Pilots And Fragmentation

[motnot]

Several threads recently have referred to the pilots contract's provisions dealing with a potential fragmentation of US Airways. Some comments have even suggestes that this part of the contract was the best in the industry. But none have come right out and really explained what it says.

As a non-airline employee, I'm wondering if someone can sort of explain what this provision covers, and how, and in relatively plain English.

And good luck to all US Airways employees, regardless of what happens.

 

[autofixer]

If parts of the airline or planes are sold, the pilots go wiht them...it will never be enforced under litigation(JMHO).

 

[motnot]

Does that mean that, in those circumstances, pilots would be subject to the CBA, if one exists, of any such acquirer? And that they'd be essentially new hires at the bottom of the list?

 

[Rampman]

if your going to a differen company you SHOULD be on the bottom? What, you want someone to save you, and then tell junior pilots at their company to hit the street. LMFAO!!!!

Then again, when I say you I am not talking about YOU.

 

[autofixer]

Generally known as the "staple job".

 

[Winglet]

I would find it very hard to believe that any major airline that would "acquire" some of U's "assets" (NOT a merger) would even consider taking employees considering they have large numbers of their own employees on the street. The labor rancor would be unbelievable and probably violate their own labor contracts.

 

[iflyjetz]

Since no one has answered this question directly, I'll give it my best shot.
As I understand UAIR's fragmentation policy, if more than 15% of UAIR's assets are sold, UAIR pilots must be transferred to the successor. I'm not sure if 15% of the pilot list would transfer or if 15% of the active pilots on property would transfer, or (most likely) some smaller percentage of pilots would transfer.
The UAIR pilots would be incorporated into the successor's seniority list in accordance with the ALPA Merger & Fragmentation Policy and Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions.
Keep in mind that UAIR's aircraft are unlikely to be acquired; it's more likely that they'll be returned to the lessor, parked in the desert, and only then will another airline have interest in the planes. The policy is more likely to be triggered from the acquisition of gates, slots, and routes.

If I understand everything correctly, the fragmentation policy is voided if UAIR declares chap 7 because it is no longer an ongoing entity. However, I would suspect that UAIR will end up going chap 11 and will survive, whether at its current size or something smaller.

The sticky point, as illustrated by yourself (motnot) and autofixer, is how those pilots would be incorporated into the successor's seniority list. ALPA's Merger & Fragmentation policy specifically addresses career expectations. The most likely outcome of any pilots who would be fragmented is that they would be placed at the bottom of the successor's seniority list ('stapled'). The acquiring airline's pilots are likely to demand management to staple any UAIR pilots to the bottom of their seniority list, with the possibility of minor dovetailing (dovetailing is when you have a ratio of, say 50 pilots currently on the seniority list to one pilot of the acquired; the first 50 slots go to current pilots the next one goes to acquired pilot, next 50 to current pilots, etc. This can be modified by stating that the top acquired pilot is #1000 on the seniority list).
Taking more pilots onto the acquiring airline's seniority list when there are already pilots on furlough will create a lot of internal problems; the acquiring airline's management will probably require UAIR's MEC to waive any lawsuits stemming from seniority integration issues.
Consider the case of AMR bidding for all of UAIR's DCA gates and slots. It would most likely trigger the 15% of assets rule. AMR already has 1356 pilots on furlough, with another 123 to be furloughed on 1 Oct 2004. You can bet that AMR's pilots are going to be ticked off if any UAIR pilots get put in front of furloughees. The same goes for UAL with 2172 furloughees, DAL with 1020, NWA with 789, CAL with 513, etc.

This is a very ugly topic; I hope that UAIR is able to hold together and make things work out.

 

[jimntx]

The fragmentation policy is the main reason that I think there will be no "knight in shining armor" for US Airways. Simply requiring ALPA to give you a waiver on lawsuits means only that ALPA won't sue you. What about the furloughed pilots at the acquiring entity who are still on the street while pilots from US Airways are brought in to paying jobs?

There is a very simple solution for other airlines who want (or I should say, covet) the landing slots at LGA and DCA. Wait until the fire sale following the Ch. 7 filing. The creditors will still get a good price for the assets, but the purchasers will not have to take on employees.

 

[B.N.]

Iflyjetz,
No dispute with what you say, but your AA Furlough number is way off. Actually there are 2,471 furloughed, with another 200+ slated for October. Even with the changing situation (UAIR/DAL in DFW) I haven't heard a peep about cancelling the upcoming furloughs.

B.N.

 

[iflyjetz]

BN, thanks for correcting me. I went off of this press release from AMR: http://www.aa.com/content/amrcorp/pressRel..._furlough.jhtml
dated 15 Jul 04.

The numbers looked way low to me, but I couldn't find anything out there to contradict it. Did they not count the TWA pilots in those numbers? If not, then that's BS. The ex-TWA pilots are now a part and parcel of AMR.

 

[B.N.]

BN, thanks for correcting me. I went off of this press release from AMR: http://www.aa.com/content/amrcorp/pressRel..._furlough.jhtml
dated 15 Jul 04.

The numbers looked way low to me, but I couldn't find anything out there to contradict it. Did they not count the TWA pilots in those numbers? If not, then that's BS. The ex-TWA pilots are now a part and parcel of AMR.

[post="179210"][/post]​

If you add 200 to the "native AA" number it does come to 1,356, so I guess that is where your number came from. I agree it is very silly, and actually bad for ALL invoved to keep seperating out the exTWA folks

 

[motnot]

The fragmentation policy is the main reason that I think there will be no "knight in shining armor" for US Airways. Simply requiring ALPA to give you a waiver on lawsuits means only that ALPA won't sue you. What about the furloughed pilots at the acquiring entity who are still on the street while pilots from US Airways are brought in to paying jobs?

Actually, there are several airlines out there that do not have pilots on furlough. Sure, most of them pay less than US Airways, but my guess is not many pilots wouldn't complain about having an employer that is stable.

 

[Rico]

Hate to be a wet towel,

But the honest truth is that the chances of fragmentation coming into play where any portion of the U senority list would find itself employed by another carrier is slim to none. The more likely senario would be a simple purchase of assets alone after they come up for auction.

The only possible exception might be MDA or PSA. But even that is far fetched.