ALPA/USAPA/Pilot Labor Thread for the week 4/12-4/19

[end_of_alpa]

Guys, this is the last post I will have on this forum. I congratulate USAPA for winning and I believe that the best path for a successful union is with an independent union. It is with this thought in mind that I and all the pilots here at US Airways seek the same goal.

Will USAPA be sued? Of course. As already posted on this forum, AWAPPA will see to that....and to you I wish you the best of luck. I will be, however, devoting my efforts to make USAPA succeed to be the union that truly represents all US Airways pilots.

I was there in the beginning and I will be there till the end.

Please fly safe out there.

 

[Phoenix]

You need to get in contact with AWAAPA ASAP! They will GLADLY accept YOUR DONATION to their legal fund.

Then, I would begin to brace for the impact of the next round of mergers.

Those donations are NOT tax deductible like say.. union dues are.

 

[Phoenix]

(Bear96 @ Apr 18 2008, 11:52 AM)
Seniority can be negotiated - BUT - the starting point in any such negotiations for USAPA will be the Nic award.
Doubt it.

Doubt it.

Bear may have a point.. the company may use the Nic as the point of departure for the seniority list.

But of course there are two very good reasons why the company would not bother to do so.

1. The company could not care less how the list is arranged. It is a union issues and they will be glad to acknowledge whatever list of seniority the union presents.
2. The representatives of the pilots are constitutionally unable to validate the Nic. For the representatives of the pilots of USAir, from a legal standpoint, Nic has less relevance than a menu from Pizza Hut.

 

[EastUS]

Guys, this is the last post I will have on this forum. I congratulate USAPA for winning and I believe that the best path for a successful union is with an independent union. It is with this thought in mind that I and all the pilots here at US Airways seek the same goal.

Will USAPA be sued? Of course. As already posted on this forum, AWAPPA will see to that....and to you I wish you the best of luck. I will be, however, devoting my efforts to make USAPA succeed to be the union that truly represents all US Airways pilots.

I was there in the beginning and I will be there till the end.

Please fly safe out there.

Thanks for all the hard work sir! Take Care/The Very Best

 

[ableoneable]

Light crude closes at $117/bbl in after hours trading.

 

[Bear96]

However, among other things, I am contesting the idea that anyone "ratified" the "nic" because in the east contract, ratification demands the membership have a say.

I do not doubt the East contract requires that amended collective bargaining agreements between the union and the company require membership ratification. However, we are not talking about an amended collective bargaining agreement between the union and the company.

Again, if there was some requirement that the arbitration award had to be ratified by the members before it became binding, please post it. That is a serious question - I am not aware of any such requirement, but maybe there is one, and if so I would like to hear about it because that would certainly improve the East's legal argument.

And think about it. If what you are saying is true, don't you think if this whole situation could have just been resolved by the East refusing to ratify the arbitration award, that simply would have been done a long time ago and the drama over the past year would not have had to happen?

I know I was never given a vote, much less asked about an arbitrator or the process.

Your union acts on your behalf. You don't have to be given a vote on everything. (Think East DB pensions - is there any doubt those are gone? Did the East pilots vote on it?) You don't even necessarily have to be given a vote to ratify amended CBAs. However, ALPA chose to make that part of the process (and I assume USAPA will do the same). Unions decide which decisions require membership votes and which do not. So again, if there is something stating that the East or West pilot reps did not intend to have Nic become binding until there was a membership ratification, please post it.

 

[700UW]

Merger may delay pilots' flight dreams

 

[oldiebutgoody]

The guys putting USAPA together are pretty bright. They were able to defeat the 800 lb gorilla. My money is on them to come up with solution that ALPA not only couldn't come up wth, but REFUSED to ome up with.

And, according to their pledge, membership ratification will be one of them, along with major restrictions on "roll call" voting, something I've witnessed ALPA use to TOTALLY go against majority rule.

 

[sharktooth]

I do not doubt the East contract requires that amended collective bargaining agreements between the union and the company require membership ratification.

Thanks for your reply.

You and I seem to have a difference of opinion over "ratification" of the "nic". I am comfortable knowing that the "nic" was never "ratified" so let us leave it as a difference. As Condi would say, old news.

The "nic" is constitutionally unacceptable in the new union, our new reality. Let us work from there.

 

[Bear96]

And, according to their pledge, membership ratification will be one of them, along with major restrictions on "roll call" voting, something I've witnessed ALPA use to TOTALLY go against majority rule.

That's great for future agreements, but it doesn't change what has already happened.

BTW, are you saying USAPA will require ratification on things like arbitrations such as the Nic one? That may sound good at first glance but ultimately will not be workable. No one will agree to arbitrate anything with a party that has an "out" such as that to binding arbitration. It essentially means the other party can never win at arbitration. So if binding arbitration is off the table, how will USAPA resolve disputes with other entities?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

That's great for future agreements, but it doesn't change what has already happened.

BTW, are you saying USAPA will require ratification on things like arbitrations such as the Nic one? That may sound good at first glance but ultimately will not be workable. No one will agree to arbitrate anything with a party that has an "out" such as that to binding arbitration. It essentially means the other party can never win at arbitration. So if binding arbitration is off the table, how will USAPA resolve disputes with other entities?

I think that after NIC that arbitration is pretty much off f EVERYBODY'S table. No one will agree to it anymore, knowing that a senile old man can impose whatever he wants on you to impose an agenda. Besides, it's really DUMB that ALPA's merger policy doesn't address these issues without needing it.

Nic was not in ANY active agreements. I'll trust the leadership at USAPA to handle the details. They've already proven themselves to be outstanding organizers, and I know most of the folks that have been selected for committee positions. All VERY BRIGHT AND COMPETENT!

ALPA's gone here. Ain't coming back in the foreseeable future. Better get used to it!

 

[sharktooth]

That's great for future agreements, but it doesn't change what has already happened.

BTW, are you saying USAPA will require ratification on things like arbitrations such as the Nic one? That may sound good at first glance but ultimately will not be workable. No one will agree to arbitrate anything with a party that has an "out" such as that to binding arbitration. It essentially means the other party can never win at arbitration. So if binding arbitration is off the table, how will USAPA resolve disputes with other entities?

What if the arbitrator had ruled that all first-born of both pilot groups must be dispatched? Would that not be "binding"?

 

[700UW]

You really dont have a choice not to agree to arbitration, the law mandates it now, your CBA has it in it for Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs, ( and no union would be stupid enough to remove LPPs).

The RLA has it in it, the grievance procedure has it in it also.

So if your terminated you and you exhaust all the steps before arbitration, you expect USAPA not to take your case any further?

Sounds like a big DFR in the making to me.

Nic award is in the transition agreement which is part of both the west and east CBAs, there is no way getting around it, time will tell and there will be a lot of "told you so's" on the boards.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You really dont have a choice not to agree to arbitration, the law mandates it now, your CBA has it in it for Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs, ( and no union would be stupid enough to remove LPPs).

The RLA has it in it, the grievance procedure has it in it also.

So if your terminated you and you exhaust all the steps before arbitration, you expect USAPA not to take your case any further?

Sounds like a big DFR in the making to me.

Nic award is in the transition agreement which is part of both the west and east CBAs, there is no way getting around it, time will tell and there will be a lot of "told you so's" on the boards.

Nobody said that arbitration wouldn't be used in THOSE cases. Just Don't expect two ALPA carriers to agree to it in a merger situation, unless legally mandated. Just happened in the NWA/DL situation.

As far as the "I told you so's", I promise I won't say that to you when it the Nic goes away or becomes negotiated out of meaningful application. Even the ALPA lawyers admitted that seniority was negotiable. Both sides agreed on that in published letters.

DFR won't happen if they fail to participate after being offered the chance.

 

[Poug Darker]

Nic will be rendered moot when it is shown to be fundamentally flawed in the MidAtlantic case.