When Is The Earliest Ua/amfa Can Strike ?

[BoeingBoy]

You are right though that this is an untested area of law. It has never yet happened that a Railway Labor Act collective bargaining agreement has received judicial approval to be permanently rejected over the objections of a union. So no one really knows how a court will react.

[post="244969"][/post]​

I was just over here reading and thought I'd stick my nose in....

Someone mentioned it earlier in the thread - Lorenzo received judicial approval to reject the CBA and a strike ensued. So there is prededent.

The only difference between then and now is section 1113 of the BK law, and (as you mentioned) it specifies what criteria have to be satisfied before the court can abrogate a CBA. It has not changed anything about what happens after a CBA is abrogated.

Jim

 

[gatemech]

FLY, you are right. With almost all of their heavy maintanence capacity gone, I believe that UAL will try to replace the relatively few that are left if they strike, they don't have the numbers to be a force. If they do strike, one has to wonder how many scabs will be brought in (there were plenty of scabs at EAL). Additionally, there are management people who have their A and P. And just as there are contract companies that do heavy overhaul, there are contract companies that do line maintanence. There are about half a dozen at the airport I work at. Reading the debates between mechanics here, it seems that AMFA is mostly supported by line mechanics and that AMFA will sacrafice heavy maintanece for higher pay for line mechanics (just look at NW and Alaska). When it is time at NW, I believe NW will get rid of the other half that they did not lay off. The next four months gives UA management time to fine tune their possible plan to replace them once and for all if AMFA does not cave and accept concessions. But I believe that McCormick and Delle want to keep the dues flowing so I don't believe there will be a strike.

[post="244887"][/post]​

United Services advertises the experiance of it's maintenance crews at airports all around the country. How do you think the people at China Cargo or NCA would feel when some guy from a little outfit shows up to fix their plane. Getting rid of all the mechanics would hurt the line contracts.

Now to reallity. UAL would get rid of all of us if they could. Even if we voted for the TA.

 

[Fly]

nm

 

[Winglet]

Self-help . . . sure.

They'll fold and bow down before Tilton . . . . I predict.

 

[Bear96]

Someone mentioned it earlier in the thread - Lorenzo received judicial approval to reject the CBA and a strike ensued. So there is prededent.

The only difference between then and now is section 1113 of the BK law, and (as you mentioned) it specifies what criteria have to be satisfied before the court can abrogate a CBA. It has not changed anything about what happens after a CBA is abrogated.

Jim

[post="244988"][/post]​

Oops, thanks Jim, I meant this has never happened since 1113 has been in force. That is where the unprecedented area is. You can bet if it comes down to it, management will point to 1113 as saying that if the 1113 process is followed by management, the unilaterally-requested changes can be legally imposed and a union does not have the right to strike, to differentiate the current situation from the CO situation in the 1980s.

So the pre-1113 CO situation is not quite the same situation legally since the laws have been changed since then, reducing its precedential value at least somewhat (although it certainly still is relevant) -- management will try to distinguish it in making their argument.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Bear,

I fully agree that management would argue that a strike was illegal (we saw that at U recently), and we all know that a judge could rule whichever way he/she wanted.

Of course, the union could appeal if the BK (or circuit, if that's where the ruling came from) judge injoined a strike.

Jim

 

[Bear96]

As could management appeal if the judge rules for the union ...

In any case, as I am sure you know, it is exceptionally hard to get a ruling overturned. Just not liking the decision is never enough -- some showing of legal error is required. The lower court generally has a great deal of discretion.

 

[mweiss]

Of course, nothing prevents a mass resignation. This is ultimately why it cannot be considered slavery, even if the judge rules the strike to be illegal.

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Of course, nothing prevents a mass resignation. This is ultimately why it cannot be considered slavery, even if the judge rules the strike to be illegal.

[post="245097"][/post]​

Even if he does, which he won't, once you are out of BK you free to do as you please.

 

[goingboeing]

They can strike whenever they decide to do a job action.

 

[Fly]

Wrong, they can't. They can quit certainly, but if they perform an illegal job action (ie - strike without the blessing of the judge) they can be replaced.

 

[700UW]

The judge does not sanction a strike. The only thing that has changed since CAL abrogated their contracts was the nine steps for a company to follow in order to achieve an abrogation. Nothing was changed to prevent the union from calling a strike, and no one ever stopped CAL's unions from striking and since nothing has changed since then in regard to self-help it should be legal.

 

[Fly]

Then why haven't they? (because they can't)

 

[usairways_vote_NO]

Wrong, they can't.  They can quit certainly, but if they perform an illegal job action (ie - strike without the blessing of the judge) they can be replaced.

[post="245210"][/post]​

They don't need any blessing the only thing the judge could do is rule you can't have a strike during BK if he can even do that. You can be replaced even with a legal job action (i.e. Stike) .

 

[TheDog2004]

AMFA hasn't struck yet because they were bluffing and it just got called.

and as far as sanctions for an illegal job action - ask the AA pilots what happens. The judge usually fines the union and threatens to throw the union leadership in jail. He then orders the membership back to work or else they lose their jobs and can be replaced.

usually the union leadership responds when faced with jail time. remember these are guys with six figure salaries and cushy jobs - not hard working line employees who are busting their tail day in and day out.