USAPA/ALPA US Pilot Labor Thread 5/10-5/17

[AAA73Pilot]

Commuter,

Changing unions does not change a binding arbitration ruling nor a CBA.

Uh......yes it does. So we disagree. Always have. What else is new?

 

[700UW]

No it doesnt and their are plenty of examples to prove it.

WN's AMTs from IBT to AMFA, NW's AMT from IAM to AMFA, UA's AMTs from IAM to AMFA, NW's FA from IBT to PFAA to AFA.

If that is the case all arbitrations would be null and void, which isnt the case.

Upon a change of representation, the new union by law enforces the current CBAs and all arbitrations remain in effect.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Don't worry. You'll understand all of this soon enough.

So will you. Don't worry, be happy.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Upon a change of representation, the new union by law enforces the current CBAs and all arbitrations remain in effect.

Considering the arbitrations in effect, show me where Nic is in effect right now. When the 2 groups merge under one contract, we will see what is in effect, won't we?

 

[700UW]

The Transition Agreement is part of the CBA, which remains in effect, otherwise all parts of the T/A would be null and void and the company could do as they please.

Once you have a joint CBA the Nic award will take effect as it has all ready been presented to the company.

 

[EastUS]

The poster said "if" they staple the US pilots. But you know what? That sure sounds good to me and my band of 1800 brothers here in the west.

I can hear the termites now....

Fully understood, believe me. We've been hearing them for over a year now... 🙄 I've just never had much in the way of warm and fuzzy feelings for termites....A great many people, including other pilots, don't either.

I must add that it's utterly brilliant to publicly note the joy and complete delight that you and your 1800 would find through being stapled underneath UA....A more intelligent "opener" has rarely been seen anywhere. At this point?...I'm almost kinda' glad that you, by your choice, won't have any voting input to the potential mess to be seen. "We Surrender!...Please do whatever you want with us! Oh mighty UA-Alpa!" is just the type of worthless, dead weight that's never useful to carry along anywhere. "Termites" is very apt terminology on your part. = Creatures that are blind, live with only marginal awareness in the dark, and concern themselves only with filling their own bellies, without the slightest thought given to their undermining necessary foundations of any sort. That last is no call for help btw, as I'm certain that the UA folks already have your sub-segment of the pilot group scored up as an "easy kill" for them.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

The Transition Agreement is part of the CBA, which remains in effect, otherwise all parts of the T/A would be null and void and the company could do as they please.

Once you have a joint CBA the Nic award will take effect as it has all ready been presented to the company.

Not totally correct, but nice try to slant opinions.

As I have said over and over, even the ALPA attorneys disagree on the status of the TA. So as far as I'm concerned we'll see what happens with the TA. And no, Sec. 22 is not closed by ALPA negotiations. The same with all of the past ALPA negotiations for a joint contract.

 

[sagurao]

(1) if the same collective bargaining agent represents the combining crafts or classes at each of the covered air carriers, that collective bargaining agent's internal policies regarding integration, if any, will not be affected by and will supersede the requirements of this section; and

well 767 I'm gonna have to agree with nycbusdriver on this one. If a merger happens the two groups will not be represented by the same union. Alpa merger policy will not prevail over the new bill.

If that were the case then as nycbusdriver said, what would be the point of the bill since every election would result in only one union?

I'm affraid that usapa will be representing me (in the event of a merger) at the arbitration. But I have little fear that any arbitrator would accept any list from them other than the one "nic" came up with.

 

[prechilill]

(1) if the same collective bargaining agent represents the combining crafts or classes at each of the covered air carriers, that collective bargaining agent's internal policies regarding integration, if any, will not be affected by and will supersede the requirements of this section; and

well 767 I'm gonna have to agree with nycbusdriver on this one. If a merger happens the two groups will not be represented by the same union. Alpa merger policy will not prevail over the new bill.

Saguro,
I think the timing of the integration talks will determine which guidelines will be followed. Overall the A-M provisions are very similar to ALPA's, but for the specific situation of which will be controlling I think that will be determined by the CBA. Remember that the USAPs didn't even start their organizing effort until well after Nicolau ruled. If we merge with UAL, the first thing we will be doing is voting on a new union. Integration talks probably won't even begin until we are both ALPA. I have to agree with jetz on this one because the timing issue is relevant here, unlike the situation we just had.

 

[CactusFlyr]

This is also factually incorrect. ALPA will be voted in first. Once that happens, the new law will not apply because it does not supersede ALPA merger policy when all pilots are represented by one union.

The sen. list must be settled before any vote for one union to represent under the new law. It is up to the two unions to do this.

They must have something written in the USAPA bylaws that supersede this. 😱

 

[ClueByFour]

Not totally correct, but nice try to slant opinions.

As I have said over and over, even the ALPA attorneys disagree on the status of the TA. So as far as I'm concerned we'll see what happens with the TA. And no, Sec. 22 is not closed by ALPA negotiations. The same with all of the past ALPA negotiations for a joint contract.

In which case, the UA pilots can use their majority to get out the old stapler, regardless of the mandated arbitration. Ain't your theory grand?

 

[Piedmont1984]

So now I'm confused, which isn't hard to do, but as of this moment the AAA pilots are represented by USAPA, and the UAL pilots are ALPA. If a merger is announced with UAL, you have two different CBA's in place. SLI (seniority list integration) would have to precede any vote on which union will survive. You can't vote on a union before the lists are integrated, otherwise A-M and McCaskill-Bond are meaningless.

How am I wrong?

 

[AAA73Pilot]

In which case, the UA pilots can use their majority to get out the old stapler, regardless of the mandated arbitration. Ain't your theory grand?

You can twist it all you want if it makes you happy. Theory though? No hardly.

 

[nycbusdriver]

So now I'm confused, which isn't hard to do, but as of this moment the AAA pilots are represented by USAPA, and the UAL pilots are ALPA. If a merger is announced with UAL, you have two different CBA's in place. SLI (seniority list integration) would have to precede any vote on which union will survive. You can't vote on a union before the lists are integrated, otherwise A-M and McCaskill-Bond are meaningless.

How am I wrong?

Of course you're right. Having the CBA vote first would negate the entire premise of McCaskill-Bond. It's just wishful thinking on some UAL poster's part.

 

[cactusboy53]

What happened to the two pilot groups? There is no more "two pilot groups." They are now one. The Nicolau award was part of ALPA, associated with a joint contract. Both are now part of history - gone.

....
At any rate, had ALPA won the toss, no doubt things would have changed quickly in regards to the award. As went ALPA, so too does the ALPA sanctioned seniority award. That was ALPA merger policy that fell short of being implemented. What you have today is USAPA merger policy. I don't think I can make it any clearer.......... <_<

Commuter;
I'd like to step in, if I may. You assert that Nicolau was part of ALPA, but you are incorrect. ALPA merger policy states that the two parties must attempt to negotiate a combined list (without ratification of the pilot groups). Failing that they then must participate in Mediation, and failing that Arbitration. This Mediation and Arbitration discussed is in fact a funtion of the National Mediation Board (a US Federal Agency empowerd by the Railway Labor Act). They have a web page that explains the details (www.nmb.gov), but here's the paragraph that specifically adresses your incorrect assertion:

Interest Arbitration: Interest arbitration is a process to establish the terms of a new or modified collective bargaining agreement through arbitration, rather than through negotiations. Although the RLA provides an effective process for interest arbitration, its use is not statutorily required. The NMB offers the parties the opportunity to use interest arbitration when the Agency has determined that further mediation efforts will not be successful. In addition, the parties may directly agree to resolve their collective bargaining dispute or portions of their dispute through interest arbitration. The NMB generally provides the parties with panels of potential arbitrators from which they select the individuals to resolve the dispute. (In some instances, the parties’ agreement to arbitrate allows the NMB to directly appoint an arbitrator.) An interest arbitration decision is final and binding with very narrow grounds for a judicial appeal.

Arbitrator Nicolau is one of the most experienced NMB arbitrators. That fact is not changed by 2700+ pilots being upset with the outcome. They were given every opportunity to attempt a different negotiation path. Ultimately the AAA MC were instructed to stay the course by the AAA MEC. So the logical choice was to vote ALPA National out because they were clearly to blame for all of the AAA ALPA short comings.

BTW, if a judical appeal were achieved as stated above...what would stop the judge from stating.."You're right. The list is not fair. The first pilot should be the #1 AWA pilot."????