US Pilots Labor Thread 5/13-19--NO PERSONAL REMARKS

[traderjake]

Are you delusional? Favored the East.... Yeah right!

The Nic did favor the East in one aspect.

The top 517 positions going to the East made A330 and 767 F/O and IRO positions senior to A320 and 737 Captains.

Only the wide body Captain positions should have been at the top.

The wide body F/Os and IROs should have been slotted after the Group 2 Captains.

 

[EastUS]

Are you delusional? Favored the East.... Yeah right!
Hence the reason they are or have tried ad nausium to
Avoid said East windfall to protect YOU guys from the NIC.
If it sound/looks/walks like a duck......

Indeed. This has gotten far past just too strange to even believe of late.....Even by my standards

 

[Eastisleast]

East pilots repeat after me....The Nic is it...The Nic is it. Ya we will all get our vote on the contract, i'm not just going to vote on the first thing that comes out just because I think it will secure the nic award. I will vote yes when we get a contract that is best for all of US...but its time to face it, the nic will be in it. Lets stop throwing our money at lawyers to fight each other and combine our resources at the company. We so need to get past this....the NIC is it people.....we gotta move on.

 

[WCT]

With this failed Economy and such, I guess you USAPA Easties would rather appeal to nowhere, or get a Fair, and decent contract????? Retirement done, nothing!!
My guess is fail to appeal, appeal to no appeal, and just shut the doors down, right??!!
Think of all the employees jobs, not your own, that will affect your decsion???
Think of your families!!! :angry: .
Oh Wait, you don't care, right???!!
This has gone to far.
Please, whether you like Parker of Kirby, think of your futures RIGHT NOW!!
There won't be ONE! OR anyother Pilot job in the industry for YOU!!
DO the RIGHT THING for ALL OF US, and JUST except the Courts decision, PLEASE!!!
Make US Airways OUR US Airways!

 

[A320 Driver]

The Nic did favor the East in one aspect.

The top 517 positions going to the East made A330 and 767 F/O and IRO positions senior to A320 and 737 Captains.

Only the wide body Captain positions should have been at the top.

The wide body F/Os and IROs should have been slotted after the Group 2 Captains.

Junior A330 Captain was about 813 or so on the East seniority list. Nic didn't protect his slot. On the US AIr/Shuttle integration, Nic protected ALL widebody Captains.

With the change in the age 60 rule, other than the structure of the list, there are NO protected slots.


A320 Driver B)

 

[nic4us]

Nic,

Are you delusional? Favored the East.... Yeah right!
Hence the reason they are or have tried ad nausium to
Avoid said East windfall to protect YOU guys from the NIC.
If it sound/looks/walks like a duck......

FA

I did not say east windfall. I said "fair and equitable" and SLIGHTLY favored east. For instance, when slotting started, Nic picked the appropriate east pilot then put the West pilot behind them. The best example, Dave Odell ( west junior guy) was placed behind, not in front of Coello ( east junior guy). Slightly favoring east. The top 517 are east, fair enough, as east brought widebodies, but again slightly favoring east thru the remainder of the list.

If it sounds/looks/walks like a duck.....if it is short/waddles/quacks....it might be a duck or it might be the new USAPA president.

 

[necigrad]

SO, again from a non pilot perespective, let's look at the Nicolau award again. IS it fair to say that the East think it favors the West and that the West think it favors the East? If THAT'S accurate, then I've always heard that the best compromises leave neither side happy.

 

[28L_or_10R?]

The pilots and the company should realize that there should be two separate pilot groups under different unions and contracts. Never the two shall meet. I would not want to be a passenger on an aircraft the day after the groups come together and have a west and east pilot at the controls. They would be giving each other the finger and arguing about fair and unfair well before they got to 10,000 feet. Like ill-behaved cats that keep fighting, they need to be put in separate rooms.

 

[Tiger 1050]

The pilots and the company should realize that there should be two separate pilot groups under different unions and contracts. Never the two shall meet. I would not want to be a passenger on an aircraft the day after the groups come together and have a west and east pilot at the controls. They would be giving each other the finger and arguing about fair and unfair well before they got to 10,000 feet. Like ill-behaved cats that keep fighting, they need to be put in separate rooms.

GMAFB! The easties are the only ones crying that tune. Most likely you only see limited mixing of crews for a few years. And I for one do not believe that this board represents the vast majority of professional pilots on both sides of the great divide. It will be a non issue. The east just wants you to believe otherwise. It promotes their separate operations scheme. And that is only to get out of their obligation. Sad...

 

[pilotn79]

There are no fences with the nic...so an east pilot can have the next capt bid in PHX
Assuming some east captains will want to leave lovely, inexpensive, "mild" wintered, northeast crew bases. Only to go to sunny, warm, friendly neighbored, yearround vacation spot PHX for a crew base......

That way you could be closer to USAPA's new headquaters and US Airways largest base.

 

[Poug Darker]

LAS closing within 2 years.
PHX closing within 5.
Both bases 'redundant' with LAX and SFO.
PHL moving international to IAD.
THEN we'll be 'united'.

 

[usabusdriver]

I agree to the extent that had Nicolau been contained in a CBA, by either ALPA or USAPA, that the plaintiffs would have had either a much harder or impossible task in prevailing in a DFR action.

Man that sounds confusing...

hp_fa,

I believe that you transposed the argument in the above quote.

If the Nicolau award had been memorialized in a CBA then the plaintiffs would have had a much easier or guaranteed DFR action, or conversely that USAPA would have a much harder or impossible task in defending a DFR action.

The argument in the Addington case was that since there had not been a ratified CBA containing the Nicolau award it was just a proposal and could be modified to comply with the new representatives C&BLs.

In the Addington case the judge ruled on the law applicable to the facts in the case, through the jury instructions, that the binding seniority arbitration process undertaken in accordance with the Transition Agreement, pursuant to ALPA merger policy, produced a binding system seniority award (Nicolau) that was an obligation USAPA assumed when certified as the new collective bargaining agent, and unless pursuant to a legitimate union objective, USAPA could not change that award.

Therefore, the proposition in your example, that vested system seniority rights in an integrated seniority list that has been implemented in a ratified CBA are not as strong than those obtained through binding arbitration is just not persuasive. B)

Just my .02 worth.

 

[usabusdriver]

So let me get this straight. Now that the court case is over, assuming the apeals process is timely and results in a simmilar outcome as the addington case....

There are no fences with the nic...so an east pilot can have the next capt bid in PHX



Go Figure.........

bigbusdrvr,

You are partially correct. There are several milestones that must be completed before that possibility could occur. Primary is that a joint contract must be negotiated and ratified and a joint contract implementation process setup and put into place. As a part of the implementation process the company needs to select, purchase, program, and implement a new crew scheduling program. Not until these issues have been settled and the next vacancy bid is posted will the pilot group have a chance to bid cross domicile east/west. At the current pace of progress it will most likely be quite some time.

 

[hp_fa]

hp_fa,

I believe that you transposed the argument in the above quote.

If the Nicolau award had been memorialized in a CBA then the plaintiffs would have had a much easier or guaranteed DFR action, or conversely that USAPA would have a much harder or impossible task in defending a DFR action.

The argument in the Addington case was that since there had not been a ratified CBA containing the Nicolau award it was just a proposal and could be modified to comply with the new representatives C&BLs.

I'm trying to wrap my brain around what you are saying and I may need more morning coffee to do so.

What I was, and still am, trying to say is that had a single CBA been allowed to proceed to an actual vote by East & West and been voted down that the plaintiffs would have had a much harder time even getting past the initial pleading stage of any DFR action. However, the failure of either the East MEC or the BPR to negotiate any CBA with the Company containing Nicolau and to present a vote to membership of any CBA containing Nicolau was (in my view) instrumental in not only getting past the initial pleading stage of the Addington lawsuit, but also instrumental in it getting through the trial stage with a plaintiffs' verdict.

I also continue to fail to accept any premise that the Nicolau award was merely a "proposal". Once any award was made under ALPA merger policy, and not overturned by ALPA as being inconsistent with its merger policy, than that award became binding and not merely a "proposal".

The jury never heard actual evidence of the costs incurred by the two sides to arrive at Nicolau. I have unofficially heard that the Nicolau expenditures were approximately $2.5 million. Whether or not that number is correct it cannot be disputed that the monetary cost of simply arriving at the award was significant. So the question arises why would the parties expend anything like that amount of money to arrive at simply a "proposal"?

I will admit that the one thing that did cause me concern about the award was the USAPA's argument that the parties bound by the TA were solely the merger committee representatives. From a broader and wider overview that did not seem to make sense, specifically that the pilots of the respective airlines were not bound to the decision reached by their respective merger committee representatives, the fact remained that the documentation seemed to indicate that the parties bound by the award were the merger committee representatives. The Court dealt with that issue as a matter-of-law, but the chance that the Nicolau award could be found fatally flawed due to that language did concern me. (I wonder if that language will be changed in the future to prevent that issue from even arising.)

One thing I did think I heard in court and did concern me going forward is that USAPA, via their constitution and by-laws, does not allow their merger committee to agree or bind their association to anything, only the BPR can do that. As such, if true, it causes me to wonder if there is any reason why the Company may choose to negotiate with any committee that doesn't have the power to agree to anything. If only the BPR has that power couldn't and shouldn't the Company insist on only negotiating with the BPR since any other negotiations would be wasting their time since the party they would be negotiating with cannot agree to anything?

Anyway, I am going to drink some more coffee and I may revisit your full question later.

 

[traderjake]

Junior A330 Captain was about 813 or so on the East seniority list. Nic didn't protect his slot.

Slotted equipment ratios protect the position, not an individual pilot who hold a position because those senior to him pass.