Atlas/AABO
 

Can somebody explain the following?

I find the latest furlough/downgrades about to occur at Atlas a big disappointment for everybody, but specially the newly upgraded Captains. How is it possible that Atlas mainline takes the big hit with 70 furloughs, and several downgrades, and displacements while AABO is only downgrading 3 people, and ZERO furloughs..... Amazing!!!

Scenario 1-
If Atlas is affected AABO should be affected, if everything went by date of hire ALL AABO pilots will be downgraded SAVING ALL mainline Captains, there will still be furloughs, but at least the pain is being shared!!!!

Scenario 2-
If they are to be treated different because of super seniority, then they still need to show downgrades, AND FURLOUGHS proportinate to Atlas. 3 Downgrades is not ENOUGH!!

Any comments? Time to do something!

Relax,

Dave Bourne and the Teamsters have everything under control.

My guess is that, with the Democrats in control, and several million out of work in the US, the AABO boys should probably dust off the old CV. Congress will not stand for outsourcing anymore - that goes for MX as well as pilots.

I hope you had a fun few years of flying boyz.

It would certainly appear that one of the previous writers (John Galt) comments indicate a total lack of knowledge of the IBT process. Negotiations are done by the local, not the International, headed by Captain Bourne. Hence it would be Local 1224, headed by Joe Muckle, with assistance from his legal staff and the currently appointed Atlas representative who is in place until the membership elects their leadership.

That said, it would also appear that the writer has not availed himself of the information sent to crewmembers this week, in which Bourne and others met with the management of the airline and are working on options.

Anyone familiar with the Atlas CBA would know that the AABO situation has been a thorn for years and worked on by Bourne and his people to no avail because the AABO crewmembers are not covered by the RLA and are foreign contractors to Atlas. Consequently, there is little leverage to force the issue other than what was later agreed to; that no additonal hiring could occur at AABO or any other company the company envisioned offshore unless they were on the Atlas seniority list (read: junior)

It can be easily assumed that the management would have been willing to work a deal to let them go as their individual contracts expired. But given the extensive delays in the merger created by the other pilot group, the AABO people have stayed longer. Had a combined CBA been executed 2 years ago, the AABO types would likely have been gone by now. But given the cost and penalties imposed in the UK when those types of contracts are cancelled early, it's clear management decided to wait.

The real question is this: Will the Polar crewmembers have the courage of their convictions and refuse to join IBT and pay dues or will they stand up and refuse as a group?

What say they?

All very true. 44 AABO people left and not one of them senior to the most junior downgraded Captains recently announced by Atlas. Which makes them junior to most of the Polar crew. The boyz have all been told for years that it was time for them to campaign to get on the Atlas roster in seniority order. Now it may be too late.

Beav
The guys at Atlas are finding out tht the "no bump, no flush" they were so happy about is a double edged sword. It cuts both ways

I doubt anyone was happy about any part of the Harris award. The no bump no flush was the section that Hair was so upset about. I wonder if he feels the same way now? The real point of this thread though is how the Polar guys feel about having 44 with super-seniority.

divide and rule
 

Go back in history and pull out the books from year 2000/2001 where Mike Citrano, Grant Kashishke, John Kunkell and Mike Bryant designed this monster of AABO/ATLAS. Some of them, still here, and craving more medals to be famous in the hall of fame, they all worked for their masters.

It is upon us to seal this page and put an end to this travesty. An Obama nation can only be successful responding maybe after their 8 year reign ends, as this is not political, is about Capitalism, a society permissive of this acts, in essence to protect the companies, and the thieves, not the slaves. "Controversy of Zion"!

Charity starts at home, neither Captain Bourne as he call himself, nor Joe Muckle can bring any hope, it is incumbent on every pilot left here to bring this joint venture to an end. Citicorp succeeded and yet others may have to follow up, and make no mistake, management at Atlas will look at the most profitable angle of this crisis.:eek:

It seems that beaver driver and icarus are under the impression that a colored president and socialist congress will thwart the musings and downright dishonesty of AAWH/AABO. They won't. All politicians think alike with total disdain for the citizenry. Just when they (the union) think they won, the company will fold and voila, a new one will be on the horizon. I have learned over the years that unions tend to think in 5 year terms, companies think in 30 year terms, therefore the company will always win.
After ALPA and the rumblings from the IBT, with no input from the aggrieved over our already won arbitration, I have little faith that anyone will ever win anything against the slugs at AAWH. It is tough to win when the opponent has no morals.
Pessimistic? Yeah. Hope that I am wrong? Yeah. But what I am seeing there no other outcome at this time.

Sorry.....what is a "colored" president?:=

In some places, it would be a president of mixed race -- another term for "mulatto."

Atlas at Stansted - Furloughs?
 

Anyone know if Atlas let go crews based at Stansted UK?

If so when and how many?

Just interested as I used to have a friend worked their and I am trying to get in touch with no luck.

Anyone got a contact number or email for Atlas at STN?

Bill - just to be clear. I am probably a whole lot more conservative than you. And I didn't say colored (I dare you to go out on the streets of Memphis and say that) I said "democratic" congress and president, who are a whole lot more interested in listening to the unions than republicans.

And still we don't know why you care. You have a better job than you would at Atlas. I guess it is just your nature to keep the beans on the bottom from burning.

Wow, now your blaming Polar crews for the AABO situation. The spin just keeps going, grow up :ok:

Huh? How did you get that from the posts above?

The AACS operation was started by management when the union was just getting organized. What you see now was the best that could be negotiated after the fact. You should have seen the original deal.

That term is way out of line. In my experience these are good people in the middle of an organization and situation not of their making. And I am sure that the AACS/AABO guys have their own list of issues with past Atlas managements.

Bourne probably got compensated well for that one!

Judging from multiple posts and only a thimble full of knowledge in them (mostly wrong) the old misinformation machine has starting up again.

AACS (now AABO) was formed to circumvent European wet leasing laws and as a ready cadre of replacement pilots for the newly formed Atlas union beginning negotiations if they went on strike. British Authorities said BS to the wet leasing circumvention in Europe so that killed one side of that which initiated the new airline GSS (global supply systems).

Atlas kept growing the AACS group and started furloughing mainline Atlas crews later to increase negotiation leverage against the union and group. Their was no status quo since this was a first contract (no title 6 protections) and the Railway Labor Act only works with us based crews so we could not look to any federal help (yet again) to stop the lorenzo tactics. The STN letter of agreement was negotiated originally under the Amussin MEC to try and slow the mainline job losses. It later became part of the final contract as a LOA also under the Bourne MEC which followed the Amussin MEC which could not get their version of the contract passed under membership ratification. Under the Bourne MEC, they were able to get it negotiated were anyone hired had to be on the Atlas ALPA seniority list at any new offshore base that was created by the company and any subsequent hiring at STN halting that particular tactic from repeating by the company. That unfortunately did not include the currently employed AACS/AABO guys already hired. Those guys got their reward of STN super seniority. They were about 170 at the time and are now around 40-50.

During that same time, the company did not let up on the pressure on the Atlas crews and association during negotiations. The company had bought a nearly defunct airline in which they moved about five Atlas aircraft and associated flying contracts over to (PAC), furloughing more Atlas crewmembers while hiring off the street at the newly aquired carrier. More Atlas guys on the street. Later proved out financially that it was another negotiation tactic in the later bankruptcy court discovery a few years later.

So your facts are wrong. Judging from who was giving it out on one side, I'm not surprised. Luckily he is not a factor in the combined group anymore other than being source of discontent.

Quote: 'I guess it is just your nature to keep the beans on the bottom from burning.'

What a great phrase - thanks for that !

Spin
 

Low & Gritty could have got McCain elected with their Spin ! Too funny !

Bill(Low) we never knew you were such a Racist ! I copied FedEx your post....

Polax52 and fr8puppy remind me of people who buy things on sale because the flyer in the carpark says "Sale! Huge Discounts!!"

A review of the facts; which appear inconsequential as they only cloud your alternative reality clearly indicate you that Mr. Nitty's comments are indeed factual. The agreement was originally signed by the previous MEC Chairman and put out as a part of the first agreement which failed. The second attempt, under Bourne's tenure also contained the document and was unchanged because the NMB would not allow the Atlas group to change that part of the agreement. What did change, and is part of the factual record, was the Polar MEC Chairman Fell's notification that he intended to have his crews operate Atlas aircraft should Atlas strike. Again, record admitted to by Mr. Fell that we in the public domain shake our heads at. Such honourable men he commanded.

Ah yes and Mr. Rilly has returned to your fold from his lofty perch at FedEx to contribute his bile. Proving yet again that the smartest swimmer does not always get to the egg first.

I'll ask the question again that none have answered. You appear supremely confident of your legal outcomes. Bearing that in mind, do the Polar crewmembers have the collective courage of conviction to refuse to join their new union? Shall you sue your management, or will you be meek and accept what now appears to be the inevitable merger of your two groups to save your arse's and jobs?

Rob old buddy, I am not a racist:=. My pick would have been Condi or Michael Steele (my write in):D. Now talk about socialist leaning administrations and then we might have a something to talk about.
The bottom line is that a company will always win the war. The battles are only won when the company lets you win. Example, how many contract violations has AAWH done to your group? What did you actually get done. From what I have read they are still doing it. They did plenty to ours, scope be damned. That is the point and contributers to this post who think just because there is a new regime in that cesspool we call Washington DC will change things is delusional. The companies control the pocketbook ergo, they win.
C.T.

What Contracts??
 

Nitty... You keep saying they moved contracts to Polar. Which ones? You like to keep stating this, but never answer with any facts. The only ACMI contract I ever remember was LH, but that was before AAWH came along.

Granted, they did move some Atlas birds over to Polar, but they did this to replace the Pratt powered ones that they parked. We used them to fly POLAR stuff. I am sure AAWH also did it to pressure your group. But we did not take over any ACMI flying.

I believe what Mr. Nitty refers to is that back in 2002, Atlas approached a couple of operators here and asked them to crew and operate the aircraft to reduce the U.S. pilots. When they found no one to help with the scheme, they moved aircraft to the Polar subsidiary and hired a number of Tower crews for those aircraft.

It appears based on public documents, that their union knew all along that the aircraft in qustion were dry leased and could be returned at any time, minus crews and that those jobs would not be part of the merged carrier. They apparently never conveyed to the individuals that they would not have job rights with the merged carrier.

It seems to me that one group here rarely lets facts get in the way of what they want to believe vs what is the truth. I think I have regularly provided documentation when others only provided their opinion.

I believe it was LH, AMC and those S.A. routes Atlas had that were quickly moved over to Polar to make a negotiation point to the Atlas membership at the time. Furloughing at Atlas after moving the A/C and flights to Polar and hiring off the street. Mostly Tower guys as IslamoradaFlyer stated.

It was also well known that Polar was going to be pretty small in the eyes of AAWW. Around 6 A/C in the end. That point was made numerous times to the Polar MEC before the A/C and flights were moved. That MEC chose to keep that to themselves while telling the membership that they own everything. Those jobs were short term to begin with and a short windfall for the Polar group choosing to ignore the facts behind it or just misinformed by their MEC. Maybe just a hope that your scope would retain that acquired flying and A/C at Polar.

Here is one document from your contract administrator at the time wrote to the Polar MEC at that time over some of the issue of Polar's expected ultimate size (IN PDF). Seems to have played out accurately somewhat considering it was made in 2001.

Routes
 

Quote:
"I believe it was LH, AMC and those S.A. routes Atlas had that were quickly moved over to Polar"

Nitty - Your beliefs are all incorrect.

LH - Looked back in my logbook. Polar was operating LH ACMI with PRATT powered classics before anything to do with AAWH.

AMC - Atlas never operated AMC due to foreign ownership until after Michael Chowdry's death. Polar was operating AMC long before Atlas thought of it. In fact, the shifting has been the other way around. Cato and company shifted almost all of Polar's AMC award to Atlas until Evergreen blew the whistle. Polar then has flown it's contractual 10%. The Atlas classics have had an AMC gold mine due to this shift.

S.A. - We have been over this before. Both Polar and Atlas had SA authorities. The DOT forced AAWH to give up one of them. Cato, of course, dropped Polar's. The SA customers became unhappy with Atlas' service and continued screw ups, and demanded that Polar operate this route, which we did until DHL. This fliying was not "shifted" either.

Nitty-----thank you for bringing this document to the forum. I think that it will enlighten all outside viewers as to what started the ongoing “Hatfield and McCoy” feud between Polar and Atlas crewmembers continues to this day.

It shows the root cause (starting in Dec 2001) of all the discord between Polar and Atlas crewmembers that has prevailed over the past 7-8 years. It provides an explanation as to why the Polar MEC took the course of action he did at that time to protect the QOL issues and RLA provisions that the Polaroids had already won in their existing contract.

Here are a few excerpts from the Dec 2001 document that you posted from Polar’s attorney to Polar’s MEC concerning merger protocol negotiations between Polar and Atlas:

[Ref: 4 Dec 2001 Letter from ALPA PAC 23 Attorney to Polar MEC]

“……Atlas Air has also suggested that the Polar Crewmembers agree to be covered by the new Atlas Air Agreement if, and when, there is a complete operational merger.

To that end, Atlas Air is inviting the Polar MEC to attend the final bargaining sessions with the Atlas MEC/Negotiating Committee for the purpose of monitoring the conclusion of the negotiations.

Although the Polar MEC would not be an official party to these negotiations, the Atlas Air negotiators would consider proposed changes to previously tentatively agreed to provisions in the Atlas Air Agreement.

Some of the issues that would be the focus of such discussions are maximum days of work for the month, reserve duty and number of days of extended duty.

The Atlas Air negotiators have given no assurances that they will modify any tentatively agreed to work rules in the Atlas Air Agreement…..” [Polar Quality of Life Issues already addressed and won in their contract].

Now comes the beauty of the proposed Atlas Air Negotiators’ protocol procedures----

“….In addition to the option of permitting Polar Air to engage in Section 6 negotiations with the Polar Air Crewmembers when the Polar Air Agreement becomes amendable, Atlas Holdings has the option of merging the two groups before these negotiations get started.

The Atlas Air negotiators have said that Atlas Holdings would invoke certain provisions of the Polar Air Scope provisions (such as the LPP provisions) to attempt to ensure that the Atlas Air Agreement would apply to the consolidated group.

If successful in this approach, the parties to the Polar Air Agreement may be removed from the jurisdiction of the NMB and, thus, denied the opportunity for permissible self-help under the Railway Labor Act.

Instead, the resulting combined Collective Bargaining Agreement would be determined through tri-party negotiations and/or binding arbitration….”

Can you imagine? Who in their right mind would agree to these protocols? Give up rights so hard won?

Remember, Atlas crewmembers had no contract and were still basically “at will” employees. Polar had a contract with solid scope and QOL provisions. To be asked by Atlas Air negotiators and Atlas Air mgt to rely on their best efforts to incorporate Polar scope/QOL issues----to be told you, Polar, will only monitor, and that if, we, Atlas negotiators and Atlas mgt, cannot agree, then you, Polar will agree that some 3rd party or arbitrator will decide what your QOL/work rules will be.

Obviously, the Polar MEC "puked," negotiation/merger talks failed, eventually leading to a Polar strike in 2005, which further inflamed Polar/Atlas crewmember relations, hence, 7-8 years of continual bickering and finger pointing between the two groups.

Again, Nitty, thank you for posting this letter.

Pure bovine scat! Atlas was operating AMC and had been almost as long as Polar. Foreign ownership??? What the heck are you talking about? Time for another history lesson?

Polar had 4 slots. Atlas had 10. Now which ones would you give up? And by the way they were ALL scheduled service - so before you say Atlas never had scheduled service, you better review your history.

BS once again. You have no clue what you are talking about. Atlas has been operating in SA as long as Polar with just as good or even better on time record. Perhaps you have proof. I doubt it. Typical.

Thanks
 

Whale -
Thanks for the response and confirming my assertions that no flying was "shifted". Are you stating that Chowdry was a US citizen?

Nitty - Also thanks for the publishing the letter. Everything that Bobb Henderson has always said suddenly becomes true in one document. As John has skillfully illustrated, AAWH's and Atlas Air's intentions and actions toward Polar were neither honorable nor professional.

Also note that the "merger" was always refered to as a "Complete Operational Merger". This was plan "B". It protected the Polar route structure by merging both carriers onto the Polar certificate. Most Polar crews had no problem with this plan to combine all operations. (Plan "A" was, of course, to leave the carriers seperate for "synergy" and now the infamous plan "C" is the Cato dream of the crew leasing scam.)

Huh?
 

What does the citizenship of the CEO of a publically-traded US corporation have to do with CRAF?

Being a non citizen as a CEO has nothing to do with it, but they want you to believe it. We did try using the AABO Euro thing to slow management down when we were doing AMC, but we found out that didn't work according to the AMC regs. It takes only one US guy to sign for the signature service stuff. Nothing else prevents it. Good try guys. Didn't matter much since Polar got most of that flying along with the A/C transfers.

Contrary to some here, we were doing AMC and a large chunk went over to Polar with the shifted A/C from Atlas.

While my intent on publishing the old report from ALPA's Everet Barber to Bob Fell was to report to the masses here that Polar was never intended to be larger than about 6 A/C and 150 crewmembers. Instead it appears that the Polar group chooses to ignore that they were being used as leverage against the Atlas crews when they got those extra A/C and routes above that in the report for obvious negotiation reasons against the Atlas crews.

Never expected anything less from one group here judging from history. Where does Polar find themselves at now? Not to far off those originally proposed numbers in the letter. I do find it entertaining how a few have latched onto very conjectural thoughts to justifying their own purposes in the report despite how history has played itself out to the present.

That which agrees with Nitty's outlook is fact, all else is conjecture.

"I believe what Mr. Nitty refers to is that back in 2002, Atlas approached a couple of operators here and asked them to crew and operate the aircraft to reduce the U.S. pilots. When they found no one to help with the scheme, they moved aircraft to the Polar subsidiary and hired a number of Tower crews for those aircraft. "

Islamorada
A check of the DOH on the Polar seniority list, along with a knowledge of the indiviiduals reveals no personnel from Tower Air were hired after early 2001.

Maybe not after early 2001, but definitley during early 2001 - I was a Polar upgrade in January 2001, mixed in with a large new hire ground school (at LGB, then sim in DEN where some of us had witnessed the distant smoke of Chowdry's crash). That class (first of three) had largely consisted of many of my old friends from Tower (a year later during during July of 2002, my old Emery refugee friends came over).

Nitty's document confirms (for me) discussion that I had in August of 2001 with Polar's then Director of Training, warning me to get over to the -400 quickly, as he had some knowledge that Polar was soon to be drastically downsized (to be expected on/about January 2002). The only un-forecasted complication for that prediction, was the upcoming 2002 AMC lift escalation for Gulf War II.

Onto something more useful and constructive for the present collective group since a number of us already know the history.

Looks like they are moving to a more secure Atlas/Polar log on site for union business now instead of using the open http://www.atlasforteamsters.com site.

They are moving to the Local 1224 servers soon it looks like. Might be worth getting your particulars in for contact. You know, mailings and such. They have a link to them at http://www.atlasforteamsters.com.

Huh?
 

Huh?
What does the citizenship of the CEO of a publically-traded US corporation have to do with CRAF?

Nothing.

Never said anything about the CEO. It is all about the citizenship of the major stockholder.

It is amazing how you guys modify the statement so that your response is correct.

And that would be????

OK--Google CRAF
 

"AMC - Atlas never operated AMC due to foreign ownership until after Michael Chowdry's death."

If you "Google" CRAF you will find a link to a DOD article dated Jan 2000 listing Atlas as a member of CRAF--Chowdrey died in 2001.

I believe Chowdry was a citizen. While not born in the U.S. he gained it later. Mentioned in a few biographies on him online and in print.

Now, who was the major stockholder of Atlas that was a non citizen? If there was, I don't think Atlas could even hold a US air carrier certificate let alone worry about what your inferring. It requires a 51% U.S. ownership just to hold a U.S. air carrier certificate by law.

I covered the AMC part in the earlier post. It only requires one U.S. citizen for signature service. We already fought that battle and found out we were left in the cold.

It would be nice if one contingent would start working with the collective union instead of continuing to believe in the incorrect and self serving oratories of past leadership.