleFR8's meals. Do you really need yet another screen name?

[WhaleDriver]

Airlines get confused all the time with Atlas tails, using Polar calls. Good thing they have Gateway, or it might be impossible to get to work.

Gee, that couldn't be the result of Polar flying two planes in Atlas colors...duhhh.

BTW, I've jump seated many times in the last 18 months and it's NEVER been an issue, no matter how much you fantasize and spin. There is equal disgust for both Polar and Atlas, this being a fine example You post BS and I have to respond.

[Best Angle]

Whale - You do not have to respond to BS any more than anyone else does. Why do you feel that you have to respond?

[L-38]

"I don't believe you have any furloughed Pilots left. Do you?"
Plenty of furloughed labor, FR8 (Polar's FEs), also plenty of Atlas classics flying Polar's AMC.. . . .that is - AMC awards that were bid in the name of Polar, but not intended for Polar to fly - Management misrepresentation? Are you listening Mr. Arbitrator?

"Atlas pilots are just convenient whipping boys"
No, should not be - not any more than the Polar MEC. . . Labor is labor. Atlas pilots are just "pilots", indistinguishable from anyone else.
(except they do this screwy uniform thing with exterior epilates).

[rob rilly]

FR8, the Atlas usage of Polar calls were happening long before Polar got any airplanes fron Atlas !! SPIN BOY, SPIN ! Right, you jump seat often, HA !:= You want to tell us all, that you jumpseat to work ? Now, that would be illegal when you have Gateway. I bet most of the Major Airlines would love to read the Atlas LOA starting on page 171 of your CBA about Gateway Travel. Saving Atlas all that money from the ticket cost, and loss of revenue to the Major Carriers. A few years back, Everzone almost lost all jumpseats for that same thing. Oops !

[trashhauler]

Now that was a good post. The word should be spread. After all isn't one of the ALPA member duties is to point out violations?
Me thinks a grievance is in order.

[layinlow]

Didn't Kalitta get whacked for a year for doing the same thing?

[rob rilly]

Sure did, and whacked HARD !:uhoh:

[WhaleFR8]

I suggest you check with Larry L. on this one before you get yourselves and ALPA embroiled in another lawsuit.

If an Atlas pilot decided to jumpseat to benefit himself, no matter if he has gateway or not, it is not against ALPA jumpseat policy. When an Atlas pilot is given a gateway ticket to his base he is charged tax on the price of the ticket (the price of the ticket is seen by the IRS as "imputed" income). Often times, when there are no other seats (such as to ANC in the summer or MIA during spring break) the company buys him a high dollar first class ticket. There have been cases where the Atlas crewmember, who has to pay taxes out of his paycheck on such a ticket, has not recieved a paycheck at all - due to the taxes. So an Atlas pilot may decide, on his own, to jumpseat to save himself the taxes; or even to give himself and extra day at home. This is what the jumpseat was policy was designed for - to allow a pilot to save money by living somewhere that was cheaper or allowed a better quality of life. Or to allow him to remain where he was living while bidding another base. Or to allow him to remain where he was living if he got displaced. The test of the pilots actions is whether it benefits the pilot more than the company - ie. if he is doing it to benefit himself or the company. Now if Atlas "required" a pilot to jumpseat then it would be a different story.

However, this is actually what the company IS REQUIRING of Polar pilots who are riding an Atlas airplane - they are requiring you to Jumpseat on Atlas as you cannot legally Deadhead on another certificate holders aircraft. So the foot is in the other shoe now. Atlas is NOT requiring Atlas pilots to Jumpseat to their trips but they ARE requiring Polar pilots to do so. hmmmmmm...........

All the Atlas pilots are trying to do is to get this merger done. You three are actively trying to screw with the Atlas pilots career. And much like the scab announcer (did I mention we now know who he is?) are cruising for legal action - is that what you want?

[trashhauler]

I think it is just a question that could be asked. That's all. If ALPA doesn't object then it is no big deal. However... It isn't a witch hunt with other carriers as with the scab list thing but a valid question that could be addressed to ALPA. Are the actions against ALPA jump seat policy? Obviously you do not think so, so be it; what's the problem with asking?

[WhaleDriver]

Best Angle, your right, and I think I'll start my Lent thing today. It's just the sight of all those Polaroids getting all excited in the ICN crew room because they think they got one over on us.....:rolleyes:

Rob Lilly, the Zoners were putting money in their pockets by jumpseating...a no-no. Connie was directing his guys to jump intra pattern, saving the company money, a no-no, mine was personal choice. Sometimes to save time (in some cases, days), sometimes I didn't want to go to my Gateway. Take a chill pill and call me in the morning.:E

Trash, go for it. It's been talked about at ALPA before. KM was our JS guy and it's been looked at, but no harm in asking.

It's Lent, and I'm outta here, back to our regularly scheduled arbitrations....

[WhaleFR8]

I think it is just a question that could be asked. That's all. If ALPA doesn't object then it is no big deal. However... It isn't a witch hunt with other carriers as with the scab list thing but a valid question that could be addressed to ALPA. Are the actions against ALPA jump seat policy? Obviously you do not think so, so be it; what's the problem with asking?
Well if you are talking about the Polar Pilots using the Atlas jumpseat at the direction of the company then yes it should be asked. But it is not for me to ask as it is not my business.

If you are talking about the Atlas pilots jumpseating in lieu of using their gateway tickets then no because:

1. It is none of your business
2. If it was asked it should not be in a public forum
3. It does not go against ALPA Policy as long as it is for the pilots benefit. It is no different than some other freight carriers travel bank, Those pilots sometimes use the jumpseat when it benefits them - I know because I have had them on my airplane.

4. and mostly because IT IS NONE OF YOUR BUSINESS! It especially ain't any business of layinlow as he doesn't even work for AAWWH anymore.


It was asked of the ALPA national JS chair many years ago (not some no-nothings on a web-board) and in fact was discussed by both the Polar JS Chair and the Atlas JS Chair. And it was asked of all the other airline jumpseat chairman. What you see above is the answer.

Guess you will have to find another way to try to screw Atlas pilots.

[L-38]

"You three are actively trying to screw with the Atlas pilots career"

Wish Atlas pilots and all pilots all the best of their careers.. We, however must arbitrate to fly our own work. . .kind of like AAWW end ruining the ball out of bounds to score a financial touch down. The proper playing field is the one whose cba turf was intended to bind with the call sign.. . . . . . . Blow your whistle, Arbitrator!

[nitty-gritty]

"You three are actively trying to screw with the Atlas pilots career"

Wish Atlas pilots and all pilots all the best of their careers.. We, however must arbitrate to fly our own work. . .kind of like AAWW end ruining the ball out of bounds to score a financial touch down. The proper playing field is the one whose cba turf was intended to bind with the call sign.. . . . . . . Blow your whistle, Arbitrator!This wouldn't be the same work that Polar gained at the expense of 175 Atlas pilots and 5 Atlas A/C when we were in negotiations and the company was making a point to us? The same AMC flying and A/C that Atlas was flying that was moved to Polar (who hired off the street while furloughing 175 Atlas crews) to make a point in the Atlas pilots initial contract negotiations? Kind of reminds me of the Bob Fell phrase "We want relief to fly these new contracts and A/C if you go on strike." New to Polar - not new to Atlas.

I know everyone wants to tell a good story here, but remembering only the facts that work for you just makes you a wanna-be lawyer. Needless to say it doesn't say much about union solidarity. "I've got mine, pull the ladder up!"

So due to some language in your CBA you think you can hold onto the work of others. OK, then I guess we will see the validity of that in the arbitration ruling.

Anyhow, it's been scheduled for April for the Company cross in the arbitration. I image the arbiter will rule sometime in May if things go as they have in the past. http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[rob rilly]

All the Atlas pilots are trying to do is to get this merger done. You three are actively trying to screw with the Atlas pilots career. And much like the scab announcer (did I mention we now know who he is?) are cruising for legal action - is that what you want?

We all know who the SA is, big deal. Don't throw threats my way, as I know who you are. Don't be afraid if ALPA is asked about the J/S to save AAWH money..

[L-38]

"So due to some language in your CBA you think you can hold onto the work of others?"

No, however we think that we should fly at least a majority of our own AMC contract. If it is someone else's work, then why do they constantly use our flight numbers?

Point is - We've got the labor, management today bids for AMC in our name, however they have no intention of us flying it. Sound's like a CBA avoiding end run that has been fielded out of bounds. Hear the whistle?

We both know that both Polar and Atlas have each substantially benefited from ample AMC flying beginning well prior to the R Fell fiasco of '99.

[nitty-gritty]

If it is someone else's work, then why do they constantly use our flight numbers?

This seems to keep coming up. Noted it on the ALPA national boards also with an ex-Polar guy. Seems like no current Polar guy will show their face there. I also noted that it was rebutted and the only flying that is done for Polar are the flights that are done due to AOG Polar flights. They are subsequently subbed out to Atlas to recover the flight which is allowed in your contract. Of course, I'm sure you would rather have the customer suffer or have it go to Kallitta instead instead of Atlas.

Looks like rob L. has a new bone to chew on. Curious who gave it to him. To bad it is on a none-issue and essentially wrong. But that won't keep him from chewing on it. I think the record stands pretty clear that the Atlas crews have been on the right side with "Battle Stars", the ADR findings on the "Scab Issue", and a number of other things. Sling as much mud as you can and see what sticks seems to be the Polar motto. Despite the initial mess, we and ALPA National eventually always prove that these stories, used as tools for getting what Polar wants, are the rantings of a group bent on the destruction of others for their own benefit. Usually requiring ALPA National to apologize for Polar actions as in the past.

[WhaleFR8]

Rob Lilly
I would suggest you call Larry before you attempt to use what little knowledge you have of the jumpseat world and get yourself in trouble. We also know who you are so I am not sure why you continue to hide behind a screen name and refuse to take this discussion to the ALPA boards where it really belongs.

[UPS FR8]

On behalf of professional pilots everywhere, it's time for Polar pilots to quick pissing and moaning about ancient history and time for the few to stop stirring the pot. Get over it, merge, unify, keep your Scope protections and get an industry leading contract for what is a great group of pilots (both sides). For starters, how about demanding Cato's termination as a bargaining chip? If Atlas and Polar guys would do their homework, they would see that that has been sucessfully done in the past more times than not. After that, fight to mix the Atlas pay scale with the Polar work rules. Bottom line is this: Dividing the pilot groups is apparantly the goal of the management. To keep the infighting alive is to play into their hands.

[rob rilly]

Rob Lilly
I would suggest you call Larry before you attempt to use what little knowledge you have of the jumpseat world and get yourself in trouble. We also know who you are so I am not sure why you continue to hide behind a screen name and refuse to take this discussion to the ALPA boards where it really belongs.


Well then who am I ? Say it here if you know ! Cute how you intentionally mis-spell names, real cute. I'm above that. There have been a quite a few who laugh at you, airing your laundry on the main boards, too funny. They don't understand how you try to trash your supposed brothers at Polar, just for the sake of playing into managements hands.:ugh:

[Miamfreight]

"Get over it, merge, unify, keep your Scope protections and get an industry leading contract for what is a great group of pilots (both sides). For starters, how about demanding Cato's termination as a bargaining chip? If Atlas and Polar guys would do their homework, they would see that that has been sucessfully done in the past more times than not."

UPS FR8, You are not privy to the requirements laid out in the ALPA Merger Policy. Merged contracts are not done under Section 6 of the RLA like usual contract amendments. A merged contract will be settled at arbitration if necessary. There are no bargaining chips. Right now Polar has good scope, there is no guarantee that we will emerge with good scope. AAWH wants to run two seperate airlines with one merged crew force. They don't want the crews to be tied to the certificates. Without scope where would we be left if they decide to sell off one of the airlines? Answer: on the street.

PS. Even if we could, why use up a chip to get rid of Cato? Eventually his antics will cost the Company more money than he saves and he will "leave to pursue other interests."

[layinlow]

And that is worth fighting for! The Polaroids have it right!

[iahtexan747400]

:rolleyes:

[nitty-gritty]

Just read a copy of the recent Polar VARS and Polar Neg. Committee messages. Compared it to the ALPA National Executive Council resolution ordering Atlas and Polar crew forces together to negotiate for the upcoming merger. The Polar message and the ALPA National resolution seem to say completely different things. Even had my wife read them to see if I was seeing things. Even she said "WTF - over". Looks like more wasted Atlas crewmember time and money while one side continues their dream.http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[rob rilly]

Just keep reading and believing J.C. & D.B. and you will stay confused. Everyone listens to their Atlas VARS B.S. too.

[WhaleFR8]

This seems pretty straight forward to me and is pretty much what all the Atlas crewmembers posting on here have been saying for a couple of years.

Atlas pilots do not wish any ill on the Polar pilots at all despite the sacrifices they have endured for, and the abuse they have suffered at the hands of, Polar crewmembers. It is just time to finish the merger. Get it done. The whole company is merged except for the pilots - and that is due to the Polar MEC, and only the Polar MEC.

From the CEO of Atlas – in his 2/14/2008 letter to Atlas and Polar Crewmembers;
“…Despite what some continue to assert, the merger has not been called off – the Company remains committed to completing it as soon as possible.

Since my appointment as CEO I have continuously expressed what I sincerely believe to be true – merging the Atlas and Polar crew forces is in everyone’s best interests. For both our Atlas and Polar Crewmembers it makes no sense to continue to battle – whether through arbitrations or even separate negotiations – for the right to the same aircraft and flying. For our Polar Crewmembers in particular it makes no sense to be restricted to a fleet of only six and one-half aircraft, without the real potential for growth that exists at Atlas as we add both -400 aircraft and the new -8 aircraft to meet the continued demand for ACMI flying, including the further ACMI opportunities with DHL Express. And for the Company it makes no sense not to have the efficiencies attendant to a merged crew force. More simply put, from any reasonable perspective this is one occasion where labor and management’s interests are the same.”From the VP of Operations August 2007:

“…Our responses were unequivocal – there were no plans to sell or otherwise spin-off Polar. However, to maximize the value in Polar - where as a standalone airline it had never been profitable – an investment partner in Polar was quite likely.” ….

[nitty-gritty]

Just keep reading and believing J.C. & D.B. and you will stay confused. Everyone listens to their Atlas VARS B.S. too.

Funny, considering I was reading the Polar Neg. Committee message & Polar VARs. Comparing them to the ALPA National Executive resolution order. Atlas VARs didn't even enter the picture. Just seems that Polar has left the reservation to a point that National might step in again.

[trashhauler]

It's amazing how you, the Atlas crews, think that the company speaks for in their interests. Believe me, the company could care less. You are just a prostitute to them. As long as you just lay down and get screwed for money, they're happy.

[WhaleFR8]

It's amazing how you, the Atlas crews, think that the company speaks for in their interests. Believe me, the company could care less. You are just a prostitute to them. As long as you just lay down and get screwed for money, they're happy.

...Um so let me see, the entire board of directors tells us to merge, the CEO says we are merging, the President of Atlas says we are merging, the president of Polar says we are merging, the VP of Ops of both companies says we are merging; indeed the whole DHL deal is predicated on merging (remember part of the Block Space Agreement is that DHL will have access to extra lift via the Atlas ACMI aircraft); every analyst on Wall Street thinks we are merging - in fact the ONLY person on the planet who doesn't think we are merging is Bobbrobin. Even the president of Bobbrobin's union directs him to begin the merger process and he is STILL (and you are) claiming we are not going to merge.

methinks that your wheel is spinning but the hamster is dead.

[trashhauler]

Me thinks you better buy some industrial strength KY jelly. And if Polar does not prevail, they better too!

[BELOWMINS]

Polar Air is not merging.
Atlas Air is not merging.
Only the crews are merging.

[trashhauler]

Look, Polar has a pretty well thought out and firm scope clause. Do you actually believe that AAWH has the crews best interests in ignoring scope? No-o-o-o, they could care less. They want only to enrich their coffers. And if it means circumventing the CBA, they will do it. So they only want to merge the crews, h-m-m-m? And do you believe they are genuinely interested in the crews? Man are you naive. There is a saying "A company gets the union they deserve". That statement says it all. For good or bad the Polar MEC is asking for two things. 1. The company abides by the scope. If they want to merge anything, make sure it is within the scope. 2. The company must abide by the ruling, that they agreed, made last year in arbitration. On these two points the company is obviously capitulating. Why? If they truly want to merge only the crews, then why not follow the CBA as agreed to? Because it is not in their best interest. If AAWH agrees to merge within the scope, I am sure the Polar MEC will run to the bargaining table. So far the company has chosen not and we have status quo. And that is not good for anyone, except AAWH!

[WhaleFR8]

We have had that scope discussion before and it hinges on the definition of "complete operational merger" so let me answer belowmins and you (again) at the same time.

Have you looked at the manuals on the Polar airplanes lately?
Have you called payroll or crew planning lately?
How about Hotels or Travel?
How about tech ops and maintenance?
How about training?
Sales? Every Ops office in every city served by either airline?

Virtually EVERY aspect of this company has been merged except the pilots. This IS a complete operational merger and in this case their scope clause is more against them than for the Polar crewmembers. Both companies have been merged for quite some time regardless of what Bobbrobin tell you.

Trashhauler, I don't believe you still work there but perhaps you would care to call Chris A. In Purchase and ask him. The companies are already merged. It is time to put this to bed and get on with the contract talks. I don't like it any more than the next guy but burying your head in the sand and wishing it were not so is just not going to make it go away.

It would actually be better for the Atlas crewmembers if the Polar guys keep on doing what they are doing as I doubt that AAWWH leadership will put their company, their business, or any deals with DP or DHL in jeopardy for 150 pilots.

This is NOT about scope - this is a pride issue that stems from the Polar negotiating chair telling the Atlas VP of OPs that he would "never wear an Atlas uniform."

For this we all suffer.

[iahtexan747400]

What is a "well thought out scope close" when DHL will use your 6.5 airplanes and ACMI everything else to ATLAS? Your argument makes no sense but we will all have to wait for the arbitrator' decision.

[rob rilly]

In Purchase and ask him. The companies are already merged. It is time to put this to bed !

First you have to do is, GET OUT OF MANAGEMENTS BED ! That bed must be full with, D.B.,J.C.,T.H.,K.M & J.Ca....


Polar negotiating chair telling the Atlas VP of OPs that he would "never wear an Atlas uniform."


Especially Eplets on the Leather Jacket. That makes everyone throw up.

[WhaleFR8]

wow that's some productive discussion and debate there Rob! I do hope that you have some better banter than that. You are beginning to sound like Staphylococcus.

[rob rilly]

I hear that all Polar Crewmembers sent Prater their ALPA Battle Star Pins. I don't blame them if Atleast got them by default.

Got to keep banter simple for you !

[iahtexan747400]

Why stop at the pins? Send in their resignations too! :)

[rob rilly]

Yep, you sound like a Bush Baby !

[nitty-gritty]

Obviously off topic, as the last dozen or so posts.

The load breached a so called engineered container during rotation containing an oil rig drill bit that punctured not only the container, but the pressure vessel of the A/C.

Not quite like what your used to flying at Polar, sailboat fuel back and forth the Pacific.http://cptaudio.com/cgi-bin/p3a/logs.pl

[WhaleFR8]

wow Lilly yet another helpful comment.

I have seen the pictures. In this case it was the shippers fault as the drill was not secured in the box itself. The crew did an awesome job getting the airplane back on the ground. True professionals.

I guess when you actually have cargo onboard these things will happen.

[Kruger Stellman]

"Ha ! Always happens at Atlas(Rookies)!"

I have read the posts on this site for months without posting, but this has to top it all. I have NEVER in my 37 years as a professional aviator seen or heard anyone as un-professional as you Mr. Lilly!

You should be ashamed of yourself. You must be a real joy in the cockpit to work with.

Time for the moderator to do something about this!

[L-38]

"We have had that scope discussion before and it hinges on the definition of "complete operational merger". . . . Virtually EVERY aspect of this company has been merged except the pilots".

I suppose Whale, with regards to Polar's scope blockade, it can be argued that "complete" is not yet complete. What's to do with those stubborn Polar bad boys? . . . someday this will all be a long time ago.

[WhaleFR8]

"We have had that scope discussion before and it hinges on the definition of "complete operational merger". . . . Virtually EVERY aspect of this company has been merged except the pilots".

I suppose Whale, with regards to Polar's scope blockade, it can be argued that "complete" is not yet complete. What's to do with those stubborn Polar bad boys? . . . someday this will all be a long time ago.The merged list for the pilots IS complete. The only hold up is Polar. You have presented a circular argument. You are saying you will not continue because it is not a 'complete operational merger' because you (the pilots) have not merged yet? So you don't want to merge because you have not merged - this is your scope argument?

hmmm..


Hey Lilly how are things by the pool in Miami? Saw you out there yesterday.

Using a new name, WOW ! My reputation in the Airline Industry has be empeccable for over 40 years. And you ? In 37 years, you never learned to spell, or you went to the same schools as FR8. So your reputation has be empeccable. I guess we went to the same school then. I usually don't criticize others for their spelling or grammar for just this reason.

[rob rilly]

WhaleB8,

I haven't been to Miami in over 8 years. But, glad you saw me.

[WhaleFR8]

hmmmm.... It must be hard to do a PC or PT at this completely merged company without going to the Atlas training center. Maybe you are sending your twin.

http://bestsmileys.com/signs1/22.gif...it is impeccable.

[jetpilot007]

rob rilly

I don't know what is going on with Polar and Atlas but the comment you made " Ha ! Always happens at Atlas ! " is really something.

You shouldn't have said that if you are true professional pilot.
I do hope not every pilots with Polar are like you.

Curse is not the way to go in aviation world.

[Kruger Stellman]

Mr. Lilly is just an angry old man stirring the pot. I have flown with some real characters out of the northwest corner in MIA over the past 30+ years, but never in my life heard a pilot insult another fly-boy when he does not even know the circumstances. I think he should up his prozac.:ugh:


By the way RIlly, I guess if you had been on board the a/c that box would not have dared to come apart.

Sheeech What a D___ Head you are

[MetAl]

Nah, last time in Miami was 03/04/00.

Pretty much puts ya outta the current loop then, eh?


Man I done seez some stupid Long Beach posting in this thread, but 8 years vacant and authority, that takes the cake.

Or am I just assuming the post was mo/da/yr format, I does get confused about them. If I confabulate the slashes into different places, the latest I get ya is at training 4 years ago.

Ohhh... now I see.

Well too bad. Condolences to Bob Fell

[WhaleFR8]

Lilly - just curious, do you still live outside of Wichita?

[nitty-gritty]

Didn't want to break up the insult trading, but this just came out and is somewhat on topic in some sections pertaining to the arbitration and new developments.


Good afternoon Crewmembers. This is MEC Chairman David Bourne with a VARS update for Sunday February 17th, 2008.

Tuesday and Wednesday of this week, the Negotiating Committee will be in Washington at the direction of the ALPA Executive Council to meet with the Polar Negotiating Committee to begin working on joint areas of concern as both groups prepare for the possible Joint Contract negotiations that will result in the Single Collective Bargaining Agreement, or SCBA, that will govern the merged pilot group.

The Executive Council and ALPA President Prater were clear that these discussions needed to begin so that, in the event the Company's merger grievance against the Polar MEC is upheld. You may also recall that both the Atlas and Polar CBAs, and ALPA Merger Policy require these joint negotiations. The Company's merger grievance is scheduled to be held March 25th to the 27th. We understand that the Company has also asked for additional dates to ensure the case can get heard and a decision issued as soon as possible. In the unlikely instance that the Company's merger grievance is not upheld, we and your Negotiating Committee will be ready to begin immediate Section 6 negotiations, but those will be OUR negotiations, not joint negotiations with any other MEC.

Again...let me be clear about this weeks meetings. They are NOT for the purpose of preparing for separate Section 6 negotiations, as has been suggested by a recent Polar Negotiations Committee Update. The Executive Council and President Prater have made it very clear that the sole purpose of these meetings is to get ready for the SCBA negotiations.

On to other matters. As you know, the Company has already announced the acquisition of two additional -400s for the Atlas fleet, and we are hopeful that is just the beginning. Our first new hire class has passed their orals and are now in the sims. A new hire class started this past week and another will be starting shortly. We're also happy to note that the Company has a class of retired crewmembers coming back, as First Officers. Obviously, the Training Center is busy, and we can expect this will be the case for the balance of the year to cover growth, new customers, and any expansion flying for DHL.

The Spring Quarter Council meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 25th at the Hilton Garden Inn- 2100 East Mariposa Avenue, El Segundo CA. The meeting will start at 3pm.

On the scheduling front, our meetings last week with the Scheduling Committee were productive. Atlas reports that they have found the source of the latest problem. Apparently, AIMS changed the PBS program without coordination with the Company. They now think that they have the PBS software problem fixed that created havoc in last month's bid. As a result, we have directed the Scheduling Committee to pay close attention to the bid scrub this month and if the system is not working well, to implement an alternative plan and take immediate corrective action. Our patience with AIMS is wearing thin.

We've been advised by the company that a number of AMC operations into Bagram AFB in Kabul have been scheduled. The first operated today, and two are scheduled for next week. We understand that Atlas is not the first carrier to operate for the AMC into Bahgram. We have been told that over the past several months there have been dozens of such missions by some of our competitors. Regardless, we take these missions very seriously, and have been in discussions with the Company about the security situation. Not surprisingly, these missions will be planned for no layovers. If there is an AOG, the crew will remain in secure housing on base. The company has also advised us they intend to voluntarily invoke the "Hostile Area Pay" provision of the CBA for all operations into Bagram. As soon as we have more information, we will advise you.

The Company has advised that it will be announcing its 2007 financials at the end of February. That means profit sharing will be paid shortly thereafter, likely by March 15th. And given what we have already heard, the Atlas crewmembers will be enjoying an even larger profit sharing check than the record pay out from last year. We will be meeting with the Company, together with ALPA National financial staff, to review the distribution formula. Bottom line -- it's nice to share in the success that we had a major role in making happen.

In closing, yesterday, your MEC unanimously, authorized the filing of Article 8 charges against the Polar MEC. We took this action very reluctantly, recognizing the seriousness of doing so, but under the circumstances felt we had no choice. Their ongoing verbal attacks against the Atlas Crew members, including actions sanctioned by them intended to harm your careers and the reputations simply could not be tolerated any longer. We will include a copy of the letter with the blast mail of this VARS and post it on the website. Freedom of speech is one thing; when it crosses the line to open slander of you and others, we can and will demand sanctions. Especially when an ADR Board, authorized by the Association has fully exonerated you. Again, it was not our first choice in taking this action against another MEC, but after all other efforts to stop this harassment have been rejected by the Polar MEC chairman, we simply had no other real option.

That's it for this update. Thanks for calling.
Until the next update after the joint contract discussions in Washington with the Polar Negotiating Committee this week...fly safe.

Link to Article VIII Charges: Click here for PDF (https://crewroom.alpa.org/AAI072/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=42013)

[WhaleFR8]

In closing, yesterday, your MEC unanimously, authorized the filing of Article 8 charges against the Polar MEC. We took this action very reluctantly, recognizing the seriousness of doing so, but under the circumstances felt we had no choice. Their ongoing verbal attacks against the Atlas Crew members, including actions sanctioned by them intended to harm your careers and the reputations simply could not be tolerated any longer.

Well this should be interesting. Bob F. gone. Bobb H. going and Robin next.

[BELOWMINS]

Whale
Don't hold your breath.

[layinlow]

Whale, I guess you haven't read any of your past posts. Maybe it is you who should be brought up on charges.
As for Bobb and the rest of the council. As can attest that they are extemely honorable and I noticed that the charges filed are very vague with no substance. Maybe if it were more specific, I would take notice, but as it is....nah.

[nitty-gritty]

Maybe it is you who should be brought up on charges.
As for Bobb and the rest of the council. As can attest that they are extemely honorable...

I believe he was, along with about 160 other Atlas guys. All found to be innocent by ALPA National of the Polar charges under a special ADR and even later given "Battle Stars" from ALPA National. That was not what the Polar MEC and membership wanted though, so they continued their hate and blame campaign to this day to anyone that will listen despite the ALPA ADR findings.

So much for extremely honorable. Maybe you should review the ALPA Code of Ethics and remember that Polar collectively has to comply with them also. Not just when it pleases them.

[L-38]

"Well this should be interesting"

Yes it should - Uncle Bobb sure seems to have his hands full.

At any rate - best of luck to those crewmembers who find themselves operating into OAIX. With the classic now expendable, I suspect that hull insurance rate's was more of an AAWW issue than pilot safety. For this reason alone a -400 would unlikely be used there.

[742]

...For this reason alone a -400 would unlikely be used there.

And you would be wrong.