US Pilots' Labor Thread 6/18-6/23-Stay on Topic and Observe the Rules

[Megasnoop]

What you present is a Hobson's choice - either resign because they couldn't honestly represent the pilot group's wishes or be fired for ignoring the group's wishes. What happens when the next candidates come forward for MC duty? They either don't get the job because they can't advocate what the pilots demand or also get fired for not advocating the pilots' demands. So the group ultimately end up with a MC that tries to get what the pilots' are demanding they get - that's the only realistic outcome of the process.

You make the choice anyway. Unless all the glamour of FPL, expense accounts, being the big cheese overcomes. Sooner or later you come up with someone who will hold the line on reality and straight talk. That never happened here.

You can't have it both ways - representatives who protect the group from themselves while being completely responsive to the groups wishes. That's why I've unwaveringly said that it's the pilot group that makes the union and not the reverse. If the pilot group demands reps (MEC/BPR/MC/ect) that do the groups bidding, that's what they'll get for better or worse. If the group wants to be protected from shooting themselves in the foot, that's the representation they'll get. Jim

When a leadership doesnt have the guts to be honest with the membership and stand up to the mob, then the mob rules.

NYC, Underpants, et al,

Im glad I sat out as an objector. While this was all falling apart, we were preparing for what we knew would happen, a ruling like the NIC, although that was way beyond even we expected. We knew what Prater knew, ALPA was dead on the property after Nic ruled. Remember insults 13 to 19 months ago? How wed never get the cards to call for an election? How wed never put it together, how we were bumblers who couldnt get a ballot box right? Well, here we are, 15 months into USAPA and still no NIC anywhere in sight and another 15+ months to go before the next major decisions. The west can keep posting one noisy attack after another, but it wont change the simple fact they have no control on implementing the NIC. Its nothing but $2M worther of paper. Neither does the courts. This will play out at the 9th circuit appeal, but even then, no NIC in sight. All the insulting barbs from them wont change that.

 

[ussnark]

Davis definitely played a role.

You implied he was a key player. I would suggest otherwise, hence the term, scapegoat.

 

[nic4us]

The solution is simple...give the West pilots (USAPA member or not) a vote on any seniority integration proposal from USAPA.

The East pilots have already decided Nic will not ever be acceptable. Now let the West pilots decide when they are ready to integrate and what is fair for them.

underpants

Seems resonable enough, but you have to take into account two things.

1. If USAPA's proposal was immediate implementation of the Nic, they will get 100% of West's vote, anything else and you may get a small % of West in USAPA's favor, but you will get another lawsuit, as even if it is a small minority of West pilots harmed they have a DFR against USAPA for the same exact reason the West just won the Addington trial. You cannot democratically vote to harm a minority.

2. Sorry, but east pilots do not get to decide wether the Nic is acceptable or not, it is the result of an arbitration. If we wanted to vote or ask your opinion we would not have been in arbitration in the first place.

Stephan warned the east that Nic would not be negotiable once you decided to leave ALPA, and he was correct. Nic is coming full throttle, unaltered and USAPA's imput will no longer be sought on seniority matters.

 

[Tiger 1050]

2. Sorry, but east pilots do not get to decide wether the Nic is acceptable or not, it is the result of an arbitration. If we wanted to vote or ask your opinion we would not have been in arbitration in the first place.

Perfectly said nic4us! Neither of us were afforded the right to vote once we started down the arbitration path. It is what it is. The east will live with it one way or another. End of story.

 

[nic4us]

The jumpseat should be open to all. I tell my FOs that it was a hard won privilege and placing it in danger over the seniority debacle is not something I am prepared to do.

I should point out, however, that several east posters on this board have stated that east and west will never be able to safely share a flightdeck.

Either it is safe and acceptable or it is not. If you believe that we can never safely fly together you have no business complaining about the jumpseat.

Worth repeating

 

[ussnark]

Ironic that Kirch ended up on the East MC for this integration, forced to fight for an outcome he didn't believe was attainable.

Was not the K man always for slotting?

As I recall, the effect of slotting during the Shuttle integration was downplayed by statements from his merger committee like, it is such a small group and most of "them" are retiring in a few years anyway, the take away overview being, yeah, it is pretty silly to slot and it violates our history, but the impact is minimal.

 

[prechilill]

Metro,
These guys are eyeball deep in their fantasy world. Just look at some of the statements here. Snap-back, err... Sorry it's "Reinstatement" now. Snoop like to refer to it as "reinstitute." LOL! I can't even find that word in the dictionary! Judges order = suggestion. That one had me laughing pretty hard too. Or Wake's order will be impotent! We'll just enjoy separate ops into the eternities. Quite arrogant considering Judge Wake will no doubt ensure his order is complete and without ambiguity. Pursuing our legal rights will result in our own demise. Hmmm. These guys have no idea what asses they look like making statements like this. All one needs to do is take a quick look at their history, their woe-is-me history and ask what the common denominator is. THEMSELVES!!!!!

Good post, tiger. It is pretty amazing what the easterlies are coming up with these days. They live in a world of pure fiction. How sad, my heart goes out to them.

 

[john john]

You cannot democratically vote to harm a minority.

This has been going on forever with unions without DFR
In negotiation it is inevitable that some employees
will fare worse than others. Disputes over seniority invariably mean that, in the end,
one’s gain is another’s loss. Achieving long term advantages, even though
individual employees may be affected differently as a result. at day’s end, the union can reach a deliberate and democratic process
Decision that is consistent with the contractual language and with
the views of a majority of its members. The duty
Of fair representation prohibits only "invidious" discrimination, such
as discrimination based on constitutionally protected categories like
race or gender, or discrimination that arises from animus or prejudice.

 

[BoeingBoy]

When a leadership doesnt have the guts to be honest with the membership and stand up to the mob, then the mob rules.

How many recalls/attempts were there over the decade 1995-2005? Leaders not saying what the mod wanted to hear so were turned on by the mob.

The problem with a large group is that there's always the mob mentality faction (give me what I demand and do it now) and the more reasonable faction (convince me why what I want isn't best for me). Of course, we've seen the "after" - the reasonable blame the leaders for being so convincing and the mob blames the leaders for not being convincing enough. Thus it's always the leaders fault no matter which faction.

Everyone wants people in leadership that fit their desires, whether that's shoot straight and tell it like it is or give me what I want. Is it any wonder that what you usually get is the worst of both - leaders who use the mentality of the mob to get what the leaders want since a significant portion of the group will think whatever the leaders do is wrong?

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

This has been going on forever with unions without DFR
In negotiation it is inevitable that some employees
will fare worse than others.

Except there's a line that can be crossed, and it's not so narrowly defined as you state. A union can negotiate an across the board 10% pay raise even though higher paid members will get a bigger dollar raise than lower paid members. A union can't negotiate a 20% pay raise for dark haired members and no raise for light haired members - that's DFR material.

In seniority integration some get hurt and some get helped - no DFR. But the union can't say dark haired pilots go ahead of light haired pilots - that's DFR material since the method is used to pick which group wins and which loses.

In the abstract, the union could produce a combined seniority list alphabetically if the company would agree (the training cost would be through the roof). But if that method was chosen because the majority on one side had last names beginning with the letters toward the end of the alphabet while the majority of the other group had last names toward the start of the alphabet, it becomes DFR material - the method wasn't impartial but was chosed to pick winning and losing groups.

Of course, in this case there's the added wrinkle of having the integrated seniority list complete, under the rules both sides agreed to, before USAPA became CBA. By ignoring that and choosing a method that could be considered punitive for one group over another, DFR rears it's head.

Jim

 

[Metroyet]

This has been going on forever with unions without DFR
In negotiation it is inevitable that some employees
will fare worse than others. Disputes over seniority invariably mean that, in the end,
one’s gain is another’s loss. Achieving long term advantages, even though
individual employees may be affected differently as a result. at day’s end, the union can reach a deliberate and democratic process
Decision that is consistent with the contractual language and with
the views of a majority of its members. The duty
Of fair representation prohibits only "invidious" discrimination, such
as discrimination based on constitutionally protected categories like
race or gender, or discrimination that arises from animus or prejudice.

Judge and Jury say you're wrong....NEXT!!!!!

 

[john john]

By ignoring that and choosing a method that could be considered punitive for one group over another, DFR rears it's head.

Jim

NMB says the USAirways pilots are all one group

 

[BoeingBoy]

NMB says the USAirways pilots are all one group

Technically, the NMB says that US Airways is a single transportation system and that USAPA represents all the pilots, not that the pilots aren't divided into groups.

That aside, however, what I meant was one or another group of US pilots. US pilots can be divided into groups any number of ways - capt or f/o, base, equipment, pre-merger carrier, military/civilian background, etc. Even those who've made water landings or not. Any criteria that divides the total group into subgroups will do, and subgroup is probably what I should have said instead of group.

Jim

 

[john john]

Judge and Jury say you're wrong....NEXT!!!!!

Believe me when I say USAirways seasoned employees have all seen NEXT

 

[ussnark]

What you present is a Hobson's choice - either resign because they couldn't honestly represent the pilot group's wishes or be fired for ignoring the group's wishes.

That is not Hobson's choice, unless you are saying his goal was simply to be on the committee. If he cannot effectively communicate to the MEC/pilots, then he needed to step aside and let someone else try.