2014 Pilot Discussion

[Bill Brasky]

First off, I would venture to say that at least 50% of the West is over 50 years old, so your false BS about young guys and 25 years is just that BS.

Second, I only remember once the company explaining at a crew news with Kirby what was meant by "accepting", and that was that they did indeed "accept" the list, and were waiting for a JCBA to implement it, but in the same breath he said there will never be a joint contract because he felt uscab was incapable of achieving one! Is that the time you are talking about?

Now, again in court numerous time they also said they "accepted" the list and that it was the only "status quo" list for all LCC pilots.

So, here we are, only ever had one accepted list covering all LCC pilots, that the company felt was status quo, meanwhile e scab union was never able to negotiate some other list and have it ratified in a contract. So, it is the Nic.

Peace out!

Except that after the 9th of December it ceased to exist, someone might convince themselves you could be correct.  If anybody tries an endaround to avoid representation of all the former LCC pilots, more lawyers are gonna get rich.  Count on it.

 

[nic4us]

What do you want to bet?  Did you even read the East bid that closes in 4 days?  Dude, get some more permatex for that gasket you're blowin'

I do not make bets with reneging malcontents who I am sure would welch once they lost!

No I did not read the bid...was there any 757/190 openings? It seems the West is owed some seats.

No blown gaskets here. It is just like when the 9th ruled. I came on here pointing out the facts after a couple of days of the east blowing their wad all over each other just to find out how deep in denial, and how incomplete an understanding you idiots have of what just happened.

Same here, Silver just ruled uscaba is toast, and you morons are high fiveing yourself to no end.

Get a grip, once the APA gets certified the scabs will no longer have any legal right to speak for the West. Now take it one step further, do you think for one minute the West is not going to introduce the Nic into the SLI?

 

[Bill Brasky]

Yea, whatever.

 

[nic4us]

Except that after the 9th of December it ceased to exist, someone might convince themselves you could be correct.  If anybody tries an endaround to avoid representation of all the former LCC pilots, more lawyers are gonna get rich.  Count on it.

Oh, for sure more lawyers are gonna make money.

First there will be the scabs trying to keep the dues money they collected to fund lawsuits unrelated to administration and enforcement of a collective bargaining agreement.

So, the West is gonna have to sue to shut down the scab union once it is no longer our legally elected rep. However, federal prosecutors will likely get involved here, so, not much out of pocket for the West.


I got to ask. You really do not see that once the APA is certified, uscaba has absolutely no rights in regard to representing the West...and actually, the east either. You actually think a former union will have some standing?

 

[Keroseneuser]

Oh good grief,   it's clear from Silvers ruling that the NIC is a dead issue.   If you are sending money on that premise you are an idiot.
 
It is also clear that USAPA will be gone before long.   Exactly when is up for debate.
 
If anybody thinks the APA is going to be their friend in these upcoming SLI talks you are also an idiot.   APA will be out for the most they can get for every single pilot on their list.   
 
In reference to the above,  the junior APA captain listed in published stuff is a 1993 hire md-80 driver........If anybody thinks they are going to give you the NIC and put a 2005 hired F/O above their 1993 hired Capt. you need your head examined.
 
The only way you will ever see an APA sponsored "NIC list" is if they staple the entire east and west pilot list below their bottom f/o.    Which they would do if they could,  but fortunately the new laws were crafted to avoid just such an event.
 
The BEST possible course of action that the west can come out of this with is the use of 3 lists and current position as of DEC 9 2013.    Then everybody goes into this where we all stand right now.   
 
I don't see anything good coming from the west continuing to sue everybody in sight.   I think the only thing the west can do by pushing more "NIC is it" is to royally screw themselves in the long run. 
 
The AOL leadership is starting to remind me of the last days of the Third Reich when Hitler was in his bunker with Soviet shells falling all around it muttering  "We just need to send the elderly out to fight and keep resisting"
 
NIC is dead,  straight DOH with no restrictions is dead,   hopefully we can come up with something with APA that pisses off all three lists, east, west and APA...then we know it is at least fair.    

 

[Bill Brasky]

Oh, for sure more lawyers are gonna make money.

First there will be the scabs trying to keep the dues money they collected to fund lawsuits unrelated to administration and enforcement of a collective bargaining agreement.

So, the West is gonna have to sue to shut down the scab union once it is no longer our legally elected rep. However, federal prosecutors will likely get involved here, so, not much out of pocket for the West.


I got to ask. You really do not see that once the APA is certified, uscaba has absolutely no rights in regard to representing the West...and actually, the east either. You actually think a former union will have some standing?

I think you're an idiot if you think that ALL the LCC pilots won't be represented, per the MB law, in the process.  Just exactly whom do you think USAPA is? 
 
Come back to reality before you give yourself a stroke over it.  Oh, and I never saw any East guys threaten to cross west picket lines.  No scabs on the East.

 

[nic4us]

I think you're an idiot if you think that ALL the LCC pilots won't be represented, per the MB law, in the process.  Just exactly whom do you think USAPA is? 
 

Not at all...I think all LCC pilots will be represented..just not by usapa.

The MB law gives rights to the EMPLOYEES of merging companies, not bargaing agents, and most certainly not FORMER bargaining agents.

You will be represented by the APA. They will set up a process under which MB is followed per the MOU.

Couple of side notes, uscaba is still currently the CBA, and can make a deal per MB, problem is the company is on the hook if it does not meet the MB "fair and equitable" standard.

Also, MB is specific in that it will not be used for mergers prior to it's enactment, so it cannot be used for the LCC combination. So, Nic still stand for LCC.

Finally, all the parties to the Nic are still here...you ain't getting out of it. No judge ever vacated the award, and the West, who will also be represented in the MB process will insist on it's use. My bet is any arbitration panel will enforce the warnings 5 out of 5 federal judges have issued against uscaba.

 

[algflyr]

Not at all...I think all LCC pilots will be represented..just not by usapa.
...
You will be represented by the APA. They will set up a process under which MB is followed per the MOU.
 
 

 
I know you understand that USAPA's constitution and bylaws say mergers should be by DOH. Do you realize the the APA's constitution and bylaws say that an acquired carrier's seniority list will be placed at the bottom (stapled) of the American seniority list? That is their official opening position... Do you want that? I think a 3 way integration would be the best for all 3 pilot groups... Probably the way it will happen. Everyone equally pissed off...

 

[nic4us]

Kerosenuser

You are spreading FUD.

Nobody thinks a 2005 hire is going next to a 1993 hire md80 captain, and the nic would not do that.

A fair and equitable integration will take place. Most likely by equipment and status.

 

[nic4us]

I know you understand that USAPA's constitution and bylaws say mergers should be by DOH. Do you realize the the APA's constitution and bylaws say that an acquired carrier's seniority list will be placed at the bottom (stapled) of the American seniority list? That is their official opening position... Do you want that? I think a 3 way integration would be the best for all 3 pilot groups... Probably the way it will happen. Everyone equally pissed off...

Hey, you are catching on......and American is the official "acquiring" company this time, even though Parker said in a crew news"hey, we are buying them" . But it does not matter what then unions CBLs say if they are in contrast with law.

It will end up a three way....Native American can say staple, east can DOH, the West will say equipment and status using the Nic.

Everybody is going to be pissed...Native cause they don't get their staple, east cause they don't get DOH and West cause we had to put up with you scabs for the last 8 years and it hurt the status portion of the argument because you morons were willing to under cut our pay on LOA 93 to steal our jobs.

 

[Keroseneuser]

By equipment and status....your words.  So if the Nic list makes all west pilots captains.....as it would since the east junior bus drivers are 88 hires....then that will indeed put a 2005 west hire next to the 93 md-80 driver...actually it would put him above the 93 guy since as you said equipment and status would make the bottom east 88 hire the junior captain beside the 93 md-80 guy.   Unless you really expect Parker to bump and flush experienced captains and mass train all the west instantly at great cost to appease you.
 
Yep APA I am sure is chomping at the bit over that prospect.
 
I still think you will do nothing but royally screw yourself if you go in a meeting with APA yelling "NIC is it"...but knock yourself out.
 
 
Also, exactly what jobs was it that the east stole?   You have every single airframe your brought to the merger.    By Parkers statements he is keeping all your pilots flying by giving you 24% of the east flying......I fail to see how you flying 24% of the east routes is the east stealing your jobs?  Oh, when you say stealing you mean we did not give you the east retirement attrition....and since we are retiring 200 or so a year and you are retiring 20 that constitutes stealing in your world I guess.
 
Silver wanted to help the west and legally could not do anything because no law has been broken.   Now considering that,  what do you think the APA is going to think about "NIC is it"?
 
Too much time has passed on the NIC,  Silver alluded to that in her Dicta.   The MOU is the contract now, and it did not trigger the NIC, also stated by Silver.   The MOU voided everything before and sets us up for merger with APA.    You cannot read the MOU and take it as anything else.    APA, USAPA, and the company will follow the MOU as it is to avoid any issues.  Especially the company, the last thing Parker wants to do is piss off 10000 of his 15000 pilots.   The west or the east is expendable to Parker.    That fact is why I think the west can do nothing but royally screw themselves by screaming NIC is it.   Remember as it stands right now USairways is a wholly owned subsidiary of American,  basically an American eagle,  which no longer has minimum fleet counts and only a token pay protection in place.    Somebody is going to be flying all those 190's American has on order.    I figure those low paying gems go to the biggest thorn in Parkers side.

 

[Keroseneuser]

Also NIC your statement about the 25 year thing earlier......a quick run down of the NIC award shows many cases where west pilots were still in middle school when the east pilot placed below them was flying 737's, 727's or DC-9's for this company.
 
Saw several west pilots that were 11 years old when the east guy one number below them were new hires with this company.    If you use the NIC list with APA that 11 year old mentioned will fall in the neighborhood of 100 numbers senior to that 93 md-80 Capt.....(The 11 year old had grown a bit and was 17 by the time 1993 rolled around,  just turned legal to get a private pilot certificate,  ATP age was still 6 years away)   Yeah APA is going to be all for that!
 
No matter how you stack it,  there is no way to make putting a new hire over a 17 year never furloughed pilot look like anything but a land grab.   Your insistence that we use the NIC list in the integration with American does the exact same thing over there that it did here.    APA has even less humor about such things than the east did.     The 11 year old is the most extreme example I saw in a quick look,  but there are many who were still in highschool when the guy one number below them was shooting CAT II's in Jurassic jet dc-9s in and out of the busiest airspace in this country.

 

[Freighterguynow]

Keep looking. I saw 3 who were 9 years old when the one now junior to them was flying the line.

 

[end_of_alpa]

For those of you who "believe" that USAPA loses all representational rights if and when APA becomes the certified bargaining agent for all of us you might wish to read what Judge Silver read and the corresponding case law.  I'll post the links but the important part is that the MOU controls who represents "the parties" going into it which is APA and USAPA.  Reading section 26 of the MOU and corresponding case law it becomes legally clear that Agency Law is the controlling law and McCaskill-Bond leaves APA, AMR and the USAPA merger committee to finish what is already memorialized in the MOU.
 
Here is what Judge Silver READ (starting on page 33):
http://www.americanbar.org/content/dam/aba/events/labor_law/2012/03/railway_airline_labor_law_committee_midwinter_meeting/mw2012rla_jermanjoshi.authcheckdam.pdf
 
Here is Thomas v. Republic Airways Holdings, Inc.:
http://www.leagle.com/decision/In%20FDCO%2020120305528
 
By way of example:

"Thus, sections 3 and 13 of the CAB's labor protective provisions in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger became statutory law.
The Midwest/RAH merger closed on July 31, 2009. The Frontier/RAH merger closed on October 1, 2009.
The unions representing the pilots of the six airlines formed merger committees to negotiate an agreement with RAH to resolve the issue of seniority integration in accordance with sections 3 and 13 of the labor protective provisions enacted by the McCaskill-Bond Amendment and provided in the collective bargaining agreements. Those negotiations resulted in an agreement, effective November 3, 2009, entitled Section 13(b) Dispute Resolution Agreement (Agreement)."
 

 
Here are two examples explaining the Law of Agency:
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_agency
 
http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/agency
 
If you READ THE MOU USAPA will NOT lose it's right under the MTA to complete the process outlined under the Law of Agency as outlined in 5. 6. 10.f 10.g & 26. through 29.
 

"5. US Airways, and its successors, if any, shall continue to recognize and treat with USAPA as the representative of the pilots employed by US Airways until another representative for the pilot craft or class is certified by the National Mediation Board (the "NMB"). Subject to the provisions of Paragraph 27, negotiations to convert this Memorandum and the MTA into the JCBA and any implementation or other interim agreement, if any, shall be conducted with USAPA and APA jointly, until such time as one union is certified by the NMB to be the collective bargaining representative of the combined pilot craft or class. At that time, the duly-certified representative shall have exclusive authority to negotiate on behalf of the pilots with respect to the JCBA. It is the Parties' intention that the JCBA shall replace any and all prior collective bargaining agreements for USAPA; however, for APA, the JCBA shall be an amendment to the MTA.
 
6. During the period US Airways is obligated to bargain with USAPA, it will provide information requested by duly authorized representatives of USAPA's Negotiating Advisory and Merger Committees that is reasonably related to the Merger, subject to the execution of standard confidentiality agreements by USAPA and/or affected individuals upon US Airways' request. US Airways will similarly provide such information on such conditions to APA. Notwithstanding the foregoing, US Airways shall continue to supply information pursuant to Attachment M of the Basic East Agreement in matters unrelated to the Merger.
 
 
10f. A Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement ("Protocol Agreement") consistent with McCaskill-Bond and this Paragraph 10 will be agreed upon within 30 days of the Effective Date. The Protocol Agreement will set forth the process and protocol for conducting negotiations and arbitration, if applicable, and will include a methodology for allocating the reimbursement provided for in Paragraph 7. The company(ies) will be parties to the arbitration, if any, in accordance with McCaskill-Bond. The company(ies) shall provide information requested by the merger representatives for use in the arbitration, if any, in accordance with requirements of McCaskill-Bond, provided that the information is relevant to the issues involved in the arbitration, and the requests are reasonable and do not impose undue burden or expense, and so long as the merger representatives agree to
appropriate confidentiality terms.
 
10g. This Memorandum is not a waiver of any argument that participants may make in the seniority integration process. Nor do the provisions of this Memorandum constitute an admission as to the appropriate allocation of flying following the expiration of the protections in Paragraph 8 of this Memorandum, or the manner in which the respective pre-merger carriers would have operated in the absence of a merger, or the job entitlements or equities that arguably underlie the construction of an integrated seniority list, or for any other purpose. This Memorandum may be offered into evidence or shown to a mediator as background information and to describe the actual operations of the separate carriers prior to expiration of the protections in Paragraph 8 of this Memorandum.
 
 
26. APA shall file a single carrier petition with the NMB as soon as practicable after the Effective Date, when APA determines that the facts support the legal requirements for the filing of a petition but in no event later than four months after the Effective Date. If and when the NMB makes a single carrier finding, the single carrier acknowledged by the NMB and the certified representative shall be governed by this Memorandum.
 
27. If and when the NMB makes a single-carrier finding, the organization certified to represent the pilots of the single carrier, the single carrier acknowledged by the NMB and the certified organization shall promptly engage or re-engage in negotiations to achieve a JCBA to be applicable to the carrier that will be the product of the Merger. In the event that such negotiations are not completed within 30 days of the NMB's certification, New American Airlines will offer final and binding interest arbitration under Section 7 of the RLA, and the organization will accept such proffer, to resolve once and for all the terms of the JCBA. The arbitration decision shall be issued no later than 60 days after the close of the 30-day negotiation period. A panel of three arbitrators led by Richard Bloch shall serve as the arbitrators for this process. If Arbitrator Bloch declines to serve in this capacity or is unable to resolve the parties’ dispute, the parties shall select another arbitrator. The arbitrator’s jurisdiction and award will be limited to fashioning provisions which are consistent with the terms of the MTA, including provisions which implement the terms of the MTA or facilitate the integration of pilots under the terms of the MTA. The arbitrator’s award specifically shall adhere to the economic terms of the MTA and shall not change the MTA’s Scope terms (Paragraph 25 of this Memorandum) or the modifications generated through the process set forth in Paragraph 24 of this Memorandum.
 
28. US Airways and USAPA agree to be bound and abide by the arbitration decision contemplated by Letter of Agreement 12-05 of the 2012 CBA. Nothing in the MTA shall modify the decision of the arbitration panel thereunder.
 
29. Attachment C summarizes the timelines prescribed by this Memorandum for the creation of the MTA, JCBA, and integrated seniority list and shall not prevent the Parties from developing the JCBA earlier."
 

I have posted here what the LAW says.  Unfortunately, Judge Silvers "dicta" through all of this has been the driving force behind the FUD.  DO NOT FALL FOR IT.
 
In sum total, whether APA survives as the representative or USAPA, both THE COMPANY AND THE SURVIVING REPRESENTATIVE ARE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THE MOU.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Got PDF from buddy at APA. Here's page 1:

January 10, 2014 Filed Electronically at OLA-efile@nmb.gov
The Honorable Linda Puchala, Chairman The Honorable Harry Hoglander, Member The Honorable Nicholas Geale, Member National Mediation Board
1301 K Street, NW Washington, DC 20572-0001
Re: Notice of Merger Involving American Airlines Group Inc. (formerly known as AMR Corporation) and US Airways Group, Inc.
Dear Chairman Puchala and Members Hoglander and Geale:
This letter constitutes notice pursuant to the National Mediation Boards Merger Procedures and NMB Representation Manual Section 19.3 that on December 9, 2013, American Airlines Group Inc. (formerly known as AMR Corporation) and US Airways Group, Inc. implemented a merger agreement dated February 13, 2013, resulting in the formers acquisition of the latter, including its wholly-owned subsidiary US Airways, Inc. (US Airways). In light of the closing of this transaction, and the other developments described below, we are providing the NMB with information concerning the operational integration that has already occurred at the two mainline carriers i.e., US Airways and American Airlines, Inc. (American) as well as the steps that will soon be taken to complete the integration process.1
Common Ownership
As a result of implementing the merger agreement, American and US Airways Group, Inc. are now each wholly-owned subsidiaries of American Airlines Group Inc., which, as noted above, is the new name for AMR Corporation. US Airways (the mainline carrier) remains a wholly-owned subsidiary of US Airways Group, Inc. American and US Airways are now operating under the American Airlines name in various respects, and will be collectively referred to herein as the New American.
All of the outstanding stock of AMR Corporation has been converted into common stock in American Airlines Group Inc., and each outstanding share of common stock of US Airways Group, Inc. has been exchanged for one newly-issued share of American Airlines Group Inc. common stock. Beginning on December 9, 2013, common shares issued by American Airlines Group Inc. have been traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the ticker symbol AAL and convertible preferred shares have been traded on the same market under the ticker symbol AALCP.2 On that date, Doug Parker, Chief Executive Officer of American Airlines

It looks valid.  First off, usually the biggest trigger for 19.4 Initiation of Procedure for Determination of a Single Transportation System is a single FAA Certificate of Convenience and Necessity.  I do not expect the NMB to issue anything until that happens (I'm not saying it couldn't, I'm just saying that Single Certificate is a certifiable measurement of completeness and is all I have ever seen with certifying Airline Employee unions).
 
Here is a good read as to how the NMB operates.  Also you can go to their website and read for yourself how they determine Single Transportation Systems with the various and numerous rulings abounding thereof.
 
http://www.nmb.gov/representation/representation-manual.pdf
 
You may wish to note that the NMB HAS conditionally approved or to that effect that an INTEGRATED SENIORITY LIST must be completed prior to a ruling.
 

"Factors Indicating a Single Transportation System 
 
The following are some indicia of a single transportation system:
(1) published combined schedules or combined routes;
(2) standardized uniforms;
(3) common marketing, markings or insignia;
(4) integrated essential operations such as
scheduling or dispatching;
(5) centralized labor and personnel operations;
(6) combined or common management, corporate officers, and board of directors;
(7) combined workforce; and,
(8) common or overlapping ownership.
 

What happens in the here and now with the APA is not the same as what happened with US Airways and AWA.  Not by a long shot.
 
Secondly, from what I am reading just from what you present....this isn't any kind of "smoking gun" considering the process outlined in the MOU is being complied with.