US Pilots Labor Discussion

[No Land Green]

You boys looking for someone to blame ? Try your old C41 reps. They are the ones who told your MEC to push for a DOH intergration or they would replace the members of your Merger Commitee, effectively tying their hands from negotiating anything else. Those are the ones you should hold accountable for where you are today. No one else.


CV580ETOPS

Not according to Phil Carey when I personally talked with him face to face.

 

[Pi brat]

If you want a sence of what the west things of the east pilots. Watch the last crew news. When Parker says that there are rational, intelligent people on both sides of this. The room bursts into laughter. No one over here believes that.

I did watch it and the look on his face after the laughter was " My God, what a bunch of children I'm dealing with!", and that is exactly what he is dealing with, no matter the actual age. The PHX crew news sessions are painful and embarrassing to watch.

There are two sides to this and both share some blame. It may not be 50/50, but it is on both sides.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Not really. You are resorting to the usual East tactic of missing the point and instead creating irrelevant issues.

Let's start with The Point: I referred to the FAA and the Steelworkers Trilogy solely to point out that courts essentially like arbitration awards and take them very seriously, to counter the nycbusdriver's thought that the legal system will ignore an arbitration award.

But I'll play along for a moment and address your irrelevancies.


What is "a federal arbitration"?


Irrelevant (even assuming it is true, which I do not know). It only needs to be "confirmed" if a party is seeking judicial enforcement of the award in the federal courts, which is not what is going on here. You seem to be implying that it has to be confirmed in order to be somehow valid at all, which is not correct.


Are you saying the Nic award did not draw its essence from the ALPA meger policy?

You are probably fixated on the word "CBA" and will be unable to follow the logic to see that in this particular case it is appropriate to replace "CBA" with "agreement between the parties."

In which case are you suggesting that only with CBA disputes do courts respect the arbitration process?

Looks like you are missing the points, not me.

The Federal Arbitration Act allows either party to get the award confirmed by a court. Why didn't the west MEC do that? Simply because they couldn't, since it was NOT A FEDERAL ARBITRATION.

And, just because it fits your argument to substitute "Collective Bargaining Agreement" with "agreement between the parties" does not make it so. A Collective Bargaining Agreement is a very specific contract, i.e. between a union and an employer. An "agreement between the parties" can be anything from General Motors contracting to purchase spark plugs from Champion, to your next door neighbor agreeing to pay you $4 to mow his lawn.

If you don't see the difference in these things, you are well beyond hope of ever grasping this.

 

[700UW]

The arbitration was an agreement signed by ALPA East and West and US Airways, its in your CBA as part of the TA, a CBA under the RLA which is a federal law.

Try again.

 

[Pi brat]

You are actually very wrong, the east rank and file are collectively to blame for this debacle. I can show you petitions signed by the majority of east pilots demanding doh before the arbitration started, their reps were only following the memberships orders.

Let's see them.

 

[Pi brat]

Not according to Phil Carey when I personally talked with him face to face.

And not what I was told by a member just last month, as I explained just a few posts ago. They can't believe it No Land Green. If they did it would take away their victim status and they wear that like a King's Robe!

 

[nycbusdriver]

As oldie recently told someone, you're welcome to have a different opinion but you're wrong. The 9th clearly said that USAPA could possibly abandon the Nic as long as it didn't do the harm that the west fears. You love to use the "even if it doesn't contain the Nic" part of the sentence to justify doing whatever you want but that's not what the 9th said. Abandon the Nic and you better come close to it with any alternative or you do the harm the west fears. The 9th also said if you don't come close, you face an unquestionably ripe DFR.

Jim

I agree.

But we will not agree exactly what constitutes harm.

I'm certain it will end up in court again, just as I am certain the Nicolau list will not be included in any new CBA. There is enough industry and court precedent that USAPA is confident that a DOH (or LOS) list will stand up to the challenge. If the court finds that it is not arbitrary and does not disadvantage one group over another, it will be dismissed. It will not be looked at through the lens of the Nicolau shame as the standard of what constitutes disadvantage.

 

[john john]

The arbitration was an agreement signed by ALPA East and West and US Airways, its in your CBA as part of the TA, a CBA under the RLA which is a federal law.

Try again.

What happen to the 401K, airbus and attendance grievance that the IAM won???

 

[700UW]

The airbus arbitration award was in a CBA that was abrogated in Bankruptcy, a final offer was ratified by the membership that gave the company the right to outsource.

The 401k match was won and in effect for years, after the the merger the M&R became part of the IAMNPF and the matching money us going in towards the years of service.

Compare apples to apples, your trying to compare apples to oranges.

The company agreed with ALPA on how the seniority would be integrated, thats their involvement, they were not part of the arbitration, it was between west and est alpa. The process is outlined in the TA.

 

[nycbusdriver]

The arbitration was an agreement signed by ALPA East and West and US Airways, its in your CBA as part of the TA, a CBA under the RLA which is a federal law.

Try again.

Wrong.

Thanks for playing, though.

 

[700UW]

Wrong?

Prove it, your abiding by the terms of the TA as it pertains to flying, arent you now?

You make this way to easy.

 

[cleardirect]

Let's see them.

http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/merger/signatures


Check out the names and the comments.

What happened to all of the ALPA supporters? All of those names with ALPA numbers proudly displayed.

Name: Elwood Menear on Aug 14, 2005
State: PA
Country: US
Comments: Let the arbitrator know that we know this position is just, do not waffle and thereby give him and easy way to screw us. Our time in service is sacrosanct.

Looks like your MEC listened to one of your pilots.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Wrong?

Prove it, your abiding by the terms of the TA as it pertains to flying, arent you now?

You make this way to easy.

I'm not saying that the TA is not an enforceable contract, it's just not the CBA. There are two entirely separate CBAs in force right now for the pilots. The TA is "part" of neither.

 

[Bear96]

The Federal Arbitration Act allows either party to get the award confirmed by a court. Why didn't the west MEC do that?

Not that it is relevant here, but the plan never was to get it confirmed by a court. Since you seem fixated on it, check Section 9 of the FAA (especially the very beginning: "If the parties in their agreement have agreed that a judgment of the court shall be entered upon the award made . . . [then any party may apply to the court for an order confirming the award]."). Who was ALPA planning to file suit against to confirm the award when the process first started - itself? The plan was (and is) to use the list going forward in the merger process.

By the way, if the award had somehow been "confirmed" under the FAA, do you really think the East pilots would have accepted it because of that procedural detail, or do you think they would still have thought of ways to try to squirm out of their legal obligations?

Simply because they couldn't, since it was NOT A FEDERAL ARBITRATION.

I still am not understanding what this "a federal arbitration" is, and how it differs from other ("non-federal"?) arbitrations.

Can you provide an example of "federal" and "non-federal" arbitrations, and explain the difference(s) between them?

And, just because it fits your argument to substitute "Collective Bargaining Agreement" with "agreement between the parties" does not make it so. A Collective Bargaining Agreement is a very specific contract, i.e. between a union and an employer. An "agreement between the parties" can be anything from General Motors contracting to purchase spark plugs from Champion, to your next door neighbor agreeing to pay you $4 to mow his lawn.

And that distinction is germane here, how exactly? Is arbitration over a CBA issue more or less enforceable than arbitrations over other issues? If so, how?

Would the GM / Champion and neighbor disputes be examples of "federal" or "non-federal" arbitration?

 

[BoeingBoy]

And not what I was told by a member just last month, as I explained just a few posts ago.

You've got to remember that everyone involved in the seniority integration process is engaging in a lot of CYA. They don't want anyone blaming them for the outcome, so there's plenty of revisionist history coming from east of the Mississippi. Go all the way back to DFR1 and the sworn testimony that the arbitration was binding only on the MC - does any pilot on the East side think that was the truth? People who will lie under oath will lie about anything including who's fault this mess is.

Jim