All sounds like USAPA has a strong case for the majority of there members. NEGOTIATIONS AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING is the way unions settle disputes plane and simply. The majority of the pilots were creative in achieving collective negotiations with the membership and the company. A REDO
This decision is wrong, contradicts established law and is dangerous to the state of the law under the Railway Labor Act.
In no way restricts USAPA from negotiating any and all terms of that agreement, including the Nicolau Award.
Predecessor union’s collective bargaining agreement provides only the beginning point for a successor union’s negotiations and the successor is free to negotiate changes to the agreement. To do otherwise would perpetuate the rejected union as representative.
The court also wrongly held that USAPA is bound by the Nicolau Award as the product of ALPA Merger Policy. ALPA Merger Policy is only an internal union procedure. It is not part of the collective bargaining agreement with US Airways (even if it was, USAPA could still negotiate changes to it.) USAPA cannot be bound to ALPA Merger Policy since it is not ALPA, and only ALPA’s subordinate bodies, the Master Executive Councils (which, admittedly, are not real labor organizations) are bound to follow the Merger Policy. The Merger Policy has no standing under the Railway Labor Act and since USAPA’s successor obligations only exist under the RLA, they cannot include ALPA Merger Policy.
The court’s conclusion that the East pilots had consented to be bound by the Nicolau Award is simply false because even under ALPA, their representatives took the position that the Nicolau Award was not final and binding, and that it violated ALPA Merger Policy. That lawsuit was only dismissed after ALPA lost the union election to USAPA; so the East MEC never took the position that the Nicolau Award was final and binding.
