No Joint Contract, No integration "AWARD"

[ab320driver]

It appears that a requirement for this "award" to go into effect is a JOINT CONTRACT. Vote NO! Keep it "teal book", "blue book"...

 

[aquagreen73s]

It appears that a requirement for this "award" to go into effect is a JOINT CONTRACT. Vote NO! Keep it "teal book", "blue book"...

You can only do that for so long. The Feds don't care much for labor making a mockery of their laws.

 

[ab320driver]

You can only do that for so long. The Feds care much for labor making a mockery of their laws.

What law would that be. May voting preference of what is and what isn't an acceptable contract is none of the FEDS business...

 

[Rico]

You can only do that for so long. The Feds care much for labor making a mockery of their laws.

The arbitrator's decision does not say we HAVE to merge, only how a combinded list must look IF we DO merge.

Company has already said in the recent past that they could keep us separate.

If the East votes to go separate, And ALPA National does not force the issue (remains neutral, which Prater will take over losing the East pilots), WTF are you gonna do about it...?

 

[aquagreen73s]

What law would that be. May voting preference of what is and what isn't an acceptable contract is none of the FEDS business...

Using an enumerated power under the Constitution, namely the Interstate Commerce Clause found in Article I, Congress passed laws which created the NMB and the arbitration process. What you propose is to circumvent those laws by preventing the implementation of the award. The Feds don't care much for those kind of antics.

 

[BottomFeeder]

You can only do that for so long. The Feds care much for labor making a mockery of their laws.

They have been thru the war so many times that this will be easy.

You might want to restart your section 6 nego.

 

[safety stud]

Using an enumerated power under the Constitution, namely the Interstate Commerce Clause found in Article I, Congress passed laws which created the NMB and the arbitration process. What you propose is to circumvent those laws by preventing the implementation of the award. The Feds don't care much for those kind of antics.

Who cares what the Feds think...
This isn't about them...
Like it was said earlier, the list only applies to a combined contract...
Here's news for ya...
This aint over...
And I don't see no fat lady either...

Just my opinion...

 

[ab320driver]

Using an enumerated power under the Constitution, namely the Interstate Commerce Clause found in Article I, Congress passed laws which created the NMB and the arbitration process. What you propose is to circumvent those laws by preventing the implementation of the award. The Feds don't care much for those kind of antics.

Interesting. What does that have to do with me finding the contract unacceptable? (Scheduling section, comp., etc...)
NO ACCEPTABLE CONTRACT. NO INTEGRATION...

P.S. I have a feeling the retirement section is now going to be VERY LACKING....

 

[AWA320]

The arbitrator's decision does not say we HAVE to merge, only how a combinded list must look IF we DO merge.

Company has already said in the recent past that they could keep us separate.

If the East votes to go separate, And ALPA National does not force the issue (remains neutral, which Prater will take over losing the East pilots), WTF are you gonna do about it...?

RICO,

Aquagreen73 is 100% correct!! You propose to hold an entire pilot group and company at considerable financial cost hostage because you didn't get your way. I guess you would much rather have a federal Judge force the issue upon you at which case you would stand the chance of seeing a bump. Lets suppose you do attempt something that stupid and we do go to federal court and you lose. All the people that upgraded on the east could be bumped as a result. Now that is costly to the company so they won't do that but what is likely is the fact that you could have several hundred f/o's ready to upgrade and they would be put on hold until things are made right by upgrading all the west pilots that should have. This could take a couple of years worth of up grades away from the east...

Bottom line, think long an hard about your next move as it really could hurt much worse in the long run.

Focus all your collective energies on getting a contract with pre BK rates and work rules...

 

[Rico]

Using an enumerated power under the Constitution, namely the Interstate Commerce Clause found in Article I, Congress passed laws which created the NMB and the arbitration process. What you propose is to circumvent those laws by preventing the implementation of the award. The Feds don't care much for those kind of antics.

Once again, if we do not merge, the decision does not matter.

It only applies IF we merge.

And why should we now...?

There is nothing in this award for any of the US Airways pilots. There is nothing worthwhile in wanting to merge the operation anymore. No financial, nor career logic makes it worthwhile to combine the two subsidiary mainline carriers.

Is there...?

"Finanacial Hostage" is a stupid counter-arguement to offer us, when we are looking at a career being your First Officers at a combinded operation.

 

[aquagreen73s]

Company has already said in the recent past that they could keep us separate.

If the East votes to go separate, And ALPA National does not force the issue (remains neutral, which Prater will take over losing the East pilots), WTF are you gonna do about it...?

Fisrt, understand that the law is both a shield and a sword. The single carrier laws which are normally used against management to prevent whipsawing of labor, can just as easily be used in the other direction.

I suspect the part where Nicolau talks about merger flexibility is a flexibility reserved for management and not, as you suggest, a blank check to prevent the implementation of an award resulting from an arbitration voluntarily submitted to by AAA pilots.

As to keeping it separate, again that's management's choice using their business judgment. Doug is picked by the board of directors. The board, in turn, are elected by the shareholders who themselves are the legal owners of LCC. What Doug does, then, is presumed to be for the best interests of the owners.

Doug's statements that he will keep the operations separate easily fall within his business judgment. He can easily justify it by saying that the Joint Contract is too expensive and it's better for LCC to keep the operation separate until (in Doug's belief) a proper joint contract is negotiated. If there weren't laws on the books, he could do this forever and whipsaw labor. But he can't because of single carrier laws which, as stated above, can be used against either party. Point is, by virtue of his position and legal responsibilities, Doug can choose to keep the operations separate for reasonable time. Secondly, that's Doug's choice, not labor's to make. Finally, we all know that the only way Doug can realize the synergy savings is to have one operation. Heck, that's been the standard, knee jerk response (from both AAA and AWA) every time he mentions keeping the operations separate.

Congress has plenary power over interstate commerce and make no mistake - Congress has all kinds of laws governing the articles and companies involved in interstate commerce. The system is set up such that Congress is the one who tells labor what rights they have and what they can do, not the other way around.

 

[AWA320]

Who cares what the Feds think...
This isn't about them...
Like it was said earlier, the list only applies to a combined contract...
Here's news for ya...
This aint over...
And I don't see no fat lady either...

Just my opinion...

Safety stud, that's emotion speaking without the benefit of intellect!!! You really don't want to attempt this and force this into federal court as the outcome will not benefit you at all...

Lets go get pre BK rates and work rules...

 

[ab320driver]

Contracts take YEARS to negotiate. I have a feeling the Democratic congress is not going to be quite as aggressive as you think. This will NOT be a quick process. I wouldn't be looking for any flights to London anytime soon...

 

[Rico]

Fisrt, understand that the law is both a shield and a sword. The single carrier laws which are normally used against management to prevent whipsawing of labor, can just as easily be used in the other direction.

I suspect the part where Nicolau talks about merger flexibility is a flexibility reserved for management and not, as you suggest, a blank check to prevent the implementation of an award resulting from an arbitration voluntarily submitted to by AAA pilots.

As to keeping it separate, again that's management's choice using their business judgment. Doug is picked by the board of directors. The board, in turn, are elected by the shareholders who themselves are the legal owners of LCC. What Doug does, then, is presumed to be for the best interests of the owners.

Doug's statements that he will keep the operations separate easily fall within his business judgment. He can easily justify it by saying that the Joint Contract is too expensive and it's better for LCC to keep the operation separate until (in Doug's belief) a proper joint contract is negotiated. If there weren't laws on the books, he could do this forever and whipsaw labor. But he can't because of single carrier laws. Point is, by virtue of his position and legal responsibilities, Doug can choose to keep the operations separate for reasonable time. Secondly, that's Doug's choice, not labor's to make. Finally, we all know that the only way Doug can realize the synergy savings is to have one operation. Heck, that's been the standard, knee jerk response (from both AAA and AWA) every time he mentions keeping the operations separate.

Congress has plenary power over interstate commerce and make no mistake - Congress has all kinds of laws governing the articles and companies involved in interstate commerce. The system is set up such that Congress is the one who tells labor what rights they have and what they can do, not the other way around.

Trust me pal, after coming in from one of the US Airways' regional subsidiaries... I know all about the law behind single carrier status, federal regulation of multiple certificates under one holding company, and multiple ALPA represented pilot groups under one "owner".

Don't kid yourself into thinking it cannot be done.

The feds dont give a flying poop about multiple operations running under one owner, it is not just commonplace in the industry, it has become the norm for those operating smaller equipment.

And ALPA's stance has been "we don't care, as long as they are under separate certificates".

We bring more to the table than you do, and as such, we retain more if we walk away from the table too.

At this point, the US Airways pilots have little to lose by doing so, that's how one-sided this award was. "Making up" for it by raising F/O rates will not fly with the majority of pilots already looking to recover what they lost in 2 BK's, so why wouldn't we stick together, and throw the idea of merging the operation under the bus.

Senior US pilots get all the Widebodies, get all the future Captain postions caused by our attrition, and E-190 growth, and have a far better shot at claiming future growth since the international flying is on our certificate.

Once again, other than "brotherhood". WTF would any US Airways pilot want to merge with you guys now...?

Enjoy your meaningless windfall.

 

[Elevation]

You can't stop the West from using the East contract. So there you go merged.