US Airways Pilots Labor Thread 12/16-22

[cleardirect]

May want to do some research before you quote the Atlas/Polar seniority award. The #1 Polar guy was put on the list DOH with junior pilots slotted in a straight ratio to the bottom.

I guess using that logic the Nicolau list is a true windfall for the east. They got the first 517 before he started ratioing in about 2 for 1.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Could you point to the section of the contract that says that can happen? That is not the procedure.
Many steps have to happen before someone is :forced: to make a life decission in the jetway.

I believe that forced dues check off is illegal. I know it is in the C&BL but it may be against federal rules.

It's already happened that way in the east (pre-merger.) That was the scenario...on the jetway.

I believe one of the westies of video fame is already on a year's non-revocable dues check-off. (I doubt this pilot wants to let all of you know that, though. It wouldn't be good publicity for "the cause" to know a poster child is paying up involuntarily.) If it's against federal rules, then sue USAPA and USAirways! Your lawyers are very hungry...still.

If you want to know how the company will react to Section 29, one only needs to hear Doug Parker himself tell a PHX pilot at the November crew meeting that, yes indeed, he will fire someone for not paying dues or fees to USAPA.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Did USAPA say that negotiating seniority was no different than negotiating crew meals?

They may not have guaranteed it but they sure implied it.

Or are you saying they are incapable of negotiating crew meals?

Either way that's quite an organization you support. See you in the jetway with that CP and law enforcement officer.

"Seniority" is Section 22 of the contract. The contract is negotiable. Crew meals is in another section, but it is equally negotiable. What part of that do pilots not understand? Look at the contract; everything in it has BEEN NEGOTIATED. EVERYTHING. Everything in it can be negotiated. EVERYTHING. (I will certainly acknowledge that courts have oversight on contracts and can impose remedies...this is why we have courts. We may see an imposed remedy in Section 22. We may see a remedy that surprises everyone, as courts tend to be surprising sometimes.)

If you think USAPA implied something, that's your perception. It's unfortunate that you may have misunderstood. Implied is different than guarantee. I watched very carefully all the information put out by USAPA, and they didn't guarantee anything in regards to DOH vs. USAPA. They took a stand with regard to negotiating Section 22 with full knowledge that it would likely end up in court. I hope the easties who may have misunderstood realize this.

 

[cleardirect]

It's already happened that way in the east (pre-merger.) That was the scenario...on the jetway.

I would guess that there is more to the story. But again that is east history nothing to do with the west. Just because it happened that way does not make correct. Had the case gone before an arbitrator? Was he given any or several notices to pay? Had he agreed to pay then stopped paying? It is all about details. Being met at the jet way by police and the chief pilot I am sure not the normal way of handling section 29. I don’t know if there is a difference between the west and east section 29.

If it's against federal rules, then sue USAPA and USAirways! Your lawyers are very hungry...still.

I said I believe that it is against federal rules. Forcing someone to sign dues check off and a promissory note to keep in the good graces of a union. Our lawyers wouldn’t be involved. A federal prosecutor would handle that case. That case would be on the tax payer dime.

USAPA does have to operate within federal guidelines.

 

[Tiger 1050]

It's already happened that way in the east (pre-merger.) That was the scenario...on the jetway.

I believe one of the westies of video fame is already on a year's non-revocable dues check-off. (I doubt this pilot wants to let all of you know that, though. It wouldn't be good publicity for "the cause" to know a poster child is paying up involuntarily.) If it's against federal rules, then sue USAPA and USAirways! Your lawyers are very hungry...still.

If you want to know how the company will react to Section 29, one only needs to hear Doug Parker himself tell a PHX pilot at the November crew meeting that, yes indeed, he will fire someone for not paying dues or fees to USAPA.

NYC,
C'mon man we all know this is patently false. USAPA tried to invoke section 29 on 4 of our pilots out west and the company said they had a problem with the way these individuals were treated concerning their acceptance into the union. Remember the whole C&BL's change so the BPR could vote in members? This is still pending arbitration! There has been no ruling other than the company siding with the affected pilots. So tell me again how one of our pilots could be on "non-revocable" dues check-off when the company has taken a wait and see approach until the arbitration outcome? You guys are drowning in the kool-aid out there. But please continue to get your information only from approved sources!!!! Ya know the BPR and your local reps. 'Cause we all know they would have no reason to spin anything, right?

 

[cleardirect]

I believe one of the westies of video fame is already on a year's non-revocable dues check-off. (I doubt this pilot wants to let all of you know that, though. It wouldn't be good publicity for "the cause" to know a poster child is paying up involuntarily.)

Nice inside information. Have a name? Why would someone of video fame be on non-revocable DCO? Was this a confidential deal that has now been made public? How is it that you came to posses this information? Hold a seat on the BPR or a domicile rep?

Might explain the spin now about never promising DOH.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Nice inside information. Have a name? Why would someone of video fame be on non-revocable DCO? Was this a confidential deal that has now been made public? How is it that you came to posses this information? Hold a seat on the BPR or a domicile rep?

Might explain the spin now about never promising DOH.

I am not now, nor have I ever been, in any official capacity with USAPA.

I am a good listener, though, pay close attention to detail and remember things very well.

(I can spel, to, and have used gramer nice.)

 

[BoeingBoy]

"Seniority" is Section 22 of the contract. The contract is negotiable.

Technically true - seniority at the airline that hired you is covered in section 22 of the East contract (and presumably in the West contract, although the section # may be different).

However, seniority integration in the event of a merger is covered in Section 1 of the East contract (ditto as stated above for the West contract). For someone that has such a good memory it's surprising that you don't remember me making this distinction repeatedly.

Perhaps what you meant to say was that the seniority integration is section 1 of the contract, and the resulting combined list is referenced in section 22...

Jim

 

[nycbusdriver]

Technically true - seniority at the airline that hired you is covered in section 22 of the East contract (and presumably in the West contract, although the section # may be different).

However, seniority integration in the event of a merger is covered in Section 1 of the East contract (ditto as stated above for the West contract). For someone that has such a good memory it's surprising that you don't remember me making this distinction repeatedly.

Perhaps what you meant to say was that the seniority integration is section 1 of the contract, and the resulting combined list is referenced in section 22...

Jim

My point actually was that the ENTIRE contract is a negotiation. Section 1 through 30. But, just to make you happy....these are the sections of the contract (east) that are negotiable:

1. RECOGNITION, SCOPE, SUCCESSORSHIP, AND LPPs 1-1
2. DEFINITIONS 2-1
3. COMPENSATION 3-1
4. MINIMUM PAY GUARANTEES 4-1
5. EXPENSES 5-1
6. NEW EQUIPMENT 6-1
7. VACATIONS 7-1
8. DEADHEADING 8-1
9. MISCELLANEOUS FLYING 9-1
10. TRANSFER TO NON-FLYING OR SUPERVISORY DUTY 10-1
11. TRAINING 11-1
12. HOURS OF SERVICE 12-1
13. LEAVE OF ABSENCE 13-1
14. SICK LEAVE 14-1
15. PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS 15-1
16. WORKER’S COMPENSATION BENEFITS 16-1
17. MISSING, INTERMENT, PRISONER OR HOSTAGE OF WAR
BENEFITS 17-1
18. INTERNATIONAL 18-1
19. INVESTIGATION AND DISCIPLINE 19-1
20. GRIEVANCES 20-1
21. SYSTEM BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT 21-1
22. SENIORITY 22-1
23. FURLOUGH AND RECALL 23-1
24. FILLING OF VACANCIES 24-1
25. SCHEDULING 25-1
26. GENERAL 26-1
27. INSURANCE 27-1
28. RETIREMENT, DISABILITY AND SURVIVOR BENEFITS 28-1
29. AGENCY SHOP AND DUES CHECK-OFF 29-1
30. DURATION 30-1


Do I need to list all the LOA's, too? They are also negotiable, and if you need me to be very specific, I can list the names of those, too.

 

[Metroyet]

"Seniority" is Section 22 of the contract. The contract is negotiable. Crew meals is in another section, but it is equally negotiable. What part of that do pilots not understand?

My GOD,

The Kool Aide Lee Seham sold the foolish must be the strongest stuff in recorded history!

Why do you guys insist that you have omnipotent powers and can run amok with unchecked impunity? Moreover, what's most shocking to me is the depths of which you ACTUALLY BELIEVE IT!!!


There are a lot of laws in the country and RLA isn't at the top of the food chain. I believe Judge Wake is going to explain this to your group of Manic Haymakers in no uncertain terms :unsure: . I also believe that if Jesus Christ himself sat all of you down and explained to you that what you were attempting to do was immoral and illegal you'd all simply confer with Lee Seham and research the best way to sue him for his judgments.

You guys are beyond helping at this point. 🙄

 

[Tiger 1050]

The Kool Aide Lee Seham sold the foolish must be the strongest stuff in recorded history!

I believe one is forced to this conclusion at this point. I can offer no other explanation. Simply stunning...

 

[nycbusdriver]

My GOD,

The Kool Aide Lee Seham sold the foolish must be the strongest stuff in recorded history!

Why do you guys insist that you have omnipotent powers and can run amok with unchecked impunity? Moreover, what's most shocking to me is the depths of which you ACTUALLY BELIEVE IT!!!


There are a lot of laws in the country and RLA isn't at the top of the food chain. I believe Judge Wake is going to explain this to your group of Manic Haymakers in no uncertain terms :unsure: . I also believe that if Jesus Christ himself sat all of you down and explained to you that what you were attempting to do was immoral and illegal you'd all simply confer with Lee Seham and research the best way to sue him for his judgments.

You guys are beyond helping at this point. 🙄

Het, I'm just waiting for the trial to conclude. And it was you that sued USAPA, not the other way around.

As far as immoral, Nicolau set that stage and the west pilots eagerly jumped on. Jesus knows the difference between fair and immoral. So do I. I'm very comfortable with my position, and my conscience in clear. The east only wants what was their coming in (which includes attrition by an overwhelmingly geriatric group,) and Nicolau summarily transferred those opportunities to the west.

I wouldn't want to lose my wallet in the PHX crew room. The west mantra is, no doubt, "Finders keepers, losers weepers." IOW, the kindergarten concept of fairness which most outgrow before puberty.

 

[BoeingBoy]

My point actually was that the ENTIRE contract is a negotiation.

Perhaps you should have said that then...

Jim

 

[Phoenix]

I am not now, nor have I ever been, in any official capacity with USAPA.

I am a good listener, though, pay close attention to detail and remember things very well.

(I can spel, to, and have used gramer nice.)

Our Unique Corporate Transaction (UTC) pilot, aka. Chip, could never spell "too" correctly either and he flew the bus in LGA. Is that you?

 

[Metroyet]

And it was you that sued USAPA, not the other way around.

AHHH Yes, The lawsuit that "has no merit whatsoever", if I recall. Understand that this Judge said that this merit-less lawsuit was "ripe for adjudication" That's bad for Lee and the boys regardless of how they spin it.

You are correct. However, this isn't a chick/egg paradox. The West sued USAPA only AFTER it was clear, beyond a shadow of a doubt to the West, that USAPA has absolutely ZERO interest in complying with their Duty to Fairly Represent all US Air pilots.

Every single argument you make about the union being able to negotiate anything they want FIRST requires that the Union not be in violation of DFR. If they are, you can stop right there. The RLA is no longer the controlling law, it is subordinated to Contract Law. When the violation of contract law is remedied, (permanent injunction, huge damages assessments from your group) the RLA steps back into the drivers seat.

The RLA assumes that the Union in Question isn't just a vehicle for mob rule and organized crime, it assumes that the Union is in fact there for the benefit of all members.

What a concept...