ALPA/USAPA Topic for week of 1/24 to 1/31

[Phoenix]

Phoenix,

I question the 2006 data for US (East).

Sure. The exact numbers may be a little off, but I doubt anyone questions how much the pilots of USAir have willingly given up in pension, pay, vacation, and workrules. The chart was merely offered as a comparison and an admission that pilots sometimes cant' get it together.

No one laughs when some one jokes that USAir is in effect nearly indistinguishable of what Mesa was just a few years ago. Its too close to reality to laugh.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

disregard. Reposted by mistake.

 

[end_of_alpa]

This is the most ridiculous statement I've seen written on this thread in some time. And it doesn't even support you position!

So if the majority is happy the judge will just overturn an arbitrator's decision that was binding, even though said arbitrator carefully examined all the arguments for many months before ruling and the judge did not, just to make you happy ??? Yeah, that makes sense. :huh:

You just explained the West's position in the first part of your statement. If the judge thinks that Nicolau and the West came to their conclusions in a reasonable fashion, then it doesn't matter if he thinks it is fair or not. His opinion doesn't matter and neither does yours or the USAPA's, since the test is reasonableness not fairness. (you said it yourself) Get it?

These are not MY words.

"A rational person could conclude that dovetailing seniority lists in a merger, treating service at either firm as of equal weight, without quotas or other preferences for either group of employees, serves the interests of labor as a whole......Seniority lists sometimes are endtailed. That is, the employees of the smaller firm are given seniority only from the date of the acquisition, effectively added at the end of the larger firm's seniority roster. Contentions that endtailing violates the union's duty have been unsuccessful........The propriety of dovetailing, treating the two groups identically, follows directly. If the union's leaders took account of the fact that the workers at the larger firm preferred this outcome, so what? Majority rule is the norm. Equal treatment does not become forbidden because the majority prefers equality, even if formal equality bears more harshly on the minority.

http://1.usairlinepilots.org/misc_docs/Rakestraw-case.doc

"ALPA's policy signifies only that if the award is valid, it is definitive so far as ALPA is concerned."

"....in general, and so far as we know also in the specific setting of collective bargaining representation in the airline industry, a majority is better protected by the electoral process than a minority is."

"Collective bargaining under the Railway Labor Act and the other federal labor statutes illustrates representative rather than participatory democracy. The union conducts the negotiations. The workers vote on whether to be represented and by which union, and on whether to ratify the agreement negotiated by their representative, and on other proposals by the representative such as a strike call; but once an agreement is in force they have no right to change it until it expires. This is another example of intelligent finality. The agreement has a term of years (normally three) and during that time the workers are bound by it."
Air Wisc. v. Sanderson.

http://1.usairlinepilots.org/library/AirWiscvSanderson.pdf

You guys will figure it out when we vote.

 

[sharktooth]

Ask AA and Judge Kendal about that, $45 million fine, part of it forgiven to force APA to take concessions when AA was not in bankruptcy.

And ask the former TWA Pilots how good APA was to them, oh wait never mind, you want to staple HP Pilots to the bottom.

Boy, your comments continue to be bereft of facts.

The "fine" was completely "forgiven", sorry, any concessions were incidental. It was known that, on appeal, the pilots would win. That is from a friend of mine who was on the APA at that time, but then, YMMV.

TWA pilots, like the Empire pilots, took their ~DOH with equipment, as long as they stayed with their equipment. Stapling did not occur unless the pilots went out (forced or otherwise) into the Piedmont/AA, respective, systems.

 

[ClueByFour]

Interesting, who are the 3 signatories on the TA? After the election, where are 2 of them?

It does not matter. USAPA still has to play by the rules that were established. When are you guys ever going to find honesty about this?

It's the "Big Lie" that the USAPA proponents and Seeham peddle--there is no way around the Transition Agreement.

And if there were somehow to become one, it means that:

A. The company can now do whatever it wants and

B. Allegheny/Mowhawk would apply. Which means no codified mention of DOH and binding arbitration again.

So again, I ask: why do you (USAPA proponents) continue to spill the shill that you can somehow overturn the transition agreement. Without negotiation with the West pilots, the very best you will get is the status quo (eg, LOA 93 forever).

Or, if we make the assumption that you can walk away from the T/A, the company can force whatever it wants on both pilot groups. "Let's Vote!" does not magically eliminate years of contract law.

 

[Leonidas]

Ok usapa's, did the nmb not declare us a single transportation system? as such are we not already merged? and if you agree we are already merged then you must see that usapa would come into play after the TA, loa93, c2004 for the west, and the NIC. So usapa inherits all those, you can't pick and choose you get it all. Your own attorney tell's you that you will never overturn the Nic. (watch the video) it will stay in place as long as lcc is alive. Now I thought your plan was to leave the Nic. intact but craft a contract that gives bidding rights on doh, right? Well guess what if you go that route you can't pick and choose who bid's doh and who doesn't, hence the empire/shuttle guys will have to bid doh. This BS that "the Nic. doesn't exist" is crazy, your own attorney tell's you that it exists and it will be binding on usapa, So while in theory you could negotiate a contract that would allow you to bid by DOH, that contract would be binding on all us pilots not just the west.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Ok usapa's, did the nmb not declare us a single transportation system? as such are we not already merged? and if you agree we are already merged then you must see that usapa would come into play after the TA, loa93, c2004 for the west, and the NIC. So usapa inherits all those, you can't pick and choose you get it all. Your own attorney tell's you that you will never overturn the Nic. (watch the video) it will stay in place as long as lcc is alive. Now I thought your plan was to leave the Nic. intact but craft a contract that gives bidding rights on doh, right? Well guess what if you go that route you can't pick and choose who bid's doh and who doesn't, hence the empire/shuttle guys will have to bid doh. This BS that "the Nic. doesn't exist" is crazy, your own attorney tell's you that it exists and it will be binding on usapa, So while in theory you could negotiate a contract that would allow you to bid by DOH, that contract would be binding on all us pilots not just the west.

Let's wait for the election. OK?

For some reason you guys just can't READ!

 

[AAA73Pilot]

It does not matter. USAPA still has to play by the rules that were established. When are you guys ever going to find honesty about this?
It's the "Big Lie" that the USAPA proponents and Seeham peddle--there is no way around the Transition Agreement.

I'll ask again. Where is ALPA after USAPA wins the election? Who is your new bargaining agent? We are being honest. It seems we have a difference in opinions. Only you wish to characterize my opinion as being a lie. OK I can live with that. Just expect the same.

And if there were somehow to become one, it means that:

A. The company can now do whatever it wants and

B. Allegheny/Mowhawk would apply. Which means no codified mention of DOH and binding arbitration again.

So again, I ask: why do you (USAPA proponents) continue to spill the shill that you can somehow overturn the transition agreement. Without negotiation with the West pilots, the very best you will get is the status quo (eg, LOA 93 forever).

Or, if we make the assumption that you can walk away from the T/A, the company can force whatever it wants on both pilot groups. "Let's Vote!" does not magically eliminate years of contract law.

A. Isn't that what Hemenway said once before?
B. I disagree, but what a surprise that is.

It's not shill, only your interpretation. We will be a single carrier with a single bargaining unit, representing one pilot group. Interesting isn't it?

 

[Leonidas]

Let's wait for the election. OK?

For some reason you guys just can't READ!

No for some reason you guys just can't come up with logical explanations for your opinions, you cannot pick and chose who you are going to represent, and what you have to defend. If alpa is gone you are bound by those agreements just like the company, why can't you get that thru your thick skull? BTW have you see the new law that bush just signed? if in fact you believe that we are not merged and the Nic. doesn't exist, then the new law says, BINDING ARBITRATION in the merging of work groups. So you can't have it both ways, usapa is taking over lcc the merger and seniority list have been completed and accepted by the nmb and the company, usapa cannot undue the merger, or can it?

 

[usabusdriver]

I do. And that is where the vote comes in. If the agent bargains with the company and the company agrees the(n) sic you vote for it.

ALPA's law firm attempts to cast doubt on the legal right of US Airways pilots to negotiate and implement a seniority-based
pilot integration agreement, yet concedes that seniority issues are subject to negotiation:

End,

Your assumption that the company would agree to disregard the Nicolau award and negotiate a list with DOH is critical to your whole argument for usapa. Do you not recall past events? Doug specifically stated that the company would not accept an integrated seniority list that they thought was not fair and equitable. The company has already accepted the Nic award and knows if they disregard it the west would sue.

Now, considering the above, is it really believable that the company would say to usapa “sure lets ignore the Nic and the west pilots, and merge the former west pilot group seniority list into the former east seniority list by DOHâ€￾?

The company will tell usapa that the seniority issue has already been settled through a process both pilot groups agreed to and that the Nicolau seniority arbitration award will determine seniority at the new US Airways. The company will do this to remain fair and equitable to ALL of the pilot group or for fear of liability if nothing else, and will not renegotiate DOH.

Why not have Bradford and Seham meet with the company and get a Memorandum of Understanding that if usapa should be successful in a representation election that the Nicolau award is not valid and will not be used for the pilot seniority list in a joint contract?

Present your legal argument to them stating it is a critical issue that the pilot group needs if a representation election is triggered to make an informed vote. That would eliminate any speculation.

 

[prechilill]

I'll ask again. Where is ALPA after USAPA wins the election? Who is your new bargaining agent? We are being honest. It seems we have a difference in opinions. Only you wish to characterize my opinion as being a lie. OK I can live with that. Just expect the same.

A. Isn't that what Hemenway said once before?
B. I disagree, but what a surprise that is.

It's not shill, only your interpretation. We will be a single carrier with a single bargaining unit, representing one pilot group. Interesting isn't it?

And the Nicolau list will be our combined seniority between the two pilot groups...You just do not understand the unintended consequences you are bringing with your robust emotions. I wish you all well in the twilight years of your career.

 

[P51Pilot]

And the Nicolau list will be our combined seniority between the two pilot groups...You just do not understand the unintended consequences you are bringing with your robust emotions. I wish you all well in the twilight years of your career.

Actually you might want to be careful what you wish for. The East contract stipulates Seniority by Length of Service. If US Airways management was right that you could be placed under the East contract, you would bound by the provisions of the east contract. The pay rates are just one section and so is seniority and there is no mention of the Nicalou award in the East contract.

 

[usabusdriver]

It's not shill, only your interpretation. We will be a single carrier with a single bargaining unit, representing one pilot group. Interesting isn't it?

73pilot,

Yes it is interesting. There are two separate groups with separate contracts that have to be administered and represented. You see the ALPA MEC may go away, but the identity of the group and associated rights does not. And that is where the problem remains with the proposed theories. The change in representation does not alter or merge the two groups. Just like under ALPA there will be two identifiable and separate groups with separate contracts that need to be represented and administered and ultimately merged together.

 

[luvn737s]

This newbie sounds reasonable.

There is no incentive for the company to negotiate a new transition agreement with U-SAPs since they have the majority of the synergies they were seeking. If they agree that the current transition agreement has expired, they need only open bases for each side in the opposing hubs and balance their fleet and staffing needs that way, should U-SAPs win.

Make sure you want what you win if you vote USAPA.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

And the Nicolau list will be our combined seniority between the two pilot groups...You just do not understand the unintended consequences you are bringing with your robust emotions. I wish you all well in the twilight years of your career.

We'll see after the vote. Thanks for the wishes. You too.