US Pilots Labor Discussion

[CallawayGolf]

And the WEST was going where? MM! enjoy the ride hope you went to the restroom before you got in!

The West and Management are both using every means necessary to prove to USAPA that the NIC is the only acceptable list for section 22 of the JCBA. No one of sound mind would want to follow USAPA where it is taking this process as DOH is a futile pursuit. Until USAPA comes to accept that reality, hundreds of millions of dollars are being lost annually, mostly by east pilots who can’t seem to understand that kicking against the goads of section 22 is never going to produce the result they want.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

The West and Management are both using every means necessary to prove to USAPA that the NIC is the only acceptable list for section 22 of the JCBA. No one of sound mind would want to follow USAPA where it is taking this process as DOH is a futile pursuit. Until USAPA comes to accept that reality, hundreds of millions of dollars are being lost annually, mostly by east pilots who can’t seem to understand that kicking against the goads of section 22 is never going to produce the result they want.
[/quot And the west is going where? And you think mngmnt has your same agenda,( maybe you could tell the f/a group) but it is going where? If you look at the chess board the outcome for a WEST hub,, seperate contracts no frag protection, and no redeeming assets looks like your risk factor with oil projected in triple digits gets worse with every passing day! One only has to look at your donation pool to see futility! 2mill out the window! Keep those donations coming, as for USAPA they thank you too, their % of the profit share comes right off the top!MM!

 

[BoeingBoy]

There is a time a place where the RLA allows a Company to impose a contract.

RLA - yes, but you didn't ask specifically about the RLA. Under BK law a judge can allow a contract to be abrogated and I gave you 3 examples of that happening. Justt because US chose not to impose it's own language and accepted the proposal that the employees ratified does not mean that the judge didn't rule that US could impose it's own contract. Personally, I think that US was afraid of a strike if it imposed it's own terms given the fragile financial condition of the company and in both the IAM and ALPA cases the ratified proposals gave the company the amount of concessions it wanted.

Of course, Lorenzo did impose contracts with the judge's approval.

You must have been (still are) one of the mushrooms that lived in the dark. During the whole LOA 93 process a portion of the MEC was talking about the doom and gloom that would happen if we had to "face the judge" without a ratified agreement.

Jim

 

[Freighterguynow]

Here is the truth and it says NOTHING about seperate ops, it does say a neutral third party will IMPOSE sections of the contract. 1

You'll need to find a more timely press than September to net that one..... and, yes, both sides agreed in an LOA to baseball style arbitration as well as giving up the right to self help or a lock out if no agreement was reached in 24 months.

 

[BoeingBoy]

RR is correct. The US Airways pilots did not have a court imposed contract. There is always the threat of a 1113 filing by the creditors and trustee, but absent the actual filing and negotiations, the contract in effect at the time of the Chapter 11 filing remains in effect.

What you are missing is that US did file under 1113c for temporary authority to alter the pilot's contract, which the judge approved. Ratification of LOA 93 was what prevented the company from exercising the that authority and unilaterally imposing changes to the contract.

With the IAM, the company had filed under 1113 and received permission to unilaterally impose it's terms, but again ratification of the concessions kept the company from imposing it's proposal.

In both cases the judge had approved the imposition of contract changes.

Of course, as I said, Lorenzo imposed contract changes in the first CO bandruptcy.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

No contract was imposed on our pilots, despite your spin.

Spin? Isn't that what I said. The judge approved the company's 1113c filing so the company could have imposed it's own concessions but didn't since LOA 93 was ratified. Not imposing the changes was a company decision but the judge had approved the imposition of contract changes.

You asked for examples where a judge had "imposed a contract" and I gave you those - the judge had approved imposing a contract". The company's decision doesn't change what the judge ruled.

Jim

 

[CallawayGolf]

The West and Management are both using every means necessary to prove to USAPA that the NIC is the only acceptable list for section 22 of the JCBA. No one of sound mind would want to follow USAPA where it is taking this process as DOH is a futile pursuit. Until USAPA comes to accept that reality, hundreds of millions of dollars are being lost annually, mostly by east pilots who can’t seem to understand that kicking against the goads of section 22 is never going to produce the result they want.
[/quot And the west is going where? And you think mngmnt has your same agenda,( maybe you could tell the f/a group) but it is going where? If you look at the chess board the outcome for a WEST hub,, seperate contracts no frag protection, and no redeeming assets looks like your risk factor with oil projected in triple digits gets worse with every passing day! One only has to look at your donation pool to see futility! 2mill out the window! Keep those donations coming, as for USAPA they thank you too, their % of the profit share comes right off the top!MM!

Thanks for reminding me of you role in Blazing Saddles MM!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke5Mr5eCF2U

That is Authentic Frontier Gibberish right there.

 

[john john]

What you are missing is that US did file under 1113c for temporary authority to alter the pilot's contract, which the judge approved. Ratification of LOA 93 was what prevented the company from exercising the that authority and unilaterally imposing changes to the contract.

With the IAM, the company had filed under 1113 and received permission to unilaterally impose it's terms, but again ratification of the concessions kept the company from imposing it's proposal.

In both cases the judge had approved the imposition of contract changes.

Of course, as I said, Lorenzo imposed contract changes in the first CO bandruptcy.

Jim

Here is CWA Passengers Service argument against interim relief
Bankruptcy ll.
Company’s violation of its promise to CWA in the 2002
Restructuring Agreement not to file a motion pursuant to Section 1113 with respect to CWA’s CBA.
A good read if you follow the fight the agents have been thru


OPPOSITION OF THE COMMUNICATIONS
WORKERS OF AMERICA, AFL-CIO, TO DEBTORS’
MOTION FOR INTERIM RELIEF PURSUANT TO 11 U.S.C. § 1113(e), AND
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF
http://web.archive.org/web/20041024044020/cwa.net/PDFs/CWA1.pdf

 

[Bear96]

The question IS can you call a strike [or] “self help”

Interestingly, in the only case (to my knowledge) directly addressing the issue of whether a union can strike or otherwise engage in self-help in response to an abrogated CBA and unilaterally imposed terms and conditions of employment pursuant to Section 1113, the court answered "No."

See In re Northwest Airlines Corp., 483 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2007), involving the F/As during NW's bankruptcy.

 

[AWA320]

You'll need to find a more timely press than September to net that one..... and, yes, both sides agreed in an LOA to baseball style arbitration as well as giving up the right to self help or a lock out if no agreement was reached in 24 months.

Oh you need something less than three months old?? Point of the matter is they are headed towards 3rd party imposed contract and we are right behind them...

AWA320

 

[traderjake]

Because we were all so close in seniority, nobody really "took" anyone's seat.

Try telling that to the Piedmont Captains who lost their seats to USAir F/Os.

You're either lying or don't realize what happened, probable because you're a former USAir pilot.

 

[nycbusdriver]

[/b]


This from someone who knows a thing or 2 about "witless intellectual charm "

cv

I do know something about it.

I read your posts, don't I?

 

[Freighterguynow]

Point of the matter is they are headed towards 3rd party imposed contract and we are right behind them...

AWA320

A contract negotiated entirely by the majority. The minority had virtually no input ( except for a few token 'gives' at the last minute) and will have no vote.


The minority will have each and every contractual section imposed upon them by the majority and management.



Did the minority threaten a DFR? Yes they did. The legal council they used has a very famous blog discussed at length here. Did they listen or was 200 pilots simply not enough to finance a DFR? I don't know but, at the time, the Addington case had been placed on the docket so they had a framework to piggy back from and still did not.

 

[Reed Richards]

Try telling that to the Piedmont Captains who lost their seats to USAir F/Os.

You're either lying or don't realize what happened, probable because you're a former USAir pilot.

Sorry Trader, I was AAA and it gets a little foggy back to 1989. And I think I made a statement about it being half my lifetime ago. I was so far down the list C/O was not an option for me anyway. My blanket statement was not appropriate.

I defer to you on this one, and I was not trying to open up any (more) old wounds. We have enough festering already!

Best,

RR

 

[Barrister]

Try telling that to the Piedmont Captains who lost their seats to USAir F/Os.

You're either lying or don't realize what happened, probable because you're a former USAir pilot.

The problem was when Usair posted a bid and there were 10 fewer 727 captains
in CLT then the PI guys lost their seats. 2 months latter when they added those
seats back into CLT they were "new openings" and guess who filled em...U guys
who live in Fla. who commuted to PIT, who are now commuting to CLT.
Happened over and over again. My personal favorite....closing GSO as a 727
base and adding the time in ....................LAX and SFO. Yea, thats the ticket.
Guess how many people thought that was a good deal. About 20.
So for you Westies we totally get why you are pissed. The same will happen when the ink is dry on
a new contract and Parker starts to DS PHX. It's just that we are more pissed about NIC that you ever dreamed

NICDOA
NPJB

PS....most people got over DOH pretty fast (IMHO) it was management that screwed up
what could have been a good airline. Managements plans for an airline are in someways
much more determinative of your career than your number. Who would have cared if
we had 600 airframes by now. (mainline of course)