US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Reed Richards]

RR would you agree that Parker and the company are all about money?

If so what do you think is the cheaper seniority list? The Nicolau that has no C&R and leaves both sides relative. Or the DOH list that would require massive C&R to balance.

If the company accepts the Nicolau there is no negotiations. If they use DOH and have to spend time and money figuring out and negotiating C&R.

If they use DOH and C&R there are going to have to spend money administering those C&R. Those C&R would restrict them in the next merger. Suppose the company agrees to DOH and a C&R that requires PHX to remain the same size like STL for AA. How much has that cost AA?

Which side has more top of scale pilots? Using DOH moves you old east guys up the scale.

With these guys it is about money. Figure out which method is cheaper and you have your answer.

I actually agree with you on the "it's about the money premise"....just not enough to argue each point on costs of DOH vs. NIC.

I understand negotiations with the Company are about managed expectations and presentations of "worth.' It is a dance (one we are failing at miserably right now.) At this time in my career and life (and I know you are sick of hearing the recaps from us all) I am not willing to subsidize the Company to move us forward.

There probably is a number the Company could throw out and get the NIC voted in. I hope I live to see the day the Company is successful enough to be able to offer that number. Probably would pass then, but still not with my vote.

RR

 

[Reed Richards]

Except to bargain in BAD faith.

And you get to determine that only after the dirty deed. So says the Ninth, backed up by SCOTUS, and soon Silver.

RR

 

[Reed Richards]

This is now strictly about contract law and NOT THE RLA.

There are indeed many cases where other Federal laws trump the RLA (free speech, FMLA, discrimination, etc.)

In the simple (I know, laugh!) case of a Company bargaining with a pilot's union, it is all RLA. All the way.

RR

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

And you get to determine that only after the dirty deed. So says the Ninth, backed up by SCOTUS, and soon Silver.

RR

You're talking money to buy your vote, NOW?

You scuttled one merger and are now being practical?

You sound like you are on the losing end of this process.

Your side has been more belligerent than conciliatory for years - yet NOW you decide to talk about money for your vote.

Good luck! I wish you well.

Who negotiates your wages?

 

[nic4us]

There is really little wrong with your post Jim, especially the parts about DFR, Silver's competence, and basic contract law.

But this is not simple contract law..if it was this would all be over. This is labor law, and perverted contorted RLA law at that.

The simple fact is under the RLA Courts don't tell unions HOW to bargain. Period. USAPA is free to bargain on any section of their contract, up to and even after ratification. The process never ends. In the case of seniority, once ratified I will agree it is near impossible to undo the knot (Empire/PI post ratification.) But we are not even at that juncture. No Section 22 has been ratified. The union is free to negotiate at will and face all the possible "painful" pitfalls of a real DFR.

I appreciate the fact you also believe Judge Silver's courtroom will not morph into a DFR. Never happen. Sure looked like that at the show on Thursday, but that was exactly that..show.

RR

This is probably a waste of time, because I have told you this already, but here goes, maybe this time it will finally sink in???

This case is not about any court telling a union how to bargain. This case is about telling a corporation how to bargain.


Get it yet??

usapa can bargain away, but they have no company at the table to bargain with, and the company is not going down the DFR road with a buch of reneging malcontents.

Soooo simple a superhero should be able to see it!!!

 

[aquagreen73s]

And you get to determine that only after the dirty deed. So says the Ninth, backed up by SCOTUS, and soon Silver.

RR

True, but we're not asking the question - the company is. The 9th didn't speak to them, only us. So, the question will in all likelihood be answered as to whether USAPA's use of a non-Nicolau is a DFR and the decision will be here pretty soon. Then we can all sit back and enjoy status quo....some more than others.

BTW, I'm grossing over $110K this year and worked a total of 3 four day trips all year that didn't lay over at home! Thank God for PBS!

 

[Pi brat]

piiiiiiiiiiibrrrrrraaaattttt please understand that the company you and I work for stated they are against usapa's illegal scheme in front of a Federal Judge countless times and will not play along.

Is this slow enough for someone of your self made intelligence?

OTTER

Are all of you out there related? I'm not arguing that? I asking about the final act in the play and when it happens, not what the play is. That is what you keep going back to. WE HAVE WON! WE HAVE WON!

Geez! Just don't reply back.

 

[BoeingBoy]

How do YOU define the "end".

First, one has to define what something is the end of, or glean that from context. I think that the westies are saying that the DJ will be the end of the Nic fight. An appeal to the 9th, if requested to be expedited by the parties (USAPA may wish to delay but they would have to file the appeal if they lose in Silver's courtroom), would be fairly quick compared to getting a contract. SCOTUS is unlikely to take the case, just as it was unlikely to take the Addington but it could take some time for that to make itself clear. Like ripeness, a DJ setting out a parties rights/responsibilities as a party to a contract is a routine matter, not groundbreaking, which is why the 9th and SCOTUS very unlikely to get involved.

I don't think any westie believes, or means to imply, that Silver will put a combined contract in place and deny a chance for membership ratification of that contract. All I think she'll do is tell the company what their obligation is in respect to the TA as it applies to the Nic.

Jim

 

[luvthe9]

The end is near for the west, Ferguson has sealed there fate.

 

[Reed Richards]

You're talking money to buy your vote, NOW?

Good luck! I wish you well.

Uh, you did not even quote the right post. I actually said that even with "enough" money I would still vote no.

Good luck to you also.

RR

 

[Reed Richards]

True, but we're not asking the question - the company is. The 9th didn't speak to them, only us. So, the question will in all likelihood be answered as to whether USAPA's use of a non-Nicolau is a DFR and the decision will be here pretty soon. Then we can all sit back and enjoy status quo....some more than others.

BTW, I'm grossing over $110K this year and worked a total of 3 four day trips all year that didn't lay over at home! Thank God for PBS!

I guess I was not clear. Under current RLA case law, the courts will not tell the Union or the Company how to bargain.

Silver telling the Company they can only negotiate one position is no different than imposing its will on the Union. Not going to happen, at least through appeal.

Good for you on the work schedule.

RR

 

[nic4us]

The end is near for the west, Ferguson has sealed there fate.

Unlike the east lemmings, I take responsibility for my own actions. If being an AOL supporter somehow ends up causing detriment to myself or my career, the last person I would blame would be the guy who had the nuts to stand up to a bunch of scumbags like the usapa founders and the scab lawyer.

Try again scab supporter, you are not scareing anybody.

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

Uh, you did not even quote the right post. I actually said that even with "enough" money I would still vote no.

Good luck to you also.

RR

You are so exemplary of what you stand for - big talk- you are losing and now it has turned to,(whether you intended or not) to ask what will my vote cost.

Just asking that question means that you are in greedy, disarray.

 

[Pi brat]

I guess I was not clear. Under current RLA case law, the courts will not tell the Union or the Company how to bargain.

Silver telling the Company they can only negotiate one position is no different than imposing its will on the Union. Not going to happen, at least through appeal.

Good for you on the work schedule. Glad you get to spend all that time in your single crew base.

RR

Okay, so here is another question. If you are on the money, can Judge Silver say to the company "None of the above"? I'm going to give you count 4.

By that I mean that she says "This is the good old USA and anyone can sue any day, so I cannot give you immunity. But you are required by the RLA to negotiate every section of the contract with the CBA. You signed a poorly worded document, live with it. If you have one group of employees saying that the other is not right and will sue, NEGOTIATE with you CBA to see if you can overcome those fears. If not, when you have everything else done and the CBA still wants DOH in section 22 then you decide if you want to take a strike or face the DFR with plausible deniability that it wasn't YOU that did this and they should sue their union."

 

[Be Careful What You Wish For.]

Okay, so here is another question. If you are on the money, can Judge Silver say to the company "None of the above"? I'm going to give you count 4.

By that I mean that she says "This is the good old USA and anyone can sue any day, so I cannot give you immunity. But you are required by the RLA to negotiate every section of the contract with the CBA. You signed a poorly worded document, live with it. If you have one group of employees saying that the other is not right and will sue, NEGOTIATE with you CBA to see if you can overcome those fears. If not, when you have everything else done and the CBA still wants DOH in section 22 then you decide if you want to take a strike or face the DFR with plausible deniability that it wasn't YOU that did this and they should sue their union."

You are so lame.