US Pilots Labor Discussion 3/26- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[usabusdriver]

Jim, what I said was that, now please pay attention, If AOL ultimately prevails all the way to the Supreme Court the state of labor-management negotiations will be turned on it's head and open the doors of the federal courthouse to special interests (minority, outside corps like AOL, other companies, psycho individuals, whatever) who want to interfere with the negotiating process on their own behalf. This time, seniority, next time, pay...healthcare, vacation, etc....what's it going to be??

You name it, and if and when this occurs, the courts and NOT the labor unions will negotiating CBA's and NOT the unions. Therefore, the need for ANY labor unions get sued out of business because the court system then becomes the defacto representative of labor. CAPICHE??

I just love this "shrinking group of pilots" you so aptley love to skewer. BTW, that SHRINKING group of pilots don't reside at the bottom of the East seniority list, FWIW!! It starts at the top and works it's way DOWN!

EOA,
The weakness in the ripeness arguments used that until the “results” of the collective bargaining process are final there can be no discrimination or failure of the duty of fair representation in this case arises because of the nature of section 22.

Integrated seniority lists are NOT the subject of negotiations at the bargaining table with the company. A proposal is proffered by the union and the company accepts the proposal or rejects the proposal. There is no methodology for creating or putting together an integrated seniority list by negotiations between the company and the union.
The Judge in the Addington case ruled that the union’s action of presenting an integrated seniority list different than the arbitrated list by the union was by law a failure of the DFR because they must abide by the former CBA’s obligations.

So in my mind the ripeness argument as presented is rather prevaricating because no matter when a contract is TA’ed or ratified it is a failure of DFR, you see that even if the integrated seniority list proposal the union sent the company is changed, if it is different than the arbitrated list it is a DFR, unless the Judge’s ruling is deemed to be in error by the 9th Circuit and I do not recall arguments to the counter anywhere just that it is not a DFR yet because it is not ripe.

The union argues that seniority is negotiable like crew meals. That may be the case but as argued in court there must be a legitimate union objective in doing so. The union failed to make that argument.

 

[end_of_alpa]

What are you proposing that I do?

Also, what is MAI NOI?

Well' I just thought that with you're LEGAL expertise you can shine the light on the ADEA and the various employer defenses availible within the act.

Sorry, my french is very rusty...MAIS NON??

 

[hp_fa]

Thank you for asking but I think I will pass on that offer.

 

[Freebird]

The union argues that seniority is negotiable like crew meals. That may be the case but as argued in court there must be a legitimate union objective in doing so.

The union failed to make that argument.

USAPA = Failure and Waste of Time

Keep arranging the deck chairs....

 

[88 B.T.D.]

Integrated seniority lists are NOT the subject of negotiations at the bargaining table with the company.

Every other section is. If the union wanted everyone paid by LOS that could be negotiated with the company if it was cost neutral or better, and if voted in would be in the contract basically relegating section 22 to insignificance. (The current injunction does not allow this, which does put an outside restraint on the bargaining process)

 

[nic4us]

If USAPA folds and there is no replacement, since both pilot contracts are officially 'amendable' under the RLA, the company would be free to impose any conditions and pay rates it desires.
Your old contract would go 'poof' and your new (and I'll bet draconian) work rules, without any input from you or your coworkers, would be presented to you as a 'take it or leave it' proposition.
Cheers.

And me and every other pilot on the property, both east and West would take it while we got other ducks in a row, meanwhile the on time performance might get to 45% in a good month, and the completion factor would go haywire.

 

[nic4us]

i believe, even if they take the east position offered (E190 FO), then upon the ratification of a new contract they would be accorded the seniority enbodied in the new agreement. During the interim, however, they would be on the bottom of the east seniority list for bidding purposes, with the payrate determined by time on the property. Its an interesting conundrum: furloughed westies coming east to a large paycut sitting reserve on the 190; then if the west happens to recall, the east 'new-hire' furloughs accepting higher paying seats on the 73 or AB.....who says the pilot group can't be integrated without a new contract?
Things that make you go "hmmmmm"....
cheers.

Mostly correct, but I think their payrate would be LOS determined, so they would be on like 4 year or so e190 pay, and as luvn pointed out they have a ROFR back to their seat, however, they may be required to forgo West recall for I think the TA said 18 months. Bottom line, it is a big can of worms, and it is symptomatic of the entire mess around here.

 

[TheBadCat1313]

Every other section is. If the union wanted everyone paid by LOS that could be negotiated with the company if it was cost neutral or better, and if voted in would be in the contract basically relegating section 22 to insignificance. (The current injunction does not allow this, which does put an outside restraint on the bargaining process)

Everyone is and will be paid according to their LOS. Pay rates and seniority are completely different things, though. The injunction does not restrain the bargaining process any more than what ALPA merger policy would have.

 

[end_of_alpa]

EOA,
The weakness in the ripeness arguments used that until the “results” of the collective bargaining process are final there can be no discrimination or failure of the duty of fair representation in this case arises because of the nature of section 22.

Integrated seniority lists are NOT the subject of negotiations at the bargaining table with the company. A proposal is proffered by the union and the company accepts the proposal or rejects the proposal. There is no methodology for creating or putting together an integrated seniority list by negotiations between the company and the union.
The Judge in the Addington case ruled that the union’s action of presenting an integrated seniority list different than the arbitrated list by the union was by law a failure of the DFR because they must abide by the former CBA’s obligations.

So in my mind the ripeness argument as presented is rather prevaricating because no matter when a contract is TA’ed or ratified it is a failure of DFR, you see that even if the integrated seniority list proposal the union sent the company is changed, if it is different than the arbitrated list it is a DFR, unless the Judge’s ruling is deemed to be in error by the 9th Circuit and I do not recall arguments to the counter anywhere just that it is not a DFR yet because it is not ripe.

The union argues that seniority is negotiable like crew meals. That may be the case but as argued in court there must be a legitimate union objective in doing so. The union failed to make that argument.

This is a repeat of the same ole argument.

First, the definition of DFR has to be addressed by the appeals court, and the evidence, or lack thereof, to totally review the appeal on the record. I believe this case will take several weeks more to come out because the court is educating itself on what the law is. They have to review the lower courts ruling and procedures. This is a complicated case made more complicated by the District court. In short, I do not believe the District court did any of us justice by slamming this through the court system as fast as he did.

RLA has it's own body of law that the legislature has empowered it to handle management-labor negotiations outside the confines of the court system unless and until the final prosuct of negotiations are produced.

As I mentioned before, when USAPA took over, several sections of the CBA were already negotiated, completed and tentatively agreed to between ALPA and the company. Since then USAPA reopened most of those sections and either renegotiated or are in the process of being renegotiated. The "process" ALPA went through to "negotiate" section 22 was completed and submitted to the company. Nicolau came up with "a" list that was acceptable to the company. It was not "the" list. And here is the difference you and I have. It is quite possible that Nicolau COULD have come up with several "lists" that would have met the companies conditions and found acceptable.

Question: Is it possible that Nicolau could have come up with one or more "lists" that the company found "acceptable"?

The Judge in the Addington case ruled that the union’s action of presenting an integrated seniority list different than the arbitrated list by the union was by law a failure of the DFR because they must abide by the former CBA’s obligations.

Using that logic, what's to prevent US Airways from suiing USAPA in District court for coming back to the table and "reopening" the other sections of the contract that ALPA negotiated and agreed to??

What you call "agreed to" seems to be a moving target. Again, without a COMPLETE CBA, no sections of the CBA are enforcable. That includes section 22. Otherwise "a" list would have already become "the" list and we would be debating a different issue: who's negotiating for labor now?? ALPA, USAPA or the court system?

You can't validate the list without a vote! Or can you? The court is negotiating for labor now. That is the salient fact of the matter.

The union argues that seniority is negotiable like crew meals. That may be the case but as argued in court there must be a legitimate union objective in doing so. The union failed to make that argument.

Yes. The district seems to have lead the jury in that direction. The LEGITIMATE union objective is: my day of employment is EQUAL to your day of employment. That IS a legitimate objective and THAT is the objective that, ultimately, the SCOTUS will address. In fact, I believe this may HELP all airline pilots in FUTURE mergers...the elimination of career expectations in airline mergers.

 

[jetjok1]

Well, to get away from this nonsense, I'd like to wish EVERYONE! a happy and blessed Easter holiday/weekend. I would ask everyone to go out and enjoy your families, signficant others, a game of golf, flying, or whatever is your fancy (even easter egg hunts- wow that was many moons ago). Relax and enjoy!!!

 

[no shizel]

Hate to rain on the Easter parade but...

PHL Goes Palin​

Well the word is that your PHL reps have gone rogue, by trading votes with the PHX council on important issues in exchange for mutual political support. What this really means is that the agenda of PHL reps does not have the support of the other east councils so it has become necessary for them to offer up your interests as bargaining capital to people who have openly stated that they aim to have USAPA fail.

As if the thick as thieves behavior of PHL and PHX at the last BPR meeting was not enough cause for alarm, Roger Henriksson traveled to PHX for their council meeting this week to be lauded for his allegiance to the marriage.

The PHX reps are also said to have talked at length of the upcoming EVP election casting thoughtfully aimed aspersions at a particular potential east candidate. This by itself could be a very serious violation of Labor Law but we will leave that for another venue. It is reported that Henriksson talked openly about the possibility of running for EVP himself.

Is there a connection here? Is Roger making an end run on the BPR fueled by the support of determined adversaries? Is he being manipulated under the guise of bringing east and west together? If so, at what cost to you? Who is really behind all of this, is someone else in PHL behind the scenes? Who there would have the current leadership fail?

When you put it all together it adds up to a potential scenario of very onerous proportions. You are certain to hear that this is all nothing but a misunderstanding. Do not rely on our account or any other for the facts. Pick up your phone and call your reps, all of them.

 

[Harry Callahan]

As an outsider I'm going to ask a question(may have asked before) what would Doug or whom ever have to do to settle your contract ?

 

[CallawayGolf]

USAPA and its supporters have no desire for a joint contract. They will use any and every tactic, legal or illegal, to avoid a ratification vote which would bring the two pilot groups under a single CBA and the integrated seniority list. This is a matter of principle for them and they will zealously pursue the same course of action they have been on for the past two years without regard to the injury it may cause to the pilots earning potential.

Your question assumes that USAPA could be convinced to accept the NIC if Parker offered the highest pay scales in the industry. I submit that such an offer would never make it out to a ratification vote because USAPA’s leadership fears such a financial offer would pass. Heck, they even fear that the company’s “Kirby proposal” would pass at this point and it is nowhere near the best rates in the industry. Management is not the problem; USAPA’s fanatical, narcissistic, despotic leadership is the problem. Until that changes there will be no new contract. If, USAPA somehow pulls of their hail marry pass of winning their LOA93 pay restoration for east pilots only, they won’t even attempt to negotiate a new contract. They will openly tell management that they are perfectly comfortable with the status quo for years to come so there is really no reason to waste time discussing it.

 

[nycbusdriver]

As an outsider I'm going to ask a question(may have asked before) what would Doug or whom ever have to do to settle your contract ?

Doug would have to throw a LOT of money into the pot to even hope for chance at ratification. The negotiators would have to come up with an outside-the-box solution to eliminate the financial disadvantage that Nicolau foisted on the east pilot group, especially the f/os who would have upgraded at some point, but now are precluded from ever doing that.

Not only does the solution need to be novel, it somehow needs to be locked in stone so that future corporate transactions cannot undo the remedy.

It's a very tall order, and may not be possible at all. At any rate, Doug seems unwilling to even consider a solution that would fairly compensate the the pilots. Until that happens, he's stuck with a divided group that is interfering with his illusions of grandeur and personal profit that might come from another merger.

 

[Poug Darker]

USAPA and its supporters have no desire for a joint contract. They will use any and every tactic, legal or illegal, to avoid a ratification vote which would bring the two pilot groups under a single CBA and the integrated seniority list. This is a matter of principle for them and they will zealously pursue the same course of action they have been on for the past two years without regard to the injury it may cause to the pilots earning potential.

Your question assumes that USAPA could be convinced to accept the NIC if Parker offered the highest pay scales in the industry. I submit that such an offer would never make it out to a ratification vote because USAPA’s leadership fears such a financial offer would pass. Heck, they even fear that the company’s “Kirby proposal” would pass at this point and it is nowhere near the best rates in the industry. Management is not the problem; USAPA’s fanatical, narcissistic, despotic leadership is the problem. Until that changes there will be no new contract. If, USAPA somehow pulls of their hail marry pass of winning their LOA93 pay restoration for east pilots only, they won’t even attempt to negotiate a new contract. They will openly tell management that they are perfectly comfortable with the status quo for years to come so there is really no reason to waste time discussing it.

Wages go up, then wages go down. Been there, done that. Seniority (being the only item of value left to the east) and what seat you hold when the music stops cannot be taken away by the company.
USAPA is doing a wonderful job of preserving east senioriy. Bravo.