After U-Turn’s revelation that the Executive Council was going to vote on whether to allow the single certificate dispute to go forward and after weeks of hiding the truth, our MEC had little choice but to mention it last night’s MEC hotline. But it was in a brief and totally uninformative statement, buried deep in the Hotline. It totally masked the scope of what the EC’s alternatives are:
ALPA’s Executive Council is scheduled to meet the week of September 17. The MEC chairmen for AWA, Captain John McIlvenna, and US Airways, Captain Jack Stephan, have been asked to discuss a number of issues, including MCF funding and the Transition Agreement dispute filed by the company over the single FAA operating certificate. This dispute is scheduled for expedited arbitration on September 21. The company plans to operate under a single FAA operating certificate by the end of September.
“This dispute is [NOT necessarily] scheduled for expedited arbitration on September 21.†It will only get there IF the much politicized Executive Council allows it to!
In our last issue, U-Turn promised to tell the truth if our MEC didn’t. We will keep that promise.
Since that last issue, U-Turn has received what we believe to be an authentic copy of the actual correspondence sent by John Prater to our two MEC Chairmen. It’s not marked confidential, it’s not an email, it doesn’t involve negotiations, it certainly wasn’t secretly addressed to the company (well, we hope it wasn’t), it’s not stamped with “destroy before reading†and we didn’t get it from an MEC insider.
If the president of our association (or the lawyers who wrote it for him) believed this communication were confidential, we would expect that the letter would have been labeled as such. It wasn’t. If it had been labeled confidential, after Herb’s “experience†with our MEC’s bogus Article VIII charges, we would not be posting it. In fact, we would have sent our MEC the name of our source, if for no other reason than to see if the MEC would go after him/her with an Article VIII witch hunt.
We have received other correspondence that makes it clear that the company is aware of the upcoming EC vote and that the single certificate dispute may not be arbitrated at all. Our brothers on the East side of things are aware of what is on the EC Agenda. Although not widely publicized, the EC’s meeting agenda is not “hidden.†Everyone knows but us.
With that in mind, U-Turn sees no problem and has a clear conscience in letting you know the truth. What we print will not shift the cosmic paradigm, nor force the planets to realign. Nor will it contribute to global warming (increased green-house gasses being passed, aside), child abuse or overturn the Nicolau Award. It will, however, keep you informed.
Compare the letter below with our MEC’s “warm and fuzzy†above. You are NOT being told the truth by your MEC.
September 6, 2007
Re: Issue under Section X of Transition Agreement concerning single certificate
Dear John and Jack:
The US Airways MEC has requested that the Association pursue a dispute under Section X of the Transition Agreement concerning management’s intent to operate under a single FAA operating certificate. The Airline Parties under the Transition Agreement have submitted such a dispute, seeking expedited hearing the week of September 17 and expedited decision prior to surrender of the America West operating certificate the last week of September.
The America West MEC has advised that it does not agree that operation under a single certificate violates the Transition Agreement. The Executive Council will review this subject at its meeting in Washington commencing September 17. In particular, the Executive Council will consider whether there can be a dispute under Section X if the two MECs do not agree that there is a dispute. If the answer to the first question is in the affirmative, then the Executive Council will decide the Association’s position and whether this position constitutes a dispute between the Association and the Airline Parties. If the answer to this second question is in the affirmative, the Association, through the Legal Department, will proceed to expedited hearing of the dispute in accordance with the terms specified in the attached letter to the Airline Parties.
You or your designees should be prepared to make presentations to the Executive Council concerning both of the above two questions in accordance with a schedule to be provided to you by [name redacted].
Fraternally,
Captain John Prater, President
Before we go any further, U-Turn has to ask the obvious question: Where does the Executive Council get the self-righteous nerve to think that they have the right to mess with or interpret OUR Transition Agreement?
The ALPA Constitution is very specific on what the Executive Council can do. Per Article VI, Section 4.A, the Executive Council can only consider and act:
“…upon the following matters:
(1) Interpretation of the Constitution and By-Laws
(2) Adoption of policy
(3) Initiation of Constitution and By-Laws changes
(4) Adoption of Association-wide immediate or long term planning
(5) Adoption of Association-wide action
(6) National budget approval or modification
(7) OCD or MCF expendituresâ€
Is there anything in the ALPA Constitution cited above that even remotely suggests that the ALPA Executive Council has jurisdiction over whether one MEC, two MECs, can file for arbitration of a Transition Agreement dispute? Under what bizarre interpretation of the ALPA Constitution do they believe they have the right to sit in judgment over whether the single certificate issue is taken to arbitration?
And even though our East brothers may not agree, this is an Unconstitutional usurping of power by Herndon. This is NOT an Executive Council issue.
So, what’s wrong with the EC having a vote? Isn’t Captain Prater correct? Doesn’t ALPA National make the final decision on whether a dispute goes to arbitration?
Yes, ALPA National, serving in its capacity as our Collective Bargaining Agent, does have that ultimate decision-making authority on whether a dispute/grievance goes to arbitration. But decisions on whether to go to arbitration are “allegedly†non-political. And they should be made by the Herndon attorneys in the Representation and Legal Departments, NOT by political bodies, such as the Executive Council. Read the limits of their authority again. The EC has no business and no Constitutional authority being involved in the internal politics surrounding this issue.
Where is Herndon coming up with this stuff? And why are they involved?
The answers are easy: CONTROL! Ever since Herndon made its first balk at presenting the “List†last May, we have seen the entire process, which is clearly defined in Section 45 of the ALPA Administrative Manual, studied, stalled and mauled into one political battle and EC vote after another. Your union dollars at work!
Next U-Turn: Why our MEC’s “180?â€
(For those of you who are so eagerly awaiting our take on representation cards, we apologize for the delay. It is an extremely complicated issue, with both pros and cons and no really right answer for us out West. We will get to that, hopefully sooner rather than later. But this issue is time-sensitive. Its shelf-life ends in about 12 days. And you have the right to know…now.)
A personal note…Herb Holland will be retiring from U-Turn at the end of September, one month prior to his ALPA-supported forced retirement from US Airways. Herb would like to thank all those who have commented on and contributed to U-Turn. For him it has been a personal sacrifice in both time and money. His two Article VIII hearings and appeal alone cost over $10,000. But for Herb it was worth the cost. If nothing other than stopping 8:30 comes out of the 140 U-turns published over the past 14 months, then it was money well-spent.
The Mighty U-Turn
..but that the East knows more about the numbers than Bug knows. 
