- May 8, 2007
- 3,146
- 3,236
That's correct so far as both groups of pilots started working for the post-merger US Airways on 9/27/2005. Prior to that each group had its own seniority list that had to be merged into a single list using a logical methodology that met with ALPA merger policy and with the TA. Failing to work out their differences on combining the lists the issue, by policy, went to binding arbitration in which a dispassionate third-party arbitrator and two pilot neutrals were tasked with the integration process. The NIC award was the result.
*Nicolau and two pilot neutrals (not the west pilots) awarded it
*ALPA accepted it.
*Management accepted it
*The west pilots accepted it
*A federal judge upheld it
*The 9th circuit only mentioned it in a pejorative way towards Seham (“not terribly binding”)
*DL/NW used the same essential formula and have accepted their list.
So it doesn’t seem that your statement is correct that “just not you and yours” understand why the NIC is the legally binding and fairly derived seniority list. So that’s my list. How many dispassionate third-parties can name who advocate rejecting the NIC in support of DOH now that binding arbitration is over?
I don't need to name ANY dispassionate "third parties" . I only know that IF and UNTIL a vote for a CBA occurs there will no "list". Jacob's and his law firm, USAPA, the company, the courts still require ONE thing before any of what YOU want can occur:
a vote of the parties that matter at all: the pilots.