ALPA/USAPA Topic for week of 1/24 to 1/31

[luvn737s]

With all due respect...you were most likely going to say no anyway.

Then maybe that's a clear sign to USAPA that they need to change their agenda (not just their rhetoric). They will have to eventually if they ever hope to lead.

Or they can remain entrenched, as those who demanded DOH before them, and wonder why nothing's changed 2 years from now.

 

[luvn737s]

I just want USAPA to come out and honestly state that Nicolau will stand, joint negotiations will resume and the only thing they really offer is a slightly different Constitution and ByLaws.

A little honesty would go a long way.

 

[pilot]

That would not be honesty. Why would USAPA state it?

You have us mixed up with ALPA.

 

[prechilill]

I just want USAPA to come out and honestly state that Nicolau will stand, joint negotiations will resume and the only thing they really offer is a slightly different Constitution and ByLaws.

A little honesty would go a long way.

Unfortunately some emotionally-misguided pilots in the east believe they can vote away an arbitrated settlement. They cite two cases which have nothing to even do with arbitration as their "evidence".

After getting to know the east pilot group a little better these past two years, I wonder if they have any feet left to shoot?

 

[end_of_alpa]

I just want USAPA to come out and honestly state that Nicolau will stand, joint negotiations will resume and the only thing they really offer is a slightly different Constitution and ByLaws.

A little honesty would go a long way.

The Nicolau award won't stand. We'll just have to get the election. USAPA will not supoort the award. That is why you won't vote for them and that is why we won't vote for a joint contract with that in it. Hence the standoff and the Representational election.

Let's vote.

 

[prechilill]

The Nicolau award won't stand. We'll just have to get the election. USAPA will not supoort the award. That is why you won't vote for them and that is why we won't vote for a joint contract with that in it. Hence the standoff and the Representational election.

Let's vote.

Nicolau won't stand where? And what does an election have to do with our combined seniority list? Do you actually believe you can just vote away an arbitrated decision? (That last one is a yes/no question.)

 

[sharktooth]

Nicolau won't stand where? And what does an election have to do with our combined seniority list? Do you actually believe you can just vote away an arbitrated decision? (That last one is a yes/no question.)

Once again. The "nic", like a crazy uncle, will be parked out of view, taken out only when someone contemplates arbitration. It will be a non-starter, a fable demonstrating greed of a small bottom-feeding group too short-sighted to take what they have.

It can be the touchstone of how close a profession came to destruction or a turning point to bus driver status. Toss it in your trophy case where it will join the rest of your memories.

No, it will not stand. But then, it will not easily be forgotten, I hope.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Nicolau won't stand where? And what does an election have to do with our combined seniority list? Do you actually believe you can just vote away an arbitrated decision? (That last one is a yes/no question.)

YES.

 

[pilot]

Yes, without a doubt.

 

[Piedmont1984]

Affirmative!

 

[luvn737s]

It doesn't really matter what anyone but the judge that hears the case thinks. But evidently, these 3 are willing to follow their emotions to whatever ends it takes them. Hopefully those who follow reason will carry the day.

Why can't USAPA be honest about what they are able to provide? I forgot, they're full-time politicians and part-time pilots who would have you believe it's the other way around.

 

[P51Pilot]

Fellow pilot,

As your USAPA volunteers sat down to craft the USAPA Constitution, it was always envisioned that it would be posted for comment and revision as the pilots offered their opinions and ideas. Having just posted the Constitution, along with the first in our series "How The USAPA Constitution Is Better," we could not be more thrilled with the considered input the pilots have offered.

As a direct result of that input, we have added a paragraph to Article IV, Section 3, that quite firmly puts the pilots in control of the voting and decision process. We have included that paragraph below, in context and emphasized, so that you can fully understand the positive effect this single paragraph has on the Roll Call vote.

We find this to be the very best example of USAPA in action - you talked, we listened, and most importantly, we acted. "At USAPA, the pilots decide. Take control of your future."

Thank you for your continuing support.

Follows is the revised language. We anticipate posting an updated PDF version of the Constitution shortly.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Understanding the USAPA Constitution
"The How's and Why's of Better Representation"

Part One - Representation and Roll Call (rev 1)

This is the first in a multi-part series on the USAPA Constitution. In this issue we focus on representational structure and the Roll Call. Before we go any further, it is important for pilots to know that Roll Call as the pilots know it does not exist in the USAPA Constitution.

Many volunteers have spent, so far, literally thousands of hours of their personal time to build a new union for you and your fellow pilots; one that will finally put the pilots back in control of their own futures. As USAPA moved closer to bringing a representational election to the US Airways pilot group, there was heated debate among the officers and volunteers as to what kind of representational structure to propose in the Constitution and By-Laws (CBL). This debate surrounded the failures of representation of our current bargaining agent and the desire to bring something better to the new union and the pilots. Some of the new ideas debated included block representation, seniority block representation, block voting and elimination of the Roll Call vote, amongst others. Nothing was excluded from consideration.

Regretfully, demographics showed that there was likelihood that such a system could give the appearance of favoring the East and, as such a system is untried, our legal team felt it was very likely that we would face legal challenges. Radical changes in representational structure by USAPA would open doors to those who might file Duty of Fair Representation (DFR) lawsuits claiming that the new representational structure unfairly disadvantaged certain members. After much consideration, the USAPA leadership team adopted the proposed CBL in an effort to minimize potential lawsuits and also to provide the representation that the pilots need and desire. With enough on our plate as it is, the very difficult decision was made to use a more “tried and true†system, smoothing off the rough edges as well as we could. The choice was to fall back to a system paralleling that of the APA, tested and proven over a 40 year period, or use an untried system that could imperil the very existence of USAPA. We would have been remiss to choose otherwise.

So, this decision having been made, we were now decided on a representational system. At this point a discussion is in order with regards to the three types of votes that can be cast by a representative body:

1. Voice Vote: the classic, “Aye†or “Nayâ€. There is no record of the tally and the Chair calls the outcome. The idea is, one representative, one vote, the majority (of the representatives present), wins. This is the most common type of vote and arguably, not really democratic, since a representative of say 50 pilots, has the same leverage as one who represents the will of 1,000 Line Pilots.

2. Division: A tally of the outcome is recorded. The outcome; for example, “the motion carries, 8-Ayes and 6-Nays.†- becomes a part of the permanent record. There is an argument that a list (by name) of which representatives voted, and which way, should be permanently recorded.

Still, one notices that there is no proportional representation here. In other words, if the representatives of two or three small crew bases form a coalition, their collective votes, which still represent a minority of the pilots they represent, can override the expressed will of the single, 1,000 pilot crew base.

3. Roll Call: in this style of vote, a representative, whose pilot constituency is large, calls upon the Chairman to tally the number of pilots, represented by each of the members voting.

In effect, each pilot-representative speaks for the number of pilots in his crew base. When the pilot representing 1,000 pilots votes, he votes with the voices of his 1,000 Line Pilots. When the pilot representing 110 pilots votes, he votes with the voices of his 110 Line Pilots.

The Roll Call vote was designed to bring in the elements of the House of Representatives by allowing a population vote. Using a real-world example - without any ability to Roll Call vote on an issue, small bases (such as BOS with 141 pilots, LGA with 103 pilots and DCA with 279 pilots) would be able to control the agenda and the votes of the two other largest bases, CLT and PHL. In a straight senatorial vote, the 523 pilots from BOS, LGA, and DCA combined could control the MEC (known as the BPR or Board of Pilot Representatives, under USAPA) while the 2,277 pilots from PHL and CLT are out-voted. In this example a system such as this would not survive a court challenge. A Duty of Fair Representation (DFR) lawsuit would almost certainly prevail in a situation where it could be proven that 523 pilots could outvote a number over 4 times as large. This is not the definition of democracy.

To recap, having decided upon a more traditional representational structure, one can see that it must include the Roll Call vote. How then to mitigate the negative effects of the Roll Call? We fell back on the one principle that goes to the heart of USAPA, “Let The Pilots Decide.†Quite simply, in the event Roll Call is used, the issue goes to the pilots for ratification. Thus, in the end it is the pilots who decide.

Below follows the relevant text from the Constitution (comments and emphasis added):

Article IV Pilot Board of Representatives, section 3, paragraph (B) as follows:

Roll call voting (division of the house) shall be permitted only for votes taken to approve or reject basic collective bargaining agreements and interim amendments thereto; setting parameters for collective bargaining; agreements on affiliation or merger with another labor organization; agreements arising from a merger of, or successor transactions involving, the employer or its parent (including seniority integration agreements); and amendments to the Constitution and Bylaws. On a roll call vote, each member of the Board shall be entitled to vote fifty percent (50%) of the active members in good standing at his domicile provided that;

1. The representative from a domicile having one hundred (100) or less members shall be entitled to one (1) vote for each active member in good standing at his domicile, and

2. For domiciles having one thousand (1000) or more members, each representative shall be entitled to vote one third (1/3) of the active members in good standing at the domicile.

Fractional votes will be counted. In the event that a senatorial vote is over-ridden by a roll call vote so as to prevent the membership from voting on any matter that would otherwise be subject to a ratification vote under the provisions of this Constitution and Bylaws, the matter shall be submitted to the pilot group for a membership vote. The result of such vote shall determine the final disposition of the matter.

As you can see above, please note that USAPA limits the use of the Roll Call vote to the following:

(1) Approve or reject a basic working agreement. This is backed up by pilot ratification

(2) Interim agreements thereto; e.g., Side Letters. This is backed up by pilot ratification

(3) Bargaining parameters and goals

(4) Agreements on affiliation or merger with another labor organization. This is backed up by pilot ratification.

(5) Agreements arising from a merger or successor transactions involving, the employer or its parent, (including seniority integration agreements) This is backed up by pilot ratification

(6) Amendments to the constitution and bylaws. This is backed up by pilot ratification.

Note that of the only 6 conditions in which Roll Call voting is allowed, 5 are backed up by pilot ratification. Pilot ratification is the circuit breaker to this issue and it follows almost all Roll Call votes. The only situation in which Roll Call can be used and not backed up by pilot ratification is the setting of bargaining parameters. The reason for this is due to the nature of debate during the setting of bargaining parameters; were Roll Call to be used it could paralyze the process due to multiple ratifications, possible even in a single day.

Finally, anytime a roll call vote over-rides a senatorial vote, the issue is sent to the pilots for ratification.

So, as you can now see, Roll Call as the pilots know it does not exist in the USAPA Constitution, just one of the many advantages of the USAPA Constitution over that of the current Collective Bargaining Agent.

Once elected and with participation from all pilots this system can be altered if the pilots so desire into a seniority block representation system or other type of representation system that doesn’t involve the Roll Call vote, again the beauty of USAPA’s Constitution, wherein the pilots decide.

For a legal opinion on this subject, click here to read USAPA attorney Scott Peterson’s comments.

Watch for our next article in this series. Upcoming issues will discuss:

Election of Officers by the membership
Recall of Officers by the membership
Compensation of Officers
Limitation of expenses
Requirement for professional negotiator
Constraints on negotiations, including notification and authorization
Guaranteed pilot ratification
If you have any questions or comments on this or any other subjects, please send an email to [email protected]

 

[P51Pilot]

Fellow Pilots,

A lot of information has come our way in the past few days. Some of it has been designed to inform and some to persuade. Communications that seek to persuade through vilification are neither honest nor useful. Likewise, messages that contain a large number of question marks are not designed to inform, they are designed to induce a feeling of uncertainty. Count the question marks and then consider whether you're being informed or persuaded.

On a much more positive note, our replacement card count is over 2,200 and the cards continue to arrive in large numbers each day. Please accept our thanks for assisting with USAPA's recovery from a very honest clerical error. It is possible you may receive another call requesting a replacement card; if you have already submitted a replacement card in the last week, please just indicate this to the caller. If you have not, the NMB told us recently that we can continue to provide election requests until February 6th, so please do not delay.

Our Administration Committee chairman and I met with our insurance team recently. In an update received yesterday, we were informed that coverage for Life, AD&D, Pre-Paid Legal, Long-Term care, and Universal Life Coverage have been arranged for. Regarding Loss-of-license (LL) coverage, our insurance vendor remains in contact with the companies that underwrite the coverage to have them offer the same LL programs to USAPA members. They have discussed this coverage with virtually every major U.S. insurer and expect to have additional information for us shortly. USAPA's insurers will be at the Feb. 8 road show in Charlotte. If you have specific insurance products you would like to have offered to US Airways pilots, please send an email to [email protected]. Additional products will be offered over time as requested by all of you.

All of us have been heartened to see so many pilots wearing the new yellow USAPA badge lanyards. USAPA lapel pins are available now; please check with a local USAPA volunteer to receive your pin. New "Seniority Matters" stickers are also available. These stickers are intended for flight kit use and should not appear on company-owned or leased property.

I want each of you to know that from the bottom of my heart, we desire only that the US Airways pilots have a brighter future. Suggestions to the contrary are just that.

Thank you for your support, take care and fly safely!

 

[end_of_alpa]

It doesn't really matter what anyone but the judge that hears the case thinks. But evidently, these 3 are willing to follow their emotions to whatever ends it takes them. Hopefully those who follow reason will carry the day.

Why can't USAPA be honest about what they are able to provide? I forgot, they're full-time politicians and part-time pilots who would have you believe it's the other way around.

Here come da judge....Here come da judge! Emotions, huh.

We're not honest,huh. We'll we told you exactly what you asked of us with YES or NO answers.

USAPA is being HONEST! You just don't like the sound of what you're hearing. Sounds fine to us.

Yes for USAPA.

No for Nicolau.

I guess you need to add at least three more zeros to the number "3" because with you, one is definitely the loneliest number!

 

[pilot]

USAPA will prevent the NIC award from seeing the light of day.

Is that honest enough for you? And it isn't 3 that are willing to take it to the end game. 3000 plus are willing. You'll see that soon enough. Just because you don't like what you hear doesn't make it untrue.

The representation this pilot group will receive under USAPA will be head and shoulders above what ALPA does. The model is set at AMR, LUV, UPS, and elsewhere. USAPA will be the next success story. Just like the APA.

This pilot group is about to realize what a ball and chain ALPA has been. It's about time. And we can thank Nic for the push to independence.

God bless that man. He finally opened our eyes.

As for part time pilots.........look at the roster of ALPA reps. There you will find your part timers. The rest of us fly a full schedule.