Feb / Mar 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[eastcoast]

Will and arbitrator undo what another arbitrator did?

Don't think so.

I agree.

It seems like no one has considered the possibility that a new arbitrator might not care what list USAPA submits. Arbitrators don't have to use either side's seniority solution. It's not about splitting the baby. They can discard both sides and come up with something THEY think is fair given the circumstances. As long as they adhere to the law, and there is no corruption involved.

So riddle me this... Let's say USAPA submits a DOH list, and APA submits their list. Not wanting to undo what another arbitrator already did, what's to stop him from FIRST reordering the USAPA list as an exact mirror image of the Nicolau award? He cites the same reasons as arbitrator Nicolau did, and the previous arbitration. Then takes that reshuffled list that is no longer called the Nicolau award, and inserts it into his solution for the current merger, using ratios, fleet, seat, career expectations, widebody aircraft, projected attrition, and even some LOS adjustments.

There is absolutely nothing stopping an arbitrator from doing something like this. In the DL/NW merger the arbitrator rejected both sides solutions, and came up with his own. It ended up being closer to the DL suggested method, but used different assumptions.

There is just no way to predict what will happen in arbitration. But common sense will prevail. And IMO common sense dictates that an arbitrator will be reluctant to completely ignore a previous arbitration award by one of his peers. There is simply no precedent for it. The union can ask for and present whatever it wants to. But the arbitrator holds all the power.

 

[AAviator]

Fantasy.
An arbitrator will re-alight a list then integrate it with another?

Never happened before in the airline industry.

And said arbitrator will do it because some pilots are unhappy with past arbitrations? (those circumstances mo longer exist)

Give your head a shake.

 

[Beancounter]

Another westie poser. How many is that? At least three right here. I don't see any East pilots pretending to be anyone else. Now, tell me just who has the weak argument?

Yeah..........okay. When this is all over how about you, eastcoast, and I get together for a beer. I know exactly how it will turn out:

http://youtu.be/TPMS6tGOACo

Bean

 

[dca319]

DCA,

Not bad, a post w/o a Nic reference.
Guess you missed my question earlier, have you ever flown as a mainline pilot for a carrier that became Usairways < awa merge?

FA

I may have not have flown for said carrier outside the timeframe you stated by prior to that.

 

[AAviator]

Been fun C-y'all tomorrow!

 

[dca319]

I agree.

It seems like no one has considered the possibility that a new arbitrator might not care what list USAPA submits. Arbitrators don't have to use either side's seniority solution. It's not about splitting the baby. They can discard both sides and come up with something THEY think is fair given the circumstances. As long as they adhere to the law, and there is no corruption involved.

So riddle me this... Let's say USAPA submits a DOH list, and APA submits their list. Not wanting to undo what another arbitrator already did, what's to stop him from FIRST reordering the USAPA list as an exact mirror image of the Nicolau award? He cites the same reasons as arbitrator Nicolau did, and the previous arbitration. Then takes that reshuffled list that is no longer called the Nicolau award, and inserts it into his solution for the current merger, using ratios, fleet, seat, career expectations, widebody aircraft, projected attrition, and even some LOS adjustments.

There is absolutely nothing stopping an arbitrator from doing something like this. In the DL/NW merger the arbitrator rejected both sides solutions, and came up with his own. It ended up being closer to the DL suggested method, but used different assumptions.

There is just no way to predict what will happen in arbitration. But common sense will prevail. And IMO common sense dictates that an arbitrator will be reluctant to completely ignore a previous arbitration award by one of his peers. There is simply no precedent for it. The union can ask for and present whatever it wants to. But the arbitrator holds all the power.

Exactly. The Nicolau is not dead and there's nothing stopping even the APA from reordering a list they submit to the arbitrators. And anyone who thinks this isn't going to arbitration is naive.

 

[cactusboy53]

Wow - an all mighty west rep speaks and I am to run along as what can an outsider lowly rank / file member know.
GMAFB - just as likely typical union politics to usurp majority will. Do I have the info you have ........hell no.
But I do have an past behavior to go on and I think it smells quite fishy.

FA

Here's your break Gramps,. Grab your trifocals and read what you should have read before you began angry-typing (these documents are readily available for anyone that seeks knowledge):

D. Inactive Membership may be granted to pilots who have completed the probationary period and meet the qualifications set forth in Article II, Section 1, upon application and approval. Inactive members shall not be eligible to vote, accept nomination for, run for, and/or occupy any elective or appointive office, including committee assignment.
E. Pilots in the following employment statuses shall be eligible for inactive membership:
1. Furlough, or
2. Medical or Personal Leave of Absence, or
3. Military Leave of Absence.
F. An active member in good standing shall be transferred to inactive membership status upon:
1. Being furloughed; or
2. Immediately upon beginning family medical, maternity, medical, military or personal leave of absence from the employer for a term of ninety (90) days or longer and/or after the expiration of paid sick leave; or​

3. Becoming disabled and no longer qualified to remain an active member under this Article.​

So, if a person were ineligible to run or hold office after an election began you would then have to do a run-off election. Pretty simple stuff. Here's what the Constitution & By Laws says about that:

F. In the event that no candidate receives a majority of votes cast for a particular office, the Secretary-Treasurer shall cause a run-off election to be concluded within sixty (60) days of the prior vote count. The ballot in the run-off election shall be limited to the two (2) candidates who received the greatest number of votes. In the event of a tie in a runoff election, the drawing of lots shall eliminate one (1) candidate.​

Abe, the rules of engagement are the same for EVERYONE (even angry FO's). Your Ballot Certification Committee has followed all of the rules, and Gary has NOTHING to do with this event. You might actually pick up the phone, call and NICELY ask the Ballot Certification Committee if they would take the time to explain the circumstances to you (vs. the threats that are coming from the Kamp McKleary for Klowns).

Hey, if you can't blame Gary maybe you can blame ALPA! You people are really an embarrassment to this industry and frankly human-kind.

 

[eastcoast]

Thats an interesting position for an APA pilot to take considering what is ahead for our pilot groups.

As it stands NIC list is an unused piece of paper, however if it does get tossed into this new merger it sets several standards which may be hard to avoid. One being that every APA furloughed pilot as of right now is automatically moved to the bottom of the list (including under the airways pilots hired last week) and any slotting that may be used in the coming SLI will be affected by that.

This is an absolutely false premise, and invalidates your argument. A previous SLI arbitration does not "set several standards." It is a precedent for sure. It will be looked at. But each new arbitration turns on it's own facts and merits . The solution for us and AWA did not fit DL/NW, which will not fit UA/CO nor LCC/AA. The financial status of AA and LCC is far different than ours and AWA at the time. AA, while in bankruptcy, was not near liquidation. They were not in need of outside investors to get exit financing. They had enough cash to finance their own emergence from bankruptcy if needed. This merger is much more of a choice than a necessity for AA and their creditors. Then there is the benefit of the merger to each pilot group. Obviously it will be argued that the lion's share of the financial gain goes to LCC, and specifically to the east. A furloughed AA (TWA) pilot still has a much better career expectation than any of our furloughed pilots had during the merger with AWA. We all like to talk about our attrition. But when you consider the vast attrition coming from the AA side a few years down the road, directly from their widebody captain seats, it makes ours look like a penny stock. The furloughed AA pilots were/are looking at a very fast climb up the ladder. And APA will be looking for some consideration for that. Didn't Nicolau give us 2 out of every 3 upgrades to account for our attrition?

I know it's all too easy to ignore the facts and realities we don't like, in favor of the few things that improve our collective lot in life. I guess it's human nature. But arbitrators are not senile nor are they stupid. And they have notoriously little patience for those who overreach. I suggest all of us temper our ideal wish list with a healthy dose of pragmatism this time around.

 

[3dtv]

No active list will be re-ordered. The NIC is not and never will be active or used. There is not 1 arbitrator. There will be 3 if it gets to that. USAPA will not submit the ALPA bargaining proposal.

 

[eastcoast]

AAviator is a westie poser. They can't get anyone to agree with them unless they pretend to be someone they aren't. I have plenty of friends at AA, and they are no fan of Nic. It ain't happening. In fact, this merger proves just how inequitable his decision was.

What's sad is how you and several others around here always fall back on the "must be a westie" accusation whenever you find your peers speaking out and disagreeing with your view of the world. I've said this for just about my entire career here. This brow-beating, peer pressure, bully mentality has plagued our group for decades. As sad as it is to see the USAirways brand go away, I am so happy that the ranks of this toxic group will finally be diluted by the majority of pragmatic, forward thinking APA pilots. It can't happen soon enough.

And by the way, AAviator has been around this forum long before you and I, or this merger.

 

[eastcoast]

Another westie poser. How many is that? At least three right here. I don't see any East pilots pretending to be anyone else. Now, tell me just who has the weak argument?

How funny. I just saw this post. So now I'm on the list too. So where are we now? Trader; dca319; beancounter; me; 767jetz. Did I miss anyone else who has been accused of being a west pilot for not agreeing with you?

You are truly pathetic. Now I see who I am dealing with. Thanks for clearing that up.

 

[3dtv]

No active list will be re-ordered. The NIC is not and never will be active or used. There is not 1 arbitrator. There will be 3 if it gets to that. USAPA will not submit the ALPA bargaining proposal.

 

[eastcoast]

Fantasy.
An arbitrator will re-alight a list then integrate it with another?

Never happened before in the airline industry.

And said arbitrator will do it because some pilots are unhappy with past arbitrations? (those circumstances mo longer exist)

Give your head a shake.

You misunderstood what I said.

I'm saying that if USAPA submits a list other than the Nic, there is nothing stopping him from deciding NOT to disregard a previous arbitration award, using the Nic list anyway, calling it something else, and moving on with the current SLI between APA and USAPA.

I'm agreeing with you. He is not likely to ignore a past arbitration just because one group claims it wasn't fair and are unhappy.

 

[eastcoast]

No active list will be re-ordered. The NIC is not and never will be active or used. There is not 1 arbitrator. There will be 3 if it gets to that. USAPA will not submit the ALPA bargaining proposal.

USAPA can submit whatever they want. The arbitrators have wide latitude to do what they think is fair, as long as it is legal and absent corruption. Can you cite one arbitration that has ever been overturned? Do you really believe that they will ignore one of their peers? I'm not a betting man, but I don't like the odds.

 

[Bill Brasky]

How funny. I just saw this post. So now I'm on the list too. So where are we now? Trader; dca319; beancounter; me; 767jetz. Did I miss anyone else who has been accused of being a west pilot for not agreeing with you?

You are truly pathetic. Now I see who I am dealing with. Thanks for clearing that up.

And you guys are all liars.

Talk about pathetic.