US Pilots Labor Discussion

[AWE Dog]

Another question for you. How is it NOT a windfall for a 1996 East Hire who was on furlough, while a 1996 West hire is a Captain, to return as a line holding Captain?

How is it fair that a west 2006 new hire can hold Widebody International f/o with the nic. ......career expectation? LOL

 

[BoeingBoy]

The West pilot is only using his/her seniority on the West list to hold that job on the new combined airline while the East pilot would be jumping over West pilots to hold a position that he/she couldn't hold on the East list (some could, not because of their intrinsic seniority but rather because some of those senior to them on the East list didn't bid the position). Your question is just another form of claiming that an furloughee had more seniority than a working West pilot for no other reason than spending time on furlough.

Jim

 

[Reed Richards]

Just astonishment that anyone on the East can even quote what the 9th said while still ignoring what they meant...

Jim

Oh great. You again. Despite what you think you learned on the recent Matlock marathon, you are dead wrong on your self serving read of what the Ninth said. Sumadarson just gave you a nice recap.

Tell us again how you think a probationary pilot should go ahead of a 17 year pilot. I guess you expect that 17 year guy (now at what...almost 21 years service) to just suck it up like an Empire pilot. Tell us how any East pilot under the USAPA Conditions and Restrictions presented to the Company can take any job in PHX out of seniority. After all Jim, unlike the morally bankrupt ALPA, we at USAPA believe seniority matters. It did not matter to you, PI, or ALPA in 1986. Seniority served you just fine in the next two mergers, so you could put those cartoon stickers on your windows, wax your barnstorming mustache, and opine to your Empire F/Os about how lucky they were to even have a job.

There have been some good arguments presented here by both parties. Yours ring hollow. We know who you are, and we know your contempt for the very pilots you flew with for most of your career. They made a choice, finally, to dump ALPA. Your anger and resentment as to the merits of that decision shows a side of a man that should better be left unseen.

I will ignore you from now on, unless you address me personally. It’s one thing to have a opinion. It is quite another to so openly be a hypocrite, having enjoyed your ill gotten gains for so long.

RR

 

[crazystnic]

Oh great. You again. Despite what you think you learned on the recent Matlock marathon, you are dead wrong on your self serving read of what the Ninth said. Sumadarson just gave you a nice recap.

Tell us again how you think a probationary pilot should go ahead of a 17 year pilot. I guess you expect that 17 year guy (now at what...almost 21 years service) to just suck it up like an Empire pilot. Tell us how any East pilot under the USAPA Conditions and Restrictions presented to the Company can take any job in PHX out of seniority. After all Jim, unlike the morally bankrupt ALPA, we at USAPA believe seniority matters. It did not matter to you, PI, or ALPA in 1986. Seniority served you just fine in the next two mergers, so you could put those cartoon stickers on your windows, wax your barnstorming mustache, and opine to your Empire F/Os about how lucky they were to even have a job.

There have been some good arguments presented here by both parties. Yours ring hollow. We know who you are, and we know your contempt for the very pilots you flew with for most of your career. They made a choice, finally, to dump ALPA. Your anger and resentment as to the merits of that decision shows a side of a man that should better be left unseen.

I will ignore you from now on, unless you address me personally. It’s one thing to have a opinion. It is quite another to so openly be a hypocrite, having enjoyed your ill gotten gains for so long.

RR

*********************************

well said, it is hypocritical at best... that's also why I say the Shuttle and Empire should Geet DOH now.... you can't have it both ways... If it's DOH. It's DOH...
but Jim must really hate his former co workers.... he sure does go out of his way on this board ever day to state so.

 

[Reed Richards]

Crazy said: well said, it is hypocritical at best... that's also why I say the Shuttle and Empire should Geet DOH now.... you can't have it both ways... If it's DOH. It's DOH...

Crazy, I actually agree with you. But it is very difficult to undo a list already ratified in a CBL. To note, the UAL guys did just that back in the 80's, by reordering an already ratified list to move the Scabs lower. SCOTUS said that was ok, as it was done for the greater good of all involved (my words.)

Going back now almost 20 years on both the Shuttle and Empire mergers would be a tough one to do. The line is being drawn here and now on the importance of seniority. I don’t believe it demeans our effort by not going back decades to fix other integrations. We have to start somewhere.

RR

 

[Bear96]

767, boeing boy, f/a bear96,

Your thoughts please gentlemen.

My thought is that you agreed to final and binding arbitration, and are now trying to worm and squirm out of it.

 

[Bear96]

How thick is your skull? I am honoring binding arbitration. The one that ALPA used to arrive at an ALPA bargaining position. Now they can present it to whomever they wish.

Can someone explain this notion the Easties keep chanting that the arbitration was used only to arrive at a "bargaining position"?

It makes no sense to me. It is a "bargaining position" for bargaining with/against whom? Must be the Company. But the Company does not really care what the list is, as far as I can see. What is the advantageous "position" this achieves - "If you don't give us what we want, we will insist on List A instead of List B?" What kind of threat is that?

Seriously - what am I missing? Has the Company indicated it would strongly prefer a DOH (or something else) over the Nic list for some sort of operational or cost reason? If so, can someone provide a cite? I would be interested in seeing the Company's reasoning.

I would really like to know how a different seniority list would alter the pilots' strength at the bargaining table.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Can someone explain this notion the Easties keep chanting that the arbitration was used only to arrive at a "bargaining position"?

It makes no sense to me. It is a "bargaining position" for bargaining with/against whom? Must be the Company. But the Company does not really care what the list is, as far as I can see. What is the advantageous "position" this achieves - "If you don't give us what we want, we will insist on List A instead of List B?" What kind of threat is that?

Seriously - what am I missing? Has the Company indicated it would strongly prefer a DOH (or something else) over the Nic list for some sort of operational or cost reason? If so, can someone provide a cite? I would be interested in seeing the Company's reasoning.

I would really like to know how a different seniority list would alter the pilots' strength at the bargaining table.

Where have you been? The westie's lawyer, Mr. Freund, told them that right before they fired him.

ALPA can present whatever thay want to the company. The company cannot legally use it for anything, since ALPA isn't the CBA. Doug even told that to the westies in his latest PHX Crew News video.

So, if you are indeed a "practicing labor attorney" (which, by the way I seriously doubt), then maybe MORE PRACTICE would be in order.

Any list which actually unifies instead of dividing the pilot group would be bad for the company. Managements LOVE divided groups. I would not believe ANYTHING the company puts out, especially during any sort of negotiation.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Crazy said: well said, it is hypocritical at best... that's also why I say the Shuttle and Empire should Geet DOH now.... you can't have it both ways... If it's DOH. It's DOH...

Crazy, I actually agree with you. But it is very difficult to undo a list already ratified in a CBL. To note, the UAL guys did just that back in the 80's, by reordering an already ratified list to move the Scabs lower. SCOTUS said that was ok, as it was done for the greater good of all involved (my words.)

Going back now almost 20 years on both the Shuttle and Empire mergers would be a tough one to do. The line is being drawn here and now on the importance of seniority. I don’t believe it demeans our effort by not going back decades to fix other integrations. We have to start somewhere.

RR

I agree, Reed. If the Pilots had done DOH all along, we wouldn't be where we are. Nor would travesties like TWA/AA, TWA/Ozark, NW/Republic, or other nasty mergers have occurred.

There has to be some kind of limit, though. USAPA can't reasonably be expected to go back over twenty years to correct the injustices of our past Collective Bargaining Agent. It would be nice if it could be done, but I'm afraid it would just generate more legal actions. Plus, that merger wasn't even completed under a predecessor company, but a predecessor of a predessor. Where would one draw the line?

Just to repeat, I think that ALL pilots should get their DOH. If there were a practical way to do it, I'd say, do it. Unfortunately, I don't think that's the case when some of these things were over 20 years ago.

 

[nic4us]

Can someone explain this notion the Easties keep chanting that the arbitration was used only to arrive at a "bargaining position"?

It makes no sense to me. It is a "bargaining position" for bargaining with/against whom? Must be the Company. But the Company does not really care what the list is, as far as I can see. What is the advantageous "position" this achieves - "If you don't give us what we want, we will insist on List A instead of List B?" What kind of threat is that?

Seriously - what am I missing? Has the Company indicated it would strongly prefer a DOH (or something else) over the Nic list for some sort of operational or cost reason? If so, can someone provide a cite? I would be interested in seeing the Company's reasoning.

I would really like to know how a different seniority list would alter the pilots' strength at the bargaining table.

The company indicated it would prefer some sort of relative integration as evidenced by its letter "joint statement of labor principles" that was distibuted to all employees prior to the merger.

The arbitration was the culmination of the pilots seniority integration, to reach a mutually acceptable list to present to the company, after negotiations and mediation between the groups failed.

The point where usapa fails is they are trying to reorder the Nic, because the east majority is not content with the fact that they will not be able to regain career status from the merger at the West's expense. usapa made a campaign promise to go with DOH and offer the company a cost nuetral contract in exchange for reordering the list.

So, usapa's "bargaining proposal" is, give us DOH and then we can talk about the other sections of the contract, a completely backward approach (especially since seniority has already been arrived at through binding arbitration).

The company's counter-proposal is, we will take the cost neutral part, which means the pilots can all stay on their current contracts in seperate ops, and thanks for the $200 million plus a year.

Again, the entire premise that you can re-negotiate, after the arbitration took place, is flawed. Not only does it expose usapa to the DFR threat, it gives them zero credibility or leverage at the bargaining table, because they have no legal "bargaining proposal" from which to start the "bargaining".

 

[Bear96]

Where have you been? The westie'sawyer, Mr. Freund, told them that right before they fired him.

ALPA can present whatever thay want to the company. The company cannot legally use it for anything, since ALPA isn't the CBA. Doug even told that to the westies in his latest PHX Crew News video.

So, if you are indeed a "practicing labor attorney" (which, by the way I seriously doubt), then maybe MORE PRACTICE would be in order.

Any list which actually unifies instead of dividing the pilot group would be bad for the company. Managements LOVE divided groups. I would not believe ANYTHING the company puts out, especially during any sort of negotiation.

Nonresponsive.

 

[nic4us]

There has to be some kind of limit, though.

Okay, done deal. The limit is three years.

Now have usapa adopt the Nic and quit wasting everybody's time.

 

[cleardirect]

Can someone explain this notion the Easties keep chanting that the arbitration was used only to arrive at a "bargaining position"?

It makes no sense to me. It is a "bargaining position" for bargaining with/against whom? Must be the Company. But the Company does not really care what the list is, as far as I can see. What is the advantageous "position" this achieves - "If you don't give us what we want, we will insist on List A instead of List B?" What kind of threat is that?

Seriously - what am I missing? Has the Company indicated it would strongly prefer a DOH (or something else) over the Nic list for some sort of operational or cost reason? If so, can someone provide a cite? I would be interested in seeing the Company's reasoning.

I would really like to know how a different seniority list would alter the pilots' strength at the bargaining table.

The east guys really need to find a new argument the list being accepted. The transition agreement that everyone agrees still applies. References ALPA merger policy. Merger policy was followed and the list was submitted. The company accepted the list. Even during the trial usapa stipulated to the fact that the company had accepted the list.

So no it is no longer a bargaining proposal it is the accepted list.

Transition Agreement
C. The combining of the America West and US Airways MECs will be governed by the Association’s Constitution and By-Laws and its Merger and Fragmentation Policy (“ALPA Merger Policy”).
IV. Seniority List Integration

A. The seniority lists of America West pilots and US Airways pilots will be integrated in accordance with ALPA Merger Policy and submitted to the Airline Parties for acceptance. The Airline Parties will accept such integrated seniority list, including conditions and restrictions, if such list and the conditions and restrictions comply with the following criteria:

SECTION 45 – MERGER AND FRAGMENTATION POLICY

5. Opinion and Award
b. The Award of the Arbitration Board shall be final and binding on all parties to the arbitration and shall be defended by ALPA. The Award shall include any agreements reached at the mediation step. The Arbitration Board will include in its Award a provision retaining jurisdiction until all the provisions of the Award have been satisfied for the limited purpose of resolving disputes which may arise between the pilot groups with regard to the meaning or interpretation of the Award. (AMENDED -
Executive Board October 1991; Executive Board May 1998)

I. MERGED FLIGHT DECK CREW MEMBER SENIORITY LIST IMPLEMENTATION
1. The merged seniority list will be presented to management and ALPA will use all reasonable means at its disposal to compel the company to accept and implement the merged seniority list. (AMENDED - Executive Board May 1998)

Doug Parker’s letter to the employees December 20, 2007
We have determined that the list submitted meets these criteria, so the company will accept the submitted list. We have notified ALPA of our acceptance

Court Order stipulation of facts.
4/30/2009
79. The Airline accepted the Nicolau Award on December 20, 2007, as the integrated seniority list to be incorporated into the single collective bargaining agreement under negotiation between the Airline and ALPA as the bargaining agent for the East Pilots and West Pilots.

Now changing the name of the agent does not change the fact of who the parties are. If usapa changes lawyers it does not change the deals or mistakes usapa made. The list was submitted and accepted. That pretty much ends the proposal or bargaining position part of the program. Once you reach a deal there does not need to be anymore "bargaining" I guess unless you are usapa and east pilots. You make a deal, agree to the deal. Break the deal then try and get a better deal. Repeat. Still trying to figure out why the east guys thaink that the west or management will believe them next time they agree to a deal. Track record is not so good.

 

[Bear96]

The company indicated it would prefer some sort of relative integration as evidenced by its letter "joint statement of labor principles" that was distibuted to all employees prior to the merger.

Thanks. That is what I recall. But I see that as more an attempt to be consistent with the already-existing pilot seniority integration process at the time all this started. I do not see it as something the Company will ultimately fight for at the table or insist on at the expense of anything else, or why it would actually care one way or the other. For example, if the ALPA merger policy was DOH (like AFA), I don't think the Company would have cared or would try to change it to something else. At least it didn't with AFA. It really does not care what the list is, so I don't see how a particular list can be seen as a bargaining chip.

So, usapa's "bargaining proposal" is, give us DOH and then we can talk about the other sections of the contract, a completely backward approach (especially since seniority has already been arrived at through binding arbitration).

I understand that. I just don't understand the reasoning the Easties are trying to promote that the arbitration was just to reach a "bargaining position" to somehow use against the Company. That just does not make sense.

Again, the entire premise that you can re-negotiate, after the arbitration took place, is flawed.

Amazing how such a simple concept can continue to elude so many supposedly intelligent people for so long, isn't it.

 

[nic4us]

My thought is that you agreed to final and binding arbitration, and are now trying to worm and squirm out of it.

For fun, lets make a list of everybody who has the same thought. All posters are welcome to add to the list, if their is somebody I have inadvertantly left off.

1. Every West pilot.
2. The company.
3. G. Nicolau.
4. Judge Wake.
5. The Addington jury.
6. Judge Bybee. and likely Tashima and Graber.
7. Jeff Freund.
8. John Prater.
9. The ALPA executive council.
10. The American Arbitration Association.
11. The National Academy of Arbitrators.
12. S. Bradford.
13. L. Seham.
14. usapa.
15. The AFA.
16. The IBT.
17. The 9th circuit law clerks.
18. The ATA.
19. The lawfirm of Baptiste and Wilder.
20. (most important, and reason usapa is a failure) Army of Leonidas, and the lawfirm of Polsinelli-Shugart!

Did I forget anybody?