US Pilots' Labor Thread 6/24-6/30 Stay On Topic

[Captain Underpants]

Well finally. You are starting to get it. That is what the west and the judge has been saying. Usapa has the right to negotiate 29 out of 30 sections to balance a ratifiable contract. But don’t forget an important part of this order.

will implement the Nicolau Award seniority proposal unmodified, according to its terms.

That means no added C&R. There will be no DOH furloughs or anything like that. Look in your current contract. Where it says anything about seniority. It says system seniority. That will be the Nicolau list. Vacations, furloughs, bidding ect. Will be Nicolau. That is unmodified.

Yes I do understand it. Some seniority rights are inherent Nic rights and some are contractual. Some current contractual seniority rights use the system seniority list as a basis and some just refer to seniority in general. Vacations Furloughs etc. are contractual seniority rights not Nic rights. For example ALPA gave up seniority processing for reserve trips in the last contract even though it previously used the arbitrated system seniority list. The Nic award says nothing about vacation bidding making it a negotiated contractual seniority right. Empire pilots negotiated their Empire DOH for furlough and pass travel regardless of any system seniority lists.

Changing the contract from bidding vacations by system seniority to company seniority does not in any way modify the Nic award. Judge Wake understands this and worded his court order accordingly. He does not intend to negotiate the contract line by line and allowed and expects compromises to reach a ratifiable contract.

You took your legal shot at forcing an unfair contract but came up short suceeding only in distorting some contract sections to balance the unfairness of others. The West hates USAPA because the union leadership with the backing of the majority of pilots requires a fair and equitable integration and contract and is requiring all pilots pay their fair share of union dues.

Nic provided only a distorted list of pilots. Fairness will be determined by contract negotiations and confirmed by democratic vote. Wake has ruled as the law requires that the pilots will determine what is a fair contract.

underpants

 

[BoeingBoy]

It may very well be in the pilots best interest ( I cannot believe I am saying this) to continue with seperate ops for a little while. Once we have single ops, the transition agreement goes away, and I am not so certain contract scope will protect as well as the TA fleet minimums.

That will depend on the contents of any single contract and in that sense you may be right - it all depends on what USAPA might give up if anything.

I was strictly talking about the sentiment that the company doesn't want a combined contract. We have no idea how much separate ops cost the company every year. For example, they've got an A320 in CLT or PHL or PHX or LAS or BOS or NYC whose crew is out of time, they've got a crew qualified on the A320 with plenty of time, but separate ops prevent them from using that crew to fly that plane. How much in hotel rooms, re-bookings on other airlines, meal vouchers, etc does that cost? Add that up over the course of a year.

Jim

 

[BoeingBoy]

Im not saying a single vote wont take place. Im just saying that no matter how I read the judge’s decision, I don’t see it in the draft. Other hurdles to overcome. I’ll keep my powder dry on those. But your 80%? That doesn't make sense at all. Please explain.

Gee, you mean all that glee from East pilots that said USAPA's election eliminated separate votes was just whistling past the graveyard? Tell me it ain't so...

"One more thing. two separate votes is ALPO policy, not TA. And like the NIC, ALPO policy is now gone. All this vote stuff died when ALPO died. Snoop"

Think about the 80% (I think I said something like "conceivable that it could take 80%") - maybe it'll sink in.

Jim

 

[A320 Driver]

That will depend on the contents of any single contract and in that sense you may be right - it all depends on what USAPA might give up if anything.

I was strictly talking about the sentiment that the company doesn't want a combined contract. We have no idea how much separate ops cost the company every year. For example, they've got an A320 in CLT or PHL or PHX or LAS or BOS or NYC whose crew is out of time, they've got a crew qualified on the A320 with plenty of time, but separate ops prevent them from using that crew to fly that plane. How much in hotel rooms, re-bookings on other airlines, meal vouchers, etc does that cost? Add that up over the course of a year.

Jim

The occasional inconvenience of separate ops is a spit in the bucket IMO compared to the cost of providing an industry standard contract (forget an industry leading contract). I mean, how often does this happen?

I listened to the crew news for CLT and PHX and I didin't hear anything I can call encouraging. Cheap labor is not something this management team wants to give up. Scope was mentioned earlier by a poster and that too is up for negotiation. What will they trade for it? Higher pay scales at the top end for a relaxed scope language that has the potential to throw more junior people under the bus? At this point, I'm not interested.

3 day a month negotiations is not going to make much progress IMO. We've changed our strategy over the years from barking across a table to passing paper to each other. Very time consuming. Almost always means "I'll have to get back to you on this". Most of the sections that were TA'd are now open again.

Enjoy the rest of your weekend.

Driver B)

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

What type of good, perhaps even exemplary behavior was it about then? Offhand; I can't recall any listed complaints about breathing....

How about web posting, just like what goes on here? Some guys had the audacity to say they would never take an east pilot on their jumpseat, the horror, and they were placed in a rico suit for that. The oxygen comment was mine, for being placed in a racketeering suit for web postings such as that is just as ridiculous as if they had been sued for breathing the same oxygen.

 

[Richard]

Enough of the "breathing" comments---really has no meaning....back to the topic.

 

[BoeingBoy]

The occasional inconvenience of separate ops is a spit in the bucket IMO compared to the cost of providing an industry standard contract (forget an industry leading contract). I mean, how often does this happen?

We can all have our opinions, and that was just one example. My point was that only the company knows how much separate ops adds to cost. Without that figure, the $120+ million per year Kirby proposal (not that I take the company's number for that as gospel) might be $110+ million or 50+ million net - we just don't know.

I listened to the crew news for CLT and PHX and I didin't hear anything I can call encouraging.

That's odd - in every one I've watched they say they want a single contract if a question brings the subject up. Doesn't mean they'll pay whatever it takes, but it sounds like they're prefer combined ops over separate ops.

Most of the sections that were TA'd are now open again.

And I understand that the mediator has told both sides to bring a comprehensive proposal to the next meeting. Sounds like the mediator isn't going to let either side twiddle their thumbs and delay just for the sake of delay.
Jim

 

[HPDriver]

Gee, you mean all that glee from East pilots that said USAPA's election eliminated separate votes was just whistling past the graveyard? Tell me it ain't so...

Amazing how the spin works over there at USAPA.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Enough of the "breathing" comments---really has no meaning....back to the topic.

Ok, back to topic. The rico case was a failure in what in was supposed to accomplish. Somehow the west managed to pull it together and bring a successful dfr case, largely because 18 individuals did not cower and allow themselves to be baited into a false confession under the duress of a potentially long and expensive legal process.

The rico case was supposed to have nipped addington in the bud before it ever got off the ground. Every thing else is spin.

 

[ussnark]

What was Doug thinking when he dragged the carcuss of a rotting so-called legacy airline to Tempe? You get what you paid for.

So, you are admitting "Parker" paid nothing for US? Perhaps, it was US who bailed HP out of their unpaid federal debt?

 

[HPDriver]

Speaking of USAPA's spin machine, here's Cleary version:

June 26, 2009


Fellow pilots:

On Thursday, June 25, 2009, Judge Wake issued a draft injunctive order in the Addington matter and requested that the parties submit their comments no later than Tuesday, June 30, 2009.

Notably, the draft injunctive order does not provide the immediate relief that the plaintiffs sought in terms the shifting of flying from East to West operations. Similarly, it does not incorporate the plaintiffs' request that East pilots be restrained from filing grievances in the event that the Company were to violate Transition Agreements operational restrictions during the period of Separate Operations.

As currently drafted, the injunctive order would compel USAPA to negotiate toward a single collective bargaining agreement incorporating the Nicolau Award and would expressly forbid USAPA from negotiating separate contracts for the two pilot groups.

USAPA will submit its comments to the court by the June 30 deadline. These comments will be posted on the USAPA website for your review. Regardless of the final form of the injunctive language, USAPA will expeditiously proceed with its appeal to the Ninth Circuit. We will comment more specifically when the injunctive order is not in a proposed condition.

In the interim, we ask all pilots to act professionally and with restraint as we move carefully through the process to protect all US Airways pilots' rights.

Safety first.

Mike Cleary
President



And now for a bit of reality:


Special Update - Judge Wake Issues Proposed Injunction

Judge Wake just published an order which contains the proposed language for an injunction against USAPA. This draft language appears to be a comprehensive injunction which will enjoin USAPA from any action not consistent with the terms of the Nicolau Arbitration. Again, this is a proposed order which means the final order can deviate from what is contained in this order. Nevertheless, we feel it is safe to use this proposed order as good approximation of what the final order will look like. Today's order reads:

The Court has composed the following draft language for the injunction order against USAPA in this case. This language is published to the parties for any comments or objections they wish to make before the order is entered.


In accord with the foregoing, and the entire record in this action, it is hereby ordered that Defendant USAPA and its officers, committees, representatives, and agents shall immediately, and in good faith, make all reasonable efforts to negotiate and implement a single collective bargaining agreement with US Airways that will implement the Nicolau Award seniority proposal unmodified, according to its terms. Defendant USAPA and its officers, committees, representatives, and agents shall immediately, and in good faith, make all reasonable efforts to support and defend the seniority rights provided by or arising from the Nicolau Award in negotiations with US Airways. Defendant USAPA shall not negotiate for separate collective bargaining agreements for the separate pilot groups, but shall rather negotiate for a single collective bargaining agreement that incorporates the Nicolau Award.


The Court retains jurisdiction to modify or dissolve this order upon motion of any party.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that counsel for both parties may submit any comments and objections relating to the Court’s proposed injunction language on or before June 30, 2009.

DATED this 25th day of June, 2009.

Clearly this language would be very restrictive upon USAPA as they would risk being held in contempt of court should they deviate from the spirit and intent of the Nicolau Arbitration. That translates into a prohibition against diluting the Nicolau Arbitration via contract sections other than 22. It also means Section 6 negotiations will not be permitted. What's more, it appears that the Court is not inclined to allow some sort of "negotiation" of the Nicolau Arbitration as the Court states in very plain language that USAPA must negotiate towards one end: a joint contract that includes the Nicolau Award. In other words, no Wye River II, no more stalling, and no more excuses backed by flim-flam legal theories.

Also of note, the USAPA spin machine just can't help itself from taking the truth and twisting into unrecognizable form. This time USAPA is trying to spin the voluntary withdrawal of both of the plaintiff arbitrations as something of a victory for USAPA. First off, we (the plaintiff class) have just finished a very important part of our litigation against USAPA and as can be seen from the above order, that litigation was quite successful. The unfortunate part is that the cost of this litigation was increased by nearly 100% due to the over-litigation coming from USAPA. Although we are relishing our victory in the federal district court, the financing of our effort is not enough to pay for all of this litigation. Secondly, one of the arbitrations was very similar to USAPA's TA9 grievance; recall that TA9 involved the furloughing out of seniority. The difference between our grievance and that of USAPA was that USAPA only argued that the 98 or so new hires (post merger) constituted the "third list." The problem for us was that if USAPA lost their TA9 grievance, then we would be handicapped going into our grievance as we would be arguing before the very same arbitrator. How could Arbitrator Bloch find that the 98 newhires need not be furloughed prior to West pilots (ie USAPA's grievance), but that the CEL pilots and the East pilots below Dave O'Dell should be furloughed? Once USAPA lost their TA9 grievance, that is exactly what we would have to argue again before we got to our grievance. So when they lost, our chance of success diminished as our attorneys would have to undo the poor performance by USAPA legal, get Arbitrator Bloch to reverse his earlier decision on TA9, and then convince him to take the remedy several steps further. Our attorneys are nothing short of all star caliber and although we have the greatest of confidence in their skills, this situation was sizing up to be not worth the cost, even if we could afford to litigate these grievances. Hence, we withdrew both arbitrations.

USAPA's claim that we had no chance of succeeding is not telling the full story. What really occurred with the arbitrations is that USAPA legal has once again let down all US Airways pilots as TA9 should have been an easy win against the company. But to Cleary and his gang running USAPA, the only adversary is apparently the West pilots - their loss in TA9 and our forfeiture of an arbitration against the company is evidently a victory for that gang. What Cleary wants all US Airways pilots to ignore is that the only entity which USAPA benefits is the company as they are making out like bandits. If this crack legal team can't win at TA9, then how on Earth will they win the snapback grievance? What is now painfully obvious to anyone following the AAA-AWA saga is that the Cleary regime is the worst thing that could ever happen to any pilot group. With today's proposed order, we are witnessing the unfolding of another loss for the Cleary-run USAPA.

What this means for all US Airways pilots is that this seniority saga is quickly coming to a resolution. When the final order is published we will be able to speak without condition, but for now we will just say that the light is at the end of the tunnel for all of us, East and West. Once this seniority dispute is over, we need to work together to secure the industry standard pay and benefits which our colleagues at every other major airline enjoy. This can only be done by getting as many rational minded pilots to become members in good standing and then throw out the cadre of fools who are responsible for wreaking great havoc in all of our lives. The last two years have been a tragic waste of time, money and resources.

We want to remind readers that the above quoted order is not a final order. Rather, Judge Wake is asking for input as to what he thinks the final injunctive order should look like. You might recall that he followed the same practice with the jury instructions: published the proposed instructions, asked for attorney input, and then ruled. The final product then looked very similar to the proposed jury instructions, and we would wager that the final injunction language will be very close to what was proposed today.

Overall we are quite pleased with the proposed language of the injunction against USAPA.The essential purpose for starting this litigation was to prevent the dilution of the Nicolau Arbitration, let alone the wholesale destruction of West pilots' careers, which is exactly what USAPA's DOH scheme would have accomplished. A comprehensive remedy similar to what Judge Wake is proposing is exactly what we seek to stop the Cleary-run USAPA. Keep in mind that we are only finished with the first half of this litigation. The fight is far from over as we must defend the Addington verdict on appeal, plus we are set to go to a second trial in August to recover monetary damages. We have received a welcomed bump in donations following the Addington verdict, but we want to remind all pilots that this litigation will require the continued support from this pilot group. The percentage of pilots who have not donated at least $500 is dwindling fast and we anticipate having more than 70% of the pilots at the Bronze level or above in the near future. Your contributions are what keep our legal team fighting. We as a pilot group have made amazing gains against the attempted theft of our careers by Bradford and Cleary, but our battle if far from over. How far we go and how much we succeed as a group depends upon how many West pilots commit financially to securing our legal rights.

 

[ussnark]

(AAA was already in its second bankruptcy and heading for liquidation) about this time?

You are so wrong.

As your own buddy, Jerry Glass, said, "We feel we left concessions on the table in BK1, therefore we are entering BK2 in order to capture them". That does not sound like US was in financial trouble, but it does sound like the east pilots were in trouble with spine-less and conniving ALPA Intl.

 

[ussnark]

What would you pay ..err.. what would you have others pay.. to be on ALPA FPL?

To TraderJoe, it would be
What would you pay ..err.. what would you have others pay.. to return to ALPA FPL

 

[ussnark]

There's a difference between what's right and what's legal.

OMG, you have just stated there is a difference between "legal", the assumed imposition of a "nic", and what is right. Good for you!

 

[nycbusdriver]

Especially if it comes wrapped in a nice raise?

Given the company's negotiating stance so far, there are no "nice" raises on the way. That being said, the Nic won't see life for a long time to come.