US Pilots Labor Discussion

[BoeingBoy]

Change it to what? Your certificate doesn't expire to my knowledge.

The default is set to display 10 records. If you're #25 on the list, however it prioritizes them, your record doesn't display.

You're right that certificates don't expire but it may only show certificate holders who are current, either on currency or medical. That would explain mine not showing up. Or it could just return incomplete results.

Jim

 

[nevergiveup]

The same applies to that statement as to "Nic didn't follow the policy". Personally I don't see anything that hard to understand. A PID - is it that? Negotiate, mediate, arbitrate - is that hard to understand? Final & binding - is that the hard part? A list of goals, with no certain order and some potentially conflicting with others depending on the facts of the merger - is it that which is so hard to understand?

If ALPA's policy is so vague, how about the law? Is "fair" perfectly clear and the same interpretation to everyone?

Personally, I see it as a case of the east not liking the result so trying to blame the policy, the arbitrator, the west, anyone or anything to justify trying to avoid the result.

Anyone is entitled to claim that the policy is vague, Nic didn't follow it, ALPA submitted bad data, whatever. However, no one is entitled to state any of that as a fact except the BOD or a Judge.

Jim

My preference would be a policy that would not send it to an arbitrator. Passing the problem on to someone else is not necessarily the best direction to take, looking at where it has taken us. I do predict a solution by 2020.

 

[No Land Green]

This is what the 9th said:

"Additionally, USAPA’s final proposal may yet be one that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau Award"


Driver B)

Sounds like wiggle room to me. 😉

 

[A320 Driver]

The default is set to display 10 records. If you're #25 on the list, however it prioritizes them, your record doesn't display.

You're right that certificates don't expire but it may only show certificate holders who are current, either on currency or medical. That would explain mine not showing up. Or it could just return incomplete results.

Jim

I bumped the records...nothing. Since it works on the FAA registry and not on landings.com, maybe it's some kind of security issue...who knows.

Driver

 

[BoeingBoy]

My preference would be a policy that would not send it to an arbitrator. Passing the problem on to someone else is not necessarily the best direction to take, looking at where it has taken us. I do predict a solution by 2020.

Then both ALPA policy and the law meets such a test - both give the sides ample opportunity to negotiate a settlement without an arbitrator being involved. The problem with completely eliminating an arbitrator is what happens if the sides can't reach an agreement? The airline stays in limbo for forever, never being able to fully exploit the advantages of merging? To leave everything is limbo risks one side or the other getting the majority of post-merger goodies and no one knows in advance which side will do the getting and which side will do the losing. So while east has seen the positive produced by this merger, if there's another east may be on the losing side and begging for an arbitrator to bring the process to an end.

As a last resort only, an arbitration is supposed to bring the process to conclusion, under both ALPA policy and the law. That's where the "final and binding" comes in. The job of the arbitrator is come up with what he/she considers a fair solution when the two sides can't. It's not to keep making recommendations until one is found that both sides can live with - that's the mediator's job.

Jim

 

[No Land Green]

The airline stays in limbo for forever, never being able to fully exploit the advantages of merging?


Jim

Is it really in limbo? It appears as if Parker has more advantages of NOT merging the East and West. We have Air Wisconsin, Mesa, Republic, PSA, Piedmont, Colgan and some I may have missed who all make up the LCC Brand. LCC is a quilt of many parts. If Parker has 2.5 more years of dragging this out in the Court System, It's quite possible their will always be an East and a West part of the quilt.

 

[cleardirect]

Actually, ALPA merger poilicy is to vague to be followed by anyone.

No only the east pilots. ALPA merger policy has worked every time it was tried except for this one. Perhaps it is your reading and understanding skills that are to vague.

 

[cleardirect]

My preference would be a policy that would not send it to an arbitrator. Passing the problem on to someone else is not necessarily the best direction to take, looking at where it has taken us. I do predict a solution by 2020.

The east pilots should have been more reasonable and found a solution you could have lived with during the Med phase. Did you not know the rules? did you not think the rules applied to you? Did no one explain what arbitration meant?

I ask again. How is ALPA merger policy different than A/M merger policy? Do both have negotiation phase? Do both have Mediation phase? What is the final step of both policies if both sides can not agree?

 

[cactusboy53]

This is what the 9th said:

"Additionally, USAPA’s final proposal may yet be one that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if that proposal is not the Nicolau Award"

IMO, this opens up the possibility that something other than the NIC might be acceptable to the courts. To meet that test, we have to have a ratified contract with USAPA's seniority proposal in it. Not being the NIC, West is sure to bring DFR II at which point a comparison would have to be completed between USAPA's proposal and the NIC to assess "disadvantages". I don't know what "disadvantages Plaintiffs fear" but if the proposal violates that (whatever it is) then DFR II would be successful...right? I think that is where the fairness issue of the NIC will be tested.

That's the way I read it. IMO, straight DOH would be one of those "disadvantages", so USAPA better come up with something different.

Driver B)

Judge Bybee also said this:

"...But when USAPA won the certification election and refused in practice to bargain for implementation of the Nicolau Award, a previously bargained-for award that the Airline had already accepted and continues to accept, this was not the announcement of an intention, but actual “act[ion] against the interest of” the West Pilots—the precise point at which, it seems to me (and to the Second Circuit), a DFR breach occurs. Id. (“the breach occurs when the union acts against the interests of its members”);..."


The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals "punted" on this one boys. Judge Bybee and Judge Wake are opposed to Tashima & Graber (essentially).

We could "cherry pick" bits and pieces of legal decisions all night. It still doesn't change the fact that your group voted in a new CBA specifically with the intent of evading a final and binding seniority arbitration. It still doesn't change the fact that all the other players are getting HUGE raises, and you are stuck trying to evade a final and binding seniority arbitration. It still doesn't change the fact that my new "union" has pi$$ed away OVER 10 million dollars of our union dues (and that lawyer has now left with our money) to evade a final and binding arbitration.

Second verse, same as the first.......

I'm Henery the Eighth, I am,
Henery the Eighth I am, I am!
I got married to the widow next door,
She'd been married seven times before.
And every one was an Henery
It wouldn't be a Willie or a Sam
I'm her eighth old man named Henery
Henery the Eighth, I am!

🙂

 

[cactusboy53]

Duplicate

 

[Barrister]

The east pilots should have been more reasonable and found a solution you could have lived with during the Med phase. Did you not know the rules? did you not think the rules applied to you? Did no one explain what arbitration meant?

I ask again. How is ALPA merger policy different than A/M merger policy? Do both have negotiation phase? Do both have Mediation phase? What is the final step of both policies if both sides can not agree?

Let me ask you this....if the Arb was done according to ALPA merger policy and all
that implies do you agree with NIC that a new hire who had never flown a revenue trip wth this company
carried the same weight as a 17 years never furloughed pilot.....yea of course you do!

NICDOA
NPJB

 

[No Land Green]

Let me ask you this....if the Arb was done according to ALPA merger policy and all
that implies do you agree with NIC that a new hire who had never flown a revenue trip wth this company
carried the same weight as a 17 years never furloughed pilot.....yea of course you do!

NICDOA
NPJB

Thanks Barrister, I was just about to post the same.

 

[cleardirect]

Let me ask you this....if the Arb was done according to ALPA merger policy and all
that implies do you agree with NIC that a new hire who had never flown a revenue trip wth this company
carried the same weight as a 17 years never furloughed pilot.....yea of course you do!

NICDOA
NPJB

Or put another way. How many pilots did the bottom east pilot have before he was furloughed? How many pilots did the bottom AWA pilot to be furloughed? How long separate ops would it take for the bottom east pilot to upgrade? How long separate ops would it take the bottom AWA pilot to upgrade. They were in the same position. It just took 17 years at Us Airways to match the same value as AWA new hire.

Sorry if that stings but that is the truth.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Is it really in limbo?

In the sense that it can't be fully integrated. In this specific case it may well be that the company is saving more than integrating would so the company is in no hurry to integrate the two groups, but that doesn't have to be true of all mergers. Just look at WN/FL. Given the pay differences it could be argued that WN would save a ton of money if they didn't bring the FL pilots up to the WN pay, but that company seems to want to get the merger behind them and move forward as one company.

Jim

 

[No Land Green]

In the sense that it can't be fully integrated. In this specific case it may well be that the company is saving more than integrating would so the company is in no hurry to integrate the two groups, but that doesn't have to be true of all mergers. Just look at WN/FL. Given the pay differences it could be argued that WN would save a ton of money if they didn't bring the FL pilots up to the WN pay, but that company seems to want to get the merger behind them and move forward as one company.

Jim

I agree with what you say above. At WN/FL when you buy a ticket with them you are going to fly on them. At LCC you have a 40% chance of not flying on an East or West jet. Because of the latter, I'm starting to think that LCC Management could really care less if it ever gets fully integrated, sans another merger. The Corporate Culture philosophy at LCC and WN/FL are not even in the same universe.