US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Zone5]

Funny how you lament all of the lawyers and court battles. Yet blame ALPA arbitration. That WAS the reason for arbitration. So that we would not all be wasting millions on lawyers and waiting for the slow wheels of justice to decide.

That is the entire point of arbitration. Just because you don't like the outcome does not mean the arbitration was flawed.

There was NO WAY we were going to get to a settled agreement. Look where we are now. The east is still trying to shove DOH up our tailpipe. That is the same east position from day one. I have never heard anything from the east other than DOH/LOS. Furloughs want full credit.

You guys have the majority and still can't get it done. How were we ever going to agree locked in a room when both sides had equal say? Thus the reason for a neutral third party arbitrator.

Question: under A/M how is that differant that the ALPA policy? A single arbitrator decides the seniority. Under A/M it states that if the process is followed it is determined to be fair. The outcome is not questioned. Don't blame ALPA. Blame the people that agreed to a process and now fail to abide by it.

That is the reason we are spending millions on lawyers. Not following the arbitration.

Arbitration should NEVER be used to settle a seniority dispute between pilots, period! If it were not a "fallback" option, an agreement, amongst pilots, would have been reached, sooner or later, if no other option existed.

Like I said, everybody cannot be made "happy". As long as 51% of the East pilots and 51% of the West pilots agree (not that ALPA would have "allowed" a Section 22 ratification vote) it would have been a done deal. Doesn't have to be what everybody wants, just what the majority of BOTH pilot groups are willing to vote for. Would it have been easy to accomplish, NO. Would it have been possible to accomplish, YES. Indeed, it would have been easier then than now, without all the vitriol, hate and discontent that has transpired since then. Not to mention the lost time (can't get that back) and the millions of dollars in legal fees (we should have spent it on Lottery tickets).

As difficult as it would be after all that's transpired to reach an agreement that a majority of BOTH pilot groups could agree on, we could still try.

I think we are making a big mistake to let a few lawyers make the call.

seajay

 

[CallawayGolf]

Arbitration should NEVER be used to settle a seniority dispute between pilots, period! If it were not a "fallback" option, an agreement, amongst pilots, would have been reached, sooner or later, if no other option existed.

Like I said, everybody cannot be made "happy". As long as 51% of the East pilots and 51% of the West pilots agree (not that ALPA would have "allowed" a Section 22 ratification vote) it would have been a done deal. Doesn't have to be what everybody wants, just what the majority of BOTH pilot groups are willing to vote for. Would it have been easy to accomplish, NO. Would it have been possible to accomplish, YES. Indeed, it would have been easier then than now, without all the vitriol, hate and discontent that has transpired since then. Not to mention the lost time (can't get that back) and the millions of dollars in legal fees (we should have spent it on Lottery tickets).

As difficult as it would be after all that's transpired to reach an agreement that a majority of BOTH pilot groups could agree on, we could still try.

I think we are making a big mistake to let a few lawyers make the call.

seajay

There is nothing wrong with the arbitration process. Federal law compels its use in certain labor mergers where there is no other method that can bring two disparate groups together. In almost every situation of this kind you can expect one or both sides to be completely unrealistic and uncompromising, perhaps committed to a scorched earth policy rather than yielding a single issue to the other side. If ALPA’s merger policy was designed to keep sending the parties back to the negotiating table until they reach an agreement, then these two pilot groups would still not be together today either. The east would have likely continued to be intransigent in their quest to take active west pilots and place them below furloughed east pilots. That uncompromised position would only bring harm for west pilots since it would result in a total theft of their seniority status and 51% of the pilots would never go along with such a scheme. In that situation you would have a protracted stalemate which is exactly what Management and the Feds believe to be harmful to the long-term health and viability of the Company.

So you can hate sending money to lawyers all you want, but those legal processes are the best and only way to settle a dispute when one side refuses to heed any calls for reasonable negotiating in the quest to attain an agreement which is acceptable to both parties. Now if both sides are determined to reach an agreement and aren’t willing to pursue the scorched earth route, then I would agree that forcing the two sides to come to an agreement they can both defend as the best possible outcome, is the best solution. The lawyers can and should stay home if there are reasonable people committed to completing the task. Since there are those who prefer to play fast and loose with the laws and have no scruples about harming other people for their own gain, we will continue to have a bloated and ineffective judicial system that can barely keep up with all the malevolence found in the world. Arbitrations are intended to ease that burden, except when one one side is so full of themselves that they won't abide by binding aribtration either.

 

[cleardirect]

Arbitration should NEVER be used to settle a seniority dispute between pilots, period! If it were not a "fallback" option, an agreement, amongst pilots, would have been reached, sooner or later, if no other option existed.

Like I said, everybody cannot be made "happy". As long as 51% of the East pilots and 51% of the West pilots agree (not that ALPA would have "allowed" a Section 22 ratification vote) it would have been a done deal. Doesn't have to be what everybody wants, just what the majority of BOTH pilot groups are willing to vote for. Would it have been easy to accomplish, NO. Would it have been possible to accomplish, YES. Indeed, it would have been easier then than now, without all the vitriol, hate and discontent that has transpired since then. Not to mention the lost time (can't get that back) and the millions of dollars in legal fees (we should have spent it on Lottery tickets).

As difficult as it would be after all that's transpired to reach an agreement that a majority of BOTH pilot groups could agree on, we could still try.

I think we are making a big mistake to let a few lawyers make the call.

seajay

So in the LOA 93 arbitration. Was usapa ever going to admit that that do not get a pay raise? Is the company ever going to agree to pay the snap back? Lock both parties in a room for as long as you want. Never going to get to a solution or compromise.

Name another seniority arbitration that one side has bailed on the result.

there is nothing wrong with arbitrations. There is nothing wrong with ALPA merger policy it is the east that has failed to abide by their word. It is the east that is delaying this and costing us all money. nothing more.

 

[nic4us]

It is the east that is delaying this and costing us all money. nothing more.

Well here is a new twist that might either delay or expedite things just a bit.

silver's new job

hmmm. Maybe with her new found responsibilities she will send some of her cases to other judges. Wonder if Wake is available for a case with those who accused him of bias?

 

[Zone5]

There is nothing wrong with the arbitration process. Federal law compels its use in certain labor mergers where there is no other method that can bring two disparate groups together. In almost every situation of this kind you can expect one or both sides to be completely unrealistic and uncompromising, perhaps committed to a scorched earth policy rather than yielding a single issue to the other side. If ALPA’s merger policy was designed to keep sending the parties back to the negotiating table until they reach an agreement, then these two pilot groups would still not be together today either. The east would have likely continued to be intransigent in their quest to take active west pilots and place them below furloughed east pilots. That uncompromised position would only bring harm for west pilots since it would result in a total theft of their seniority status and 51% of the pilots would never go along with such a scheme. In that situation you would have a protracted stalemate which is exactly what Management and the Feds believe to be harmful to the long-term health and viability of the Company.

So you can hate sending money to lawyers all you want, but those legal processes are the best and only way to settle a dispute when one side refuses to heed any calls for reasonable negotiating in the quest to attain an agreement which is acceptable to both parties. Now if both sides are determined to reach an agreement and aren’t willing to pursue the scorched earth route, then I would agree that forcing the two sides to come to an agreement they can both defend as the best possible outcome, is the best solution. The lawyers can and should stay home if there are reasonable people committed to completing the task. Since there are those who prefer to play fast and loose with the laws and have no scruples about harming other people for their own gain, we will continue to have a bloated and ineffective judicial system that can barely keep up with all the malevolence found in the world. Arbitrations are intended to ease that burden, except when one one side is so full of themselves that they won't abide by binding aribtration either.

Yes there is, if ALPA merger policy had mandated negotiation (and nothing but) from the start, neither side would have had parachutes (arbitration) strapped to their backs and an agreement would have been reached. The process would have remained an internal Union matter, which the Courts are loath to meddle with.

OK, assume I'm wrong (I don't think I am), where would we be today? Where we are now, only not nearly as poor, still operating separately and probably much closer to an agreement. I mean really, years and years of negotiation and no ability to reach an agreement that 51% of the pilot groups would not support?

If that were the case we still wouldn't need lawyers, we would need therapists. We would need to keep changing the negotiating teams. It's human nature for individuals to "want to win" at all cost, to become entrenched, to loose sight of the big picture, to get tunnel vision and to abandon rational thinking. Some things are just too important to just give up on.

An EGO can be a terrible thing.

seajay

 

[Zone5]

Well here is a new twist that might either delay or expedite things just a bit.

silver's new job

hmmm. Maybe with her new found responsibilities she will send some of her cases to other judges. Wonder if Wake is available for a case with those who accused him of bias?

"Silver's elevation to Roll's former post was mandated by statute that requires the most senior judge who has not yet reached the age of 65 to be named chief judge in the district."

There's that seniority thing raising its ugly head again!

seajay

 

[767jetz]

Arbitration should NEVER be used to settle a seniority dispute between pilots, period! If it were not a "fallback" option, an agreement, amongst pilots, would have been reached, sooner or later, if no other option existed.
seajay

The problem with your theory was best described in the following quote:

In almost every situation of this kind you can expect one or both sides to be completely unrealistic and uncompromising, perhaps committed to a scorched earth policy rather than yielding a single issue to the other side.

There were no rational people at the table with (east) ALPA. There are no rational people at the helm of USAPA. Your own fellow pilots have already labeled you a "westie" for not bowing to their altar. And while I admire your determination to look at things from outside the box, I must also say shame on you for not speaking out during the negotiation and mediation phase, and rather waiting until after the fact. Perhaps you did speak out. But did you try to compel the more rational among your ranks to rise up and take control of your MEC?

That being said, lets make a few assumptions for a moment. Lets say that you convince the company and USAPA to go along with a mock bid using nic. Lets say the results are somewhat accurate and not biased by people "paper bidding" one way or another to influence the outcome. And lets say the results shows that the majority of east pilots are not harmed as they claim they would be. (harmed being defined as a pilot not reaching a position he would have absent the merger.) Throw in some pay protections, good work rules, and a decent raise as well as increased contributions to the defined contribution plan. How do you propose to get your union to post such results for the masses to see? How do you convince the union to then turn that information into a nic inclusive contract and put it out for a vote?

That is exactly the thing we have been saying since day #1. If you had taken nic, added some small extra protections for longevity and attrition, along with a decent contract, and maybe even pay protection for certain demographics (like captain pay for f/os within 5 or 10 years of retirement), and put it out for a vote in the beginning, USAPA may have had a shot. After years of gamesmanship, out of (nic)seniority furloughs, no shared growth aircraft, and threats from USAPA like the failed RICO case, the west if rightfully entrenched in their position of a nic contract or rot on LOA 93 forever.

 

[767jetz]

Yes there is, if ALPA merger policy had mandated negotiation (and nothing but) from the start, neither side would have had parachutes (arbitration) strapped to their backs and an agreement would have been reached.
seajay

I see what you're saying, although I disagree with your analogy. The arbitration is like taking the parachute away. The parachute if separate ops forever. Arbitration is like jumping from an airplane without a parachute and hoping you survive, because you agree to give up all control to a third party.

Remember, ALPA does not force you to go to arbitration until all else fails. It is a stopgap measure. It only happens if you refuse to negotiate and compromise.

 

[No Land Green]

No need for a "moc bid". Everyone on the East and West knows exactly where they are on the Nic List and what they can hold with the Nic List. One of the many reasons why ALPA was launched..........YAWN, next item of discussion........

 

[Zone5]

So in the LOA 93 arbitration. Was usapa ever going to admit that that do not get a pay raise? Is the company ever going to agree to pay the snap back? Lock both parties in a room for as long as you want. Never going to get to a solution or compromise.

Name another seniority arbitration that one side has bailed on the result.

there is nothing wrong with arbitrations. There is nothing wrong with ALPA merger policy it is the east that has failed to abide by their word. It is the east that is delaying this and costing us all money. nothing more.

In general, I agree. In a situation where a pilot group (employees) are at an impasse with an employer, arbitration is probably the only viable option.

Big difference when two employee groups with a common trade, have a disagreement about something as important as seniority. I just don't buy having ONE person unilaterally (OK, maybe if his initials were JC) make that decision for all of us.

Don't buy it, never will.

seajay

 

[fodase]

In general, I agree. In a situation where a pilot group (employees) are at an impasse with an employer, arbitration is probably the only viable option.

Big difference when two employee groups with a common trade, have a disagreement about something as important as seniority. I just don't buy having ONE person unilaterally (OK, maybe if his initials were JC) make that decision for all of us.

Don't buy it, never will.

seajay

Seajay,

Arbitration has worked in every single merger to this point, having a third party is the only way to settle issues when parties can't agree. Divorces, contract disputes etc., all need a third party to resolve. You are being naive if you think 2 pilot groups could ever agree to a seniority list.

 

[cactusboy53]

You know what would be really interesting to see?

Run a company wide permanent pilot bid using the NIC.

Granted it would just be for "instructional" purposes at this time, but assuming everybody "really" bid what they would if it were real, it would indeed be a tool for all concerned to get a better grip on what we are all talking about. Throw a few make believe caveats in there like equal pay parity, industry standard pay scale for all equipment types, remove all existing equipment and position freezes, if you make a location change you have to pay for it yourself, no company bought homes, pull the kids out of school?, have the spouse quit their job?, commit to a cross country commute?, ect, ect, ect. Really think through the ramifications and bid as you really would.

Would the East really be screwed as bad as they think they would be?

Would the West really gain what they think they want and deserve?

Would the company really be willing to pay for the resultant training?

Put your bid where your mouth is folks and lets just see where the chips would really fall!

seajay

TRANSLATION: I know, let's do something else to create further delay (so as to dodge and obfuscate the Nicolau Award). We could call this the "Rice-Blue Ribbon-Wye River-Jack-with-the-AWA-pilots-further-NICDOA-Mock-Bid".....or you could all do what is legally, morally & ethically right.....

Standby, I'm holding my breath....

 

[AvgJoe]

Seajay,

Arbitration has worked in every single merger to this point, having a third party is the only way to settle issues when parties can't agree. Divorces, contract disputes etc., all need a third party to resolve. You are being naive if you think 2 pilot groups could ever agree to a seniority list.

No, Seajay's right on this one. Time, and the fact that there's a carrot at the end (pay raise with new contract) would have eventually resulted in an agreement. The rank and file would have eventually demanded it. Now we're just sitting around waiting for the DJ to be settled.

 

[CallawayGolf]

No, Seajay's right on this one. Time, and the fact that there's a carrot at the end (pay raise with new contract) would have eventually resulted in an agreement. The rank and file would have eventually demanded it. Now we're just sitting around waiting for the DJ to be settled.

That "carrot" has already been there for three years. All that has to be done to resolve this mess is for USAPA to agree with Management that section 22 is closed and the unmodified NIC is the list for the JCBA. The DJ goes away and any threat of a DFR goes away. Apparently the east pilots have no interest in getting a new contract or better pay so your claim was already false before you began typing your reply. It has probably been said here a thousand times, but the NIC was already a compromise position and the west didn't get what they wanted either. So now it's the east's turn to accept reality, make a move off of DOH, put the seniority dispute to rest and move forward on getting a JCBA. The east's stranglehold over USAPA is the only barrier to a full and complete resolution.

 

[fodase]

No, Seajay's right on this one. Time, and the fact that there's a carrot at the end (pay raise with new contract) would have eventually resulted in an agreement. The rank and file would have eventually demanded it. Now we're just sitting around waiting for the DJ to be settled.

Nah, you are waiting for a merge or bankruptcy, the DJ just like the addington won't settle a thing. Management has the perfect situation to use as an excuse for never giving us a raise.