Polar Arbitration II

[L-38]

Damn - The original thread had wandered. . . . . and then later, was hijacked!.

Hopefully this thread will remain focused on Polar's multiple federally mediated arbitrations with AAWW management. . . . Not to be confused with the ALPA mediated Polar / 5Y / strike behavior dispute.

Polar's 3 separate federally mediated arbitrations were scheduled to each debut in order - October, November, and December.

[WhaleFR8]

How many are there?
How many were won so far?
What was the final outcome? ie. How did the company react? Was it gr84u?

[layinlow]

I think it is a wait and see. What is, is.

[CR2]

Alright. I'd hoped to have one great big thread. At least keep this one on topic.

[WhaleDriver]

Obviously, there will be spin, but word on the street is one finding has been decided (expedited grievance), and another delayed until late "next year" (Holden review of previous findings).

Text, facts and spin (from both sides) will follow from those with access.

[layinlow]

If it has been decided, it isn't out yet. I very seldom buy "the word on the street". Both grievances have been heard and the Nov 6th briefs have been submitted, so I would not be surprized if there is a decision.
I have two thoughts on grievances, the longer it takes for a decision the better it is for the plantiff. Usually it means a significant penalty for the company and the arbitrator is much more careful in making a decision that could cost the company a lot of dollars. That is what the Holden thing is all about now, money and jobs. That has been my experience anyway.
As for spin, what is there to say, it is either good, or bad, depending on who's side you are on. As I mentioned before, what is, is and that is it. Spin is only to make the bitter pill of the loser go down easier and, for one, am not going to get into that game.

[WhaleDriver]

LL, the key players know the results. How and when they let the public know is up to them. They're probably waiting on the written findings to make comment.

As far as waiting, because the arbitration is leaning toward the plaintiff, well, if I had rendered a decision and felt someone was going around it, I would make a decision fast, just to make a point. I think he's hoping other actions will make this grievance null and void. If the merger were forced to go forward, there's no need for this to continue worrying about shifting equipment.

[layinlow]

That is always a possibility I suppose. I worked grievance many years and it had been my expierience that anytime a decision will impact a party finacially, the arbitrator will take a long time in rendering a decision. I acutality it is "We're not happy until your not happy" scenario. Let's use this grievance as an example. The pilots and fe's want back pay for about a year and the return of their jobs. Face, it ain't gonna happen!
But, there will have to be (assuming the plantiff wins) some sort of monetary compensation. That could be very costly to the company so the arbitrator may try to take a middle ground. And that could take time with all the variables involved. Hence the company isn't happy because he has to pay something, and the plantiff isn't happy because he isn't going to get what he feels is just, nor his/her job back. Now let's look at the other side of the coin, ie, the company wins. It is basically a status quo position, no middle ground would have to be taken and the decision is fairly simple and quick. That is my take anyway.
Now as to who is right; I obviously, am on the Polar side, you just as obviously is on the Atlas side. But the only side that counts is the arbitrators side and what is, is. Let's hold our collective breath for the final result. Then it is all over amd the chips, where ever that they lay, give a little to boths sides. On that I think we can agree.

[L-38]

I understand that the Holden arbitration decision is now extended/deferred until March / 2008

[layinlow]

You are correct

[Miami Freight]

B, you know me. and I hate to get into our face about this topic but you are so off base it is driving me nuts. Let those of us who have some skin in this issue and credible information do the posting. Enjoy your new job, sit on the sidelines. Get off this thread.

[WhaleDriver]

Anyone care to explain how Polar won the Expedited Grievance arbitration. The Polar VARS is mazing, talk about spin!

[mercpc9]

Lets see,

Atlas management gets to have their merger grievance done at first availability of the arbiter per the recent Nov 16th award of the arbiter and Bobb claims this as a win.

Wasn't this recent grievance at hand over if Atlas management has the right to have their original merger grievance heard before others at Polar? Isn't that what was just awarded by the arbiter?

I guess you have to think like Bobb or Robin to construe this as a win or is he just trying to put a flower on a cow turd for political reasons. Guess I'll have to dig up the award and post it. Maybe cptvac should post it since his name is on it.

Bobb's (probably Robin's) VARS in streaming audio:

Click Here for Streaming Mp3 (http://cptaudio.com/mp3/polarvars11172007.m3u)

[cptvac]

Merc

Told you weeks ago that you (and the Whales) "may even like" the outcome. It seems you are pleased. Good.

The process will continue rambling along to a final conclusion, and we will all get our answers...whether you continue your anti "Bobbin" rant or not.

[WhaleDriver]

So, your saying you see no spin in the VARS and understand it?

I didn't say I was looking for Polar to lose, in fact, we would all be better off if Polar had won, in more ways than one.......

[cptvac]

Understand? I sure do. Spin? One mans' spin gets another mans' grievance heard...understand ya'll have a backlog, too.

Don't get me wrong, would've loved to had won as much as you wanted us to, it was just not going to happen--now we are shopping arbitrators and Cato can't block OUR arbitrations anymore. Thats a good thing.

The Company was awarded an arbitration date in March. Though a bit unfair to Polars' Crewmembers with grievances, as good as we could hope for...and the merits are not going to change. Just got to take what we can get.

Honestly, the only spin I've seen is from the Company and Atlas parrots that claim we must have a "weak case". Once again, a complete failure to understand diligent representation of our membership...In this case Crewmembers whose grievances have not been heard now have a "new" procedure clarified that should keep everyone concerned busy for awhile getting them done...

Don't see why this would've been played any other way.

[mercpc9]

Though a bit unfair to Polars' Crewmembers with grievances, as good as we could hope for...and the merits are not going to change. Just got to take what we can get.

Welcome to what we at Atlas have been having to deal with for years before the purchase of Polar and since. You guys should count your blessings of what you got under a previous non Atlas lead management. We at Atlas have been having to deal with the ex-Lorenzo group day one. That may be changing now with the introduction of Mr. Flynn, but that still has to be proven out yet.

Our backlog is due to the highest disciplinary actions in the ALPA membership which take priority above other grievances. That includes all of the US ALPA carriers. Done so just to log jamb the grievance process up on our other issues we want addressed. Unlike those of our sister union which they just don't schedule the arbitrations unless they are MEC grievances.

The biggest resolution to this is a combined merged CBA that hopefully has language in it for the System Board of Adjustments more conducive for labor. Otherwise, we both sit in stagnation.

[cptvac]

Merc

I agree with your post--though the "welcome" is a bit late, we've been combatting this for quite awhile ourselves. As for feeling lucky, NO that is how it is supposed to work--AAWH simply has no integrity...it is dysfunctional. And Mr. Flynn has taken ownership of these practices.

Guess the rub is that we've been accused by Management and the Atlas MEC of delaying the process when the reality is exactly what your post explained. Now why would one Labor group willfully misrepresent the facts to help Management strong-arm another Labor group? Troubling.

[WhaleFR8]

Vac,
The Polaroids were welcomed to the group the day after Atlas Air Inc used the Atlas profits (which could have been used to pay Atlas Pilots profit sharing) to purchase Polar. Atlas pilots offered to put your then communications committee chair (Johnson?) on the Atlas communications committee and actually looked forward to sharing the pain with, and garnering help from, another group of ALPA pilots. Merc has been over the history several times with you and others - suffice to say that you spit in Atlas pilots faces. And have continued to do so. So if the second welcome was a long time coming you will just have to deal with it.

Your problem is that you have been combating this for a while yourselves as you claim, but at the expense of the Atlas pilots. Instead of working with the Atlas pilots you have chosen to alienate them.

You claim the Atlas pilots do not support you? And are in bed with management? Perhaps it is time you stepped back and took a look again at the history.

Polar had less than a months worth of cash left when Atlas bought them. Atlas upstreamed profits from Atlas Air to AAWWH to purchase Polar. You would not have a place to go to work if Atlas pilots had not been forced to sacrifice for you - beginning with that step. It has continued for the last four years. EVERYTHING you have gotten you have gotten at the Atlas pilots expense - EVERYTHING. Airplane, jobs, your pay raises (both the 3% and the 10%) came at the expense of the Atlas pilots. The one time you were asked to support Atlas pilots - your MEC chair conned us. You continually blame all of your problems on the Atlas pilots. And you continue to delay delay delay - keeping them from the contact they deserve. No Atlas pilot I know wants to merge with you. None that I know of want to fly or share the same cockpit with you.

If it is so terrible for you then maybe it is time you all vote with your feet and leave the Atlas Pilots to deal with Atlas management.

[cptvac]

Whale

Merc was clearly (though not for you, genious) "welcoming" us to the blocked arbitration situation of which we are well aware. And he gave a damn good explanation of it.

I spit in no ones face. I do not want to merge. I will leave when and if I damn well want to. Ditto on sharing a cockpit with you. Clear?

[cptvac]

And I said your MEC is in bed with Management. And your pilots think so, too.

[WhaleFR8]

Vac,
I doubt that. Do you even have any "blocked" arbitration? Has your MEC ever taken any grievances to arb that were not scope grievances?

You excel at name calling and placing the blame and you give the appearance that you want to stay here. Yet you insist on blowing up the airline. This could be a great place to work; and the current management seems to want to negotiate. You need to get out of the dark ages and read a book on interest based negotiation. The merger is going to happen. No court in the land will allow a union to dictate managements business rights to them.

You don't have a case. So quit belly-aching and get on board - or quit. Either way the Atlas pilots are REALLY tired of the Polar crap and the source of all of the current troubles. When all is said and done He, Bobb, and you will probably quit anyways - so why not save all the pain and anguish and do it now.

I guess my question is if it is so terrible for you; If management sucks so bad; if you hate the Atlas pilots and the Atlas MEC so much then why do you stay?

[cptvac]

Whale

Thanks for your "expert" legal and bargaining advice, simplistic as it is.
And, uh, best of luck on Interest-Based Bargaining with Mr. Cato--guess you've never heard his rather outspoken opinion on the subject.

I do not hate anyone, nor have I ever said that I do. I do not even hate you Whale, despite that fact that you work for a different airline and yet repeatedly tell me to "quit", "get out of the way", and blame my airline for all that is wrong in your "world".

Namecalling? Would you find "Bonehead" offensive?

[cptvac]

Merc

Let me write this s-l-o-w-ly: I did not say anything about the Atlas membership. I said and still say your LEADERSHIP is in bed with Management and apparently that is OK with the membership. And, again, that is great. Just don't blame others for all your problems.

Please stop misrepresenting history...(I was in the room with Flynn and Henderson--saw nothing as you describe)...(You are insinuating that the Atlas leaderships' "tough" stands with Management have removed/installed multiple CEO's? Um, ok...). Please stop insulting Polar pilots...(I will NOT respond in kind.) And please stop trying to undermine Polar Leadership while they are representing my interests. There, I said "please".

[WhaleFR8]

(I was in the room with Flynn and Henderson--saw nothing as you describe)Vac
Was that the time you all wore your uniforms? lol - now that is funny. 3/4 of you had not turned a fan in years and you wear your uniforms to a meet and greet with the new boss?!? And you found nothing adversarial in that? Or in Bobb's opening comments to the boss? You truly are whacked.

How does Bobb's koolaid taste?

And if you construe the Atlas MEC having a relationship and the ability to talk to management as "being in bed with them" then I will take that any day over being alienated by management as well as the union leadership. After all, it is important to be able to at least talk to the guys who run the company.

[WhaleFR8]

The point is that they didn't wear their uniforms to a meeting in an attempt to intimidate the new guy. They actually know how silly that would look as they haven't flown in about the same number of years as the Polaroid MEC.

Try to keep up here willya :ugh::ugh:

[trashhauler]

Just what are you bitching about Merc and Whale? Your are Atlas not Polar, so stop the vitriol against the Polar MEC and worry about your sorry contract. From what I hear it could use a lot of work.

[layinlow]

Man-o.man; someone definitely got up on the wrong side of the bed this morning. How about getting back on subject and the arbitration. The decision has been made, who one or lost is a matter of perception. Now wait for the other which I understand is being heard soon. I may be furloughed but I still care. And personally; the Polar MEC has been outstanding and deserves a ton of credit.

[WhaleFR8]

Just what are you bitching about Merc and Whale? Your are Atlas not Polar, so stop the vitriol against the Polar MEC and worry about your sorry contract. From what I hear it could use a lot of work.Pretty hard for Atlas to get to a new contract when Bobbrobin continue to delay delay delay the merger. The merger is going to happen - even Bobbrobin believe this. Why do you think they continue to delay? If they were so sure they had a case they would expedite the thing to arbitration.

Atlas has been without a contract, without a pay raise, without changes to their QOL now for two years - and the reason can be laid directly at Bobbrobins doorstep.

So Atlas pilots are worried about the sorry contract; and that is all they are worried about. You don't think for a moment that really WANT to merge with the Polaroids do you?

[Furloughed]

EVERYTHING you have gotten you have gotten at the Atlas pilots expense - EVERYTHING. Airplane, jobs, your pay raises (both the 3% and the 10%) came at the expense of the Atlas pilots


You have one twisted view of 'reality' there bubba. FWIW without the Polar scheduled service there would've been no lender willing to provide DIP financing resulting in Atlas liquidating in 2003.

[WhaleFR8]

FWIW without the Polar scheduled service there would've been no lender willing to provide DIP financing resulting in Atlas liquidating in 2003.hahahah Perhaps you are right - of course the real REALITY is that without the purchase of the nearly bankrupt Polar operation and the drain that their non-integrated and highly unprofitable scheduled service placed on Atlas, there would have been no need for dip financing.

No Polar = no bankruptcy.

[WhaleFR8]

cptvac said Your idiocy is beyond words. The Polar contingent jumpseated-at no expense to ALPA to see Mr. Flynn for his "meet and greet" and you jerk-offs bought train tickets and expensed them to ALPA...dressed in nice suits and pretended to be executives. Hint: Despite the nice rags, the Company continues to use you and the rest of the Atlas pilots as doormats. But if Dave and Paul and Phil and Tom feel better dressed up to go see Papa--thats OK with us. They looked real purty. Funny, never see Caputo dressed that way.

Note: After that meeting, I jumpseated into a trip after your Negotiating Committee canceled any further meetings...ya moron.Well first, you don't need to be in uniform to jumpseat. And if you were trying to "SAVE" ALPA national some money it would be the first time in the history of your council.

Secondly most airlines require that you be in an active works status to jumpseat; in fact here is a quote from one airlines JS agreement: "Use of cockpit jumpseats is restricted to pilots, flight engineers, and aircraft dispatchers who are in an active work status. it will not be extended to contract employees, trainees, furloughed personnel, retirees, employees on leave of absence or sick leave." [emphasis theirs]

My guess is that full time UB is considered, at least for the airline quoted above, as a leave of absence - in any case most of you are not in an "active work status."

And for you personally here is another quote "OMC travel is restricted to personal use. No company business use of any kind, including crew movement is permitted."

Drink some more koolaid vac - you will feel better soon.

[WhaleFR8]

naahhhh - it's just too hard to have a battle of wits with an unarmed man.:{

[CR2]

cptvac is taking a few days vacation from this thread.

Insults not tolerated. :rolleyes:

[WhaleFR8]

careful Rat,
<sarcasm follows>
Next thing you know your name and birthday will be on some list on the internet and you will be accused of every falsehood on the planet as well as "being in bed" with management.

[Furloughed]

No Polar = no bankruptcy


How many hundreds of millions went missing? Who was fined by the SEC and unable to restate earnings for multiple years because the dog ate the documents.

Not the successful entity you dream of.

[WhaleFR8]

ahhh - another Polar person who insists on revisionist history. Here is the news release:

"4/3/2007
...The SEC investigation focused on matters arising during the period from 1999 to 2002, when AAWW was under different management and prior to the Company’s successful emergence from Chapter 11 bankruptcy in late July 2004. Since emerging from Chapter 11, AAWW has a new management team and a new board of directors. None of the present board of directors or members of senior management was a focus of the investigation.

Pursuant to the settlement, without admitting or denying the findings therein, AAWW agreed to an administrative order to cease and desist from committing or causing any violations and any future violations of federal securities laws and regulations relating to the filing of annual, quarterly and periodic reports with the SEC, maintaining appropriate books, records and accounts, and maintaining an internal system of accounting controls. The order does not impose any civil penalties or fines and does not include allegations of fraud..."

There was no fine, but your response is typical of the half truths and innuendo that Bobbrobin feed you for this forum.

As far as the SEC investigation, there may or may not have been any wrong doing by the same group of gomers that paid good money to buy a failing airline with a bad business model. They proved to the stakeholders what financial geniuses they are just by that huge mis-step.

The simple fact is that Atlas Air Inc. was accused of mis-reporting, or reporting improperly, something (or things) on their balance sheet. None of us knows what that was despite the rumors of parts valuation and JFK Polar mechanics kick-backs. It just as easily could be valuing Polar route authorities higher than they should be, valuing Polar "blue sky" or "good will" higher than it actually was, or maybe even someone who attended Bobb's school of business and thought that REVENUE was better than PROFITS.

The holding company was formed in Feb of 2001 and Atlas purchased Polar in Nov of 2001. That tragic event falls right in the middle of the period that the SEC had issues with. Why were they trying to make the company look better on paper? Oh yeah - to shore up the failed, non-integrated, scheduled service business model that they had just bought. PT Barnum said there is a sucker in every crowd. GE Capital saw AAWWH coming a mile away.

So once again, if there were No Polar, there would probably be NO ISSUES with the SEC and there certainly would be no need for BK or DIP financing..

But you go right ahead and believe Bobbrobin. :D

[Furloughed]

"4/3/2007
...The SEC investigation focused on matters arising during the period from 1999 to 2002,

Why were they trying to make the company look better on paper? Oh yeah - to shore up the failed, non-integrated, scheduled service business model that they had just bought.

So once again, if there were No Polar, there would probably be NO ISSUES with the SEC

Last time I checked 1999 was 2 years prior to the Polar purchase.

[WhaleFR8]

"4/3/2007
...The SEC investigation focused on matters arising during the period from 1999 to 2002, .... and 2002 was just after the Polar purchase.

You don't for a minute think that Atlas just went shopping one day and said "hmmmmm.... I think I will buy Polar today" do you?

The whole structure of AAWW was set up to buy Polar. They announced the completion of the holding company in early 2001. That holding company certainly took some time to form, upstreaming money from Atlas, finding financing etc - so as I said the SEC allegations can be directly tied to the Polar purchase. It all happened during the same time frame.

so once again, No Polar = No Bankruptcy and No SEC investigation.

The problem with just posting what Bobbrobin tells you to is that you don't think for yourself. Bummer.

[Intruder]

so once again, No Polar = No Bankruptcy and No SEC investigation.
Quite an oversimplification, and with little basis...

AAWH did not go bankrupt because they had no money. They went bankrupt because the top officers stole/hid/laundered so much of it that the company's outside auditors could not certify over 2 years' worth of the books! The only option available, if the company ever wanted to be relisted on any stock exchange, was to declare bankruptcy and get their "fresh start accounting" status.

I suppose it's possible that the planned Polar acquisition was PART of the cause, but far from the root or only cause. That was the corruption inherent in the Lorenzo-era company officers.

[WhaleFR8]

...and your basis for your facts is??

[Intruder]

Press releases and other industry articles floating around at the time.

[WhaleFR8]

References would be nice - not just something you think you read.

As I said in a previous post no one of us will probably ever know what the real story is. And I have NO references - only rumor and my reading the balance sheet and listening to the analysts calls. I guess that is why this is called a "rumor" board.

In any case the 600Mil in cash that Schyuler said Atlas had, is now thought to be due to an overinflated balance sheet which didn't exactly follow GAAP. This would seem like the logical (criminal?) thing to do to attract financing and to convince the Street that buying Polar was a good thing. It seems like the reporting and the balance sheet is what the SEC was investigating. However, without proof - such as 8130 tags for the parts off of the two Japan birds (that they valued as new but were actually not), there was no way for the auditors to tell if the balance sheet was correct.

I doubt they actually stole the money and I doubt you will find any article or reference that says they did. The "lost" records were most probably never there in the first place.

But lead on McDuff - we would love to see your references. Otherwise you run the risk of....Quite an oversimplification, and with little basis...

[Intruder]

I'm not going to re-research the references for this forum. I'll put my spin on the information I've obtained in the past, just as you put your spin on the information you have. You can juggle the proportions of stealing/hiding/laundering any way you want to define them. They're much the same from my perspective.

In any case, the fact remains that the Polar acquisition is NOT the primary cause of the Atlas bankruptcy.

[WhaleFR8]

Why did I expect any thing else.

Sorry but if you put something forward as fact then you need a reference. Being an engineer and as well educated as you are you should know that. What you mean to say is that in your OPINION the Polar purchase is not the primary reason for the AAWW bankruptcy.

Just as in my OPINION (as inferred earlier) the need to upstream money and form a holding company was the reason for the improper GAAP on the balance sheet. And why did they need to do this - oh yeah, to purchase Polar.

I stand by my opinion.

[L-38]

I can't resist jumping in on this debate over Schuyler, being around at the time and following the events closely.

I recall (but cannot prove as my source has long become stale) that Chowdry had little respect for R.Schuyler. I believe that Chowdry's intention was to keep Schuyler around solely to tap his proven financial skills. Skills that would be contained as long as Chowdry was around to hold Schuyler's leash. After the sad tragedy of 01/01, the fox then entered the chicken coop unsupervised. Schuyler was razor sharp, not stupid. He knew what he was doing.

Sadly, it would have been interesting to know what Chowdry would have done otherwise later that year, if only he were alive back then. Atlas Air was Chowdry's baby, and he like any proud father, would never dare to jeopardize it .. My worthless two cents. . . now please back to the topic.

[Intruder]

OK... for some of the facts regarding the required (but never completed) re-audits, you can start with par. 45 on page 20 of the Atlas Treasurer's first-day affidavit in the bankruptcy proceedings. All that stuff is still available at www.atlasreorg.com

[Intruder]

I guess it's "too hard" to simply search for "affidavit" on the Pleadings page and find the second instance on line 46... For those incapable of figuring that out, it's http://www.atlasreorg.com/pdfs/4A_FIRST_DAY_AFFIDAVIT.pdf

[Intruder]

My reference was not meant to "prove out" any assumption. It is meant ONLY -- as stated -- as as starting point for EVIDENCE that the lack of audits and pursuit of "fresh start accounting" was a major reason behind the bankruptcy.

EVIDENCE was the request; EVIDENCE is the response. You can choose to believe or pursue it further, or not. It is more evidence than that [not] provided by whaleFR8 (though I don't care if he provides any or not) to substantiate his opinion regarding the role/significance of the Polar purchase in the bankruptcy. My opinion is based on evidence that includes the reference, but the single reference was not all the evidence available at the time.

[WhaleFR8]

Yet you never said it was an opinion - I did. You said "the FACT remains" etc etc....

The elections were over long ago. You don't have to position yourself in this manner.

[L-38]

Merc - in your zeal to shoot, you are double posting. Please don't "shotgun" (muddy) this diverse topic.

[LANCERDVR]

Your are both pathetic, a real embarrasment to our profession. I read your posts and get sick to my stomach. Your accusations are so slanted and one sided as to be moronic. If you want a new contract tell your MEC to get out of Mgmts butt and start negotiating. You have (for some time now) the legal right to begin negotiations, what are you waiting for!!! I'm tired of hearing about who did what to who, you sound like children of fools. Why is it everytime I meet an Atlas pilot they tell me the same thing, they want an MEC that is not afraid to stand up to Mgmt like the Polar MEC! A few of you senior Atlas types are getting rich on your profit sharing checks, so don't rock the boat, and screw everyone else, right.

[free at last]

U need to ask you'r ask ur MEC chairman about scope since, since his last job scope was thrown out the window and the "radical" types failed and at the end were out of work. It looks like from this threat a good meeting of the mind would greatly improve everyones position. Looks to me chasticing other posters on this thread shows people that good information has not been made available to you.:):)

[WhaleFR8]

Your are both pathetic, a real embarrasment to our proffesion. Really - at least I use a spell checker and a grammar checker so that I don't embarrass my profession. I read your posts and get sick to my stomach. Do you really? Or does Bobbrobin have to read them to you?
Your accusations are so slanted and one sided as to be moronic. So our accusations should be TWO sided? hmmmm.....
If you want a new contract tell your MEC to get out of Mgmts butt and start negotiating. You have (for some time now) the legal right to begin negotiations, what are you waiting for!!! Well Einstein, it takes two to negotiate. How can we force the company to the table? THEY seem to think a merger is on and are unwilling to negotiate. Is there some legal way you know of to force them to talk to us - we are all ears. I'm tired of hearing about who did what to who, you sound like children of fools. Then go away and don't listen - that is totally your right on this board. This merger is a farce. Yeah that is true - especially the thought of having to fly with some of you all; but unfortunately in this case neither union council owns or runs the company. So if the company wants to merge then we have to go along - or quit. Quitting is an option you might consider if you are so upset. You want the Polar pilot group to walk away from the most valuable section of its contract, SCOPE. Nope. I just want them to quit lying and to have some integrity for a change. Why in Gods name would you want another pilot group to give up such a valuable and hard faught for contractual right. hmmmm.... your professionalism is showing again -- the word is FOUGHT.

I will tell you why, you are as far up Mgmts butts as your MEC. I wonder what kind of things MGMT promised you. I can't even believe your MEC chairman having the gall to call a union busting Lorenzo wanna be like the VP of ops by his first name and boast on how good there relationship is. SICK!!! If having a relationship that allows discussion and negotiation is what you call being up management's butt then I guess the MEC is guilty. Personally I would rather have them able to talk with management than be ostracized like Bobbrobin are.

Why is it everytime I meet an Atlas pilot they tell me the same thing, they want an MEC that is not afraid to stand up to Mgmt like the Polar MEC! Because you are lying again.

A few of you senior Atlas types are getting rich on your profit sharing checks, so don't rock the boat, and screw everyone else, right. Yup that is why our MEC is on 82 hours UB a month and yours is on 100. Profit sharing is based on hours worked so the MEC takes a hit there too.

Nice post - you must be feeling the heat.

By the way, how are those article VIII charges coming - I can hardly wait to get my letter.

[MetAl]

I got a copy of the neutrals decision.

Pretty clear, Polar MEC is run by dorks.

Hee, next QB meeting, I know where the jokes are going to focus.

What a bunch of loons.

[LANCERDVR]

As I said before you two are foolish. I'm not going to waste my time responding to your b.s. except to say that you have a legal right under the RLA to negotiate a new contract. Of course they don't want to meet with you, did you think they were going to come to the table voluntarily. If the company does not want to meet, I suggest you take it to the RLA for resolution/mediation. Although I am a little confused, in your post you boast on how your MEC has such a good working relationship with mgmt. Oh yeah, as long as you are doing what they want it's all hugs and kisses. How can you say you have a good working relationship with mgmt if mgmt refuses to engage in good faith negotiations towards a new contract.

As for the Article VIII charges, we will be pressing for an MEC resolution to do just that in our next quarterly meeting. We may not succeed, or the MEC may not want to use valuable time on it, but at least the rest of the industry will begin to learn what you have been up to and how the results of your actions could be used to negate there contracts going forward. Sorry if my spelling isn't up to your high standards. I won't be responding to any more of your propaganda, in fact I wish I hadn't wasted my time in the first place. The two of you are hopeless.

[Hogg]

Guys stop double posting.......and that includes the links.

[LANCERDVR]

Just to set straight for those who are not privy to the real story, not the one Merc wants you to believe. Polar was cooperating with the merger when it was in fact a legal merger, two companies becoming one company, two operating certificates becoming one certificate One company, operating under one certificate with one work force. This is covered by the Polar CBA. There is nothing in the CBA which allows the company to remove the Polar pilot group from its operating certificate to merge with another companies work force and then be leased back to operate under its former certificate. Merc, do you not understand what the company is trying to do here? Eliminate scope provisions amongst many other things, eliminate the labor groups attachment to its company, and make it much easier to sell the remaining 51% of Polar to DHL should DHL become eligble for 100% ownership next year. It may also be the companies way to stall both groups from negotiating new CBAs. It's all good for the company and no good for the labor groups.

When the company announced its new plan to maintain both companies and both certificates the Polar MEC responded by calling a foul. The MEC, at the direction of the pilot group, and the advice of ALPA national, responded that they would not entertain this so-called crew merger without first negotiating sound job protections. The Polar MEC insisted on negotiating work protection provisions before agreeing to move any further forward toward a pilot group merger. The Polar MEC asked for 42 months of follow the certificate protections, the Atlas MEC (who offered 12 months) declined this in unison with the company (surprise). ALPA national mediated the time frame and asked both sides to meet at 22 months. The Polar MEC, in good faith, agreed to 22 months, the Atlas MEC then moved further away to zero months, the company then balked at the whole idea and declined to negotiate scope as asked prior to proceeding with this illegal merger. Merc you keep distorting the truth and I'm sure your imagination will try to distort these facts with your propaganda.

By the way why hasn't Captain Bourne informed Atlas Mgmt of his intent to enter negotiations. He stated to the ALPA executive board in its last quarterly meeting that he would do this "if forced by the Polar MEC". I guess Mgmt would prefer that he hold off for a while, right? The Atlas pilots want and deserve a new contract, what is he waiting for. Oh yeah it's the Polar MECs fault, right? The Polar MEC has already filed its intent for section six and recently completed an extensive survey of the pilot group in preparation for contract negotiations. Why hasn't the Atlas MEC been working parallel paths as has the Polar MEC?

Hope to see you before the executive board very soon Merc!

[CR2]

From what I understand on these threads, all postponed until March '08. Let's take a break from all this until then (or some new news).