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

Status
Not open for further replies.
When recalls start it brings up an interesting twist. The TA reciprocates the hiring from the furlough pool prior to off the street, but the question becomes who gets recalled first if the east needs pilots while West still has furloughs? I would think if recall happens on the east prior to the West, the pecking order for those east slots would be, former east , former West, then third list. What say you?

Did notice something else you may be interested in. Went looking to try and answere my own question about who was the most junior groupII captain on the east, and I think I found it but was unable to correlate that to how many West F/Os are senior to that pilot. What I also found was a LOA93 pay table. On this pay table it has scales thru the year 2011 inclusive. So my question is, does the LOA93 pay structure extend thru the year 2011, a full 2 years past the claimed expiration? Because if you have a pay table with rates thru 2011, you are not going to convince anyone that those written rates were published but would never apply.


Did a little research for you. Junior East A320 Captain is based in LGA and was hired 7-28-86. The West pilot immediately senior to him on the NIC list was hired 8-9-99. You'll have to do the math from there...I won't post names.

Driver B)
 
well I'm not a pilot /lawyer/labor expert somebody needs to explain to me how it is right that an 86 hire is junior to a 99 hire??
 
well I'm not a pilot /lawyer/labor expert somebody needs to explain to me how it is right that an 86 hire is junior to a 99 hire??
The reasoning within the Nicolau Arbitration Award answers your question fully. In two words it boils down to: career expectations.
 
At the time of the merger, that East 86 hire had 1/3 of the active East pilots below him while the West 99 hire had about half the active West pilots below him. The West guy had more seniority than the East guy, although less longevity.

Don't worry though, I'm sure there'll be someone along shortly that'll tell you seniority doesn't matter, only DOH does.

Jim
 
Court draft:




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.
 
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.

So much for Section 6 as long as this order stands...

Jim
 
Strictly personal opinion, but I'd say no - as long as an arbitrator ultimately agrees with the union's position. It would fall under the category of previously agreed to language in the current contract and not Section 6 negotiations to establish future contract language.

Jim
 
well I'm not a pilot /lawyer/labor expert somebody needs to explain to me how it is right that an 86 hire is junior to a 99 hire??

Well, it all started back in 1989 when someone came up with the phrase "Date of hire leads to Unity". It's been downhill every since.

All depends on whose seniority list your on.

Driver B)
 
I wonder if the LOA93 "snapback" is DOA.

Case 2:08-cv-01633-NVW Document 539 Filed 06/25/2009
This is pretty much a yawn. Wake is telling USAPA that it cant negotiate separate contracts for either side. There goes that west complaint. Got to negotiate the NIC in good faith. Now isnt that almost exactly what I predicted? Wake left out monitoring. But he did include The Court retains jurisdiction to modify or dissolve this order upon motion of any party. And he is allowing comments between now and June 30.

Im not seeing any damages there. Almost forgot, you walked away from damages when you no-showed the furlough grievance.

Item Three: In his letter to the pilots of June 2, 2009, USAPA President Mike Cleary described how Counts One and Two of the Addington litigation — which sought immediate relief for West furloughees at the expense of East pilots — had been dismissed by the federal court on the basis of subject matter jurisdiction. In a word, these matters had to be decided by the Transition Agreement System Board.

In that same letter, President Cleary stated that it was the opinion of the Association that the plaintiffs had "virtually no chance of prevailing" before the System Board with respect to either of these causes of action. Apparently, the plaintiffs agree.

By letter dated June 19, 2009, from Addington attorney Kelly J. Flood to Arbitrator Richard I. Bloch, the Addington plaintiffs have withdrawn the grievance incorporating Counts One and Two. The plaintiffs have withdrawn this grievance despite their stated belief that the Company breached its agreements with the West pilots by "operating in such a way as to take economic advantage of the terms of the US Airways CBA ... to the detriment of the West pilots."

With the withdrawal of this grievance, the plaintiffs appear to have surrendered any chance of implementing the Nicolau list during the period of Separate Operations.




With LOA84 rates and the $70M coming, its going to take a long time for East pilots to vote for a single contract.

Regarding LOA93, first its not a snap-back and second its not subject to negotiations. Some day in your own universe youll understand the LOA84 pay issue. It either happens or we go to arbitration on it. If the company thinks their going to win, theyll want arbitration ASAP after the grievance filed. If they think their going to lose, theyll drag it out as long as they can.

So much for Section 6 as long as this order stands...

Jim

Very interesting point, Jim. But can a Federal judge take away RLA rights to Section 6? If so, the company has ZERO incentive of EVER negotiating in good faith. One thing sure, there wont be separate Section 6 negotiations. So there goes one of the west's most recent boogie-man. East cant do separate either. But can the judge squelch Sectoin 6 in its entirety? Another thing sure, with no damages in sight whoever the west pilot was that filed those grievances that got counts 1 & 2 thrown out has got a lot of explainin to do.
 
Could I have the page # with that pay scale in it. I just looked thru LOA 93 twice and I didn't see it.

Thanks

Driver B)

Driver, what I am looking at is View attachment 8475,

It is not in the language of LOA93, but I quickly scanned LOA93 and did not see any payscales included in the text. I do not know who produced this table, only that it existed long before the mention of LOA93 payrates expiring. Again, I do not know what this means but it clearly has columns for 2010 and 2011.

Thanks for the reply on the junior 320 capt. The dates do me more good than a name. If that info is correct there are about 275 West F/Os senior to this pilot on the Nic. That includes the 100 displaced recently, but does not take into account lifestylers who have bypassed at upgrade.
 
Just in from Wake:



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 term
s. 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.
 
Court draft:




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.



Wow! The best I ever hoped we could accompish was a fence. This ruling pretty much ensures seperate ops for the next 8 to 10 years. I'm not sure there is reason for an appeal other than it stalls the outcome even more. I find it utterly amazing that the west would not have considered a fence when asked for one. With a 7 year fence, this could have been a combined pilot group with a new contract within 3 years of when Nic was announced. Now it will be much much longer. USAPA has effectively bought a fence. There won't be a contract until there are more west pilots than east pilots. Even after a contract is voted in it will take a minimum of a year for an integration bid. Money well spent if you ask me. Having said this, It's not personal.....just business. I have nothing against any west pilots and I consider some of you my friends. I don't want to see anyone furloughed. (Tiger...I honestly hope we get you back to work soon.) I hope that we we win the RJ greivence and it brings everyone back to work. However, In a best case senario....and i do mean best case..(money would have to be unbelieveable).....there will not be a new contract voted in for at least 2 or 3 years.......In other words best case senario for a combined pilot group is 3 to 4 years......expect it to be more like 8 to 10. Unless something else (merger) happens between now and then. On a side note, the best thing USAPA could do now is put some West Reps in charge of negotiating a new contract with the company. It's hard for someone to say you're stalling when they are in charge of contract negotiations. Just my thoughts on the matter. Looks like the west won the battle.....but lost the war.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top