US Pilot Labor Thread--11/16-23

[des nudo]

Wow, mates...if that is what Parker said then I think you're all tooted. I mean, maybe a judge sees it differently, but the company looks like they're jerry with it like it is.


cheers

 

[LSS]

Okay, if, as some posters here claim that Parker accepted the NIC list... then why hasn't Parker said I've accepted the NIC list... I find it does not violate threshold guidelines we've established, so the NIC list is OUR bargaining position?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Then knowing what USAPA wants to do regarding seniority integration I'd say we have a clear DFR case.

I don't even know if there is such a thing as a DFR involving internal union affairs. EVERYTHING I've read deals with DFRs involving representation between a union and a management.

What you guys are failing to understand is that you are, in reality, employed by USAPA and they "contract" your services to the company. I know that's not how it seems, but it is the reality. The company has no input in this. In fact, the RLA specifically prohibits it. There is NOTHING in any labor law I know of dealing with internal union matters, except in the limited arena of civil rights.

If you can find something along those lines, let me know. And please, give me the ENTIRE document or link, so that I can see the context of the argument.

 

[electricjet98]

Okay, if, as some posters here claim that Parker accepted the NIC list... then why hasn't Parker said I've accepted the NIC list... I find it does not violate threshold guidelines we've established, so the NIC list is OUR bargaining position?

He did:

View attachment Parker_Letter_20DEC07_1_.pdf

You guys are so predictable.

And to further seal the deal...he paid each pilot group $300k to get it done.


Now perhaps someone from USAPA will post where he has accepted USAPA's Wish List.

 

[electricjet98]

I don't even know if there is such a thing as a DFR involving internal union affairs. EVERYTHING I've read deals with DFRs involving representation between a union and a management.

If you check to see what those initals (DFR) stand for, you might have your first clue.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

If you check to see what those initals (DFR) stand for, you might have your first clue.

Oh, I know what it stands for. Apparently you don't. The union represents you against the company, not itself. Whomever told you otherwise has no idea what they are talking about.

Again, you continue to bring up statements that Parker made PRIOR to USAPA becoming the CBA. Again, I'll repeat, they have no meaning.

 

[BoeingBoy]

I don't even know if there is such a thing as a DFR involving internal union affairs. EVERYTHING I've read deals with DFRs involving representation between a union and a management.

Oh, I know what it stands for. Apparently you don't. The union represents you against the company, not itself. Whomever told you otherwise has no idea what they are talking about.

Apparently you need to read more. DFR applies not just to the union's representation of covered employees' contract disagreements with management (the union can't aggressively defend one employee and just go through the motions with another) but also must fairly represent every covered employee in all union matters. It cannot represent only the majorities interest at the expense of the minority.

The company has no input in this. In fact, the RLA specifically prohibits it. There is NOTHING in any labor law I know of dealing with internal union matters, except in the limited arena of civil rights.

Wrong again - as should be obvious not just from the TA but also from USAPA's position that seniority is negotiable. Is not anything that's negotiable dependent on the agreement of both sides - management and union?

If you can find something along those lines, let me know. And please, give me the ENTIRE document or link, so that I can see the context of the argument.

Here you go...

The plaintiffs say the award became a provision of the collective bargaining agreement and expired when that agreement expired. We leave aside the merit of this contention beyond noting that an attempt by a majority of the employees in a collective bargaining unit to gang up against a minority of employees in the fashion apparently envisaged by the plaintiffs could itself be thought a violation of the duty of fair representation by the union that the majority used as its tool. Alvey v. General Electric Co., 622 F.2d 1279, 1289-90 (7th Cir. 1980).

Link

Jim

ps - your NMB vs NLRB argument is bogus also (just note the citations in USAPA's submissions to the court in the current DFR case - you'll find many that cite non-NMB non-RLA industries). The only difference between the rights and obligations of unions in RLA and non-RLA industries is the area of contract expiration. The airlines, considered a national resource like the railroads before them, were put under the RLA so that contracts wouldn't expire, but rather become amendable. That also carries a sequence of steps that must be completed before either side can engage in self-help. As far as the other rights and obligations of unions (like DFR), that is covered by federal law that applies equally to all unions.

Jim

 

[Tiger 1050]

Okay, if, as some posters here claim that Parker accepted the NIC list... then why hasn't Parker said I've accepted the NIC list... I find it does not violate threshold guidelines we've established, so the NIC list is OUR bargaining position?

I am tired of arguing here but I would bet it has more to do with laughing all the way to the bank...

 

[wopr21]

I am tired of arguing here but I would bet it has more to do with laughing all the way to the bank...

Yep you got it..

This will go on until most of the east pilots are retired and gone, lets say 8 to 10 years from now.

Once we are gone on the east, the west will wonder who they were fighting and claim victory. The Nic will not even matter anymore and DOH will reign again.

The contracts don't have to agreed to until a few years after they expire.

The company is really enjoying this

CHA CHING CHA CHING

wopr

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Apparently you need to read more. DFR applies not just to the union's representation of covered employees' contract disagreements with management (the union can't aggressively defend one employee and just go through the motions with another) but also must fairly represent every covered employee in all union matters. It cannot represent only the majorities interest at the expense of the minority.

The Posner(Air Wisconsin) case deals with the exact opposite of what we have here. ALPA remained on the property and continued to support the arbitration. They are no longer on this property, and cannot support it. In fact, the case says that in order to prevail in a DFR case, "The first is the principle that a union's interpretation of its own constitution, by-laws, and other promulgations is entitled to judicial deference; we must be able to call the interpretation unreasonable, perhaps even "patently unreasonable," before we can set it aside " (quote from the Posner case). In other words, Unless the Union's own interpretation of it's C&BLs are "patently unreasonable", then it can implement it's will as it sees fit.

Wrong again - as should be obvious not just from the TA but also from USAPA's position that seniority is negotiable. Is not anything that's negotiable dependent on the agreement of both sides - management and union?

Thanks for finally agreeing with me on something. IT IS negotiable. Perhaps I should have been clearer about company interference, but the company CANNOT inerfere in internal union matters, which this clearly is.

...ps - your NMB vs NLRB argument is bogus also (just note the citations in USAPA's submissions to the court in the current DFR case - you'll find many that cite non-NMB non-RLA industries). The only difference between the rights and obligations of unions in RLA and non-RLA industries is the area of contract expiration. The airlines, considered a national resource like the railroads before them, were put under the RLA so that contracts wouldn't expire, but rather become amendable. That also carries a sequence of steps that must be completed before either side can engage in self-help. As far as the other rights and obligations of unions (like DFR), that is covered by federal law that applies equally to all unions.

Jim

Um, YOU"RE WRONG there. Read the preamble on the NLRB website. You don't even need to proceed past the first page. It specifically says that it doesn't apply to airline workers. There are LOTS of differences, including the idea of amendable contracts, the grievance process and the process which evolves into "self-help". I understand the issue of DFR, and, I know that the threshold is such that it is very difficult to prevail against your CBA, due to the latitude given them in determining fairness.

As far as the references by the USAPA lawyers, only references I see to non-RLA cases have to do with jurisdictional questions. On the other hand, the lawyers for AOL and AWAPPA used MANY non-RLA industries as references in their briefs.

 

[cleardirect]

I don't even know if there is such a thing as a DFR involving internal union affairs. EVERYTHING I've read deals with DFRs involving representation between a union and a management.

What you guys are failing to understand is that you are, in reality, employed by USAPA and they "contract" your services to the company. I know that's not how it seems, but it is the reality. The company has no input in this. In fact, the RLA specifically prohibits it. There is NOTHING in any labor law I know of dealing with internal union matters, except in the limited arena of civil rights.

If you can find something along those lines, let me know. And please, give me the ENTIRE document or link, so that I can see the context of the argument.

Oldie,

What would you call the MDA DFR?

That is an internal suit, pilots suing ALPA.

 

[Tiger 1050]

Yep you got it..

This will go on until most of the east pilots are retired and gone, lets say 8 to 10 years from now.

Once we are gone on the east, the west will wonder who they were fighting and claim victory. The Nic will not even matter anymore and DOH will reign again.

The contracts don't have to agreed to until a few years after they expire.

The company is really enjoying this

CHA CHING CHA CHING

wopr

You're probably right. But as you and yours have so astutely demonstrated... My Seniority Is Not For Sale!

BTW under RLA contracts do not expire. They only become amendable...

 

[N924PS]

Yep you got it..

This will go on until most of the east pilots are retired and gone, lets say 8 to 10 years from now.

Once we are gone on the east, the west will wonder who they were fighting and claim victory. The Nic will not even matter anymore and DOH will reign again.

The contracts don't have to agreed to until a few years after they expire.

The company is really enjoying this

CHA CHING CHA CHING

wopr

CHA CHING CHA CHING- That's the sound of any financial gains from a delayed joint contract going right into Doug's pocket. Not to mention that the West Pilots get a raise (3%) January 09.

You are right. The company is still laughing all the way to the bank, with your money.

 

[Phoenix]

You're probably right. But as you and yours have so astutely demonstrated... My Seniority Is Not For Sale!

BTW under RLA contracts do not expire. They only become amendable...

Amendable?

 

[wopr21]

You're probably right. But as you and yours have so astutely demonstrated... My Seniority Is Not For Sale!

BTW under RLA contracts do not expire. They only become amendable...

My seniority is not for sale either...

All the east will be retired before we can enjoy even a 3% rase

Like I said if the company really wants a contract they will talk. The companies actions speak real words, not what is coming out of their mouths.

wopr