ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
You also questioned the merging of the seniority list and got a bogus answer from Third Seat Hero. I say it is bogus and he knows why. As I have explained many times before: the seniority issue at UAL is not an issue for the Teamsters or any union representing mechanics. TSH knows this. It does not matter what the unions say on the subject of mechanic seniority at UAL. UAL was sued in federal court years ago and the result of that suit dictates our seniority, not the union or management. Our list will be merged according to court order. This court order happens to be in line with the philosophies of the IBT which is hire date for lay off and recall, craft date for everything else. For most of us mechanics the two dates are one in the same but for some there is an adjustment.
The Teamsters did not come right out and take a hard line stand on this which upset many of us but I am now gaining a decent understanding of why. Although our seniority is a court order, the contract is clear that negotiations for an amalgamated agreement between two merged carriers can NOT continue until an agreement in seniority is met. The Teamsters were rightly concerned that taking a hard stance would force any mechanic groups in opposition to call for a legal challenge of the law and hold up the process of a new contract for possibly years. Two independent law firms reported that such a challenge would be pointless. A legal firm hired by a group of mechanics who were against hire date in favor of rank ratio also issued the opinion that a civil suit would be a great waste of time and money. Some of us incorrectly believed that the Teamsters were involved in some type of political or organizing stunt in order to hold off any embarrassment, but it is becoming more and more clear that they simply were allowing those who opposed hire date seniority the chance to see for themselves the problems and expense of fighting this lost cause. It is vary apparent to all of us at UA including TSH that date of hire is the most fair basis for merging the seniority list. Some at CO did not see that at first but they are coming to understand that a rank ratio, or crediting years of seniority would not be the right thing to do. The Teamsters allowed the time needed for those groups who opposed it at first to realize the legal walls in place rather than acting like tyrants and telling them what to do. I for one am OK with this now that I know see more of the big picture.
I'm curious just what part of my post on concent decree was bogus?
From my original response...
The last news we received on seniority integration was that due to UALs concent decree language (language put into our CBA by the courts decades ago) that seniority will be ordered by Date of Hire. The problem is, we've heard nothing on the implementation and we've heard alot about legal challenges by CAL AMTs who do not want to be integrated by DOH. Thus we're still waiting on a final determination.
You'll notice the date on my post was back in September of last year and at that time, we still had no word on implementation. You yourself mentioned the legal challenges by the CAL side, so how was my post "bogus"?