Seniority Integration

[delldude]

i remembered some of the things that were proposed in our last round of givebacks....some of which never made it in the final offer but nonetheless were tendered on the table.i feel these things were brought up for a reason and most likely are going to be an issue down the road shortly.
the main issue i refer to was in several labor groups there was a "trial ballon" over seniority at U.now if you consider the ramifications this will have between U/HP its huge.
there was a redemption of U seniority i think in a ratio of something like 5:1. a 20 year U employee would equate into a 4 year person.this ratio will benefit the transition into a merger with HP and i think something has to give being how in all labor groups at U most junior emp's are far senior to those at HP.
i read ALPA ,IAM,AFA have junior emp's far senior to HP people.
i think this HAS to rear its ugly head sooner rather than later.

PDF

if you check into the mechanic and related contract at HP all the areas covering wages,vacation,scope,sick leave,insurance,401k,etc are all open ended(yet to be resolved).i feel these areas can easily be done by aborbing AWA into U with IAM as a succsessor union and in other unions too...when and if the merger takes place.
but what i find interesting is this HUGE seniority issue....will it be allowed to literally take over the list at AWA by almost all U employees? i doubt it...
so how do you fix this problem? the other problem i also see is in house maintenance.
so,before emerging,what if U wants to leave wages and benefits alone but wants contract changes in these areas or the merger will fail.
what do you think???

 

[eolesen]

i think this HAS to rear its ugly head sooner rather than later.

[post="275801"][/post]​

It already did. Two or three weeks ago... This was also the single most contentious issue with the failed UA/US merger proposal.

Since this is a hotly debated issue, first a disclaimer... I'm a long time management employee, and probably more neutral on this than some of the other folks who are neck deep in this debate. The only reason I'm saying that is because there are a few people who think I have an axe to grind in the seniority debate. I don't. It's not that I don't care about the outcome, but admittedly, I'm not anywhere near as emotionally attached to the issue as most of you are.

but what i find interesting is this HUGE seniority issue....will it be allowed to literally take over the list at AWA by almost all U employees? i doubt it...

[post="275801"][/post]​

Depends. If you believe the dozens of US employees over on the HP forum preaching "DOH," yes.

After a DOH integration, if there's another downturn, it's likely that most of the HP employees will be flushed before the majority of the remaining US employees. Once furloughed, they'll have to wait for the current US employees to be recalled.

That's why you've got a handful of former TW people telling how they got screwed in the AA integration, and a handful of AA people still trying to defending how the three unions' (and an arbitrator in the case of the TWU) handled the integration of AA and TW. When the downturn hits, it's no longer a matter of "look forward to working with you" but an episode of Survivor or The Apprentice, where everyone is looking out for themselves...

From a fairness/career expectation standpoint, the 5:1 ratio example seems to be more logical in that it protects the relative position on the seniority list between the two groups, and ensures that a proportionate group from each former carrier feels the pain if there's another downturn.

Whether or not that happens is another story.

 

[BoeingBoy]

As good a place for this as any, I guess....

Air Transport

America West, US Airways set sights on integration and easing employees' fears

Aviation Week & Space Technology
06/06/2005, page 30

Frances Fiorino
Washington

Watching, Waiting

The US Airways/America West proposed merger is no sure bet. The deal, under optimum circumstances, will not be completed for 2-3 years--or maybe never, if another bidder emerges.

And that could happen when US Airways submits its restructuring plan to the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. The planned merger is part of US Airways Chapter 11 reorganization, and the go-ahead is contingent on the court's approval. The court will review the plan and open it to a 30-day competitive bidding process. What company or companies might enter the arena is a matter of speculation. If no bidders appear, the two airlines are free to pursue the merger.

Meanwhile, both airlines are maintaining close dialogues with their workforces, who are concerned about job security. Following the merger announcement, America West held a web-based Q&A session with employees. Executives fielded more than 450 questions and continue to post information on the employee hotline.

One participant queried how management planned to combine the diverse cultures of the two airlines "into a force that competes with other airlines, but doesn't compete internally."

America West CEO Doug Parker, who will become CEO of the new entity dubbed "US Airways," said there was no doubt the culture combination would be "a challenge. . . .During the 2-3-year integration period, the plan is to take it slow . . . and work together to create one airline that is profitable . . . and more successful than either of us could have done on our own."

The two-is-better-than-one philosophy applied to other matters as well, such as how employees are expected to respond when passengers ask about the merger. "The combined airlines will offer employees and customers a more stable future than either airline could on its own," says Parker.

Regarding the status of regional partnerships, Parker said that Mesa Airlines holds contracts with both America West and US Airways and will continue to feed into the network. Air Wisconsin will also feed into the combined system. The allocation of flying among Mesa, Air Wisconsin and others has not been determined.

Parker indicated pilot training and cockpit procedure issues have not yet been decided. He says no US Airways aircraft would be flown by AmWest crews until the merger gets final approval and that details about the final route network and certain operational issues are pending.

And the list of government approvals is long. The Justice Dept. is to review the competitive nature of the transaction; the Transportation Dept., the ownership, economic fitness and international routings; the Securities and Exchange Commission, the financial aspects. And, of course, the Bankruptcy Court has to approve the merger. The Air Transportation Stabilization Board will have to approve the deal as well, because both airlines have outstanding loan balances. Asked by an employee about the chances of government shooting down the deal, Parker responded that he was focused on "getting through the bidding period."

If the deal wins approval, management of both airlines will be integrated and matched to appropriate positions. As to how to implement that difficult mix, Parker quoted Good to Great author Jim Collins, discussing leading through change: "Get the right people on the bus and then figure out what seats to put them in."

 

[av60]

so,before emerging,what if U wants to leave wages and benefits alone but wants contract changes in these areas or the merger will fail.
what do you think???

[post="275801"][/post]​

I wouldn't be surprized one bit, weren't the pilots told "we need your pensions to get out of bk", in bk 1?

 

[johnnyfleet]

From a fairness/career expectation standpoint, the 5:1 ratio example seems to be more logical in that it protects the relative position on the seniority list between the two groups, and ensures that a proportionate group from each former carrier feels the pain if there's another downturn.

Whether or not that happens is another story.

[post="275810"][/post]​

Just put up fences around PHX and LAS and go with DOH, pretty simple isn't it

 

[N924PS]

Just put up fences around PHX and LAS and go with DOH, pretty simple isn't it

[post="275815"][/post]​

Why no fences?

 

[jimntx]

Just put up fences around PHX and LAS and go with DOH, pretty simple isn't it

[post="275815"][/post]​

I would recommend that you talk with some former TW flight attendants about how well fences work. Once the ink dries on the signatures, fences have a way of coming down early.

The major problem with this issue is that the pilots and flight attendants at both airlines are ALPA and AFA. Both are AFL-CIO unions and have date of hire seniority integration written into their constitutions and by-laws. Now, do you interpret that literally--as a number of the U people seem to want? Or, do you temper that with the "career expectations" clause that on the surface of it seems to permit some wiggle room on DOH?

It's easy enough to say that a large number of U pilots (by law) or flight attendants (by choice) are going to be leaving within the next 5 years. However, if you are the person who loses your captain's seat or is forced to commute to LGA or PHL or BOS from your established home in PHX or LAS and/or go back to being on straight reserve in LGA or PHL or BOS, 5 years can be a VERY long time.

I saw a post on here (by Pitbull, I think) that over 900 U flight attendants with 15+ year seniority have taken the EO option and will be gone within 12 months. Well, that still leaves about 4000 active U flight attendants after the EO--IIRC. How many AW flight attendants are there in total? On straight DOH, the 4000 U flight attendants could still swamp the seniority lists at AW. It has been a few years since U has hired any new flight attendants. AW was hiring as recently as last year.

And, what do you do about the U flight attendants on furlough? There are some who might reconsider their decision to not come back, if recalled to a healthier company. And no, I'm not talking about the ones who have already refused recall.

 

[latreal]

The major problem with this issue is that the pilots and flight attendants at both airlines are ALPA and AFA. Both are AFL-CIO unions and have date of hire seniority integration written into their constitutions and by-laws. Now, do you interpret that literally--as a number of the U people seem to want? Or, do you temper that with the "career expectations" clause that on the surface of it seems to permit some wiggle room on DOH?

I dont think that ALPA has anything in writing that specifically states DOH.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

 

[justaumechanic]

The problem with the IAM contract for mechanics as applied to AWA is restrictions. There are to many work rules and restrictions still in place vs AWA.

Parker is going to want the AWA contract regardless of who enforces it. (IAM or IBT)... Flexiability is what he wants..

Bottom line is Parker is going to want to be able to outsource anything at anytime to anyone.. Just like at AWA.. They have no interest in doing any work in-house.

AWA does not even do C check inhouse..

If you want to run with AirTran and JetBlue you have to act like them.. Even the Southwest Contract is more flexiable than the current IAM contract.

 

[jimntx]

I dont think that ALPA has anything in writing that specifically states DOH.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[post="275832"][/post]​

AFAIK, all AFL-CIO unions are expected to use DOH integration regardless of circumstances--whether merger or purchase. ALPA is AFL-CIO.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Let me throw some numbers out, just addressing the pilots because 1 - that's the only group I have info on and 2 - we pilots probably have as great if not greater divide in seniority as any other group.

Using DOH, and assuming no attrition of HP pilots, at the end of 2010:

The top 460 pilots on the combined list would be from US.
The next 2300+ from US would blend in with the top 1200 +/- HP pilots.
The last 900 or so from US would blend in with the last 600+ from HP.

At the end of 2015, again assuming no attrition of HP pilots:

The top 70 pilots would be from US.
The next 1400+ from US would blend in with the top 1200 +/- HP pilots.
The last 900 +/- from US would blend in with the last 600 +/- from HP.

As you can see, by the end of 2015 things would mostly have balanced out - it would almost look like a ratioed or slotted integration except at the very top.

The simple solution would seem to be a 10 year fence - make the PHX/LAS jobs available only to HP pilots. They would enjoy their current seniority as long as they remained there.

The only problem with fences is that they are designed to protect one side or the other under some envisioned set of circumstances - in this case a future that holds growth or at least no shrinkage.

So what happens if there's another 911 type event in 3 years? The combined airline needs to contract, and 25% of pilots are furloughed. Because of the relative seniority of the HP pilots, say 50% of them get furloughed - leaving PHX/LAS with too few pilots to staff the flying from those bases.

Do you furlough out of seniority so that only 25% of the pilots on each side of the fence get furloughed?

Do you tear down the fence, letting US pilots move into PHX/LAS to fill the void created by the furloughed HP pilots?

Do you go around the fence by moving the flying that can't be accomplished by the remaining PHX/LAS HP pilots east to be flown by then surplus US pilots?

In short, unanticipated events can make a shambles of a carefully constructed fence.

And that doesn't even consider the games management could play with a fence:

Fence off PHX/LAS and then a decision is made to move 757/767 or 330 flying from the east to PHL/LAS, for example.

What I expect will happen with the pilot integration is this - the two sides will spend several million dollars (from the pilots pockets since ALPA represents both sides) and the decision will ultimately be made by 1 person, the arbitrator. Many on each side will find something unfair in that decision, but those feelings of unfairness will not be equally spread between the groups - one side will probably see it as more unfair than the other.

Why not save the millions of dollars, lock representatives of both sides in a room, and tell them not to come out until they have an integration that each side finds equally unfair?

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

AFAIK, all AFL-CIO unions are expected to use DOH integration regardless of circumstances--whether merger or purchase. ALPA is AFL-CIO.

[post="275834"][/post]​

ALPA, of the unions in question, may be alone in not having DOH as the driving force behind integration, I just don't know about the others.

Jim

 

[xoxo]

U and AWA are AFA/CWA..so it is DOH. PERIOD. They may figure something out so the bases will have fenses, which is only right. The nearly 1000 F/A's that are leaving this year are ALL senior to the AWA F/A's. They are gonna do another VFLR in Jan 2006, it is also in the contract. They recently stopped classes at AWA..Like last month. So, yes they do have alot of junior F/A's. They are junior to the U furloughed ones, and the furloughed f/a's at U will come back and be senior to them, only fair. Some of us had nearly 4 years at U.

 

[eolesen]

Fences work to some degree for pilots and flight attendants, but it pretty much ignores what to do in the other 60%+ of the workforce.

You might be able to make fences work to some degree with mechanics, ramp, and agents in the larger hubs, but it's pretty much ineffective when you get to stations like SFO, LAX, SAN, LAS, MSY, etc. where you'll have more of a 50/50 split of employees from both sides.

I also think it's naive to think that former PSA folks would have no interest in returning to the Pacific timezone. And I'll guess that's the first place you'll see HP employees getting slowly squeezed out when there's a downturn or if/when US/HP has to downsize.

 

[whatkindoffreshhell]

USAir is in BK and without HP would be gone.

Those goofy union contracts should be a non-issue.

Staple staple staple.