AAA ALPA Thread 9-14 to 9-21, East ALPA here

Status
Not open for further replies.

USA320Pilot

Veteran
May 18, 2003
8,175
1,539
www.usaviation.com
US Airways MEC Merger Committee Update - September 12, 2007

Since the Nicolau Award was issued, efforts have been proceeding on two fronts to address the Award. While you have been getting numerous updates about individual activities, the Merger Committee would like to take the opportunity to bring it all together and give you an overview of where we are and where we’re headed.

As we discuss these issues, it is important to keep in mind that there are four parties involved: the AAA and AWA Pilots, ALPA International and Management. Each of these parties have very specific goals.

The AWA Pilots want the award implemented ASAP in order to capture US Airways Pilots jobs vacated by attrition. For every five pilots who retire, four of them are US Airways Pilots and they view these jobs as lost opportunities as each day goes by. The US Airways Pilots want the award vacated, but for now, we are capturing our own attrition evidenced by the recalling and hiring of pilots that has been taking place. ALPA International would like to see a settlement, through negotiations, which is why the Rice Committee was established. The Association is also wrestling with the decertification effort. As for management, while they once threaten separate operations to influence negotiations, they now indicate they wish to have these issues settled so that they can prepare for industry consolidation.

For our pilots, there are three main issues with the Nicolau Award. First, protection of our jobs. We bring about 1,200 captain jobs to the merger with AWA bringing about 850. Implementation of the Nicolau Award causes these numbers to reverse, with the US Airways count decreasing and the America West count increasing. The negative effects from this situation increase as the years go by for the foreseeable future. Clearly the America West pilots are benefiting from US Airways attrition at the expense of US Airways pilots. Our captain jobs are being handed over to the America West pilots. The America West pilots think they have an entitlement to the jobs brought to the merger by US Airways. This sense of entitlement includes our premium transcontinental flying in which they brought none to the merger. As a result of the Northwest-Republic merger, Northwest pilots’ Wide Body International flying was protected for twenty years. The AWA sense of entitlement is indicated by their continued insistence that ALPA hand over the Award as is.

The second issue is the next merger. As we stated above, Mr. Parker makes no secret of his desire to do another deal. Under the Nicolau Award, many of our pilots will be blocked from accessing the attrition we brought to the merger by AWA pilots with far less service at their carrier. This situation will be magnified by another merger unless the issue is addressed in one or more of the ways discussed below.

The third issue relates to furloughs. A pilot with 16 years of service should not be furloughed while a pilot who had only six months of service when the merger was announced remains working.

In addition to just keeping the operations separate, there are at least three other ways to address these serious issues. The merged list can be re-sequenced. The bidding restrictions accompanying the list can be altered and, additional contract provisions can be negotiated.

Subsequent to our presentation on May 21st in Herndon, the ALPA Executive Council passed resolutions directing the two MECs to “explore consensual approaches that promote mutual career protection and mutual success, as part of achieving acceptable collective bargaining outcomes that improve pay, benefits, work rules and job security for both pilot groupsâ€. The Executive Council also recognizes that “serious issues exist affecting the ability of both pilot groups to complete and ratify a merged collective bargaining agreementâ€.

The Nicolau list is currently being held by ALPA, something that has never happened before. Captain Prater has appointed the Rice Committee consisting of ALPA First Vice President Paul Rice (UAL), Executive Board member David Webb (FDX), and Executive Council member Ray Miller (NWA), to work with both sides to try and find a solution that we all can live with.

We currently have a stand off. The America West pilots are sitting with a huge windfall and want the Award implemented along with pay, benefit and work rule improvements. The US Airways pilots have made it clear that they aren’t about to ratify a merged contract including those improvements, if it also implements the Nicolau Award. If the Nicolau Award stands as is, the US Airway pilots may take themselves and the America West pilots out of ALPA. The company for its part is currently not interested in agreeing to separate contract improvements for the US Airways pilots.

The Rice Committee has no small challenge before it. Clearly it is in the Association’s best interest to try and work out an agreement. If the Association were to force a solution on either side, the battles would just be starting. To do nothing and allow the Nicolau Award to stand would cause a schism within the post-merger pilot group and be detrimental to the Association. Captain Prater certainly doesn’t want to have as the first significant event of his presidency the most damaging defection from ALPA since American Airlines. Obviously all ALPA pilots benefit if pilot pay and working conditions can be significantly improved at US Airways, but we won’t stand by and have that accomplished at the cost of the East pilot’s seniority. It will be very difficult to break the current logjam.

The Rice Committee has begun meeting with the Negotiating Committees from both sides. The Rice Committee’s focus so far has been on using contract provisions to address our issues. They have floated the ideas of doing this through a single merged contract and a single operation or through separate contracts and separate operations. Our MEC has taken the position that the operations should remain separate indefinitely. Meetings are scheduled to continue between the two Negotiating Committees and the Rice Committee.

The other venue in which we are fighting the Nicolau Award is in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. The MEC has retained Roland Wilder of Baptiste and Wilder, P.C., the firm that represented the Shuttle pilots when they were merged into USAir. Dan Katz, our merger attorney, could not represent us for this case as he represents ALPA in other matters creating a conflict of interest.

On June 26th we filed an application to vacate the Nicolau Award in the District of Columbia Superior Court. The lawsuit is filed under the District of Columbia Arbitration Act. We filed in state court because the arbitration under ALPA Merger Policy is between two labor organizations that are not subject to Section 301 of the Labor-Management Relations Act (that is part of the National Labor Relations Act (“NLRAâ€). Since Section 301 does not apply, the federal courts have no jurisdiction over ALPA Merger Policy and the arbitration is subject to state law. The District of Columbia was selected because the arbitration hearings occurred there.

Under the DC Arbitration Act, a party can ask the court to vacate an arbitration award where the arbitrator exceeded his powers under the arbitration agreement. If the arbitration award does not “draw its essence†from the agreement (that is, the award does not conform to the requirements of the agreement) it can be set aside. Our argument under the Arbitration Act is that the Nicolau Award violates the ALPA Merger Policy prohibition on granting one group windfalls at the expense of the other. We also argue that the award failed to fulfill other goals of ALPA Merger Policy to “minimize detrimental changes to career expectations†and to “maintain or improve pre-merger pilot status.†(The award, not the merger transaction has caused the detrimental changes to US Airways pilots). Finally, we argue that the Award contradicts its own factual findings regarding the active status of pilots and the expectations of AWA pilots for wide-body captaincies.

The Superior Court set an initial scheduling conference for October 5, 2007. Due to AWA pilots filing a Notice of Removal to federal court on July 24, 2007, that date has been canceled and the Superior Court action stayed (technically, the case is dismissed in Superior Court unless and until the federal court orders the case returned to Superior Court).

The Notice of Removal filed by the AWA pilots is a procedural maneuver permitted under federal law when a party believes that a state court action is actually subject to federal court jurisdiction. The principal basis for federal jurisdiction in a labor case is the presence of a “federal question†(that is, a lawsuit under the federal constitution, treaties or statutes). The AWA pilots filed their Notice of Removal alleging that the AAA MEC’s challenge to the Nicolau Award presented a federal question. The federal question alleged by the AWA pilots is that the arbitration award challenge actually states a Duty of Fair Representation claim against ALPA and the relief we seek (setting aside the Nicolau Award) seeks to dictate bargaining proposals to ALPA (since ALPA presents the award produced by the merger process to the carrier.). The AWA pilots did not file a response in the Superior Court to our application under the Arbitration Act.

The AWA pilots filed the Notice of Removal as a gambit to bring ALPA National into the dispute on the side of the AWA pilots. It is also an attempt to get the AWA MEC dismissed from the lawsuit (on the ground that the AWA MEC owes no DFR to the Airways pilots—which is correct, but irrelevant).

In response to the Notice of Removal, we filed a “motion to remand†the lawsuit to the Superior Court (if the motion is granted the federal court would order the case returned to the DC Superior Court). The basis of our motion is that no federal question is presented since the ALPA Merger Policy is subject to state law and we do not allege any DFR violation by ALPA National in the Superior Court complaint. In addition to returning the lawsuit to Superior Court, we have asked the federal court to order the AWA MEC to pay the attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in seeking the remand.

The AWA pilots have made obvious their intent to entangle ALPA National in the dispute by filing a motion to “implead†ALPA to the lawsuit. The motion asks the federal court to add ALPA as a defendant in the lawsuit and order ALPA to participate in the case as a defendant. We have filed our opposition to this motion based on the same grounds of our motion to remand—our complaint does not state any claim against ALPA and ALPA is not a party to the arbitration agreement since it is to remain strictly neutral under ALPA Merger Policy.

The AWA pilots will file their reply on their motion to implead ALPA and their opposition to our motion to remand on September 14, 2007. We will then file a reply brief on the motion to remand responding to the AWA pilots’ opposition.

Once all of the papers on the two motions are filed, we anticipate that the federal court will order a hearing date on the motions. We cannot know when that will occur, but it will likely take place sometime in late October or in November. Because our motion to remand challenges the jurisdiction of the federal court, it will first address whether it should send the case back to Superior Court before it addresses whether ALPA should be involved in the case. The Superior Court case is stayed pending the decision of the federal court on the motion to remand. If the federal court grants our motion to remand and sends the case back to Superior Court, the Superior Court will set a new scheduling conference date and we will then have a new trial schedule for the case.

As we proceed on these two fronts, the best we can do is take it a step at a time. There is no quick fix for the Nicolau Award. It is going to take time to reach any resolution that is acceptable to the US Airways pilots, and during that time, we are capturing our own attrition.

Capt. Bob Kirch
Capt. Phil Carey
F/O Kevin Barry
 
US Airways MEC CODE-A-PHONE UPDATE - September 13, 2007

This is Arnie Gentile with a US Airways MEC update for Thursday, September 13th, with three new items.

Item 1. The MEC reconvened its third quarter meeting this morning and processed 15 items in plenary. Over the past two days, the MEC passed more than 20 resolutions, including:

-- Passing a resolution recognizing that US Airways pilots have faced multiple sequential months of 95 hour pay caps and 5 hour flexes for the majority of 2007 and the amount of time away from home that is required to fly such monthly schedules, creating hardships that our pilots' families endure during such high workloads. Since holiday months are traditionally time spent with family and friends, the MEC designates November 2007 as “SAP Awareness Month" so as to offer some relief from the hardships placed on the pilots' families. During November’s "SAP Awareness Month 2007,â€￾ the US Airways MEC members, officers, committee members and all ALPA members on AFB status, will limit their scheduled hours to the minimum allowed through SAP and any other legal means.

-- Appointing Capt. Dave Ciabattoni to make the presentation to ALPA’s Executive Council regarding the AAA MEC Transition Agreement Dispute concerning US Airways acquiring a single FAA operating certificate by US Airways.

-- Approving the financial operating plan that the communications and Strike Prep committees created, for submission to the Executive Council for their approval.

A compilation of all the actions from the third quarter meeting will posted shortly under What's New.

The MEC adjourned its meeting at 3:30 p.m.

Item 2. Your Merger Committee is releasing a very important update that discusses many of our issues involving all aspects of the current merger situation. It discusses the four main parties involved and our main issues with the Nicolau award. It also updates us on the Rice Committee and gives a complete brief on the current litigation situation. Although there are some opinions in this document, you will find many facts pertinent to our situation. This document is a must-read for all US Airways pilots and it will be emailed to all pilots and posted under What’s New.

Item 3. The Wilson Center for Public Research began polling both the US Airways and America West pilots yesterday. This is not a US Airways MEC poll. It has been initiated by ALPA National for use by the Rice Committee. If and how you answer questions will have an impact on the Rice Committee. If you have any questions or comments about this poll, please contact your elected representatives.

News you can use:

W.A.R. Item 911

AB 320PH 2b.10.5 Please reference appropriate PH

Do not start an engine until pushback complete when aircraft is being directed by hand signals only.

Educate to Vacate:

At the May 9th session of the Joint Negotiating Committee, it was revealed to the assembled representatives of both pilot groups and ALPA National, that a project code-named “Project Zanzibarâ€￾ was in place for America West Airlines in 2005, and that the legal papers for a Chapter 11 Bankruptcy filing had been prepared and a plan developed for a America West bankruptcy in the event that the merger with US Airways failed.

Equal pay for Equal Work:

It has been 13 days since September 1, 2007, the start of retro active pay

Money to be paid to each Group 2 Captain is $640

Money to be paid to each Group 2 First Officer is $330.

Follow the three-prong approach, fly safe and thanks for listening.
 
Airline Unions are not covered under the NLRA.

State laws are not applied to airline workers and Federal Law supercedes State.

Don't let the facts get in your way!
 
State laws are not applied to airline workers and Federal Law supercedes State.


Actually, state laws _do_ apply to airline workers, unless superseded by Federal law.

I imagine a similar dynamic exists for NLRA vs RLA.

BTW, note misspelling. By super ceding something, do you mean Fed Law cedes itself in a super manner to state law?
 
The NRLA does not cover Transportation workers, that would be the RLA.

That is why the NMB has jurisdiction for airline workers, not the NLRB.

The Labor Management Reporting, is its own law and not part of either.

Go read up on the RLA and NLRA.
 
Why not?? They seem to think it's worked thus far... :lol:


Hmmm...on one of your PM's to me (outside of the ones wherein you've told me that you're going to personally sue me out of my main house) :rolleyes: ,you've noted: (AWA320) "I am and about to take the upgrade in PHL when this is said and done!! Com'on now you guys started this game of litigation I am just following it thru because like true USAirways pilot fashion i'm entitled"

How's that going so far? :lol:

PS: How's that "upgrade" that you're "about to take" in PHL work as per there being "no windfall"? :lol:

I can't help but laugh. You guys truly deserve your own stand up act in LAS :up: ...or, at least a guest segment on Penn and Teller's show Bullsh-t ;)
 
The NRLA does not cover Transportation workers, that would be the RLA.

That is why the NMB has jurisdiction for airline workers, not the NLRB.

The Labor Management Reporting, is its own law and not part of either.

Go read up on the RLA and NLRA.


As soon as you read up on State vs Federal law.

BTW, try to get better than 50-50 on NRLA vs NLRA.
 
The NRLA does not cover Transportation workers, that would be the RLA.

That is why the NMB has jurisdiction for airline workers, not the NLRB.

The Labor Management Reporting, is its own law and not part of either.

Go read up on the RLA and NLRA.

Well Gosh...just kindly tell us all exactly how all this will play out, and on what time table. Enquiring minds want to know :rolleyes:
 
AWA MEC ALERT HEIGHT: Mickey Mouse Tactics

While the East MEC persists in it search for decoys to negate the final and binding Nicolau Award, your MEC continues to plan for the long run. The AWA MEC supports the efforts of the Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) and ALPA-appointed Rice Committee, while we continue to march forward in a professional, transparent, and principled manner in order to obtain a new contract.

Lately, the East MEC has increased its hostility toward our pilot group. Instead of focusing their time and energy on attaining a joint contract that improves all of our livelihoods, especially that of their own membership, the East holds Special MEC meetings in which obstructive resolutions are passed. Some examples include: continued insistence on a date-of-hire seniority integration, attempting to exclude West union negotiators from positive space travel, their desire to maintain permanent separate operations, and seeking to prevent West pilots from listing (via IVR) for the jumpseat on our own metal.

In a disgraceful turn of events, the East MEC recently withdrew their JNC members from joint negotiations while demanding that their pilots only be brought up to parity. This was met with a timely response form Mr. Parker that suggests that the East pilots will receive parity as part of a negotiated agreement with the West pilots.

The AWA MEC stands ready to engage with our East comrades in a meaningful way. Valuable time, which could have been spent advancing the JNC talks, has been squandered.

We congratulate the Fleet Service workers on achieving a single contract during their recent NMB mediated talks with management. Theoretically, the combined pilot group should be in the same position. Had the JNC process sustained the same momentum it had prior to the issuance of the Nicolau Award, it’s possible that our own “close out†talks with management would have already taken place. It’s well pat time for the East MEC to move on and help all US Airways pilots achieve the joint contract we deserve.

We’ll continue to keep you posted on any developments. Please watch for further updates on this dynamic situation.

September 10, 2007 MEC Resolution

SUBJECT: Presentation of AAA/AWA Seniority Integration Award to US Airways Management

SOURCE: AWA MEC

BACKGROUND:

On July 18, 2007, the Executive Council adopted a resolution (AI#25) resolving that a number of issues be addressed regarding the AAA/AWA Seniority Integration Award. Since the resolution was adopted, a number of events have occurred including:

· The Rice Committee has engaged in a number of meetings with representatives of both MECs.

· The AAA MEC has sued the AWA MEC in an effort to overturn the seniority integration award issued pursuant to ALPA Merger Policy.

· The AAA MEC has adopted a resolution withdrawing from joint negotiations in favor of stand alone “parity-only†negotiations and the AAA MEC has requested funding for that negotiations process.

· US Airways CEO Douglas Parker has sent a letter to all AWA and AAA pilots stating that the Company will not engage in stand alone negotiations with either MEC.

· The AWA MEC Chairman has sent a letter to ALPA President John Prater stating the AWA MEC’s position that “parity†negotiations are neither permitted under the AAA/AWA Transition Agreement, nor are they allowed by ALPA Merger Policy.

· US Airways management has sent a letter to the AWA MEC refusing their request for funds that are to be provided to both MECs under terms of the Transition Agreement when the merged seniority list is presented to the Company, on the ground that the merged seniority list has not been presented to the Company.

· Joint negotiations between ALPA and the Company as provided for by the Transition Agreement are scheduled to resume on September 25, 2007 in Washington , D.C.

· The Wilson Center has completed two surveys of both pilot groups.

· The AAA/AWA Strike Oversight Board decided effective with date of the adoption of the AAA MEC “parity†resolution to withdraw from JNC talks, to suspend all disbursements of MCF funds to both MECs.

· US Airways management has informed the AWA MEC that they expect the furlough list to be purged by early October 2007, and new hires to begin in earnest on or around November 1, 2007

RESOLUTION:

WHEREAS on July 18, 2007 the Executive Council by resolution directed that the work of the Rice Committee be continued, and that reports be made by the Committee and the MECs to the Executive Council at its next meeting, and that consideration then be given as to whether further action on this agenda item is warranted, and

WHEREAS ALPA Merger Policy provides that ALPA’s role in seniority integration “is solely to provide the process,†and that “ALPA National†is confined to “a neutral position on the merits,†and

WHEREAS on July 18, 2007 the Executive Council resolved that “Given that ALPA National’s role is solely to provide the process for seniority integration, the appropriate question for the Executive Council is whether it has done so in this case. No evidence has been presented of any impropriety in any aspect of the process which would support a finding that ALPA has not provided the exact process that it was obligated to provide, including negotiations, mediation, and arbitrationâ€, and

WHEREAS in their “Motion to Remand†filing in United States District Court for the District of Columbia on August 20, 2007 (pg. 18) the AAA MEC states: “The plaintiffs also do not allege any unfairness in the merger integration process established by ALPAâ€, and

WHEREAS no other evidence or knowledge of interference in the ALPA merger process has been alleged by the AAA MEC, and

WHEREAS Part 1, Section N., paragraph 1. of ALPA Merger Policy (Merging of Employment Agreements) provides, “In no event, except by mutual agreement of all parties, will the company be given the right to use the merged seniority list prior to the successful conclusion of the merged working agreement,†and

WHEREAS Section IV. of the Letter of Agreement dated September 23, 2005, between the Association, America West Holding Corporation, America West Airlines, Inc., US Airways Group, Inc., and US Airways, Inc. (the “Transition Agreementâ€), as approved by the America West and US Airways MECs provides that management may not use an integrated pilot seniority list prior to Operational Pilot Integration as defined in Section VI.A. of the Transition Agreement (i.e. negotiation of the Single Agreement and issuance of a single FAA operating certificate), and

WHEREAS both the AAA and AWA MECs are due to receive a payment in the amount of $300,000 under terms of the Transition Agreement when the merged seniority list is presented to the Company, and

WHEREAS the Rice Committee continues to assist the MECs and JNC in achieving the goal of developing consensual approaches that promote mutual career protection and mutual success, as part of achieving acceptable collective bargaining outcomes that improve pay, benefits, work rules and job security for both pilot groups, and

WHEREAS the AAA MEC has unilaterally resolved to enter into stand alone “parity†negotiations, and refuses to participate in joint negotiations, and

WHEREAS the AWA MEC is fully aware of, and is engaged in efforts to defeat the current campaign to remove ALPA as the collective bargaining agent of either/or both the AAA and AWA pilot groups, and

WHEREAS Part III.C. of ALPA Merger Policy specifically provides that “any attempt by a member or members of ALPA to obtain an agreement which would operate to frustrate the objectives of this policy shall be considered an act contrary to the best interests of ALPA and its members,†and the AWA MEC has alleged that the AAA MEC’s attempt at obtaining a “parity-only†contract is designed to prevent implementation of the merged seniority list reached under ALPA Merger Policy, and

WHEREAS ALPA Merger Policy requires that “the merged seniority list will be presented to management and ALPA will use all reasonable means at its disposal to compel the company to accept and implement the merged seniority list,â€

THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that AWA MEC directs the MEC Chairman and the ALPA Group B-4 Executive Vice President to petition Executive Council to have ALPA President John Prater present the merged seniority list to US Airways management without further delay, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that AWA MEC will continue to actively support the efforts to defeat the campaign to remove ALPA as the collective bargaining agent of either/or the AAA and AWA pilots, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the AWA MEC continues to authorize the MEC Chairman, or his designee(s), and the JNC to meet with the Rice Committee in the hopes of achieving the goal of developing consensual approaches that promote mutual career protection and mutual success, as part of achieving an acceptable joint collective bargaining outcome that improves pay, benefits, work rules and job security for both pilot groups, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the AWA MEC directs that joint collective bargaining agreement talks will continue with or without the participation of the AAA MEC, and

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Rice Committee meetings should not interfere with or take precedence over joint collective bargaining negotiations.

Moved: Ray Burkett

Second: Mark Culmo

Vote: unanimous in favor

Passed this 10 day of September, 2007

Certified by:
_/s/_____________________________________
Captain Peter Blandino, MEC Secretary-Treasurer
 
Have some crow sharkie, beat up any TSA agents lately?

Fact Sheet | Published 09-25-2004

Obstacles to Organizing Under the Railway Labor Act

In Workers' Rights Watch: Eye on the NLRB, various workers' stories, and fact sheets , we've shared the challenges the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) presents to workers who wish to organize and collectively bargain. Yet workers in the airline and railroad industry are subject to an entirely different set of rules and regulations for organizing. Find out why the Railway Labor Act (RLA) makes the path for forming a union even more difficult than for workers covered by the NLRA.

Obstacle 1: A Higher Threshold for Voting
The RLA requires that in order to form a union, there must be support from a majority among all eligible company employees—not just those who turnout to vote. This requirement is a higher threshold than the NLRA—and even general U.S. election law—both of which require majority support from only those who actually vote in an election. Imagine if in order to win the presidency, John Kerry or George W. Bush needed the votes of a majority of all eligible voters!

Obstacle 2: Organizing Companywide, Nationwide
In addition to the voting threshold, the RLA requires that a majority of a company's employees at ALL company locations must vote for the union—not just those at any one location. This requires workers to reach out across huge geographical areas, as many of them are covered by national companies. So airline workers in Baltimore cannot decide to organize by themselves, they must also enlist the support of their coworkers in airports across the country.

Obstacle 3: RLA: Benefiting Employers, Not Employees
One example of how this law hinders organizing is that anti-union employers strive to be covered by it. When Federal Express (FedEx) workers tried to organize in 1996, management officials aggressively and successfully lobbied Congress to retain its status as an airline so its employees would not get the chance to organize under the less-restrictive NLRA.1 It may come as no surprise that workers are organized at UPS because these workers—employed by a company that is no more an airline than FedEx is—are covered by the NLRA. If FedEx employees now want to organize, they must mount a Herculean effort to reach out to 80,000 workers in cities from coast to coast.2 Thus the company gets the help of labor law to hinder its employees' attempts to organize.
 
Merged US Airways Pilots Contemplate Separation From ALPA

See Story

US Airways Pilots: No contract until pay gap is closed

See Story

Regards,

USA320Pilot
From the second article:

"...union members say they want money they were promised and will not agree to a new contract until they are paid equal money for equal work."

Hmmmm, so what you're saying is you won't vote for more money until you get more money.

Damn, what a ship of fools you guys are.
 
Separate operations? Great. Just open PHL and CLT crew bases for west piltos to bid. So long TA!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.