United to merge with US AIRWAYS rumor

[cactusboy53]

Is there anything spelled out in the HP, US and UA pilot contracts that would make integration go any smoother than what we've seen with US/HP? Wouldn't we have all the UA pilots insisting on DOH, which would effectively put the US pilots (and HP, by extension) at the bottom of the list...

PHil;
You have to read the ALPA Merger policy VERBATIM. It states that NO list can be created in such a way so as to give a WINDFALL to any one pilot group. PLUS, there is NO "date of hire" verbage in ANY portion of section 45.

 

[Ardenian]

Why does it have to be UA going back into BK? Why not US? That seems to be the direction Tempe is taking this company these days. We can't continue much longer operating like this. We're in a tailspin with no one at the controls.

And it's all the PHL reps fault!!

Am I right, guys?


It's a Great Pyrenees

 

[crusher]

You can't go into BK when you are showing profits and have money in the bank. Unfortunately UA is still not profitable after coming out of BK.

 

[delldude]

Why does it have to be UA going back into BK? Why not US? That seems to be the direction Tempe is taking this company these days. We can't continue much longer operating like this. We're in a tailspin with no one at the controls.

Wow,just like under Wolfe/Gangwal and Bronner/Seigel....some things just never seem to change do they?

 

[jerseyfinn]

Just so we dump QIK & use UA computers

If UA is using sabre, I'm all for a merger. Can they get it done by next Friday?

Barry

 

[N965VJ]

rumors are starting to fly again

Oh yeah, sure.

I heard the same thing at the Sea Shell last night, so its gotta be true.

 

[700UW]

It cant be true, USA320Pilot did not report it first!

 

[as the prop turns]

Ain't gonna happen.

 

[USFlyer]

You can't go into BK when you are showing profits and have money in the bank.

Yes, you can. There's no "test" for declaring Chapter 11. The general guide is if one's liabilities exceed its capability to service those liabilities.

 

[safety stud]

Nope...

It's gonna be a joint merger with Alaska and Hawaian...
Extra longhaul A/C and west coast slots...

Just my opinion...

 

[EMBFA]

Nope...

It's gonna be a joint merger with Alaska and Hawaian...
Extra longhaul A/C and west coast slots...

Just my opinion...

That really is stupid enough to sound like something they would come up with. Four completely disjointed, unrelated route networks. Add a whole bunch more narrowbodies. Add ZERO international to an airline that desperately needs it.

If United US Airways 2.0 (or is it 3.0?) were true, how is it supposed to be structured? Flat out merger of the two, UA return to BK aquired by US?

 

[RowUnderDCA]

I know I'm probably dense about this. But it's a question that I haven't been able to resolve through reading the posts. Does the Nic decision, if implemented, extinguish the possibility that any subsequent merger with LCC could use DOH for pilot list integration? I assume that this is true, because there will be no meaningful DOH figure on the merged LCC list. Or is it ok for one carrier's pilot's list to be re-ordered internally because of a switch back to DOH.

 

[exB717Flyer]

Does the Nic decision, if implemented, extinguish the possibility that any subsequent merger with LCC could use DOH for pilot list integration?

Of course not. First of all, every merger is treated individually. The Nicolau Award is binding but not necessarily precedent-setting -- that's up to the next arbitrator. Second of all, any integration can go DOH if the arbitrator decides so. Nicolau simply ruled that it wasn't appropriate for the AWA/USA merger. DOH is only fair if it doesn't create windfalls for one side.

 

[prechilill]

I know I'm probably dense about this. But it's a question that I haven't been able to resolve through reading the posts. Does the Nic decision, if implemented, extinguish the possibility that any subsequent merger with LCC could use DOH for pilot list integration? I assume that this is true, because there will be no meaningful DOH figure on the merged LCC list. Or is it ok for one carrier's pilot's list to be re-ordered internally because of a switch back to DOH.

A merger with another ALPA carrier will be handled according to ALPA merger policy which does not include DOH at all in the merger policy language. So for a future integration to go DOH would actually be counter to ALPA suggested merger policy. This does not mean an integration cannot go DOH (Air Wisconsin used it in 1998 with Mountain Air Express), it is up to the negotiating parties to reach an agreement on how they wish to integrate the lists. There is no reference, however, to DOH like there once was. (The AAA pilots are greatly confused about this issue.)
Regarding this recent arbitrated integration, it followed the ALPA merger policy so it is somewhat important in another integration in that it establishes a precedent. It would be extremely challenging legally for the current seniority list to be redone soley on a DOH guideline or on any conceptual measure for that matter. Arbitration is a measure of last resort and ALPA merger policies are suggestions to the negotiating parties on integration measures to go by. Any standard can be used so long as it is agreed to by both parties. In the AWA/ U case, all three members in the arbitration panel agreed with the America West plan more than the other proposal (straight DOH), even the representative appointed by the USAir pilots. So you can walk away from the Nicolau decision thinking the AWA merger committee at least had a more realistic approach to integrating the lists than did the PHL-pressured U merger committee because the end product looked very similar to what the AWA group was advocating a year before the arbitration.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Or is it ok for one carrier's pilot's list to be re-ordered internally because of a switch back to DOH.

I haven't seen this answered yet - there is not supposed to be any rearrangement of a pre-merger list during a merger so if this award goes forward it would pretty much set the US list in stone for any future merger no matter what method was used to merge the lists in the future.

In theory, I suppose the two merger committees could come to an agreement that would rearrange one or both of the pre-merger lists but you can imagine what kind of uproar that would cause.

Jim