US Pilots Labor Discussion

[CallawayGolf]

I have read them. The rule of law will prevail, just as it has been.

My first instinct is to agree with you that the rule of law will ultimately prevail – although I would guess we have 180-degree opposite view of what the rule of law is in this situation. However, I don’t think the rule of law can always be counted on to prevail. Human beings are fallible and judges don’t always get it right. In far too many cases there is a split decision with only one vote separating the “rule of law” from a very different outcome. The true measure of the rule of law is when there is a unanimous verdict from unbiased justices who hold the law to be more important than their own personal agendas and personal preferences. I would say that Wake, Bybee and Silver are more persuaded by the rule of law than Tashima and Graber have been, but I would suspect you to disagree. So this issue goes on regardless of personal opinions or even a guarantee that the rule of law will ultimately be upheld.

 

[aquagreen73s]

We shall see.........


If you are so sure of yourself, then why does it irk you when I say the rule of law will prevail?

I don't know how to answer that without sounding offensive, so I'll just say it. I can't believe there's professional pilots as dumb as you.

 

[doh nogo]

.Truth be told, the most dangerous place for union work is now INSIDE the USAPA office.

Basing a day to day union decision on "whether the West reps like it or not" is very telling on your part. I hope you never attain a position of real responsibility where you could harm us all with your bias.

RR

A post that I can actually agree with. I thought the same thing, but figured mentioning the "anything the west wants must be bad" decision making would only get the usual partisan response. Thanks for showing a thread of pragmatism.

Interesting how BlackSwan and Hate jump on you for daring to say something against USAPA's actions, no matter how reasonable the criticism. I would expect more attacks, or even PM's telling you to keep your comments to yourself, much the same way JetJok1 was treated after stating that he was re-considering his position about USAPA.

It's very telling.

 

[CallawayGolf]

They most certainly will go along with a non-NIC proposal for section 22, if Judge Silver gives them a liability pass. Which of course, the company hopes she doesn't, because then they would have to quit stalling the JCBA process.

Regardless, as I have stated several times before and you don't address, section 22 has virtually NOTHING to do with the rest of the JCBA! At this point in time, if the company truly wanted to complete negotiations (everything except section 22), they would have by now. They have chosen to stonewall the negotiations, for obvious financial reasons, as you point out and everyone knows, especially the company.

Think of section 22 as the signature on the picture, no reason not to finish the rest of the painting first.

seajay

I disagree. The financial sections are the most volatile in terms of external forces such as the economy, consumer demand and confidence, competitive threats to business operations, and the Company’s own financial position. For both sides, those ought to be the last sections they would want to close on because the financial variables out of the control of either party are so vast that a good deal today may be disastrous 2,3 or 10 years from now when a TA is finally ready for ratification. First an agreement needs to made on the contentious issue of section 22 (which could still take many years to resolve based on the court system). Once that is out of the way, the negotiations can make real and sustained progress towards a new JCBA. Short of that, what’s the point or value of negotiating other sections since USAPA clearly doesn’t want a contract anyway?

 

[Zone5]

In the abstract, so long as there's no bump/no flush, that's true. But what you uSAPians consistently ignore is the fact that the company can be held liable for agreeing to a contract term with the union, when that term is a DFR breach. That's what the declaratory action is all about. You need to read the transcripts. For once you need to start thinking for yourselves.

Wrong. Every other section (could be agreed to) of the JCBA, I suppose it's possible that some section other than 22 could end up being the subject of a DFR. After all this is America and anybody can sue anyone, for damn near anything, if they so desire.

Going forward, a contract term is not a DFR-II until a court says it is, as the SCOTUS has concurred, a DFR-II cannot even be filed until there is a RATIFIED JCBA. Only after that process is completed and a non-NIC ratified contract, taken as a whole, can be proven to have "harmed" the West, could a finding of "collusion" against the company, even be sought.

You are correct though, at this point, it is all about the DJ ruling from Judge Silver. If she gives the company a "free get out of liability pass" the company is going to be out of excuses for not completing negotiations for a JCBA which would then be put out for a ratification vote. A contract is not a DFR-II, NIC or not, just because anyone other than a court thinks so.

By the way, I have read the DJ transcript and I can assure you that I do think for myself. I also think that Judge Silver will rule in such a manner as to remove any ability of the company to continue stalling the JCBA process over the seniority issue and soon.

seajay

 

[Zone5]

I disagree. The financial sections are the most volatile in terms of external forces such as the economy, consumer demand and confidence, competitive threats to business operations, and the Company’s own financial position. For both sides, those ought to be the last sections they would want to close on because the financial variables out of the control of either party are so vast that a good deal today may be disastrous 2,3 or 10 years from now when a TA is finally ready for ratification. First an agreement needs to made on the contentious issue of section 22 (which could still take many years to resolve based on the court system). Once that is out of the way, the negotiations can make real and sustained progress towards a new JCBA. Short of that, what’s the point or value of negotiating other sections since USAPA clearly doesn’t want a contract anyway?

What? Contentious or not, I say again, section 22 is a NO COST factor to the company. And yes, after a JCBA is ratified, NIC or not, there can be and there very well likely will be a DRF-II, DFR-III, DFR-IV..........filed. If it's the NIC the East will DFR it, if it's anything else, the West will. It goes with the territory, you can't make everybody happy and the collective bargaining process is designed to accommodate those who might not agree with ANY JCBA, here or at any other airline. That process, as we all well know, is costly and lengthly. If those who feel aggrieved, are so motivated, they are free after ratification, to go for it. In the mean time, the contract would stand and the company would be paying more to fly the jets. That's why the company has continued to use section 22 as an excuse for not negotiating an otherwise ratifiable JCBA. That's also why Judge Silver's ruling on the DJ is not something the company really wants, once it comes down, in any way, shape or form, "Dougie" will be out of excuses. You've got the cart before the horse, that's why ALPA changed the process to separate seniority from the rest of the JCBA and in our case, even more so, because the whole DFR thing can't even move forward until there is a ratified JCBA, with or without the NIC.

The myriad of financially relevant terms contained in any JCBA are always subject to becoming a better deal for the pilots and a worse deal for the company (and vice versa) going forward. It's called a business risk and that's what the company and the union are in the business of taking. That's why contracts are for a specific number of years and why companies declare bankruptcy and why they "re-open" contracts with LOA's (when the sky is falling and only the employees can save the day). Interestingly however, that contracts never seem to get "re-opened" by the employees when things are suddenly going much "better" for the company than anticipated.

seajay

 

[luvthe9]

I don't know how to answer that without sounding offensive, so I'll just say it. I can't believe there's professional pilots as dumb as you.

How can you say that? Koontz has managed to get his friends to part with 2 million for an unripe case. How did so many buy the damage issue when there was yet to be damage? They listen to his amateur advice every day, and get routinely stung. That is how it happens.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Well if it's Nic, at least you guys get to fund the dfr for a change. You'll love it. The first guy or gal to retire with no lawsuit on the books should get some kind of prize.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

How can you say that? Koontz has managed to get his friends to part with 2 million for an unripe case. How did so many buy the damage issue when there was yet to be damage? They listen to his amateur advice every day, and get routinely stung. That is how it happens.

We all knew from day 1 what we were getting into. We knew it may not be ripe, but we also knew we may get stung later by missing our sol, which incidently would make us sol, the other sol. Personally, for me it's about right and wrong. I'll continue funding whatever I have to.

You have your convictions on the east, and we have our convictions. This isn't over yet for anyone, and likely won't be for quite some time. Who's right? Who's wrong? Who's in the right? Who's in the wrong? Who knows. Time will tell.

 

[Zone5]

Well if it's Nic, at least you guys get to fund the dfr for a change. You'll love it. The first guy or gal to retire with no lawsuit on the books should get some kind of prize.

Now that's funny! Really!

True enough, I also think if it does somehow turn out to be the NIC, that there would be enough sufficiently pissed off Easties, to file a DFR action. After all there are more of them to spread the cost and they would have some extra money in their pockets.

seajay

 

[No Land Green]

I don't know how to answer that without sounding offensive, so I'll just say it. I can't believe there's professional pilots as dumb as you.

You really do crack me up. You are a VERY ANGRY person. Your post above reeks of ANGER. Amazing, I agree that the rule of law will prevail and that angers you. So far the rule of law has prevailed and will continue to......

 

[CallawayGolf]

What? Contentious or not, I say again, section 22 is a NO COST factor to the company. And yes, after a JCBA is ratified, NIC or not, there can be and there very well likely will be a DRF-II, DFR-III, DFR-IV..........filed. If it's the NIC the East will DFR it, if it's anything else, the West will. It goes with the territory, you can't make everybody happy and the collective bargaining process is designed to accommodate those who might not agree with ANY JCBA, here or at any other airline. That process, as we all well know, is costly and lengthly. If those who feel aggrieved, are so motivated, they are free after ratification, to go for it. In the mean time, the contract would stand and the company would be paying more to fly the jets. That's why the company has continued to use section 22 as an excuse for not negotiating an otherwise ratifiable JCBA. That's also why Judge Silver's ruling on the DJ is not something the company really wants, once it comes down, in any way, shape or form, "Dougie" will be out of excuses. You've got the cart before the horse, that's why ALPA changed the process to separate seniority from the rest of the JCBA and in our case, even more so, because the whole DFR thing can't even move forward until there is a ratified JCBA, with or without the NIC.

The myriad of financially relevant terms contained in any JCBA are always subject to becoming a better deal for the pilots and a worse deal for the company (and vice versa) going forward. It's called a business risk and that's what the company and the union are in the business of taking. That's why contracts are for a specific number of years and why companies declare bankruptcy and why they "re-open" contracts with LOA's (when the sky is falling and only the employees can save the day). Interestingly however, that contracts never seem to get "re-opened" by the employees when things are suddenly going much "better" for the company than anticipated.

seajay

Just because you say section 22 is not a cost factor to the Company doesn't mean it's true. Exposure to litigation risk for breach of contract and collusion is substantial. You can hold your breath and say it isn’t so, but no one at the Company believes your opinion is correct. However, even if you were correct, what leverage does USAPA have to bring Management to the table? So far Management doesn’t seem to be threatened in any way by USAPA or the NMB with regards to their pace of negotiations –and they shouldn’t be since USAPA is 100% to blame for the lack of a JCBA.

The east has zero chance of winning a DFR on the use of the NIC in a JCBA. Even if ALPA or USAPA had just accepted it as-is, there would be no basis for it since it was the result of an agreed upon SLI process and was resolved by a neutral 3rd-party arbitration board. Now that USAPA has spent 3+ years fighting it and will clearly only accept it under court-order once all appeals have been exhausted, how can a DFR claim be made? What could USAPA do differently to avoid the NIC than all they have done already. No DFR. That’s a straw man argument if there ever was one.

Management isn’t looking for excuses. They filed the DJ to move the process forward. They want this mess cleaned up as much as anyone, but USAPA isn’t acting on logic, reason or in the best interest of its constituents so Management had to go with a legal process to get the JCBA negotiations back on track. I didn’t put the cart before the horse; ALPA and Management were working effectively on the JCBA until the east pilots threw a tantrum and bailed out of any attempt to put an agreement out for ratification. ALPA did learn from the unscrupulous way the east handled this and improved their SLI process as a result – I do agree with you there.

You seem to be comparing the standard JCBA/CBA process to the one facing USAPA and Management. There is no equivalency between standard processes and this situation. How many CBA negotiations go to court on two separate lawsuits brought against the CBA in order to resolve the legal question concerning one of the contract sections before the contract is in place? This isn’t normal because USAPA isn’t normal, rational or operating in the same plane of reality as everyone else. Trying to have an intelligent conversation with USAPA is like trying to explain E=MC2 to an earthworm. USAPA has been the CBA for 1036 days. How many of those have they not been subject to some legal action from or against their own constituents? Whatever that number is, it is not normal for any organization to be that litigious as a normal course of business. USAPA is the problem, not the west, not Management, and not the boogy man.

 

[767jetz]

jetzz,

DOH would not make you a 757 Captain overnight. There would be conditions and restrictions that would prevent that. I have many friends at UAL and wish you all the very best. I realize that this is your first merger and this will change your outlook in the future.

Hate

Actually it would. I'm already based in NY, so I can't be C&R'd out of NY. I would instantly have 757 captain seniority. Yes, no bump no flush. But as soon as a bid opens it would be mine. As well as all the other pilots in my seniority range. Their captains would not only move backward for a long time, but would also become furlough fodder. But then again, you think that separate ops forever is a solution. No surprise you don't get it. Like I said, DOH won't happen at UA.

C&R's are useless when you get the seniority so wrong.

 

[767jetz]

Now that's funny! Really!

True enough, I also think if it does somehow turn out to be the NIC, that there would be enough sufficiently pissed off Easties, to file a DFR action. After all there are more of them to spread the cost and they would have some extra money in their pockets.

seajay

A DFR suit from the east is a far different animal than a DFR suit from the west. What would the east argument be? That the union didn't represent them because they followed the law and followed the result of binding arbitration? If Nic does go forward, lets say after a new representational election and new leadership, or just through court direction or the company standing firm, someone on the east might file a case, but will have little merit and will doubtfully get to a jury verdict.

 

[767jetz]

ALPA did learn from the unscrupulous way the east handled this and improved their SLI process as a result –

100% correct. You hit the nail on the head. Many of the posters here claim it was changed to benefit UA, which is a complete crock. The east behavior, reneging on agreements, unscrupulous negotiating, tantrums and the like were the reason.