US Pilots Labor Discussion 6/10- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[oldiebutgoody]

Not true Oldie, given Eastern DOH the Shuttle pilots would have been able to capture every single widebody Captain job at US Air. All their Captains, the First Officers and several Flight Engineers, all of them could take every one.

Thanks. I stand corrected.

 

[nycbusdriver]

If it were as simple as the "final and binding" crowd insists, it wouldn't take 2 years and 2 million bones to say it. The 9th said a LOT of things they didn't have to in these 22 pages, things that were well outside the scope of the "ripeness" issue. They could EASILY have included 6 words for guidance. (The Niclolau is final and binding) They gave a lot of foreshadowing and insight into their decision...I didn't read those 6 little words anywhere.

Yes, but you're missing one of the most important aspects of the case. HP_FA has ruled that the 9th got it wrong, so it's not over.

Is there any way to appeal an HP_FA ruling? She's missing in action here lately.

 

[767jetz]

My understanding is ALPA has since modified merger policy in the last twelve months and added longevity and category & status to it list of criteria. Clearly this was to rectify the things you mention of above to the advantage of UAL. No principle involved in anything ALPA does, just shifting targets to suit the Elephants. Real unionism at its best.

Yes, but according to you it's perfectly OK for the majority to dictate terms to the rest. So even though you are off the mark, it would be fine by your standards to do so anyway. So what's the problem?

In reality you guys are the ones who caused the changes in ALPA merger policy, in order to ensure that commitments are actually kept. The most significant change is that a Joint CBA MUST be agreed upon and voted in before the Integrated Seniority List is finalized. That way both sides are motivated to reach compromise and avoid binding arbitration. If one side decides to pull a "US-East" and not budge from their demands, forcing the whole thing into binding arbitration, there is no way to hold up the final ruling by refusing to negotiate or vote for a contract. The ruling becomes binding immediately since the contract is already in place. Exactly what DL/NW did, and the results speak for themselves.

 

[Captain Underpants]

BY the way, I NEVER said that the Trump guys should only get their "Trump Shuttle DOH", in fact, I've always thought that would be unfair. I was only agreeing that there was a serous conflict with the guys that quit EAL and were hired at U, but I don't know just what a fair solution would have been for them.

Oldie,

I was one of the EAL guys who quit Eastern (pre-Lorenzo) and was hired at USAir. A national seniority list by DOH would have prevented all these destructive seniority battles. The only other solution is a strict DOH merger law or union policies with any inequities fixed with conditions and restrictions.

As a Delta pilot once explained to me "We know relative position is just a scheme to create winners and losers but the American way is to create a path for some guys to get ahead".

The NIC is dead because it is a lottery ticket that can't be cashed. The NIC was brain dead as soon as the ink hit the paper with George's signature because as a stipulated fact by both sides in court it would never be ratified by East pilots. The 9th just pulled the plug on the NIC.

The legal issues are settled and the lines drawn by the 9th. USAPA has an ongoing duty of fair representation to all USAirways pilots as all unions do. The goal was and still is a fair and equitable seniority integration.

USAPA must proceed with a healthy awareness of risks and responsibilities but without fear because as we learned with ALPA when decisions are made based on fear there is no bottom.

underpants

 

[e28]

I agree with you underpants. I think it's safe to say that the vaporization of the west regulars and their researcher hp_fa suggests that they are planning the latest strategy to implode this process. Smart bombs, frags, internal plants...whatever. Maybe the contribution phase is getting problematic. I think it's clear they are having a real honest moment with Harper on odds of success going forward with the en banc. (the ultimate hail-mary)

No, it's not over yet...too many rabid ones left standing out there.

The cavalry did make an effort though...props to Jim and JuniorjetBMW...or whatever his handle is....bravo.

 

[767jetz]

There is is, right in front of everyone. Yet, magically, move forward a few days and BoeingBoy and the West Island holdouts will be right back in spin cycle, as if the truth never was in their face. Let's see. How many hrs. will it take Nic4us to contradict the 9th. Minutes. Wagers?

OK, a few questions:

How free was ALPA to abandon the Nic award? Could they just toss it aside or did they need concurrence from both sides to alter it?

I also have never really heard an honest realistic answer from an East Pilot to rectify the following:

Just prior to a merger, what position did a 16 or 17 year East pilot hold? Was he on reserve or a block holder? Considering the age 65 rule and East attrition, as well as the age of the 16-17 year pilot, when (if ever) would he have been able to hold A320 captain? A330 f/o? If further downsizing happened (absent the merger, say in another economic downturn), where would that same pilot be?

Now, where would that same pilot be today with the Nic Award post merger? Compare that for me, to where he'd be today with DOH with C&R's?

I'd really like an honest and thoughtful answer. Whenever these questions were posed in the past I only got the standard "I'm not having some young new hire ahead of me" response. Or I was answered with more questions, rhetoric, and attacks. I'd really like to know the unemotional answers to these questions to challenge my own point of reference to this whole situation. And if you or anyone else decides to give me some rational answers, please, for the sake of conversation, leave out union politics, anyone's age or slants on fairness. I'm only interested in the facts.

 

[767jetz]

Why do you think we don't want you to get a good deal?

Because there are some here claiming that UAL pilots are "in a bad position with regard to CAL pilots" and they want nothing to do with UA. Just setting the record straight.

 

[767jetz]

Yes, it' s true. DOH is the winner! Even your beloved ALPA says so, now that is.

What are you smoking? ALPA still says nothing about DOH. DOH is never coming back. Get over it. It is an ancient relic of the regulated and shortly post regulated era. No surprise the dinasaurs of the industry hold it so dear.

If you remember, back in 1988, during the PI-U merger, PI wanted straight relative position and lost. Some folks just can't let go. Back then ALPA's merger policy had DOH in it, too. UAL got it taken out when it looked like they were going to merge with U in the early 2000s.

I guess memory really does fade with age. Tell us old wise one... what year did ALPA merger policy change? Who voted for it to change?

I'll give you a hint: It was long before the attempted 2000 merger of UA & US, and it wasn't just UA as many want to believe here.

 

[e28]

OK, a few questions:

How free was ALPA to abandon the Nic award? Could they just toss it aside or did they need concurrence from both sides to alter it?

I'm only interested in the facts.

Abandon, alter, modify...the 9th commented on ALPA's attempts to modify the NIC in order to reach a compromise between the two parties (East/West MEC). Obviously, the 9th is under the impression that not only could ALPA modify the NIC, they tried to broker a compromise off of the NIC in order to facilitate the possibility of ever getting it into a ratified contract.

They also stated that USAPA has the same ability to abandon the NIC as ALPA did. Here's the difference: there's no 2 sides to sign off on that...just one big happy legal CBA with the usual duty to represent all their members within a wide range of reasonableness.

them's the facts.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

OK, a few questions:

How free was ALPA to abandon the Nic award? Could they just toss it aside or did they need concurrence from both sides to alter it?

I also have never really heard an honest realistic answer from an East Pilot to rectify the following:

Just prior to a merger, what position did a 16 or 17 year East pilot hold? Was he on reserve or a block holder? Considering the age 65 rule and East attrition, as well as the age of the 16-17 year pilot, when (if ever) would he have been able to hold A320 captain? A330 f/o? If further downsizing happened (absent the merger, say in another economic downturn), where would that same pilot be?

Now, where would that same pilot be today with the Nic Award post merger? Compare that for me, to where he'd be today with DOH with C&R's?

I'd really like an honest and thoughtful answer. Whenever these questions were posed in the past I only got the standard "I'm not having some young new hire ahead of me" response. Or I was answered with more questions, rhetoric, and attacks. I'd really like to know the unemotional answers to these questions to challenge my own point of reference to this whole situation. And if you or anyone else decides to give me some rational answers, please, for the sake of conversation, leave out union politics, anyone's age or slants on fairness. I'm only interested in the facts.

When you get your time machine fixed, let us know. We'd ALL like answers to that. I do know that even when the age rule was moved to 65 that most East F/Os would be captains for 5 or more years at the end of their careers. With nic, almost none would, even with some growth.

 

[767jetz]

First merge ever in USAIR history, and this clown goes off DOH.

This is where you guys go off the reservation. It is not YOUR merger. there is always a second party involved. What makes you guys think that USAIR history does or even should play a role in any integration? Yours are not the only interests involved, and you treat everyone else like they owe you. (All this 'how dare anyone alter what we are used to!' garbage)

 

[ROACLT]

Yes, but according to you it's perfectly OK for the majority to dictate terms to the rest. So even though you are off the mark, it would be fine by your standards to do so anyway. So what's the problem?

In reality you guys are the ones who caused the changes in ALPA merger policy, in order to ensure that commitments are actually kept. The most significant change is that a Joint CBA MUST be agreed upon and voted in before the Integrated Seniority List is finalized. That way both sides are motivated to reach compromise and avoid binding arbitration. If one side decides to pull a "US-East" and not budge from their demands, forcing the whole thing into binding arbitration, there is no way to hold up the final ruling by refusing to negotiate or vote for a contract. The ruling becomes binding immediately since the contract is already in place. Exactly what DL/NW did, and the results speak for themselves.

Well, I can't take credit for it but what the East pilots did for ALPA is make them scramble to find ways not to suffer for the backlash of their own weak anti-union polices so they won't face the loss of any more dues. Wow, real unionist reasons for changing the policy again, and yes the majority is important. What you didn't say or don't want to acknowledge is behind closed doors is that the criteria in your merger policy was changed to advantage UAL, who oh by the way has 2000 more active pilots and including the inactive in a possible NMB election, has 4000 more than CAL. The difference in view for someone watching who works in a real union is that USAPA's majority is moving its policies in line with the principles of real Labor unions, while ALPA just modified them "this time around" for political purposes that have absolutely nothing to do with unionism, but dues and membership preservation. They can't take a stand on anything and that is why they keep changing the way they do business. It isn't founded in true unionism.

See, DOH is a union principle embodied in the way 99.9% of union work when dealing with individuals with similar skill sets or in the same craft. As I indicated ALPA has no principles, or unity as evidence by individual member airlines changing their position on merger policy, UAL specifically 3 times in the last 25 years.

I am just a lowly crane operator and I and my fellow uneducated grunts make more than many of your senior Captains. You could try to argue many reasons as to why and I will bet none of them will be the failures of your mighty Pilot union. You might have to look in the mirror then, especially since UAL as one of the biggest members has to make you culpable in the demise of your profession over the last 30 years. It has been a miserable downward spiral and as your airline has been one of the power brokers, what does that say about your view of unionism and union principles?

Your union constantly brags about its large membership standing shoulder to shoulder but if that were truly so, you wouldn't be making only 30% of what you made 30 years ago with no pension and a fraction of the work rules. Just google any CPI inflation calculator and see the dismal failure in hard numbers. What is more saddening or embarrassing is the fact your union and its reputation is attached to workers who make $17000 a year like the unfortunate co-pilot in the Colgan crash. I work with new members who are bringing in $50000-$60000 in their first year. You won't ever get anywhere with me extolling the virtues of ALPA. You should be embarrassed for its dismal failures and the fact some of your union brothers and sisters you stand shoulder to shoulder with qualify for food stamps and public assistance.

 

[GuntherA320]

This is where you guys go off the reservation. It is not YOUR merger. there is always a second party involved. What makes you guys think that USAIR history does or even should play a role in any integration? Yours are not the only interests involved, and you treat everyone else like they owe you. (All this 'how dare anyone alter what we are used to!' garbage)

I agree. Everything you have posted is garbage. 767jetz is now on "ignore"

 

[767jetz]

When you get your time machine fixed, let us know. We'd ALL like answers to that. I do know that even when the age rule was moved to 65 that most East F/Os would be captains for 5 or more years at the end of their careers. With nic, almost none would, even with some growth.

That's a pretty evasive answer. Hopefully someone else might give it a real try for the sake of conversation.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Abandon, alter, modify...the 9th commented on ALPA's attempts to modify the NIC in order to reach a compromise between the two parties (East/West MEC). Obviously, the 9th is under the impression that not only could ALPA modify the NIC, they tried to broker a compromise off of the NIC in order to facilitate the possibility of ever getting it into a ratified contract.

They also stated that USAPA has the same ability to abandon the NIC as ALPA did. Here's the difference: there's no 2 sides to sign off on that...just one big happy legal CBA with the usual duty to represent all their members within a wide range of reasonableness.

So you now agree that ALPA wasn't free to unilaterally change/abandon the Nic. So when the 9th said what they did about ALPA's ability to change/abandon the Nic, that ability was nil. So you shift to a different argument. Here's a news flash - the "wide range of reasonableness" test applies to only one prong of the 3 prong test of DFR. Usapa can offer a seniority proposal within a wide range of reasonableness and still be guilty of violating it's DFR.

And them's the facts...

Jim