US Pilots Labor Thread 1/21 to 1/27

[john john]

I hope all unions on the property has learned a lesson with MDA/metrojet/express carriers.
Management whipsawing tactic and the union selling out to kept them on the property at any cost

 

[cubfan]

Even if the MDA list is flawed. There will be NO "re-arbitration". George Nicalau maintains jurisdiction over the list. This is spelled out in no uncertain terms. If a federal court tell him the list was flawed, and in fact these (fill in the blank) number of pilots were affected, George Nicalau would slot them in in the different order. Hardly the windfall you're hoping for.

You are not holding the lynch pin to a certified DOH ruling from another Arbitrator!!

Metro,
Let me start off by saying, it's not a MDA list but an east list. When the east list is considered flawed, my gut take is it will go back to Mr. Nic because he did the arbitration. How he handles it, or re-orders it is left to be seen. I'm not sure anyone thinks that it's a lynch pin to a whole different decision by him. (slam dunk for DOH) He will be forced to place MDA pilots further up the list, how much, how many, what do I do with pilot A senior to B, A doesn't go to MDA, B does, B can't go ahead of B on east list, do I move them both? He will have his hands full. Then that will be the NIC. Now back to the other court to find out if the new NIC list will be implimented or not. I'm sure some on the west would not be pleased, they would feel they got screwed, but if those on the west feel they want the NIC award because it was an agreed upon process by all, then they would have to accept the new Nic with open arms.

 

[Metroyet]

Metro,
L, but if those on the west feel they want the NIC award because it was an agreed upon process by all, then they would have to accept the new Nic with open arms.

IF the East list is in fact flawed, I'll be the first one to tell you I'm all for the proper re-ordering of those pilots...within the framework already established by Nic. It's the right thing to do. I would accept that with open arms.

However fighting for a "re-arbitration" in the hopes of getting DOH will be fought every step of the way and frankly I'm not interested in another front on this war.

 

[nic4us]

I still do not get this MDA thing.

If you were required to be furloughed from mainline to work at MDA then you would still have a mainline seniority number and have been placed on the Nic accordingly.

If you were a CEL pilot and never worked mainline, you are still included in the Nic, in opposition to the West argument at the time.

Considered active or furloughed does not matter, both groups had their number, and that number was included in the Nic.

Everyone is assuming that since Nic put Odell as the last active pilot that if you consider MDA and CEL as active they will automatically jump somewhere ahead of Odell. This reasoning is flawed. Their placement on the Nic is a result of many considerations, for one it was a compromise between the East desire to have them (CEL) included in the list in the first place and the West desire to have active pilots junior to Odell as furlough protection. So go ahead and consider MDA as active, active pilots junior to Odell placed on the list according to their original AAA MDA number.

This is all discussed in the award and is a result of compromise in the arbitration.

So in a nutshell, even if they are/were considered active it should not effect their placement on the Nic.

If this went back to Nicolau over this issue, I do not feel he would change the list significantly or at all, but I am certain the West would honor his opinion and accept the reordered list and seek its implementation.

 

[Crzipilot]

Does that also mean, that if a Judge issues a ruling that a newly voted in Union does not have to adhere to the merger policies of the old Union, and can determine how seniority lists will be combined within it's own bylaws. Combined with the fact that the previous Unions policies and procedures were never fully completed as set forth in it's agreement with management, will the west also seek to implement the new list decided upon by the new union? :jerry: 🙂

 

[NiceLandingCaptain]

Does that also mean, that if a Judge issues a ruling that a newly voted in Union does not have to adhere to the merger policies of the old Union, and can determine how seniority lists will be combined within it's own bylaws. Combined with the fact that the previous Unions policies and procedures were never fully completed as set forth in it's agreement with management, will the west also seek to implement the new list decided upon by the new union? :jerry: 🙂

The "if" in that question is a pretty big one. Are you indicating that you will abide by the Judges decision no matter what it is?

But before we get too far into this challenge of rhetorical questions, allow me to pose a real one: has there ever been a seniority arbitration that has been summarily rejected by any court in the land?

Answer that question, and you might just get a clue as to how things will likely transpire in Judge Wake's court.

 

[des nudo]

Does that also mean, that if a Judge issues a ruling that a newly voted in Union does not have to adhere to the merger policies of the old Union, and can determine how seniority lists will be combined within it's own bylaws. Combined with the fact that the previous Unions policies and procedures were never fully completed as set forth in it's agreement with management, will the west also seek to implement the new list decided upon by the new union? :jerry: 🙂

I'll take a stab at that, mate. I'd guess no AWA pilot will complain about ANY rearranging of the NIC..as long as it all happens BENEATH Dave O'Dell. Once they have all their side firmly placed above the East pilots via the NIC...they don't care about it afterwards.

Mark my words.

Unfortunately for the most enraged west pilots, ( you know who you are) the "MDA Effect" will materially change the East list, which will materially affect the Nic, and the litigation regarding USAPA and it's CBL's regarding DOH principle's will have a very real bearing on your gift from George Nicolau. Kinda wish I was still there to see this one play out.

Cheers

 

[tazz]

I guess some people just have reading comprehension problems, possibly the reason for the position they are in currently?


So tazz.......

Have you stopped beating your wife/Girlfriend/Significant Other?????

A simple, YES or NO answer will suffice.

Geeeze, talk about a 6th grade mentality...

Clever. Childish, but clever. Twisting words and semantics. You guys are really good at that. Mine, however is a straightforward question. Yes or no WILL suffice.

 

[nic4us]

Does that also mean, that if a Judge issues a ruling that a newly voted in Union does not have to adhere to the merger policies of the old Union, and can determine how seniority lists will be combined within it's own bylaws. Combined with the fact that the previous Unions policies and procedures were never fully completed as set forth in it's agreement with management, will the west also seek to implement the new list decided upon by the new union? :jerry: 🙂

You bring up separate issues.

The lists were combined prior to the new union. Not during or as yet undecided.

The questions would be, does a new union inherit the contractual obligations of its predicessor?

Can a potential union campaign on the promise that if elected it will reorder the list to the benefit of a clearly disgruntled majority without fulfilling its obligation of DFR to the minority?

However, if a judge decides that a new union can pick and choose which contracts it inherits and which it does not, harming a minority is okay for the greater labor peace, and DOH is a sacred union principle contray to federal law and almost all precedent in pilot seniority integration.

Then yes, the West will live with it, but as Seham is so good at, first expect an appeal.

 

[tazz]

Tazz, Your questions are irrelevant to the propriety of ALPA and company actions.

How the pilots were treated only determines how they were treated, not how ALPA and the company were legally obligated. You may as well ask if the pilots were put in jail. Their experience "enlightens" nothing absent an analysis with respect to the relevant rules.

What rule existed that the so-called MDA pilots were legally flying under the USAir certificate? The certificate...

My questions ARE relevant. I am willing to bet, however, that if our argument was decided by an arbitrator and it didn't agree with your world view that you would diregard it anyway.

Our bantering is a colossal waste of time. Judges" decisions will come soon enough. I am looking forward to that time.

 

[Crzipilot]

Clever. Childish, but clever. Twisting words and semantics. You guys are really good at that. Mine, however is a straightforward question. Yes or no WILL suffice.

Now Taz, my question was as straight forward as well. A simple yes or no WILL suffice also. Obviously, if you know how to frame a question you will get the answer that you want. As you have done with your questions. Unfortunately if the solutions or explanation was as easy as a yes or no question, there wouldn't be the problems we have. But it is sufficient to say, the information you are requesting can not be answered by a yes or no answer, and in fact would require you to go through a number of years of debates on this board as well as others, to find the answer your looking for.

 

[des nudo]

Now Taz, my question was as straight forward as well. A simple yes or no WILL suffice also. Obviously, if you know how to frame a question you will get the answer that you want. As you have done with your questions. Unfortunately if the solutions or explanation was as easy as a yes or no question, there wouldn't be the problems we have. But it is sufficient to say, the information you are requesting can not be answered by a yes or no answer, and in fact would require you to go through a number of years of debates on this board as well as others, to find the answer your looking for.

Don't bother with rational talk with Tazz, mate...no possible.

Lets put it in a scenario he may relate to a little better, and use his logic as well:

So, Tazz,

Some "senior" west pilots are furloughed and off the property out of seniority compared to new-hires out East.

Question:

Did they get a fair shake from the company? Was this handled correctly in your opinion? Are they being treated "fairly" in your astute opinion?

As "Phoenix" has already attempted to explain to you, what has "happened" does not make it "legal"...or "proper"....and can be litigated about.

No bother about a response...I'm just making a point. I don't care a twit what you think.


One more thing: If we should merge with ABC airlines next week, your westie boys are off the property, right? And our Eastie "new-hires" are BRINGING JOBS TO THE NEW MERGER...your furloughed westies go to the bottom now, right?

 

[Crzipilot]

Well I happened to be in a group that was definitely sought after by the USAPA people when the were first getting moving. I do not remember once, a single person stating to me that if they were elected in, they would reorder the list to DOH. Now I do remember the terms, we would be able to redo the seniority integration to something that is actually fair to both sides.

Obviously, what is fair is a matter of perspective I suppose.

Also, while "A List" was constructed, there never was a list implemented.
As you read section 22 of the East contract it states what the seniority list is. See ???

3. The Pilots' System Seniority List, as established by the Award of
Arbitrator S. Kagel dated October 31, 1988, shall constitute the official Pilots' System Seniority List.

So as there isn't anything else stating that it has changed. I guess the ALPA merger policy never got implemented. It did get close, as far as going through it's process and having an arbitrator decide a list for ALPA merger policy, but then everything stopped.

So then ALPA gets voted out. Not just by one side, but strangely, for the whole airline (that single carrier vote) So did their merger policy.

Now the DFR thing. As you stated "Can a potential union campaign on the promise that if elected it will reorder the list to the benefit of a clearly disgruntled majority without fulfilling its obligation of DFR to the minority?"

I would imagine a union can campaign on almost any issue, Just as a representative can campaign on any issue. If they are successful with regards to that issue, who knows.

I would guess though, that one has to determine and define just what a union's DFR obligations are. I thought I believed, at least in contract enforcement, it simply meant that it treated each member the same, in equal situations regardless. I.E. It couldn't decide to defend one pilots job over a violation, and not anothers. However, if the union had NEVER defended a pilots job over his own violation, the union could not be forced to defend ANY pilot over violations.

Very well could be wrong here, but if USAPA's merger policy does not result in a west pilot losing his seat, or position, (once the airlines are combined, since they are not now, and the majority of the pull down have been on the west side) How is that unfairly representing the west pilots? If the west pilots are able to capture there own attrition, as well as just by the shear numbers, a portion of the east attrition, how have the been unfairly represented?

 

[BoeingBoy]

Very well could be wrong here, but if USAPA's merger policy does not result in a west pilot losing his seat, or position, (once the airlines are combined, since they are not now, and the majority of the pull down have been on the west side) How is that unfairly representing the west pilots? If the west pilots are able to capture there own attrition, as well as just by the shear numbers, a portion of the east attrition, how have the been unfairly represented?

And you could very well be wrong....

It is part and parcel of Section 24 that the company can award vacancies and displace pilots from the same job (base/equip/seat) at the same time. That means that a PHX vacancy could be awarded to an East pilot at the same time a West pilot was displaced from that same job - ergo a West pilot was replaced by an East pilot.

The conditions and restrictions that the East is so proud of have several of those loopholes. We can discuss it all you want - just bring facts and not "well, I was told...".

Jim

 

[fodase]

You easties are so blind it's incredible. I just had the pleasure of speaking with a in east 320 captain, while discussing the Nic. he informs me that the arbitration should have been done just like the dal/nwa ( i.e. 3 arbitrators) and that the outcome would have been much better. I laughed and asked if he had seen the dal/nwa list, he informed me he had not but that it was much better handled. So I pull out my laptop and show him the dal/nwa results and how they are IDENTICAL to awa/us, he was floored he had no idea that it had gone relative position, just like awa/us. It blows my mind, grown man, smart, capable of graduating a military academy, yet so delusional that can't even coprehend a simple document because it doesn't agree with his version of the world.