And we all know how "good" USAPA is at negotiating.
ual pilots have been negotiating since 2006. How are you doing now at ual. For your assistance I have provided part of your negotiating q and a that is recent and includes the cal pilots. What is taking you gentlemen so long, maybe Usairways pilots can learn from your six plus years of failure.
ual negotiating recent update;;
"""As of December 17 our contract is now in arbitration, correct? I have heard that US Airways/America West went to arbitration, and 5 years later they still do not have a contract. I was told that their contract was arbitrated expeditiously but they decertified the union when the seniority lists were not merged to the satisfaction of the pilots. Did Delta/Northwest have to go to arbitration for either a contract or seniority lists? What length of time would be considered typical to have a contract in arbitration? Is our contract arbitration being expedited? After the mediator reaches his conclusion, are the pilots given an opportunity to vote on it, or is our only recourse to strike? When would we be released to go on a strike?
Answer: Our contract negotiations are not in arbitration. On December 17 we requested the services of the National Mediation Board (NMB) per the Railway Labor Act (RLA). A mediator has been assigned to our negotiations, but his role is that of a mediator, not an arbitrator.
From the NMB web site:
As provided for in the RLA, the National Mediation Board (NMB) is responsible for providing mediation services to help the parties reach a settlement should the parties fail to reach an agreement during direct negotiations. If the parties are unable to reach a voluntary agreement to establish or modify a collective bargaining agreement, either party may apply for the mediation services of the NMB. Once mediation is invoked, the NMB conducts mediation meetings until an agreement is reached or until the NMB concludes no agreement can be reached despite its best mediatory efforts. If the NMB reaches this conclusion, it urges both sides to resolve their dispute through binding arbitration. Upon rejection of the proffer of arbitration by either party, the NMB releases the parties into a 30-day cooling off period. During the cooling off period, neither side can alter the status quo. At the end of 30 days, the parties either reach an agreement or engage in self help.
In reality, binding arbitration is almost never accepted by the parties to airline contract negotiations.
In the past, the length of time that airlines have remained in negotiations has depended on a host of complicated factors. To understand and appreciate the complexity of the process, some knowledge of the history of the RLA is required. It was enacted by the Congress in 1926 in an effort to end the constant labor strife in the railway industry, and the RLA's primary purpose is to minimize disruptions to the nation's commerce by making it very difficult for transportation unions to go on strike. But, recognizing that some method of dispute resolution is necessary, the RLA set up a framework for negotiating disputes (e.g. contract negotiations). That is the framework that we must follow, but it is the reason that, so often, contract negotiations drag on for years. In contrast, countries that are more labor-union-friendly than the United States do permit legal strikes to occur much more easily, and union members in those countries generally have relatively more lucrative contracts as a result.
In our specific case, however, it doesn't necessarily mean that our negotiations will drag out for years. There is a lot of incentive on both sides to expeditiously negotiate a new contract. Our management has the positive example of the success of Delta Airlines and the negative example of the mess at US Airways as signposts. We will continue to negotiate per the procedures specified above, but we don't know how long the process will take, and our intent is to move the process along as expeditiously as possible.
It's the NMB that has the legal authority to release the parties into a 30-day cooling off period. Their decision to do so is done in accordance with the RLA, of which its primary purpose is to minimize disruptions to commerce.
The NMB's web site has a lot of very good information:
http://www.nmb.gov/mediation/faq-mediation.html
As far as US Airways is concerned: Under the ALPA merger policy in effect at the time, the seniority list integration (SLI) process, which does call for binding arbitration if necessary, took place prior to negotiating a new contract. The SLI went to arbitration, but many of the former US Airways pilots were unhappy with the arbitrator's integrated seniority list award, so they successfully decertified ALPA, replacing it with an in-house union, USAPA, with a new union constitution that mandated merger of the seniority lists based on date of hire. The new union re-merged the seniority lists, but before the new consolidated seniority list was presented to US Airways, the America West pilots sued the new union in federal court, alleging breach of the duty of fair representation (DFR) under federal labor law. A jury trial was held in Arizona Federal District Court. The jury held for the America West pilots and against the new union. Notwithstanding the jury trial and verdict, the Ninth Circuit dismissed for "lack of ripeness", holding, in effect, that the case was premature because the former America West pilots had yet to be harmed by the imposition of the new "date-of-hire" seniority list. And so it continues to drag on. Till all this has been resolved in the courts, the US Airways pilots have not been able to negotiate a new contract, and the former America West pilots and the former US Airways pilots continue to operate as separate groups with separate contracts.
As a result of the US Airways SLI, ALPA merger policy was changed to include longevity as one of the factors to be taken into consideration, and SLIs now do not take place till AFTER a new contract has been negotiated to preclude giving up contractual improvements, including pay.
