US Pilot Labor Thread 7/20-7/26

[Edward]

With the above in mind new thread

 

[Phoenix]

From Leonidas Letter

In this regard I am unwilling to abide by USAPA’s Constitution and Bylaws.

...With these disclosures, and the understanding of the above, I request that you now accept the
enclosed USAPA Membership Application so that I may fully assert my rights as a member.


From USAPA Constitution

E. Members of the Association shall accept and agree to abide by the Constitution and Bylaws of the339 USAPA as they are in force or as they may be amended, changed, or modified in accordance with the
340 provisions of this Constitution and Bylaws.[/size][/size]

An explicit disclosure of an "unwillingness to abide by USAPA's Constitution and Bylaws", accompanied by a request to "accept the enclosed USAPA Membership Application so that I may fully assert my rights as a member" :blink:

I'ld rather attempt to explain the unflappable logic of ALPA merger policy, err.. guidance...
"
But I do wonder, is disclosed "unwillingness" really a cause for rejection? After all the letter sounds like a "Whining warning", and whining is so pilot-like.

Actually my real question is "Does the Railway labor act (or whatever applicable law) make provision for rejecting the constitution of a union which you might otherwise be eligible to join. Yes...? Might that be called an objector?


From Leonidas Letter:
Whereas your promotion of USAPA during the recent NMB election forced the pilots who voted to treat that election as a referendum on “ALPA Merger Policy...

The NMB was responsible for the election that determined the bargaining agent and I don't recall them announcing a referendum on ALPA merger policy. Is this an attempt to have USAPA agree to that dubious proposition as a precondition to their request for membership?

This is so illogical on so many levels. But the lawyers are making a killing.

 

[HighbutFast]

They're trying to "conditionally join" with pre-disclosed objections to the very bylaws they would be subject to.
They're playing a game...finally, somebody smells the coffee out there and knows some heads are about to roll over the dues. So the solution seems to be:

1) Apply in the hopes of rejection based on the dissenting statement.

2) Avoid termination because if they apply but are not accepted, they are protected from termination by the company as it is USAPA who refuses their membership...(just like ALPA policy)

This is rather transparent, and regardless of full membership status or not,
maintenance dues are payable, in any event...as we all know.

They've delayed paying dues about as long as they can, and now the rubber meets the road...

 

[boeingplt]

They're trying to "conditionally join" with pre-disclosed objections to the very bylaws they would be subject to.
They're playing a game...finally, somebody smells the coffee out there and knows some heads are about to roll over the dues. So the solution seems to be:

1) Apply in the hopes of rejection based on the dissenting statement.

2) Avoid termination because if they apply but are not accepted, they are protected from termination by the company as it is USAPA who refuses their membership...(just like ALPA policy)

This is rather transparent, and regardless of full membership status or not,
maintenance dues are payable, in any event...as we all know.

They've delayed paying dues about as long as they can, and now the rubber meets the road...

It sounds to me like they are trying to pick a fight, (deleted by moderator). For them to state that by joining they do not intend to forfiet their rights to litigate is one thing - not inappropriate in my view, BTW - but for them to include a statement that, verbatum, refuses to abide by a requirement for membership appears to me that they are baiting refusal of membership in order to avoid agency shop.

In my view this is a gross disservice to west pilots in that it, one: misleads them into thinking that they can sidestep agency shop responsibility, and two: perpetuates further deepening of the devide between us - no help needed there thank you very little.

Any west pilot who would interpret the Leinodas letter to be an attempt to be involved, barf bags not withstanding, without giving up your rights should contact the appropriate Leinodas people and have them reconsider the part about being unwilling to abide by the USAPA constitution.

Rant over.

 

[nostradamus]

Awappa recommendation for joining USAPA click here

 

[Megasnoop]

Awappa recommendation for joining USAPA click here

Noster, seems like AWAPPA is trying to shift tactics. But whose running it? I heard Mcalvena resigned as their leader. Anyone else here that? Westies? S

 

[AAA73Pilot]

FYI: For those who can't see the "Conditional" letter accompanied by a membership application.

My name is ______________________________________________, and I am a US Airways
pilot who was employed by America West Airlines prior to the merger of the two carriers.
According to the preamble of the USAPA constitution, “This Association… aspires to provide...
a truly participative organization that ensures freedom of speech [emphasis added] and promotes
integrity, honor, and trust.â€

I am sending this letter with my USAPA Membership Application to clarify my opposition to
Section 8. D. of the USAPA Constitution and Bylaws, which states as an objective of USAPA,
“To maintain uniform principles of seniority based on date of hire and the perpetuation thereof,
with reasonable conditions and restrictions to preserve each pilot’s un-merged career
expectations.†In this regard I am unwilling to abide by USAPA’s Constitution and Bylaws.

Whereas your promotion of USAPA during the recent NMB election forced the pilots who voted
to treat that election as a referendum on “ALPA Merger Policy,†and furthermore, that USAPA
was primarily created to subvert the obligations that the “East†pilots have under that policy, I
must also state that I voted for ALPA and I am unalterably opposed to USAPA’s stated intention
to replace the Nicolau Award with any other system for integrating the seniority lists of the
former America West Airlines and the former US Airways.

Please understand that I will take all lawful measures within my power in effort to prevent
USAPA from entering into an agreement with the Company to replace or modify the Nicolau
Award. These efforts are not limited to suing USAPA, its officers, or the Company.

Additionally, I plan to lawfully assert my free speech rights under both the LMDRA and the
USAPA Constitution as a frequent and vocal critic of USAPA. I will also take all lawful actions
within my power to replace USAPA with a bargaining agent that believes in the rule of law
rather then the tyranny of the majority, and I will never strike in support of a contract that
contains seniority provisions that deviate from the Nicolau Award.

With these disclosures, and the understanding of the above, I request that you now accept the
enclosed USAPA Membership Application so that I may fully assert my rights as a member.

Sincerely,

 

[nycbusdriver]

It's a futile attempt to build a paper trail.

Just sending an application doesn't guarantee membership. The BPR has to approve every application. I doubt they will approve any application sent in with the AWAPPA disclaimer.

Non-membership has not a thing to do with agency shop or the obligation to pay germane fees.

AWAPPA's pissing in the wind if they think this will be effective. The USAPA C&BLs are binding in their entirety on all members. The NMB certified them on April 18.

 

[HighbutFast]

From Leonidas Letter

"In this regard I am unwilling to abide by USAPA�€™s Constitution and Bylaws.

...With these disclosures, and the understanding of the above, I request that you now accept the
enclosed USAPA Membership Application so that I may fully assert my rights as a member. "


Ummm, just exactly what intellectual giant told them they could CONDITIONALLY join the union, on THEIR terms, no less? HELLO.....my backward friends, you cannot change, edit, restrict, or ignore the content of the C&BL's as written in order to apply so you dodge the bullet here.

You must apply unconditionally, without any prepared disclaimer for union membership....any other application that contains restrictions or modifications is not a proper application to begin with and should be considered an INCOMPLETE application, and therefore is not considered a bonafide application....thereby leaving you un "unapplied"....

PS: this places you back in front of the train...

 

[elixir]

This ploy is just ridiculous. You can't modify the application to suit your needs and consider it a legitimate application.

When I bought my house, if I had stapled a statement to the front of the HUD-1 at closing which said that I sign this with the expressed understanding that I intend to repay this mortgage note in rupees because I have a problem with US currency....I wouldn't have a house today.

And yet this is precisely the logic that someone cooked up for the westies who hear the grim reaper coming with termination letters in hand.

It is an INVALID APPLICATION and should not constitute an official and proper application because it is not in original form, and has attachments to it....therefore, they have NOT properly applied for membership, and they are still on the hook.

The key here, if anything like ALPA, is one must APPLY for membership once every 6 months, if you get denied, you can't get fired. Thats what this is about.

It's not a proper application as compared to all the other applications...it shouldn't be denied, it shouldn't be considered until it's a proper and unmodified application...period.

 

[sharktooth]

FYI: For those who can't see the "Conditional" letter accompanied by a membership application.

Thanks for posting that.

I can only see where such a conditional would only get the signer in trouble. At the very least, it would tend to negate any possible subsequent DFR lawsuit.

 

[exB717Flyer]

I can only see where such a conditional would only get the signer in trouble.

Trouble with whom?

At the very least, it would tend to negate any possible subsequent DFR lawsuit.

On what precedent do you base that opinion?

 

[flynomore]

So if the application and protest letter get separated, how in the world does the protest register?

I can see a clerk assigned to sort these letters doing just that and giving a pile with only the application to the membership group.

 

[Phoenix]

So if the application and protest letter get separated, how in the world does the protest register?

I can see a clerk assigned to sort these letters doing just that and giving a pile with only the application to the membership group.

What letter of protest? We never got one of those.

It would be tempting but no way Jose. USAPA wouldn't do that because, "Integrity Matters.!"

 

[elixir]

The applications shouldn't be looked at or considered...so, "no joy" on the plan...think of it like a ballot with "hanging chads" on it....it just never happened.

It is my opinion that no strategy has changed, per se, but that the reality of getting fired over this is sinking in. The solution to the termination threat is to apply, but stack the deck so you get rejected...ie: the conditional statement and disclosure.

The rejection resets the clock (just like ALPA) and keeps the company from being able to fire you...if you're "trying to get membership approval, but keep getting turned down..."

Thats why a flat rejection is not the way to handle this.

(nice try though...)