U.S. Pilot Labor Thread 9/28 - 10/05

[Ralph]

New week. New thread.

 

[Megasnoop]

megasnoop, The injunction exist on the docket of the federal district court for arizona where it was originally filed, at least it was still there 3pm 9-26-08. It was not filed in the superior court.

So there is NO injunction, just an attempt at one. Thanks for the clarification, nic4.

Freund is still AWAPPA's attorney, at least he was this morning when Seham sent him a letter and he replied to same as counsel for AWAPPA. I have not been made aware of any contadictions of arguements from Freund, I have however seen them in Seham, in particular his opinions on when agency shop is due the CBA.

It sounds like hes just Macalvenas personal attorney now. Freund, isnt he the attorney who said the Nic was only a negotiating tool? Hes my hero.

I am glad to hear USAPA is fighting block hour reductions, keep up the good work, you can start by also filling the grievences for the out of seniority furloughs the west has been filling, or not your choice, I will not hold my breath.

Grievances are filed by individual pilots. Your Macalvena filed one. TA disputes are handled by the union and will get to arbitration in January with Bloch. Thats as fast as they could get it there. And after the win, the company will have to bring everyone back, making individual grievances like Macalvenas moot. USAPA is walking the walk, representing West pilots who are being illegally furloughed. ALPA would be negotiating. We MIGHT get our furloughees back with the Scope win, because the company could just cut some code-share cities. You WILL get your pilots back.

I'm sure this is getting a lot of play and help out west (NOT). The Snoop

USAPA Update
September 27, 2008

Item Two: The Scope Monitoring Committee issued an update on the 25th outlining the status of the violation to our scope language regarding Regional Jet flying at the Express carriers. A System Board of Adjustment hearing in front of Arbitrator Block has been scheduled for December 8th and 9th on this matter (dispute #8).

Most recently, the Committee informed the BPR that the data provided by Management relative to minimum block hour requirements (utilization) has fallen below what is required by our CBA. Lacking a resolution within the next week to this Transition Agreement dispute, it will be submitted to the System Board of Adjustment per Section X of the Transition Agreement. Dispute # 10 should be in front of Arbitrator Block sometime in January. The Committee reminds everyone that contract compliance is a cornerstone to our profession and our collective existence. The full text of this important update is available in the USAPA Updates section of the web site.

 

[Res Judicata]

Tell whomever wrote the CLT update to grow up and take some anger management classes.

He's nearly in tears that the company wouldn't do their dirty work for them and fire the 4 West pilots.

The update is just one huge diatribe that follows the same path USAPA always takes when someone challenges their perceived omnipotence...throw a tantrum, point fingers, blame somebody else, demand restitution, promise revenge!. Classic.

 

[EastUS]

Megasnoop: "I'm sure this is getting a lot of play and help out west (NOT)." Indeed...as sadly expected.

grow up and take some anger management classes ...nearly in tears ....just one huge diatribe....throw a tantrum, point fingers, blame somebody else, .....

:blink: Physician, heal thyself.....

 

[nycbusdriver]

Wow! We went almost 36 hours without a post (whine/rant) on this thread. That must be a record.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Tell whomever wrote the CLT update to grow up and take some anger management classes.

He's nearly in tears that the company wouldn't do their dirty work for them and fire the 4 West pilots.

The update is just one huge diatribe that follows the same path USAPA always takes when someone challenges their perceived omnipotence...throw a tantrum, point fingers, blame somebody else, demand restitution, promise revenge!. Classic.

Since the language concerning the Agency Shop provisions are in BOTH contracts AND BOTH TAs, The company really doesn't have much hope of winning this. Nor do the four individuals. If I were running USAPA, I'd advise the company that they'd better live up to their contract, or I'd send out all 1750 or so letters at once, then go to court (or the arbitrator, as the case may be) to make them fire them all, ALL AT ONCE. Pretty hard to find a way the company or AOL could win that one, either.

I'm sure that once a few are made examples of that the rest will pay their agency fees. There are plenty of unemployed pilots out there, just waiting for jobs to open up. They wouldn't even be scabs to take such a job. Labor groups everywhere would back it, since the agency fee rules apply everywhere, not just at airlines.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Since the language concerning the Agency Shop provisions are in BOTH contracts AND BOTH TAs, The company really doesn't have much hope of winning this. Nor do the four individuals. If I were running USAPA, I'd advise the company that they'd better live up to their contract, or I'd send out all 1750 or so letters at once, then go to court (or the arbitrator, as the case may be) to make them fire them all, ALL AT ONCE. Pretty hard to find a way the company or AOL could win that one, either.

I'm sure that once a few are made examples of that the rest will pay their agency fees. There are plenty of unemployed pilots out there, just waiting for jobs to open up. They wouldn't even be scabs to take such a job. Labor groups everywhere would back it, since the agency fee rules apply everywhere, not just at airlines.

Really, I think USAPA should absolutely not send out letters in small increments. Every pilot who is in arrears should have his/her name sent to the company, even if it is 1750. Then, let the company determine how to proceed. I'm not saying that USAPA needs to demand that all be processed at once (at least not at this point,) but they must see progress from the company or then go to court over breach. It is not incumbent on USAPA to determine the order, but simply to notify the company of its obligations for these pilots. In fact, I think USAPA would be opening itself up for litigation if they did it in an incremental manner.

 

[Tiger 1050]

Since the language concerning the Agency Shop provisions are in BOTH contracts AND BOTH TAs, The company really doesn't have much hope of winning this.

I do not believe the TA has anything to say regarding agency shop fees. In addition I believe that this issue is concerning the language in your unions C&BL's. In the C&BL's it states that one can only be granted membership in the union if voted on by a majority of the local council. In the west's contract, section 29 says (and I'll paraphrase here) that one must be a member first and one must be granted all the rights and privileges of a regular member for one to be responsible for any fees associated with the union.

I believe Uncle Al referenced Section 29 paragraphs (2) and (3) in the west contract. I'm quite sure though that you have failed to read them and went on nothing but the drivel USAPA fed you...

USAPA will have to amend their C&BL's. Which I'm sure they'll do. But until then USAPA will be stuck. Question is, how long can USAPA keep going with lawsuits and other non germane costs drowning them in debt. I am also curious to find out if these particular individuals out west will be charged back to April. Seems to me one could argue they were never members and therefore not responsible for any fees until they were actually vote on by their local council.

As for me... Well I'm still waiting for the independently audited statement ensuring I am not paying any fees that are not germane to the administration of the contract. This is my right as an objector according to Seham.

View attachment 7964

 

[Res Judicata]

r I'd send out all 1750 or so letters at once, then go to court (or the arbitrator, as the case may be) to make them fire them all, ALL AT ONCE.

You're math reveals your true intent, (not that your sides intentions were ever all that concealed), Destroy the West. You somehow forgot to add in the 1000 or so other East guys that are refusing to pay as well....Somehow you're not interested in forcing the terminations of their careers for the exact same offense.


No one will be fired for not paying USAPA until USAPA plays by the rules/law. Obviously the company agrees and since USAPA is a marginalized annoyance of a "union" don't expect the company to do your dirty work. Ever. USAPA will be off the property before they agree to an independent audit, (even though it's required by law). Hmmm. Makes me wonder what they're hiding.

As far as all other labor groups getting on board with your idea of firing 40% of your "membership"...well, I'm not sure what you're smoking.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You're math reveals your true intent, (not that your sides intentions were ever all that concealed), Destroy the West. You somehow forgot to add in the 1000 or so other East guys that are refusing to pay as well....Somehow you're not interested in forcing the terminations of their careers for the exact same offense.


No one will be fired for not paying USAPA until USAPA plays by the rules/law. Obviously the company agrees and since USAPA is a marginalized annoyance of a "union" don't expect the company to do your dirty work. Ever. USAPA will be off the property before they agree to an independent audit, (even though it's required by law). Hmmm. Makes me wonder what they're hiding.

As far as all other labor groups getting on board with your idea of firing 40% of your "membership"...well, I'm not sure what you're smoking.

Nope. I'd send the letters to the East guys that aren't paying as well. You're WAAAY off on the number, though. USAPA has been way too reluctant to play hardball, IMO. USAPA will be at LCC for a LONG TIME! Especially after they get rid of the company's problems by helping them terminate the "nonmembers". USAPA would not attempt to get it's members terminated. And, it will have the support of ALPA, the AFL-CIO and other labor organizations to do it!

Now's the time to make it happen, while there are plenty of replacements available. Oh, yea. Where's that injunction that AOL said would save the west guys' jobs? If anybody gets them their jobs back, it will be USAPA with their greivance against the scope violations, not the almighty lawyers of AOL.

By the way, item XII C covers the agency shop provisions in the TAs.

 

[cleardirect]

IMO. USAPA will be at LCC for a LONG TIME!

Very long odds on that outcome. But I guess you are willing to bet the rest of your career on that dream. After the 24 months of USAPA regime and no contract it will be easy to replace the dictator.

Especially after they get rid of the company's problems by helping them terminate the "nonmembers".

OK. You are going to have to explain this statement. What problem is the company having? Members, non-members the company does not care. That is an internal association problem. The way you have this written it sound like you think that the company works for the association.

USAPA would not attempt to get it's members terminated. And, it will have the support of ALPA, the AFL-CIO and other labor organizations to do it!

What support are you talking about? How will they support USAPA? Do you think the other unions will welcome you into the club for firing fellow pilots? As all of you USAPA supporters are so quick to point out. ALPA is gone. What do them have to do with this? How many pilots has ALPA ever terminated in their history? How many pilots have gone to arbitration over section 29? The other unions have been very reluctant to use section 29. Why does USAPA the newest association think that it is a great idea and want to make it their legacy to be the first association to terminate people that it supposedly represents?

Now's the time to make it happen, while there are plenty of replacements available.

So! Training costs would be huge. The time to train a significant number to replace all of the west pilots. Besides does USAPA want to represent all of those "rookie" pilots. After all they would all be new hires with no experience.

 

[prechilill]

Since the language concerning the Agency Shop provisions are in BOTH contracts AND BOTH TAs,

Excuse old wise one, but I thought you stated ALPA's signature doesn't mean anything anymore on things like, oh, completed seniority integrations for example.

Do you forget what you make up, or has the story changed again?

 

[Res Judicata]

And, it will have the support of ALPA, the AFL-CIO and other labor organizations to do it!

Is this the same ALPA that publicly asked the question, (of usapa) "What kind of "union' is based upon overpowering their own pilots?"

May edition of ALPA magazine I believe.

Yup, they'll support you 100%. You guys are all powerful and accountable to no one.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Is this the same ALPA that publicly asked the question, (of usapa) "What kind of "union' is based upon overpowering their own pilots?"

May edition of ALPA magazine I believe.

Yup, they'll support you 100%. You guys are all powerful and accountable to no one.

Yes, they'll support it. If they didn't and agency fee payers were allowed to not pay, how many members would ALPA or the AFL_CIO have? Answer: a lot fewer than they have now.

USAPA inherited ALL of ALPA's contracts, including the TAs which say that in order for the NIC to be implemented it would have to be in a ratified contract. Ain't gonna happen.

I am happy not to receive ALPA's Airline Pilot magazine. It was the most expensive and least informative piece of propaganda I've ever subscribed to.

USAPA didn't overpower anybody. They won a majority election sanctioned by the NMB. Get over it. You lost.

 

[BoeingBoy]

USAPA inherited ALL of ALPA's contracts, including the TAs which say that in order for the NIC to be implemented it would have to be in a ratified contract.

You'll have to point out which section of the TA ( of which there's only one that covers both East and West, BTW) contains that language.

What the TA says is that Nic can't be implemented before there's a single combined contract covering both sides. You'll have a hard time finding TA language saying that the Nic has to be contained in that single combined contract.

For bonus points, which seniority integration award was implemented at US without being mentioned in the applicable contract?

Jim