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

[exB717Flyer]

Being as if US Airways merges with another ALPA represented airline, then you have to follow the oh so flawed ALPA merger policy, but if ALPA is voted off the property, then you MUST MERGE at Date of Hire. It is now Federal Law (as of DEC07).

You don't understand the new law (and I wonder who's giving you incorrect information?). DOH isn't in it. ALPA Merger Policy is based on the Allegheny-Mowhak procedure and it calls for binding arbitration if no agreement is reached. In other words, ALPA or ALPA-like merger policy will apply to any future mergers USAPA or not.

 

[CapnCockroach]

What kind of drugs are you on? where does the new law say doh? oh yeah it does say "binding arbitration"

Hey, don't tell them that!! Let's let these USAPS get themselves hosed again. Let them believe what they want. Got to wonder how they ever get their pants on in the morning without assistance.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Point well taken. However, have you ever been in a bar-brawl and not gotten arrested or kicked out of the bar. It doesn't matter who started or who is right, you are never going to win the argument and you are probably never going to drink there again. Just remember, all we are saying is that we will change the award and all they are saying is that we can't cause its "final and binding." Well, in a way it is. That part of the process is over, what can we do now? Can we come up with a rational argument to work with the west so we can get our point across and mitigate the award? I hope this answer is YES!!!!!!!

I'm sorry, but the answer is NO, unfortunately. And therein lies the conundrum. A policy with no boundaries is in on of itself failed policy. As far as "changing" the award that argument has been debated without end on this forum.

Changing underwear is one thing. Not having to change underwear because you're not wearing any is another matter. We're not "changing" anything. We're just not going to put them on! We have nothing to hide!

And the final answer is "Where does a ten thousand pound elephant sit?" Whether anyone likes it or not the answer is obvious...anywhere it wants to.

With all due respect..."mitigate"? Sounds like the MEC East leadership. You're not Jack, are you?

I'm sorry, the Nicolau award is so one sided that mitigation is too far to the left of abortion to reconcile. The flawed logic is too convoluted.

As far as the bar fight, I was always smart enough to "see and avoid". Not my gig, thank god. Knew a lot of guys that went looking for it. I did'nt need it to secure my place in life. Besides, the guys always looked alot bigger than I did...remember....where does a ten thousand pound elephant sit?

Any where it votes.

 

[end_of_alpa]

You don't understand the new law (and I wonder who's giving you incorrect information?). DOH isn't in it. ALPA Merger Policy is based on the Allegheny-Mowhak procedure and it calls for binding arbitration if no agreement is reached. In other words, ALPA or ALPA-like merger policy will apply to any future mergers USAPA or not.

Where in gods green earth did you come up with this one? A genie bottle?

 

[end_of_alpa]

The Steering Committee is meeting to determine just that. Remember, however, a negotiation involves give-and-take -- something the East has thus far not shown any interest in.

We're not surrendering DOH. Fences and restrictions...certainly. DOH? Not anytime soon. USAPA constitution.

By the way, John Prater supports the Seham law firm. So does Pat Burke, the Continental/former NY Air Pilot here last week. Isn't it funny how everyone bashes Lee but the praise letters from ALPA leadership say otherwise? IACP or Independent Association of Continental Pilots run ALPA. when I spoke to Pat, he had nothing but praise for them. FACT!!!

Who's you daddy, NOW?

I don't suppose you read them? Oh, I know, USAPA leaders quietly snuck into Herndon offices and got them to sign their names while they slept. Oh, wait, that was Watergate. How original.

 

[Rico]

Wow, you are right. No DOH mentioned, I must be "on drugs"...

But to quote:

Sections 3 and 13 of Allegheny-Mohawk don’t even mention Date-Of-Hire. Section 3 simply states that seniority integration should be “fair and equitable.” And if the two sides can’t agree on what “fair and equitable” really is, then the issue would go to Section 13, which defined the steps in binding arbitration. What the MEC fails to mention is that using Sections 3 and 13, the original Allegheny-Mohawk seniority integration award ended up with DOH. And for the Mohawk pilots, whose airline had been shut down for over six months prior to the final ruling, that meant going back to work with DOH seniority. Using Allegheny-Mohawk in his April 2007 decision, arbitrator Richard Bloch used straight DOH in merging the two US Airways dispatcher seniority lists. Maybe Arbitrator Bloch thought his hands were tied by the LPPs found in Allegheny-Mohawk and in the two TWU labor contracts. He didn’t split the baby. He awarded DOH, because he found that: “In summary, based on these findings, the conclusion is that fairness and equity in this case militates strongly toward a date of hire list.” If Arbitrator Bloch had been using ALPA Merger Policy, his award might have been different.

Hmmm

So basically stick with ALPA, and be sure that you will not get DOH, or go USAPA and no longer be hamstrung by ALPA's merger policy.


Not much of a choice, unless you like being junior

 

[end_of_alpa]

Hey, you west guys want any "Gold and Yellow" USAPA lanyards and/or USAPA pins? had more made up and I would like to be gracious and include you all in the cause. What say you?

:angry:

 

[exB717Flyer]

Where in gods green earth did you come up with this one? A genie bottle?

Something called the "Railway Labor Act". Good reading if you seek facts.

http://books.google.com/books?id=zVRPXtnUu...Tx25U#PPA369,M1

 

[exB717Flyer]

Hey, you west guys want any "Gold and Yellow" USAPA lanyards and/or USAPA pins?

Yes! Please send me all you have.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Something called the "Railway Labor Act". Good reading if you seek facts.

Interesting read by a law professor from Virginia. I thought you said it was the RLA? The book preview I saw had many missing pages.
Is that how you really want to answer the original question?

Where in gods green earth did you come up with this one? A genie bottle?

I guess a genie bottle from Virginia.

 

[exB717Flyer]

Is that how you really want to answer the original question?

Yes. You can do your own google search as well. The facts of the Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs are common knowledge apparently to everyone but USAPA supporters. Don't take my word for it; ask Seham.

 

[CactusFlyr]

Whew! AWA320...the more I read here....well....that sadly seems to be a very viable possibility.....sigh. :blink:

I believe that the "ship" you're really referencing is Alpa though....

Actually, it is your career path if you guys continue down this road. Enjoy LOA 93 while it lasts. I have a life-boat, how-about-you?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Where in gods green earth did you come up with this one? A genie bottle?

Not sure what "this one" you're specifically asking about, but current ALPA merger policy is section 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-Mohawk LPP's with the addition of the 5 goals to be achieved, the timeline for the process, and the "mechanics" like creation of merger committees for each side, how an arbitrator is chosen if necessary, each side picking a pilot neutral, etc.

Both say that the two sides will attempt to negotiate a "fair and equitable" integration and failing that submit to binding arbitration and neither gives preference to any particular method of integrating the lists. In other words, the next merger (if there is one) will be just like the last with respect to integrating seniority lists - if a satisfactory method can't be agreed to thru negotiations, an arbitrator will decide what's "fair and equitable".

I assume whoever posted the original message added in the "(i.e.'s)" because they're not in the legislation.

Jim

 

[CactusFlyr]

Ever tried to have that "rational, non-emotional arguement" in a brawl? Tried it your way for several months. When all you get here is "final and binding" as the only answer I get. All I can come up with in response is Death (taxes seem moot at that point). That's the only final and binding argument I can answer. Everything in between is negotiable. Try explaining that "ad infinitum" day in and day out and see where that gets you.

And there you have it...Bob's you're uncle!

Actually, it is "final and binding",and I don't negotiate at the point of a gun. Enjoy your job while it lasts.

 

[CactusFlyr]

Where in gods green earth did you come up with this one? A genie bottle?

Where did you coe up with DOH,oh yeah, it's not there anymore for good reason.