US Pilot Labor Thread 9/7-14
- Thread starter Richard
- Start date
- Status
Because a federal judgment becomes the "law", and is enforceable up to and including jail. Right now we have a contract between two parties, one of the parties is reneging on it and has repeatedly publicly, on video and in writing stated they would do everything in their power to not abide by it, and to harm the other party in the contract. You should familiarize yourself with the case, where a larger group of pilots, unhappy with a seniority arbitration, tried to staple a minority group. It didn't work.
boeingtamer
Member
- Apr 20, 2008
- 30
- 8
My point, one last time, is that EITHER side that strong arms the other will never "enjoy" their gain. They will suffer for years to come in a caustic work environment that may well destroy the source of the "golden eggs". That includes USAPA.
Have you seen the USAPA conditions and restrictions yet? I haven't either but they may be fairer than you anticipate. To not even engage in the dialog and point fingers is prejudicial and unfair.
If you couldn't understand Mr. Parkers clear explanation I won't try again on this one
Time will tell. I wasn't much affected (about 100 west pilots) by Nic but my conscience wouldn't allow me to throw the good f/o's I work with under the bus and think only of myself. Nic is unfair plain and simple. If it stands it may well destroy this company. The loss is so egregious to most East pilots that many feel Nic would be the end to their careers. To ignore that fact is foolish. A compromise is the only durable solution.
One last time and I give up:
West won the Nic fair and square.
Nic was not a fair award.
Perhaps Mr. Nic is to blame. Perhaps ALPA East's poor performance. Perhaps ALPA West's cunning. But it is still not equitable.
Greed caused the west to refuse negotiations through ALPA to fix Nic. Now they will reap what they've sown. Years of litigation. Continued west downsizing. Job insecurity.
I have a friend who is a real estate tycoon. He could out-negotiate most anyone he deals with. He restrains himself out of a sense of morality when he knows the deal is starting to be unfair. I hear calls from the West for the East to show integrity and honor Nic. I call for the West to show integrity and admit that Nic was a windfall and compromise.
I give up.
BT
luvthe9
Veteran
- Aug 30, 2002
- 9,464
- 14,119
WHY WOULD THEY DO THIS NOW?
AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL
102ND REGULAR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING
September 9-10, 2008
SUBJECT
National Seniority Protocol
SOURCE
UAL MEC
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
See proposed resolution.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
WHEREAS the Air Line Pilots Association has been at the forefront of pilot labor representation in the airline industry since 1931, and has consistently been the champion of safety protocols that assure our passengers have the safest transportation system possible, and
WHEREAS the 77 year history of ALPA is replete with examples of bold decisions made by ALPA leaders in order to assure that measures, necessary to protect the economic bargaining rights and professional interests of its members, have been instituted and that the best interests of the profession have been secured, and,
WHEREAS opportunities to make significant and enduring policy changes that enhance the professional opportunities of every ALPA member come along rarely and are often precipitated by industry destabilizing events like those brought to bear on ALPA members with The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, the September 11th acts of war, the bankruptcy era, and the current manipulated inflation of the price of petroleum, and
WHEREAS the most unfulfilled professional benefit, recognized by all airline pilots and by ALPA members specifically, is the lack of a policy, derived from fundamental union principals, that enables and enforces the individual members’ ability to transfer their seniority, longevity, and operational experience as professionals from one airline employer to another, thereby allowing a manipulation of their entire career path by the actions of the very same capitalist cabal whose fundamental goal is to limit, degrade and minimize the essential role of pilots to the airline industry, and
WHEREAS parochial company loyalty, historically embraced by ALPA pioneers of previous eras, has been perverted and used against ALPA members as a capitalist leveraging tool that stifles the inherent right of professional pilots to collectively negotiate an economically sound and stable ratio of pay and work rules for identical job responsibilities using the continual underlying threat of losing the earned seniority benefits derived from their professional longevity at a particular airline while being compared to the economics of another airline (whipsawing), and
WHEREAS the fundamental principal of national seniority does not conflict with the current or future job prospects of pilots but instead extends a common system of advancement to be used at every ALPA carrier and bonds all ALPA pilots to the profession instead of to an individual airline; a national seniority list would assure a logical and rational adherence to a measurable, protected status of those pilots from a commonly defined starting point in their professional careers regardless of how many airlines may exist, regardless of the skill and economic acumen of the managements that run them, and regardless of the transient political influence of the day, and
WHEREAS the career security of any pilot who was able to transfer his seniority to another air carrier would liberate ALPA pilots and forever eliminate the ability of management to whipsaw or erode ALPA unity based on loss of job threats, economic fear or arbitrary merger awards, based on a perceived surviving carrier analogy, thus enabling ALPA to negotiate wages and work rules at all airlines based on the pilots’ collective evaluation of their true contribution and economic value to an air carrier,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Executive Board acknowledges this historic and momentous opportunity in time when several key air carrier contract amendable dates are so closely aligned, and which could be coordinated as part of this undertaking, that will launch a historic, new career security protocol for all ALPA pilots and by design, realign the true interests and career expectations of every pilot represented by ALPA both now and in the future, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the development of a national seniority protocol be assigned to a select National Seniority Committee (NSC) consisting of the President of ALPA; one pilot from each represented pilot group within group A, to be appointed by the Master Chairman of each MEC of the group; and one pilot representing each group designation: B1, B2, B3, B4 and C, each of whom shall be appointed by a consensus of the MEC Master Chairmen from each of the pilot groups represented within a classification; for a total of 11 members, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the National Seniority Committee will establish a single national seniority protocol that will be used to establish two separate lists reflecting the Canadian ALPA pilots and the United States ALPA pilots, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the protocol for an ALPA national seniority list will be developed by the NSC under a rigid timeline with a specific date for completion in 2009, and using a simple and transparent methodology that defines a starting point common to all professional air line pilots from which all seniority benefits and longevity will derive, and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that without discrimination to any pilot, the NSC will set and fix a methodology recognizing “benchmarks of career achievement†with associated “exercise rights†in order to minimize unrealistic windfalls/detriments to any pilot unless and until those common benchmarks have been met, regardless of whether the benchmarks have been achieved at an ALPA carrier or not, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon completion of the protocol, the NSC will present a single, unified explanation of the developed protocol to all ALPA members, and all other represented professional pilot groups, using all available communication tools before preferably submitting the NSC proposal for ALPA-wide membership ratification, Roll Call by the governing body, or the applicable rules as stipulated in the ALPA Constitution and By Laws, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon adoption as ALPA policy by the proper authorizing internal ALPA mechanisms, the national seniority protocol will be enforced as of that date and no ALPA Collective Bargaining Agreement will be signed by the President of the Association without full inclusion of this policy as a part thereof.
AIR LINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION, INTERNATIONAL
102ND REGULAR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEETING
September 9-10, 2008
SUBJECT
National Seniority Protocol
SOURCE
UAL MEC
BACKGROUND INFORMATION
See proposed resolution.
PROPOSED RESOLUTION
WHEREAS the Air Line Pilots Association has been at the forefront of pilot labor representation in the airline industry since 1931, and has consistently been the champion of safety protocols that assure our passengers have the safest transportation system possible, and
WHEREAS the 77 year history of ALPA is replete with examples of bold decisions made by ALPA leaders in order to assure that measures, necessary to protect the economic bargaining rights and professional interests of its members, have been instituted and that the best interests of the profession have been secured, and,
WHEREAS opportunities to make significant and enduring policy changes that enhance the professional opportunities of every ALPA member come along rarely and are often precipitated by industry destabilizing events like those brought to bear on ALPA members with The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, the September 11th acts of war, the bankruptcy era, and the current manipulated inflation of the price of petroleum, and
WHEREAS the most unfulfilled professional benefit, recognized by all airline pilots and by ALPA members specifically, is the lack of a policy, derived from fundamental union principals, that enables and enforces the individual members’ ability to transfer their seniority, longevity, and operational experience as professionals from one airline employer to another, thereby allowing a manipulation of their entire career path by the actions of the very same capitalist cabal whose fundamental goal is to limit, degrade and minimize the essential role of pilots to the airline industry, and
WHEREAS parochial company loyalty, historically embraced by ALPA pioneers of previous eras, has been perverted and used against ALPA members as a capitalist leveraging tool that stifles the inherent right of professional pilots to collectively negotiate an economically sound and stable ratio of pay and work rules for identical job responsibilities using the continual underlying threat of losing the earned seniority benefits derived from their professional longevity at a particular airline while being compared to the economics of another airline (whipsawing), and
WHEREAS the fundamental principal of national seniority does not conflict with the current or future job prospects of pilots but instead extends a common system of advancement to be used at every ALPA carrier and bonds all ALPA pilots to the profession instead of to an individual airline; a national seniority list would assure a logical and rational adherence to a measurable, protected status of those pilots from a commonly defined starting point in their professional careers regardless of how many airlines may exist, regardless of the skill and economic acumen of the managements that run them, and regardless of the transient political influence of the day, and
WHEREAS the career security of any pilot who was able to transfer his seniority to another air carrier would liberate ALPA pilots and forever eliminate the ability of management to whipsaw or erode ALPA unity based on loss of job threats, economic fear or arbitrary merger awards, based on a perceived surviving carrier analogy, thus enabling ALPA to negotiate wages and work rules at all airlines based on the pilots’ collective evaluation of their true contribution and economic value to an air carrier,
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Executive Board acknowledges this historic and momentous opportunity in time when several key air carrier contract amendable dates are so closely aligned, and which could be coordinated as part of this undertaking, that will launch a historic, new career security protocol for all ALPA pilots and by design, realign the true interests and career expectations of every pilot represented by ALPA both now and in the future, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the development of a national seniority protocol be assigned to a select National Seniority Committee (NSC) consisting of the President of ALPA; one pilot from each represented pilot group within group A, to be appointed by the Master Chairman of each MEC of the group; and one pilot representing each group designation: B1, B2, B3, B4 and C, each of whom shall be appointed by a consensus of the MEC Master Chairmen from each of the pilot groups represented within a classification; for a total of 11 members, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the National Seniority Committee will establish a single national seniority protocol that will be used to establish two separate lists reflecting the Canadian ALPA pilots and the United States ALPA pilots, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the protocol for an ALPA national seniority list will be developed by the NSC under a rigid timeline with a specific date for completion in 2009, and using a simple and transparent methodology that defines a starting point common to all professional air line pilots from which all seniority benefits and longevity will derive, and,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that without discrimination to any pilot, the NSC will set and fix a methodology recognizing “benchmarks of career achievement†with associated “exercise rights†in order to minimize unrealistic windfalls/detriments to any pilot unless and until those common benchmarks have been met, regardless of whether the benchmarks have been achieved at an ALPA carrier or not, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon completion of the protocol, the NSC will present a single, unified explanation of the developed protocol to all ALPA members, and all other represented professional pilot groups, using all available communication tools before preferably submitting the NSC proposal for ALPA-wide membership ratification, Roll Call by the governing body, or the applicable rules as stipulated in the ALPA Constitution and By Laws, and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that upon adoption as ALPA policy by the proper authorizing internal ALPA mechanisms, the national seniority protocol will be enforced as of that date and no ALPA Collective Bargaining Agreement will be signed by the President of the Association without full inclusion of this policy as a part thereof.
Here is the case I was referencing on my earlier post, see if the situation is similar. Funny that usapa never told you guys about this precedent setting case.
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 89-3350
June 14, 1990, Argued—July 30, 1990, Decided
"The system that ALPA has created for determining seniority in a merged work force is not biased in favor of one group of workers or prejudiced against another. It was as likely to yield an award in favor of Air Wisconsin's pilots as in favor of Mississippi Valley's. It is fair, and nothing more is required to comply with the duty of fair representation, since "so long as the union does not intentionally harm a member or class of members, it will be deemed to have represented its members fairly." Olsen v. United Parcel Service, 892 F.2d 1290, 1294 (7th Cir. 1990). That the system ALPA has created places a good deal of power in the hand of arbitrators is not a sign of "unfairness" in the limited sense relevant to evaluating claims of breach of the duty of fair representation, especially since the alternative would be to encourage continuing and acrimonious disputes among workers by opening seniority to continual revision. It is not in the interest of organized labor to incite workers to fight among themselves over job rights. Nor is it in the workers' own interest, behind the veil of ignorance, that is, before they know whether they have been the winner or loser of the arbitration. Here as elsewhere finality serves important social purposes and we certainly cannot pronounce ALPA unfair for giving the arbitrators' determination of seniority as much finality as it has done."
"We do not wish to sound starry-eyed about democracy. We realize that majority rule is not always efficacious and that majority preferences sometimes, perhaps often, are thwarted by the machinations of interest groups; and these and other systemic problems with aggregating preferences by voting are not touched by the efforts of the Landrum-Griffin Act, of which more later, to democratize union governance. But in general, and so far as we know also in the specific setting of collective bargaining representation in the airline industry, a majority is better protected by the electoral process than a minority is. It is therefore the minority that has the more legitimate fear concerning the behavior of the collective bargaining representative. That is why the legal duty of fair representation is oriented toward the concerns of minorities, whether a racial minority systematically discriminated against by the union or a group of dissidents on the outs with the union leadership whom the leadership seeks to punish or an individual worker with a grievance against the company whom the union deliberately and unjustifiably refuses to assist. This case has no flavor of any of these systematic failures of representation. The plaintiffs are unable to explain why, if ALPA is oppressing a majority of Air Wisconsin's pilots, the pilots have twice failed to vote ALPA out as their representative for collective bargaining."
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SEVENTH CIRCUIT
No. 89-3350
June 14, 1990, Argued—July 30, 1990, Decided
"The system that ALPA has created for determining seniority in a merged work force is not biased in favor of one group of workers or prejudiced against another. It was as likely to yield an award in favor of Air Wisconsin's pilots as in favor of Mississippi Valley's. It is fair, and nothing more is required to comply with the duty of fair representation, since "so long as the union does not intentionally harm a member or class of members, it will be deemed to have represented its members fairly." Olsen v. United Parcel Service, 892 F.2d 1290, 1294 (7th Cir. 1990). That the system ALPA has created places a good deal of power in the hand of arbitrators is not a sign of "unfairness" in the limited sense relevant to evaluating claims of breach of the duty of fair representation, especially since the alternative would be to encourage continuing and acrimonious disputes among workers by opening seniority to continual revision. It is not in the interest of organized labor to incite workers to fight among themselves over job rights. Nor is it in the workers' own interest, behind the veil of ignorance, that is, before they know whether they have been the winner or loser of the arbitration. Here as elsewhere finality serves important social purposes and we certainly cannot pronounce ALPA unfair for giving the arbitrators' determination of seniority as much finality as it has done."
"We do not wish to sound starry-eyed about democracy. We realize that majority rule is not always efficacious and that majority preferences sometimes, perhaps often, are thwarted by the machinations of interest groups; and these and other systemic problems with aggregating preferences by voting are not touched by the efforts of the Landrum-Griffin Act, of which more later, to democratize union governance. But in general, and so far as we know also in the specific setting of collective bargaining representation in the airline industry, a majority is better protected by the electoral process than a minority is. It is therefore the minority that has the more legitimate fear concerning the behavior of the collective bargaining representative. That is why the legal duty of fair representation is oriented toward the concerns of minorities, whether a racial minority systematically discriminated against by the union or a group of dissidents on the outs with the union leadership whom the leadership seeks to punish or an individual worker with a grievance against the company whom the union deliberately and unjustifiably refuses to assist. This case has no flavor of any of these systematic failures of representation. The plaintiffs are unable to explain why, if ALPA is oppressing a majority of Air Wisconsin's pilots, the pilots have twice failed to vote ALPA out as their representative for collective bargaining."
ok... I'll familiarize myself with the case. What case?
Never mind... You must have been adding it as I was posting. Got it.
exB717Flyer
Veteran
- Aug 20, 2002
- 1,106
- 599
... and USAPA won the NMB election. Hmmm....
Unable. That "tyranny of the majority" thing gets in the way.
I disagree. Let's have an arbitrator decide. Ooops, that doesn't work so good with Easties.
Not so. The war won't stop until the side with the tyranny of the majority gives up trying to screw the West. Have we not proven we won't negotiate with a gun to our head?
True. The ball is in USAPA's court. Do the right thing.
GorgeousGeorge
Senior
- Apr 29, 2008
- 326
- 357
You couldn't be more wrong reading that case and how it compares to the present situation. You might want to go back and look why the case was brought against ALPA and the fact that the circumstances at present have played out 180 degrees opposite of what transpired then.
Res Judicata
Veteran
I'm a pilot, former East, now working for a Major Airline represented by ALPA. I am in good standing. What don't you get?
I've been lurking between websites for a long time. I've had it with the East and their blind arrogance. That's all. No conspiracy, no lies, no agenda other than calling it how I see it. It's really not that complicated.
E
EastUS
Guest
QUOTE(javaboy @ May 9 2007, 06:10 PM)
lawsuit inevitable
you aint getting away with this one.
QUOTE
Posted on: May 9 2007, 08:46 PM
exB717Flyer' Whom are you referring to by "you"? We, the AWA pilots, didn't get away with anything. Both sides went into arbitration knowing the risks. And BTW, I'm part of the TWA Pilots' DFR lawsuit against ALPA, now in its fifth year of litigation and depositions aren't even over. If you're putting your hopes on a lawsuit you'd better have a big bank account ready and close to a decade to wait..."
Posted on: May 9 2007, 12:11 AM: exB717Flyer' "The only people who scream "DOH always" are those who would benefit from it."
Posted on: May 9 2007, 01:29 PM: exB717Flyer"When one projects one's own feelings on another the psychological term is "displacement".
'Sep 7 2008, 10:48 PM' exB717Flyer': "Do the right thing."
Fair enough sir. Exactly what IS "the right thing", for ALL concerned, at this point? The west refuses to participate in the new union. The east isn't about to ever say Yea Nic!, and hand such an abomination over to you, just to suit west wishes...and.."If you're putting your hopes on a lawsuit you'd better have a big bank account ready and close to a decade to wait..."
Seriously; What do you honestly suggest? I don't mean that in any smart-azzed way, but rather as an honest qustion here...
Posted May 6, 2007 QUOTE
If you continue or begin to engage in open warfare with each other the company WINS, not any of you."
exB717Flyer: "True. So far only one side seems to have declared war."
"QUOTE(nycbusdriver @ May 5 2007, 12:36 PM)
One doesn't have to read the entire 88 page award to see the unfairness of the result."
exB717Flyer: "I know better than to argue what's "fair". Afterall, that why there's an arbitration process. You can cry unfairness all day but your opinion carries no more weight than anyone else's. Only Nicolau's is what's binding."
Let me review this briefly = "You can cry unfairness all day but your opinion carries no more weight than anyone else's...." and nowadays it's "Do the right thing"?
Res Judicata
Veteran
Is that still true if the Wests votes are pre-engineered, even at 100% participation, to be nullified?
No. Of course not. Please stop insulting my intelligence.
I get the feeling that the East guys that post here don't give a damn what is legal, moral, or ethical. You have no obligations other than to yourselves. Forget Agreements, renege on promises, act in bad faith when it serves you. Even if the supreme court or Jesus Christ himself told you that USAPA is in violation of 1000 laws, you still don't care. No matter what you're told, from whatever the source, you're owed something...you're owed something you didn't earn and it should come from the sweat of another pilot. Your career was a disaster so now you, (because of majority rule) get to go back in time and insist/threaten/demand, that you in fact, started working for America West the same day you did USA and now you get to choose which airline will work best for you. That's plain wrong,illegal, and goes directly to the heart of your dysfunction as a group.
USAPA and the East Sicken me as a US Citizen and a lifelong union member.
The East's number 1 guy was no more "number 1" than the West's. At least now, The west has brought the fight to the doorsteps of those vindictive, immature, rank amateurs that are running the show with wreckless abandon. USAPA has ZERO idea how to actually run a Labor Union. That's why it's clear they're making it up as they go along...one day the TA means everything...the next day nothing...One day Captains authority, (fuel) means everything, the next day, (jumpseats) it means nothing. The only eyes the proverbial wool is being pulled over is on the East coast. USAPA fools no one else. Anywhere.
Perhaps USAPA makes a few beat down, pseudo tough guys, (M.K.) feel good about themselves, (finally) but as always, bullies are just bullies and will always lose in the end.
GorgeousGeorge
Senior
- Apr 29, 2008
- 326
- 357
All in the eyes of the beholder. If you in any way support ALPA, don't use the words trade unionism. Maybe the resolution that the UAUA MEC is bringing to the BOD is in the spirit of trade unionism. ALPA, its history, its arrogant mistakes and where it has taken the profession over the last 30 years is far from trade unionism. No one seems to care how once reviled Lorenzo alter-ego pilots and Scabs now walk around in good standing wearing ALPA pins, all in the name of union dues. All is forgotten, and what could be expected from an entity that acts as clearinghouse for dues and is a Law Firm first, a Corporation second, and a Union a distant third.
You are a bulldozer operator, a highly paid heavy equipment operator, and instead of making that clear to you, ALPA perpetuates a self defeating, ego-centric view of the gravitas of its pilots. When instead of instilling true blue collar, trade union ideas, it acts as a parasite sucking off the host pilot groups and seems content to let everyone head in different directions so long as it can hang on and suck away.
GorgeousGeorge
Senior
- Apr 29, 2008
- 326
- 357
Ahh, yes you understand ALPA's version of unionism, which is the path of least resistance so long as they get theirs. Why else stand back and let meger policy change twice in the last 20 years, 1986 and 1991. No elected officer sucking the ALPA teat will tackle anything politically unpopular and just leave it to the will of the majority. What you say? The will of the majority? How can that be? Well if you think the largest member airlines are well within their right of changing policyin ALPA to affect everyone so long as it constitutes the majority, UAL for DOH in 1986 when their pilot group was older and the changing positions in 1991, when their member demographic changed, how could you possible object to USAPA? They simply decided as the majority of ALPA did in 1991 to object and change their policy. As one member in an "association", it took a decert and election where everyone voted directly on the C & BL, and not just an Executive Board at a resort down in Bal Harbour, FL away from their members. USAPA actually based seniority and its merger policy off seniority principles as they exist in the real "trade union" labor world. So please don't speak like an authority with some moral mission, your view of things is just like any other poster and your qualifications are just like everyone else on this board, you have a rectal orafice.
Res Judicata
Veteran
I Agree with you 90%. However, that does not give USAPA carte blache. If ALPA tried to be a "bulldozer" as you claim, then USAPA is trying, (fruitlessly) to be the "big bang". When I was at US Air we worked under the Parity +1% concept. Nobody hated ALPA, there was never a drive to get rid of them. Only when the Easts legal obligations and commitments became distasteful, (to themselves) was ALPA thrown off the property and subsequently blamed for years of perceived neglect. Everything you claim to hate about ALPA in your post can be magnified many times over by the beligerant and unchecked antics of USAPA. ALPA was then, and is now, the guy you see in the mirror. No amount of finger pointing, no bag sticker, and no fake union is going to change that fact. USAPA fools no one. I was there. Lyle Hogg was my BCP in Dulles at the time. They closed Dulles to Metrojet, we all went over to BWI and worked under Jim Courbisuer, (sp?)
GorgeousGeorge
Senior
- Apr 29, 2008
- 326
- 357
You know the company may finally decide its in it's best interest to keep you guys a part for ever. They don't need the acrimony or the hostile work place law suits or heaven forbid worse. Each layer of hostility and ill will can only motivate the company further in that direction.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
