American Airline Pilots' Slowdown Wins a Victory, Despite What You Read in the DMN

[Bob Owens]

Like it or not, your workgroup ratified the concessionary deal as did the flight attendants. You've been posting about a wildcat strike since November 29th, why would you guys want to strike now if you have a ratified agreement? All that will result from illegal job action is fines and a possible injunction. You are completely off base to compare restrictions on airline workers' right to strike to apartheid, racial segregation, and extermination of the Jews its outrageous. How successful were the strikes in countries more friendly (less hostile) towards organized labor? BA prevailed in getting concessions from their cabin crew (thanks to the help of BALPA), Lufthansa is seeking to cut FA costs and establish a new low cost subsidiary and has faced job action, and closer to home PM Stephen Harper forced Air Canada workers back when they faced a strike this past spring. I'm not sure why you think through illegal job action and the courts you will win the ability to strike upon abrogation.

How successful has recent job action in the United States? Sure some may credit the Chicago teacher strike as a victory but the fact is the city had the upper hand and got much of what they wanted in terms of extending the school day and assessing teacher performance. What about the extended strike at Caterpillar in Joliet, IL? The IAM bowed down to company demands. Caterpillar closed a plant in Ontario after job action and is relocating to right to work state Georgia. How successful was the IAM at Lockheed Martin? They were striking when the company wanted to eliminate pension for new hires and have the workers pay a greater share of health care costs, again the IAM eventually got down and gave the company what they wanted.

Josh

My group, Local 562 shot it down by 96%, the line by 75% , it passed by .25%, as far as I'm concerned it has been imposed on us by the larger group.

I've said we should support the pilots, I dint say we should Wildact. Show me where I said that.

I feel that the comparasion to other oppressed groups is valid. True that we chose this profession and could move to another one, but Jews were told they were not welcome in Germany and if they didnt like it they could leave as well. Sounds simple , just move right? While no doubt it's easier for us to change careers, even people like me in their 50s, than it was for Jews to find a place to go, in both cases the answer the oppressed was given was unrealistic and failed to justify the policies that were imposed. I'm not saying that these are equal in the severeity of oppression, loss of life is certainly more severe than the loss of ones career but the patterns are the same, and as I would think the Jews learned the oppression starts off small. The oppressors first isolate the group, take away certain rights (like the Germans at first did to the Jews, like the courts have done to airline workers) and just continue from there. Like I said, I'm not saying that the two examples are equal, but they follow a pattern.

Explain to me how you feel its justified that the court tells us we can not strike after our contracts are abrogated in Bankruptcy when EVERY OTHER WORKER in the country can?

You may respond "because we are under the RLA ", but Sect 1167 says that contracts under the RLA can not be abrogated in Bankruptcy, they have to follow the RLA and the RLA says that when the company engages in unilateral self help that we can too.

The courts response was that those parts of the RLA dont apply to Airline workers. Only the parts that restrict our rights do.??? You dont see the inequity in that? You dont see the injustice?

The only way I know of that a carrier could resort to unilateral self help under the RLA (other than being relaesed after following Sect 6) is through Bankruptcy.

The court also said that for Airline workers, when a contract is abrogated that its as if the agreement never existed. well thats not abrogation, thats annukllment and the legal standard for annulment is much higher. In an annullment the court is saying the agreement was never valid and never should have existed. That ws the only way they could 'get around" the clause under the RLA thats said that ststus quo is what prevented self help and that once the status quo was lifet both sides were afforded self help. So the courts created a fiction, a fiction with the intent to deny Airline Unions their rights, that there never was a status quo so there can be no violation of it.

If we are bound by the RLA then ok, but the courts have been making up rules that conflict with the RLA and only imposing it on the Airlines. Well once they do it to us, whats to stop them from doing it to others? If Unions are forced to continue to give their labor under terms that were set forth in an arena that does not recognize their right to their self interests then whats to stop the courts (other than the cash) from mandating that Exxon has to sell the fuel for whatever the carrier feels they can pay and have their business plan to make $3 billion a year in profits succeed? You may reply that individual workers can quit, sure, and individual shareholders in Exxon can sell their shares if they dont like the terms, in other words "just move". Once agin, it does not justify the injustice.

Airline workers are being seperated from all other workers by the courts in this process and systematically denied the rights provided for them through legislation that has been on the books for over 75 years.

How successful was the Warsaw Rebellion? If I had the option to die in Warsaw or Aushwitz I'd choose Warsaw. But thats me.

 

[Bob Owens]

No, I do not. I do not equate the AA bankruptcy and pilot dispute with the civil rights fight of Rosa Parks.

The fight to change the bankruptcy process and the RLA needs to be with the Legislative branch of the government. Beating on the customers and the bottom line of the corporation will not result in meaningful change.

Wrong, The boycott was an economic act against the Bus Company.
This is a civil rights issue, airline workers have been singled out by the courts and denied rights provided by law. In this case its the right to fight abck against unilateral changes to terms of work.

I liken this to situations like after the OJ verdict. People who felt they were wronged burned down their own neighborhoods.

I guess that was right after the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor right?

PS Rodney King??

 

[Bob Owens]

Not entirely true Bob. You are corect that they cannot engage in self help as a reaction to the abrogation, that is what makes any job action illegal and wrong right now. The part you may have forgotten is that the prior situation of being, as you normally point out, several years past the amendable date means that they could return to the bargaining table and continue to pursue the proper release into a cooling off period. I think you'll agree with me that this wouldn't be forth coming until long after the chapter 11 proocess is complete, but it does not mean they do not have the right of self help. It only means they would have had to wait the legally (whether you agree with it or feel it fair or not) mandated process. As someone who was there with Glen in 2005 (hell maybe even worked with him for all I know) I have to agree with him. AMFA was also fighting on an uneven playing field nad facing compelte destruction, but chose to follow the rules and play fair. Maybe that is why despite what our unions were instructing us to do so many of us were side by side with them in 2005 yet today are not supporting the pilots or many of your "let the place collapse" mind sets.

The company has unilaterally imposed changes, the Union has been told they can not strike. Nowhere in C-11 does it say this is how things proceed and the RLA is explicit in that when the company imposes new terms (self help) that the union can do so as well.

At NWA the mechanics were never put in a position where their contract was abrogated and told they could not strike.

See my response to 737. To say that its wrong for the pilots to react to the abrogation of their contract is to say it was wrong for Rosa parks to not give up her seat when she was legally obliged to do so. The courts are morally wrong in what they have done to airline workers.

 

[737823]

My group, Local 562 shot it down by 96%, the line by 75% , it passed by .25%, as far as I'm concerned it has been imposed on us by the larger group.

I understand and respect your feelings but that doesn't change the facts. The vote is tabulated across other locals not just line stations, not just Local 562, not just JFK. If there is such clear division in the priorities of the membership and your interests are misaligned maybe be you should have representation that matches that.

I've said we should support the pilots, I dint say we should Wildact. Show me where I said that.

I know I'd be reluctant to book on an airline thats in BK and looks like its headed towards the rocks with its labor groups. They may not liquidate but they may go on strike, legally or otherwise.

On the issue of strikes, well plenty of judges ruled that "separate but equal" was legal, it took Rosa Parks to sit in one of the front seats, despite all the legal rulings, to change that legal injustice. Airline workers may need to follow the example of Rosa Parks, we should comply with what the RLA says, as much as it sucks it's a law that was put in place by elected representatives, not of couple of one per centers who aren't accountable to the public, and according to the RLA if our contract is abrogated we can resort to self help.

Those are just a few examples, don't have the desire to sift through all your posts in the past ten months but its clear from your nonchalant attitude and posts like "GAAP is smoke and mirrors" or "Why can't AA pay PANYNJ $100 to land a 777 at JFK" or "why isn't AA asking Exxon-Mobil to sell their product for half its market value" have been clear.

I feel that the comparasion to other oppressed groups is valid. True that we chose this profession and could move to another one, but Jews were told they were not welcome in Germany and if they didnt like it they could leave as well. Sounds simple , just move right? While no doubt it's easier for us to change careers, even people like me in their 50s, than it was for Jews to find a place to go, in both cases the answer the oppressed was given was unrealistic and failed to justify the policies that were imposed. I'm not saying that these are equal in the severeity of oppression, loss of life is certainly more severe than the loss of ones career but the patterns are the same, and as I would think the Jews learned the oppression starts off small. The oppressors first isolate the group, take away certain rights (like the Germans at first did to the Jews, like the courts have done to airline workers) and just continue from there. Like I said, I'm not saying that the two examples are equal, but they follow a pattern.

First of all its an outrageous comparison and at best serves as a trivialization of the atrocities committed toward an entire race. It's more one thing to feel the law is unjust but its another to resort to hyperbole like this. You have no idea what it was like for many who left Europe to escape persecution only to come to the United States and be spat at called names, demonized, and restricted from accessing education, employment and other parts of society.

Explain to me how you feel its justified that the court tells us we can not strike after our contracts are abrogated in Bankruptcy when EVERY OTHER WORKER in the country can?

You may respond "because we are under the RLA ", but Sect 1167 says that contracts under the RLA can not be abrogated in Bankruptcy, they have to follow the RLA and the RLA says that when the company engages in unilateral self help that we can too.

The courts response was that those parts of the RLA dont apply to Airline workers. Only the parts that restrict our rights do.??? You dont see the inequity in that? You dont see the injustice?

Bob, the RLA exists to ensure job action does not cause excessive harm to the economy at large. As I replied this morning even if AA as the #4 largest US domestic carrier were to shut down it would have a profound impact that would be felt in communities all across America. The RLA serves to balance the needs of workers and ensure any work stoppage or job action does not disproportionately harm others. Do you similarly feel that compulsory union membership in RTW states is an injustice? Why should the union be imposed on someone if they don't want representation? Is that too an injustice? If the perceived injustices of the RLA were so prevalent you'd have all the unions and AFL-CIO battling it in Washington and with the courts but they weren't. Instead they invested tens of millions of dollars to have the election rules changed before the 2010 DL elections only to still not gain enough votes for representation.

Like I said above to compare this to the civil rights movement is beyond outrageous. I understand your desire to inspire change and a movement like Rosa Parks but this issue is entirely different.

Josh

 

[Bob Owens]

First of all its an outrageous comparison and at best serves as a trivialization of the atrocities committed toward an entire race. It's more one thing to feel the law is unjust but its another to resort to hyperbole like this. You have no idea what it was like for many who left Europe to escape persecution only to come to the United States and be spat at called names, demonized, and restricted from accessing education, employment and other parts of society.

You're right, I dont, but I do know what its like to have the law single you out and treat you differently than anyone else. How old are you? Has that(escaping persecution) been your experience? Probably not, because if it was then you would see how what I'm saying about systematic oppression relates.

Bob, the RLA exists to ensure job action does not cause excessive harm to the economy at large. As I replied this morning even if AA as the #4 largest US domestic carrier were to shut down it would have a profound impact that would be felt in communities all across America. The RLA serves to balance the needs of workers and ensure any work stoppage or job action does not disproportionately harm others. Do you similarly feel that compulsory union membership in RTW states is an injustice? Why should the union be imposed on someone if they don't want representation? Is that too an injustice? If the perceived injustices of the RLA were so prevalent you'd have all the unions and AFL-CIO battling it in Washington and with the courts but they weren't. Instead they invested tens of millions of dollars to have the election rules changed before the 2010 DL elections only to still not gain enough votes for representation.

Like I said above to compare this to the civil rights movement is beyond outrageous. I understand your desire to inspire change and a movement like Rosa Parks but this issue is entirely different.

You didnt answer any of my questions. The effect of a Union Pacific or CSX strike would have the same impact, yet they will never be put in the position airline workers are put in under Bankruptcy despite the fact we both are under the RLA and both would have the same impact on the overall economy. We are being seperated and treated differently under the law. You say its outrageous for me to use Rosa Parks and the Holocaust as examples and that what is happening to us is trivial because its not happening to you and dont see it ever happening to you but the fact is our rights are being denied and we are being singled out because of the industry we work in.

By the way Jews werent the only people to ever be persecuted. My ancesters werent welcomed with open arms either, they got over it, you need to as well. Dont allow current injustices to prevail simply because the ones in the past were worse and dont think that because your ancestors were persecuted it gives you the right to do it to others.

 

[737823]

You're right, I dont, but I do know what its like to have the law single you out and treat you differently than anyone else. How old are you? Has that(escaping persecution) been your experience? Probably not, because if it was then you would see how what I'm saying about systematic oppression relates.

No I was not but I do have family members that were.

You didnt answer any of my questions. The effect of a Union Pacific or CSX strike would have the same impact, yet they will never be put in the position airline workers are put in under Bankruptcy despite the fact we both are under the RLA and both would have the same impact on the overall economy. We are being seperated and treated differently under the law. You say its outrageous for me to use Rosa Parks and the Holocaust as examples and that what is happening to us is trivial because its not happening to you and dont see it ever happening to you but the fact is our rights are being denied and we are being singled out because of the industry we work in.

You're right I didn't answer all of it because you are going on a rant victimizing airline employees because of the RLA which has been around for 85+ years. We don't need to go in a lengthy exchange about Nazi Germany, the Warsaw Rebellion, and the Civil Rights movement. You feel the RLA presents an injustice to airline workers. Fine, you are entitled. I'm just saying you don't need to draw parallels to the above to convey your feelings. You really lose credibility with people when you resort to rhetoric like that even if you feel it is justified.

As for the railroads you raise a very good point there, happy to discuss that. Not sure why you are saying they aren't subject to the same restrictions. If they are then that's not fair. Just don't see why you are so adamant about this, its a moot point now, your contract didn't get abrogated, the LBFO was ratified. Like I said before, if enough in organized labor were concerned they would be petitioning in Washington and through the courts. It seems organized labor has their plate full trying to fight back on the collective bargaining and public employee pension reforms going on coast to coast.

II. Employee Representation
Craft Representation . The RLA contemplates that employees will be represented on a carrier-wide basis through crafts or classes of employees (e.g., railroad engineers and airline pilots), and that the majority of the employees in each class or craft may select a bargaining representative. Representational disputes include issues of whether: (1) a majority of a craft or class of employees desire to be represented by a particular union or to be unrepresented; (2) a union's certification survives a merger; and (3) two related carriers will be treated as one (or two) for representation purposes. The RLA commits representational disputes to the exclusive jurisdiction of the NMB, and requires the NMB, upon the request of either party to a dispute among a carrier's employees, to investigate and certify bargaining representatives for a class or craft. A carrier is required to deal with the representatives certified to it by the NMB.

http://www.fra.dot.gov/pages/955.shtml

By the way Jews werent the only people to ever be persecuted. My ancesters werent welcomed with open arms either, they got over it, you need to as well. Dont allow current injustices to prevail simply because the ones in the past were worse and dont think that because your ancestors were persecuted it gives you the right to do it to others.

Thanks for telling me, I didn't know that. Of course others were and continue to be, I never stated otherwise. I simply responded to your earlier post.

Josh

 

[Bob Owens]

No I was not but I do have family members that were.

Dont we all?

You're right I didn't answer all of it because you are going on a rant victimizing airline employees because of the RLA which has been around for 85+ years.

Wrong, the prohibition on equal application to self help in bankruptcy for airline employees only has only been around since 2007.

You feel the RLA presents an injustice to airline workers.

Wrong again, I feel the selective application and selected exclusion of the provisions of the RLA in bankruptcty, but only for Airline workers (Not RailRoad workers), is an injustice.

As for the railroads you raise a very good point there, happy to discuss that. Not sure why you are saying they aren't subject to the same restrictions. If they are then that's not fair.

They arent, the Rails are treated differently. Read Sect 1167 of C-11. Contracts under the RLA can not be abrogated in BK. back in 1983, a Judge who I believe later took a job working for Lorenzo ruled that 1167 did not apply to airlines so Lorenzo could void out his labor agreements at Continental, but the RLA was clear that if the carrier unilaterally changed terms airline workers could strike, as the ALPA did when Lorenzo had the contracts thrown out in 1983, which is what Lorenzo wanted. So for nearly 30 years it stood that Airline labor contracts, despite being under the RLA were treated in BK like contracts under the NLRA-ie they could be voided and the workers could strike. Then read the AFA VS NWA case of 2007. In the NWA case when the contract was thrown out the airline filed an injunction to stop the AFA from striking, as the Continental ALPA pilots had done nearly 30 years prior. The BK Judge even agreed they could strike, but NWA was able to find a friendly Judge, who granted the injunction, but the reasoning behind the Injunction contradicted the RLA, it made no sense, it was bumbling, so instead of throwing out the injunction and allowing the FAs to strike the appellate court decided to uphold it and create a whole new concept-just for the airlines. The RLA was clear, if the company engaged in self help so could the unions. They had no way around it so they made up a new rule just for the airlines. They said that in bankruptcy the contract isnt abrogated, essentailly its annulled, it never existed therefore there is no violation of the status quo, the union has to start bargaining as if it just got certified and there never was a union or a contract in place before the ruling. This of course is a legal fiction and just because a company wants to make $3 billion a year in profits and it wants to do so by forcing its workers to work for less is hardly the standard that the courts have used in the past to annul contracts.That is the injustice, a legal fiction created to single out airline workers and deny them the rights that every other worker who has their contract abrogated has while at the same time applying only selected parts of the RLA, the restrictive ones, while removing the protective ones. Its like they tied our hands and threw us into the Ring. Dont complain if we resort to kicking and spitting when we have been denied the right to defend ourselves.