US Pilots Labor Discussion 5/13- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[Phoenix]

By the way I'm currently on your certificate but restricted from flying your jets. I'm not furloughed but I cannot exercise any ability of bidding on anything on the east list. This same type restriction existed for MDA pilots

Flip, good observation. You and MDA pilots both are on the same certificate but can't bid East jets.

You are not yet on the same seniority list because East and West are not merged. They are separate, and lawfully so. You are getting warm.

 

[Pi brat]

This is the big 2 assumptions people have a problem with. You are stating as a fact that they are "mainline aircraft" just because they used the US certificate. This is certainly not a hard and fast fact. It is opinion and can be argued either way. In fact It should have been argued by your union, but wasn't.

And the idea that an MDA captain position if worth more than a mainline f/o position is a far reach. I doubt you will find many that really agree with that, given the nature of the separate contracts.

So UA could bring the 787 in under your certificate at say $100 and hour for a capt and you would be okay with that? What else would you call an airplane operated under your certificate except "mainline"? For about the fourth time, ALPA should have used the leverage of having to put the E170s on the mainline to improve the contract, but even so, from what I've seen I would have taken the #1 E170 capt. over the bottom 737 F/O in PHX. The thought that most wouldn't is your uninformed opinion. You don't even work for US! Tell me, do you really know what was in their contract, have you ever flown an E series, or is it just he mainline superiority that drives your opinion?

"In fact It should have been argued by your union, but wasn't." Well DUH! Hence the DFR and just one of the many reasons ALPA got thrown out on their rear end!

 

[aquagreen73s]

What a joke the MDA issue is. Just another fantasy du jour to get the rest of the East pilot group to believe the AFO club that it's worth it for the majority of the East to continue working under a BK contract.

Good luck with that.

 

[Phoenix]

You are stating as a fact that they are "mainline aircraft" just because they used the US certificate. This is certainly not a hard and fast fact. It is opinion and can be argued either way.

Yeah the certificate opinion thingy. Do tell us what legal threshold will be necessary to make it a fact, in your opinion of course.

 

[GuntherA320]

EVP vote is in........

There will be a run off between Eric Ferguson and Gary Hummel. There were 3,526 eligible voters, for which 2,640 cast ballots, representing 74.9% of the eligible voters. Of the 2,640 ballots received, 838 (31.7%) were cast via IVR, and 1,802 (68.3%) were cast via the Web. No ballots were cast in which the voter did not make a selection. There were 118 ballots declared void. Ferguson received 34% (889 votes) of the eligible ballots, while Hummel received 41% (1088 votes) of the eligible ballots. The other 25% of the vote was split between 5 other east pilots.

 

[pitchlow]

The problem with this logic is that no where does a merger policy talk about "lifestyle expectations." It only talks about career expectations, which is much more definable than lifestyle which is infinitely subjective. The difference in your example is that the 170 captain has no where to go. (Unless he was recalled to mainline.) The 737/A320 f/o can only go up. The other direction is furloughed.

Those of us who came up from commuters generally left our former employers somewhere near the top, with schedule, equipment, even pay, to take jobs on reserve at the bottom with less pay at our current employer. If lifestyle was such a factor, why on earth would we do that?

A mainline job is a mainline job no matter how you slice it. And at US the only way to get that back was/is a recall letter.

Let me ask you this? Did MDA pilots work under the same contract as mainline? Of course not. There goes that quality of life thing again. Hours or service, guarantees, vacation days, call out time, duty rigs, monthly caps, etc. etc.etc. Since when is flying for a commuter, even as a captain considered a quality of life improvement? ANd the separate contract is another factor that works against you, pointing once again to the fact that MDA was seperate from mainline. At UA with Ted (and DL with Song) pilots worked under the same contract regardless and could bid on or off without restriction. Same contract, same work rules, same quality of life.

And the problem with your logic is that ALPA Merger policy is not objectively definable. ALPA Merger Policy was written to first protect the Association from litigation. Don't misunderstand that ALPA wants reasonable outcomes to be sure, but when an award is perceived to go awry there is little it can do except what it did at Wye River. That did not work because the AWA leadership knew that ALPA National could not change the award without losing a DFR. Legally ALPA's hands were tied. Bottom line, ALPA merger policy was written by lawyers whose first charge is to protect the association from litigation, and preserve their revenue stream. IF ALPA merger policy was absolutely definable there would be no need for arbitration's. ALPA merger policy is more of a political calculation then a policy.

 

[Phoenix]

And the problem with your logic is that ALPA Merger policy is not objectively definable. ALPA Merger Policy was written to first protect the Association from litigation. Don't misunderstand that ALPA wants reasonable outcomes to be sure, but when an award is perceived to go awry there is little it can do except what it did at Wye River. That did not work because the AWA leadership knew that ALPA National could not change the award without losing a DFR. Legally ALPA's hands were tied. Bottom line, ALPA merger policy was written by lawyers whose first charge is to protect the association from litigation, and preserve their revenue stream. IF ALPA merger policy was absolutely definable there would be no need for arbitration's. ALPA merger policy is more of a political calculation then a policy.

Pilots have paid millions of dollars to an organization that purports to unify pilots, yet they were incapable of taking responsibility to merge two lists of pilots that have paid all those dues. People are far too lenient and anxious to just rush past that simple reality.

If nothing else, ALPA should have been smart enough to establish seniority integration policy based simply on the amount of dues you have paid. Imagine the dues donation that would poor in (pun intended) at the announcement of a merger!

 

[767jetz]

So UA could bring the 787 in under your certificate at say $100 and hour for a capt and you would be okay with that? What else would you call an airplane operated under your certificate except "mainline"? For about the fourth time, ALPA should have used the leverage of having to put the E170s on the mainline to improve the contract, but even so, from what I've seen I would have taken the #1 E170 capt. over the bottom 737 F/O in PHX. The thought that most wouldn't is your uninformed opinion. You don't even work for US! Tell me, do you really know what was in their contract, have you ever flown an E series, or is it just he mainline superiority that drives your opinion?

"In fact It should have been argued by your union, but wasn't." Well DUH! Hence the DFR and just one of the many reasons ALPA got thrown out on their rear end!

Well hold a second. First of all, if UA tried to fly the 787 on our certificate we would certainly fight it. But with our scope, any airplane that UAL owns (or leases) must be flown by UAL seniority list pilots. That's regardless of certificate. Heck they could start a whole other airline and certificate, but if it's owned by UAL Corp, then it's UAL pilot's flying it. So you see there are many different ways to define a mainline airplane. That's my point.

I don't disagree that there is a strong case to argue for those jets being mainline due to the certificate they are flying under. But the time to argue that has long since past. No matter what ALPA now admits to, it has little chance of changing anything. As for a DFR suit against ALPA, perhaps. That's something for the courts to decide.

I fully understand that you agree with the fact that MDA was separate. I just think that your definition of mainline aircraft due to the certificate they are flown under is not clearly defined by any law. That has everything to do with scope language, agreements and side letters, etc. Without knowing all the details behind those things, you can't definitively say that those are mainline jets based on that narrow interpretation alone. Maybe your right and maybe your not. But it's not written in stone.

I think we also agree that your union officials should have argued that a long time ago. So if anything, a DFR suit would be directed at your own union, US ALPA at the time. It would be hard to hold ALPA National accountable for the actions (or in this case inaction) of your elected officials.

 

[Phoenix]

..

I don't disagree that there is a strong case to argue for those jets being mainline due to the certificate they are flying under. But the time to argue that has long since past. No matter what ALPA now admits to, it has little chance of changing anything. ...

A premise to ALPA's faithfulness and advocacy to an arbitrated seniority list is the accuracy of the lists which they certify and present to an arbitrator. Even ALPA would be smart enough not to present a list for ratification after they had denied the premise of its accuracy.

Its just one more reason why courts should be averse to embroiling themselves in unsettled internal union matters.

 

[767jetz]

And the problem with your logic is that ALPA Merger policy is not objectively definable. ALPA Merger Policy was written to first protect the Association from litigation. Don't misunderstand that ALPA wants reasonable outcomes to be sure, but when an award is perceived to go awry there is little it can do except what it did at Wye River. That did not work because the AWA leadership knew that ALPA National could not change the award without losing a DFR. Legally ALPA's hands were tied. Bottom line, ALPA merger policy was written by lawyers whose first charge is to protect the association from litigation, and preserve their revenue stream. IF ALPA merger policy was absolutely definable there would be no need for arbitration's. ALPA merger policy is more of a political calculation then a policy.

ALPA merger policy is written to give each airline's MEC and pilots the tools to negotiate. It is meant for reasonable people to come together and compromise in order to resolve their differences. The final measure of binding arbitration is a last resort in case 2 groups can't find common ground. ALPA National never wanted to dictate to every airline's pilots how they should integrate during a merger due to the vast differences at different companies in this deregulated industry. That's the problem from the start. You think ALPA National was some how in control (or should have taken control) of your destiny, when in fact it was your MEC and your own pilots who were responsible.

You say "if ALPA merger policy was absolutely definable there would be no need for arbitration's." (Basically the DOH stance.) There would also be no need for pilot input either. Maybe you like it this way. With the demographics of the east maybe this would benefit you. You also wouldn't have to worry about any corruption among your own pilot group and your elected officials. But most (not all) pilots outside of the east do not agree. So round and round we go.

The problem with your premise when you say "but when an award is perceived to go awry ..." is that you consider things going awry when the award was not what you wanted it to be. Perhaps you should consider that things actually went awry long before, when everyone at the table, including the arbitrator and the neutrals warned your merger committee and asked (heck they practically begged) that you come off the DOH stance and try another approach. There was much that could be done if men had stood up to be heard and not let your leadership run amok. But anyone who spoke up was threatened with recall. Correct? "Tote the line" they were told.

This world of "do-over's" that the east lives in is really murky. The villain is always someone else, the fault always lies elsewhere, and the problem becomes everyone's.

 

[767jetz]

Even ALPA would be smart enough not to present a list for ratification after they had denied the premise of its accuracy.

And it was not ALPA National who presented the initial lists as certified and accurate. It was the east and west. What was the East method of determining the accuracy? If the east had doubt about MDA and the status of pilots flying those airplanes, and questions about what certificate they were on, etc. wouldn't they have delayed presenting the lists to the arbitrator until those questions were answered and problems rectified adequately?

 

[Black Swan]

Flip, good observation. You and MDA pilots both are on the same certificate but can't bid East jets.

You are not yet on the same seniority list because East and West are not merged. They are separate, and lawfully so. You are getting warm.

Finally.

 

[Phoenix]

..and the problem becomes everyone's.

Seniority is the solution that eliminates problems among skilled labor. If a union chooses to collect dues from its members, but chooses to reject the solution, the problem is already hatched. They should not be offended by the consequences they brought on themselves.

 

[pitchlow]

Pilots have paid millions of dollars to an organization that purports to unify pilots, yet they were incapable of taking responsibility to merge two lists of pilots that have paid all those dues. People are far too lenient and anxious to just rush past that simple reality.

If nothing else, ALPA should have been smart enough to establish seniority integration policy based simply on the amount of dues you have paid. Imagine the dues donation that would poor in (pun intended) at the announcement of a merger!

I think ALPA has in a way done that. ALPA merger policy has changed over the years because it is beholden to pilot groups with the largest revenue stream. Merger policy as I said has little to do anything other than CYA. Life is good at ALPA National and revenue makes it so. It's not a union. It's an association of Airlines with competing interests. Paying dues may give you a seat at the table but in the end the pilot group that pays the most gets there way the most. Nothing knew here it's quite obvious.

 

[Phoenix]

And it was not ALPA National who presented the initial lists as certified and accurate. It was the east and west. What was the East method of determining the accuracy? If the east had doubt about MDA and the status of pilots flying those airplanes, and questions about what certificate they were on, etc. wouldn't they have delayed presenting the lists to the arbitrator until those questions were answered and problems rectified adequately?

Lots of interesting questions that speak to culpability, but all irrelevant to whether or not the list was accurate, and irrelevant to whether or not MDA was mainline.