ALPA Thread 12/30 to 1/6--ALL ALPA/USAPA discussed here

[PA18]

I guarantee that if DOH didn't favor you you'd be against it.

That exactly describes the sentiment of the former Piedmont pilots in the Empire and USAir mergers.

But guess who have been the most vocal proponents for DOH, starting with the tentative talks with UAL in 1995, and continuing through the aborted DAL merger last year?

 

[Hawkhunter]

Not only no, but HE11 NO! You mistakenly presume I'm as selfish as you are.

Before Nicolau ruled I was nervous. I didn't know how badly things would turn out for me yet I was comforted by the knowledge that we'd gone through a fair process -- a process denied to us at TWA.

Do you think an arbitrator would've ruled similarly to what the APA imposed on TWA? (My guess is we'd have gotten something better. Regardless, I'd have been willing to risk it.) How would you have fashioned the TWA-AA integration? Keep in mind that due to the demographics of that merger a DOH integration would've been very close to Relative Seniority. The APA stapled 2/3 of the TWA list and ratioed the top third up from the bottom at 7:1. The STL base was fenced so that a minumum number of now-junior TWA pilots could keep their captain seats -- a variable number based on the number of captains in ORD and DFW. To this day many at AA complain that exTWers are "stealing" their captain seats. This is what happens when one pilot group gets to unilaterally decide an integration and it's also why ALPA Merger Policy is the most fair way there is. Every merger is different so no one-size-fits-all integration scheme exists. I guarantee that if DOH didn't favor you you'd be against it. I favor ALPA Merger Policy no matter what.

Nic stapled 2/3 of the list as well. You should not say TWA got screwed because you were ready to go out of business. Failing airline and all. Kind of sounds like you Westoffs are saying the same thing. Hell, we easties should of ALL been stapled according to you Westoffs. I would say alpo merger policy is fair to if I got the land grab you guys got. Cashing in any time soon is another story.

 

[end_of_alpa]

exB717Flyer said:

"You seem confused on the whole "majority rules" thing. The majority doesn't vote on every law. We vote in our reps and they make the laws. Very few things are sent to the populace for a vote because it's a cumbersome process."

Agreed. However, contract ratification IS ONE of the items you DO vote on to put those laws into effect. NO?

"The MAJORITY of ALPA pilots, as represented by the Executive Board, ratified ALPA Merger Policy and nowhere within that policy is there a vote by the populace. The fact that a majority of the pilots of one airline favor an integration which favors them isn't exactly a surprise but it is exactly why ALPA Merger Policy doesn't allow one airline to take advantage of another purely due to its size. "

Theoretically, I agree again. But that is NOT the issue we are discussing. We are talking about the vote for or against any proposed TNA. The "list", if and when the JNC comes to agree with the company that the TNA is ready for a vote to ratify it, you have to have at least 1422 East pilots to vote YES for the TNA to become the new ACBA. Now, I know how I'm going to vote, and maybe you know how all the West pilots are going to vote and I even conceed that you know all 1622 pilots in the West are going to vote YES (I would even agree with you.)

So my Question is, how are you going to convince the 1422 out of 2844 East pilots to vote for the TNA if it means accepting "the list"?

"That's what you're saying, after all, is that you should win becaue you're bigger."

If "bigger" means "leveraging" majority preferences then that IS the way democracy works. Remember we're voting in the LAWS (ACBA) as well, not just Reps. Do not confuse a union Constitution with the CBA. They are two separate documents, or contracts, if you will.

OK. But If you can not convince more than 1422 pilots to vote YES in the East that means NO CONTRACT and status quo. Doesn't it? So how is that a "win" for you?

"Might doesn't make right.THERE WAS NO VOTE! And their leverage wasn't so much in their size but in TWA being in bankruptcy court. We were coerced into giving up our right to arbitration because if we didn't the judge would've abrogated our whole contract. AA would've gotten the sale to close one way or another. I applaud the fact that USAirways being in Chapter 11 at the time of the merger didn't adversely affect your rights to a fair integration process. Consider yourself lucky in that regard. But the damage to your careers was already done and your bitter disappointment in Nicolau's decision is misplaced. USAPA will not make you whole again because it isn't possible."

Sorry for the misunderstanding. I did NOT say they did vote...I said "If the majority of the combined APA/TWA pilots took a vote....". I may have written it awkwardly so how about this : "If the combined group of APA/TWA pilots took a vote and the majority voted for...." maybe you would have understood it better. My bad! Sorry.

"Got news for ya: Nicolau essentially WAS a court of law. He was your day in court and he's ruled. No judge will ever second-guess his decision, I guarantee you.You erroneously assume ALPA Merger Policy is broken. DOH isn't in it for a reason and the AWA/AAA integration is a prime example. DOH so blatantly favors the East it can't possibly be considered proper. That's why we ended up in arbitration and no matter how many times you say Nicolau was unfair the fact remains that he's the one who got to decide what fair is. And you empowered him to do so."

With all due respect, I do not recommend calling it "law". It was a board hearing and Nicolau was no Judge (ever) as far as any Court of Law that the states and/or the Federal government have. But no matter.

I never said ALPA merger policy is "broken". I MAY have said ALPA merger policy is GAMBLING or a "crap-shoot", but I never said "broken". I don't think AWA/AAA was the "reason" for ALPA merger policy but I'll concede the point.

DOH (dovetailing) may BE blatantly unfair...to you and many others, I'm sure. In fact, the "award" under ALPA may be "unfair" as well. So may be stapling (endtailing). But I say again in the final court analysis....fairness is NOT the criterion a court "generally" looks for. It looks for whether any CB agreement or the specific part thereof falls within the boundaries of reasonableness. In labor unions those boundaries are very wide. It also looks to see if the CB agent had a logical reason for doing what it did. So suiing USAPA for DFR, the Judge would first determine what breaches a union's duty of fair representation with these elements:

"A breach of the statutory duty of fair representation occurs only when a Union’s conduct toward a member of the collective bargaining unit is 1) arbitrary, 2) discriminatory, or 3) in bad faith.

"In order to constitute a breach of the duty, the Union’s conduct must be “so far outside a `wide range of reasonableness,’... that it is wholly `irrational’ or ‘arbitrary,’†The court will examine the “legal landscape†at the time of the Union’s action, rather than apply hindsight."

In short, there is an award or "the list". The legal landscape at the time (or this time) is that we can't get more than the required 1422 pilot on the EAST to vote for the TNA with the "award" in it. The West won't budge. ALPA presented the "award". Stalemate.

So, keeping ALL three lists just mentioned in mind, several courts have found that ALL three "lists" are within those boundaries. So, If we can't get a TNA ratified with "the list" being part of it...the question becomes if the majority votes in a CB agent, the agent negotiates another TNA with a different list such as DOH with restrictions, for example, and the MAJORITY votes it in....do you think the judge will invalidate the the election to award the minority their preferences because they couldn't get 1422 guys to vote in a TNA under ALPA? Be careful here...this may not be Bush v. Gore but the courts are VERY skeptical about altering any democratic voting process. I'm not saying they wouldn't, but I am saying the odds favor the collective bargaining agent in power, if you will, being sued in the lawsuit.

The "flaw" if you will, is what the EAST MEC thought it mean't...and here I agree with you AGAIN. However, the "rank and file" may eliminate the MEC by voting them out, but they can also eliminate YOUR MEC by voting ALPA out. Do you understand the power of the "vote" in the democratic process?

The award has been presented to the company and the company has said it meets the terms of the TSA.

My question to you has nothing to do with this.

My question dujour is....how are you going to convince 1422 or more East pilots to vote for the TNA if the opportunity EVER presents itself? (Having a gun put to their head is not an option, VBG.)

 

[end_of_alpa]

No surprised, but USAPA is already asking for more handouts. Less than a third of the pilots have donated and we haven't even seen the first of many lawsuits coming from the west and they are in need of money. Pathetic. Sometimes you just can't help but to laugh at people...

From the USAPA treasurer (who can't seem to get his Roman calendar straight):

"(02Jan2007)

Subject: "The Calm Before The Storm..."


Mark King here, the interim USAPA treasurer with an update to our loyal members. I know most of your are patiently waiting for something to happen..anything..that will accelerate USAPA to its destiny as your new union. The Federal Government works in mysterious ways. The NMB process was not only sidetracked by the Holidays, but also by ALPA National's angst over our Single Carrier status. I believe the NMB will have the issues sorted out in days, rather than weeks..and we will soon find ourselves in what could only be called a "particle acceleration chamber " of activity.....an actual election to determine who will represent you for the rest of your careers. When the election is called, the full force of ALPA and its funds will be upon us. Remember, our pilots alone pay over 30K per day in ALPA dues.

For the last six months I have continued the drumbeat that each pilot needs to donate at least $200 our cause. Over 3000 of you turned in a card. 2/3 of you have sent nothing, nada, zip in the way of moneys. Our volunteers are working for free. Many won't even cash their expense checks, much less even claim them in the first place. From $200 cell phone bills, to office supplies, to you name it...this volunteer group is carrying the water for this pilot group. We are doing this because we believe in USAPA, and we believe we can win the election. I have backed off a bit during the last month on fundraising...the usual suspects keep donating, and the rest of you sit idly by hoping for the latest bit of USAPA news.

Now is the time to donate. I have said many times I am uncomfortable asking for moneys. Not any more. If you see me, in the crewroom, in the jetway, or in a crew van...I will be asking you point blank if you support this cause..and I will be asking for a donation. I expect every volunteer in this organization to do the same, and I expect every pilot to look to the other seat in the cockpit and ask the question..have you sent money to USAPA? EVERY pilot is sending ALPA a nice donation twice a month. When the election is called, each pilot will be able to vote his heart and intelligence on who will represent this pilot group going forward. Your vote will be your little secret..as it should be. But from here forward, just as I will always know who sent in a card...a record, win or lose the election, will always be kept of who really supported this effort. There was a logical reason for every pilot to send in his or her card. I believe there is a logical reason to send in a donation..even if you are still on the fence. At least give this group of volunteers a chance to show you our stuff...we have a very competent and efficient union on the way for you...but if we are swamped with legal fees and the like during the heat of the battle..we will have no choice other than to simply stop our efforts cold if we run out of moneys. Let there be no doubt..the day USAPA takes office we will be more than ready to represent you, with the full force of union dues and lines of credit. But up until that day, that wonderful day, we are dependent upon donations.

Many pilots are already in the $1000 club..in fact one pilot just wrote us a check for $4500. One of our C/Os is challenging each F/O he works with to donate..then he donates double their amount! Many pilots have easily given their $200 through monthly donations of $25 or $50..and that has really worked great. No more. I need your money NOW. The battle is days away and I simply don't have time to wait 6 months for your donation to be complete. If you really believe in our cause, like I do..then beg, borrow or steal and come up with a donation. This is no longer a spectator event, and I want so see a couple of thousand of you pony up.

This is it folks. Our time is short. We need more funds.

Best to you all,"

First off, I wouldn't shoot the messenger. Second, there are more than sufficient funds...but this is NOT the point of his letter. He is saying over 3000 pilots sent in their cards. Only one third have sent in money. His point here is there should more pledges that match the card count so everyone that is voting pledges SOMETHING to the election for the CB agent of their choice.

IMHO, I would be very cautious of interpreting anything more than what this means "on its face". Appearances can be and often are deceiving. I know SEVERAL people who have sent in a card and KNOW how they will vote and haven't sent a penny in. That logic could be simply that "I know how I'm going to vote and if you win you'll get my dues money to support you." Although I do not agree with this kind of "contribution" I understand the reason. Besides, it is still very early yet and until the NMB even determines IF there is going to be an election they may be holding off.

As to your "presumption" that USAPA needs to collect money for the "lawsuit" that is NOT their intent and it never has been. It is simply to establish an initial operating budget so basically office supplies, legal fees and other applicable costs for establishing a new unions operating needs (volunteers are DEFINITELY paying their own way NOT because of a shortage of funds, but they want to establish their principles for not spending the "crowns" money, if you will. No crime in standing up for principle, is there? OOPs. Opened myself up for that one. Go ahead guys, I can take the insults on that :-0).

They'll be time enough for the collection of money if and when any suit comes along. Let's not get our hopes up just yet.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

According to Dave Blomgren in one of the U-turn issues, your MEC ain't doing so hot either. In fact, I'll even do you one better. We need to get rid of our MEC. That is one of the main reasons for USAPA...new leadership. Former MEC Rep Dave Blomgren thinks you could use it too:

Citing Dave Blomgren is supposed to lend credibility to your point? Oh geez, you must be getting desperate. He's a nice guy, and fun to fly a trip with, but boy does he draw some bizarre conclusions.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Citing Dave Blomgren is supposed to lend credibility to your point? Oh geez, you must be getting desperate. He's a nice guy, and fun to fly a trip with, but boy does he draw some bizarre conclusions.

As I said before...I'm cool with that. He's got an issue with leadership. One man's opinion. OK. We have the same issues out East.

That WAS just one of you guys that has issues with leadership. You certainly can speak to that better than I. But I think I can speak to the East group that we have considerably more than just myself who has issues with leadership.

 

[EastUS]

No, it's fairly plain that what I'm saying is that ALPA does not have an agenda to disenfrachise a large percentage of the US pilots.

Hmmm..If they "have no agenda to disenfranchise a large percentage of the US pilots"...One must properly note that they're utter incompetents then..as they've done exactly that...in case you've not noticed. My honest observation over the years is that Alpo has only one agenda = Alpo, and couldn't actually care less about any particular pilot group, or all combined...except as dues paying fools.

 

[EastUS]

No surprised, but USAPA is already asking for more handouts.

Hmmm...(fetches calculator)...Looks like just in dues money and a few "assessments" for interminable Alpo "processes" over the years...I coulda' paid cash for an extra house. Then..there's this small issue of losing over a million bucks worth of retirement..instantly surrendered by those jackazzes without a vote, but merely a craven whimper from Alpo and it's "geniuses"... :blink:

Ya' know what?...It just MIGHT be worth having some actual representation for once

Of course; In full fairness...I'd certainly miss wasting over 2 grand a year on that fine magazine...replete with regional pilots only as cover art. 😉

Keep shoveling it as you feel the need 😉

 

[CactusFlyr]

Nic stapled 2/3 of the list as well. You should not say TWA got screwed because you were ready to go out of business. Failing airline and all. Kind of sounds like you Westoffs are saying the same thing. Hell, we easties should of ALL been stapled according to you Westoffs. I would say alpo merger policy is fair to if I got the land grab you guys got. Cashing in any time soon is another story.

Furloughed pilots don't count. Jobs do.

 

[Phoenix]

Hmmm..If they "have no agenda to disenfranchise a large percentage of the US pilots"...One must properly note that they're utter incompetents then..as they've done exactly that...in case you've not noticed. My honest observation over the years is that Alpo has only one agenda = Alpo, and couldn't actually care less about any particular pilot group, or all combined...except as dues paying fools.

"dues paying fools"?

I think ALPO prefers to use the more stately term of "benefactor".. oops.. "member in good standing". Yeah that will flatter them enough to miss the whole deception, while "member in bad standing" will put the fear in them.

That is to say, 1. Carrot, 2. stick, 3. repeat. (ALPA = one trick pony)

And if anyone starts to discover the scam and speak out about it, then "Squealer" starts the ALPO cheering squad, ACPC, "Four lawyers good. Two lawyers bad." [a slight variation of the commandment "Four legs good. Two legs bad" (from Animal Farm)]. Squealer was the propagandist pig of Animal Farm. He would get the dupes to repeatedly sing out this "commandment" to drown out any discussion of logic. It is important to note that the seven Pig Commandments were reduced to just one, "All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others".)

Things that make you go, hmmmmm...

 

[flynomore]

Furloughed pilots don't count. Jobs do.

=====================================================

OK I'll conceed that despite that you may argue that the E170 pilots' jobs had no benefit. Never mind them for right now.

Now if we conceed that "Jobs Count" then we could take away the names attached to the arbitration list and substitute either a U or A and allow only a "U" to replace a "U" in seniority order and the same for an "A". Arrange some type of displacement and or increase in flying scheme and we have "conditions and restrictions."

Neat, huh?

 

[P51Pilot]

=====================================================

OK I'll conceed that despite that you may argue that the E170 pilots' jobs had no benefit. Never mind them for right now.

Now if we conceed that "Jobs Count" then we could take away the names attached to the arbitration list and substitute either a U or A and allow only a "U" to replace a "U" in seniority order and the same for an "A". Arrange some type of displacement and or increase in flying scheme and we have "conditions and restrictions."

Neat, huh?

You broke the code but good look at getting the west to admit to their shameless attempt at theft.

 

[exB717Flyer]

So my Question is, how are you going to convince the 1422 out of 2844 East pilots to vote for the TNA if it means accepting "the list"?

Lemme put it this way: you and others tell us a CBA will never pass as long as the Nic Award is part of it. To this I respond: prove it! I won't believe it until I see it. Without the JNC doing its work we just won't know, will we?

If "bigger" means "leveraging" majority preferences then that IS the way democracy works. Remember we're voting in the LAWS (ACBA) as well, not just Reps. Do not confuse a union Constitution with the CBA. They are two separate documents, or contracts, if you will.

So a bigger airline should automatically be advantaged in an integration? No, that's not how democracy works in our union. The majority approved ALPA Merger Policy.

OK. But If you can not convince more than 1422 pilots to vote YES in the East that means NO CONTRACT and status quo. Doesn't it? So how is that a "win" for you?

You seek to disadvantage us by delaying. Why shouldn't we in kind disadvantage you by making you live with LOA93? Your behavior should not be rewarded.

"If the combined group of APA/TWA pilots took a vote and the majority voted for...." maybe you would have understood it better.

I understood you fine. Your point is moot since seniority integrations are not subject to a vote by the populace.

With all due respect, I do not recommend calling it "law". It was a board hearing and Nicolau was no Judge (ever) as far as any Court of Law that the states and/or the Federal government have. But no matter.

I didn't say it was law, but it's equivolent because no judge will bother overturning an arbitration when there's been no impropriety. The USAPA guy said Nicolau violated ALPA Merger Policy but it was Nicolau's job to interpret it. His opinion is as irrelevent as mine is.

Stalemate.

This is of the East's making. It's not reasonable for you to demand that the West break your stalemate.

So, keeping ALL three lists just mentioned in mind, several courts have found that ALL three "lists" are within those boundaries. So, If we can't get a TNA ratified with "the list" being part of it...the question becomes if the majority votes in a CB agent, the agent negotiates another TNA with a different list such as DOH with restrictions, for example, and the MAJORITY votes it in....do you think the judge will invalidate the the election to award the minority their preferences because they couldn't get 1422 guys to vote in a TNA under ALPA? Be careful here...this may not be Bush v. Gore but the courts are VERY skeptical about altering any democratic voting process. I'm not saying they wouldn't, but I am saying the odds favor the collective bargaining agent in power, if you will, being sued in the lawsuit.

Is this the bullcrap Lee Seeham is feeding you? Any judge would see that your actions are purely to run-around something you previously agreed to.

My question dujour is....how are you going to convince 1422 or more East pilots to vote for the TNA if the opportunity EVER presents itself?

My guess is that if the JNC can put out a decent TA it will be voted in. Go ahead and prove me wrong, if you have the guts.

 

[b737fo]

I wasn't implying that his statement was more than it was. I was just pointing out that "he" doesn't have a lock on complaints against leadership. 🙂 Again, it was "one man's opinion". Evidently to you he is a vocal miniority and I'll defer to you on that point. After all, he was YOUR prior MEC rep, not mine.

And again, we can agree.

And you may call it "USAPA...more than a vocal minority" I would also agree with you. (See, we agree more than you think.) And for the "piece de resistance" you and I agree AGAIN! The process IS healthy (which is why I'm going running here shortly.)

(I don't see anything wrong with your post....stop being so defensive! ;-) VBG!)

Defensive I am not. I am confident in both my leadership and my opinions in what best represents my interests as a pilot at US Airways. I was just merely responding to your quote of:

"According to Dave Blomgren in one of the U-turn issues, your MEC ain't doing so hot either."

While I appreciate you referencing DB as to whether our MEC is or is not doing a good job, I am only relating as to what most of us see as a realistic assessment of job the AWA MEC is doing in these contentious times. Fly safe and I would say see you out on the line but as you can tell from my name I don't get east of the Miss. river.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Lemme put it this way: you and others tell us a CBA will never pass as long as the Nic Award is part of it. To this I respond: prove it! I won't believe it until I see it. Without the JNC doing its work we just won't know, will we?So a bigger airline should automatically be advantaged in an integration? No, that's not how democracy works in our union. The majority approved ALPA Merger Policy.You seek to disadvantage us by delaying. Why shouldn't we in kind disadvantage you by making you live with LOA93? Your behavior should not be rewarded.I understood you fine. Your point is moot since seniority integrations are not subject to a vote by the populace.I didn't say it was law, but it's equivolent because no judge will bother overturning an arbitration when there's been no impropriety. The USAPA guy said Nicolau violated ALPA Merger Policy but it was Nicolau's job to interpret it. His opinion is as irrelevent as mine is.
This is of the East's making. It's not reasonable for you to demand that the West break your stalemate.Is this the bullcrap Lee Seeham is feeding you? Any judge would see that your actions are purely to run-around something you previously agreed to.My guess is that if the JNC can put out a decent TA it will be voted in. Go ahead and prove me wrong, if you have the guts.

Look. Everyone has gone through rough times. 2008 will likely be one of them for US Airways, as it will be for all the airlines. Our company and many others are undermanned, price of oil going up, falling home prices, take your pick. The aggregate affect: if we exchanged opinions they would probably vary by much. NO?

I just posed hypotheticals you either can't answer or won't. You are not alone. The amount of questions are increasing expotentially for us as a group and as a company every day. The question is when WILL we get answers? I guess we won't find them here. Your welcome to call it anything you want. I asked you for an answer.

The latest United MEC Chairmans video message is out on tape. It's an eye opener. They say mergers are coming and they'll be ready for and WILL protect THEIR pilots interests. He didn't say other pilots but you and I know, when you see the tape, what his intent is.

My prediction: IF and when they merge with anyone, especially after watching our situation, if their pilots are the majority in the transaction...they will call the shots regarding the seniority integration. ALPA merger policy won't occur because it will be their way in ALPA or the highway outside of it. But it WILL be there way. And I can assure you it will most likely be a staple, as in endtailing. Obviously this is my prediction...but I bet I'm right.

So I tell you what. I ask the "hypotheticals" and don't get an answer. That's cool. Your bitter. I don't blame you. Prove a CB agreement won't get voted in? Wilson polling data on the East. ALPA has the data. Have you seen it?

Seeing is believing or the proof is in the pudding. I'm cool with that as well. Lee Seham doesn't make any decisions for me with his writing. I think he writes very well. But after all, I've read a lot of lawyer legal stuff and many of them write very well. But I look for substance and not form. I am sure you do too. Lawyers don't have a "lock" substance any more than you or I. The sun doesn't rise and set on any judges opinion either. I just try to look in the future...as far as I possibly can with the information I'm given. Good inforamtion or bad, it affects your decision (clouds judgement or provides clairity).

You won't answer even with polling data from ALPA. Again, waiting for the vote.

It's going to take at least 3-4 weeks for the NMB to determine single carrier status, get the list of pilots from the company, check the cards and confirm the vote. The election, if it does get through by that time, will most likely be held at the end of February. I know you and others have a different opinion here on what your going to do and that's cool.

There may be a TNA by then, there may not. So many questions and so much uncertainty. The uncertainty and the doubts among us feed everyones FEAR. Fear of what the future year brings? Fear for our company? Our careers?

Do you and I get to vote on the TNA if it comes before us?

I'm asking you the "hypothetical" question again.

If YOU could command the vote to be taken right now, if we ALL voted today, and if it didn't pass.... for ANY reason, what answer or what command do you have next? Forget the award for a minute. I'm just asking this question.

What happens next if the TNA does not pass...you nor I know the reason yet? It just doesn't.