RLA petition

HVYMETALDRVR

HVYMETALDRVR

Well-Known Member
This came up on our union forums today, I didn't write it but have permission to post it on here. And yes, I'm aware of the misspellings also (again I didn't write it). If I understand correctly if we get the required 25,000 signatures, the white house is required to respond.

For the betterment and safety of our industry! :D

http://wh.gov/Snd1
 
I've never really been to the petition part of whitehouse.gov. It's a compelling case against democracy if I've ever seen one. To have to dignify some of those with an answer would be difficult I imagine.
 
HVYMETALDRVR said:
This came up on our union forums today, I didn't write it but have permission to post it on here. And yes, I'm aware of the misspellings also (again I didn't write it). If I understand correctly if we get the required 25,000 signatures, the white house is required to respond.

For the betterment and safety of our industry! :D

http://wh.gov/Snd1
Click to expand...

100,000, by mid June.

Good luck.
 
BobDDuck said:
Repealing the RLA is a terrible idea. I'm all for modifying it (which would be all but impossible unless Democrats controlled both parts of Congress and the Whitehouse), but putting airlines under the NLRA would be disastrous.
Click to expand...

I don't know if it'd be so much disastrous so much as it'd be completely inapplicable. Then courts would try to figure out how airlines fit into the NLRA, and they'd end up looking back to old RLA case law to do it (or at least that's my guess), and we'd see little change.

But you're right, modifying the RLA is the way to go.
 
Look at the differences in the use of the term "bargaining unit" between the RLA and NLRA. That's what scares me most. You think the current whipsaw between companies is bad... Imagine it between domiciles.
 
BobDDuck said:
Look at the differences in the use of the term "bargaining unit" between the RLA and NLRA. That's what scares me most. You think the current whipsaw between companies is bad... Imagine it between domiciles.
Click to expand...

I think that'd need some amending in order to have it be applicable to pilots. We're organized in a fundamentally different way than most other industries, both on a union level, and on a company level.
 
BobDDuck said:
Look at the differences in the use of the term "bargaining unit" between the RLA and NLRA. That's what scares me most. You think the current whipsaw between companies is bad... Imagine it between domiciles.
Click to expand...

I can't see the whipsaw advantage changing much with a complete repeal (although I do agree that amendment is the way to go). The most limiting aspect is FAA regulations, anyway. Companies are currently free to move flying to already trained pilots and/or companies.
 
HVYMETALDRVR said:
This came up on our union forums today, I didn't write it but have permission to post it on here. And yes, I'm aware of the misspellings also (again I didn't write it). If I understand correctly if we get the required 25,000 signatures, the white house is required to respond.

For the betterment and safety of our industry! :D

http://wh.gov/Snd1
Click to expand...

Horrible, horrible, horrible idea. The alternatives are far worse than status quo. Trying to amend it will result in a draconian mish-mash of anti-labor nonsense, and repealing it would result in utter chaos that would completely decimate the profession. Leave well enough alone until you've got Democratic super-majorities in both houses (in other words, probably never).
 
I'd be up for making the NLRA mirror the RLA. Then the conservatives could never complain about "striking whenever labor feels like it."

I've been told my unionism is a problem because we can strike at will. All I can do is LOL.
 
falconvalley said:
I can't see the whipsaw advantage changing much with a complete repeal (although I do agree that amendment is the way to go). The most limiting aspect is FAA regulations, anyway. Companies are currently free to move flying to already trained pilots and/or companies.
Click to expand...

I don't think you understand. Under the NLRA, which is where we would fall if the RLA was repealed, the definition of a bargaining unit is quite different. Each domicile at each airline would constitute its own bargaining unit. Furthermore, we would no longer be protected from state "right to work" laws, so domiciles in "right to work" states would have their agency shop provisions disappear. Imagine the Delta ATL domicile having a different union than the Delta DTW domicile, and half of the ATL domicile deciding that they're not going to be members at all, and they don't have to pay dues.

If you want to see how ugly things can get, look to Ryan Air in Europe, where O'Leary has taken advantage of a mish-mash of labor laws and spread crews all over Europe, making it virtually impossible for the employees to organize under a single contract and a single set of labor laws. That's a taste of what we would experience with no RLA.
 
Even modifying it is dangerous. The RLA is "the devil we know." Unless we (and by we I mean Democrats) have a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate and a majority in the house, replacing the RLA is like deciding to take a casual stroll through an active mine field.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I don't think you understand. Under the NLRA, which is where we would fall if the RLA was repealed, the definition of a bargaining unit is quite different. Each domicile at each airline would constitute its own bargaining unit. Furthermore, we would no longer be protected from state "right to work" laws, so domiciles in "right to work" states would have their agency shop provisions disappear. Imagine the Delta ATL domicile having a different union than the Delta DTW domicile, and half of the ATL domicile deciding that they're not going to be members at all, and they don't have to pay dues.

If you want to see how ugly things can get, look to Ryan Air in Europe, where O'Leary has taken advantage of a mish-mash of labor laws and spread crews all over Europe, making it virtually impossible for the employees to organize under a single contract and a single set of labor laws. That's a taste of what we would experience with no RLA.
Click to expand...
I believe there's some Airserv labor-related butthurt at LAX about seniority and bargaining units - each TERMINAL is its own bargaining unit, would you believe...
 
Autothrust Blue said:
I believe there's some Airserv labor-related butthurt at LAX about seniority and bargaining units - each TERMINAL is its own bargaining unit, would you believe...
Click to expand...

Interesting. I could definitely see that interpretation being made. Management could argue that each terminal is its own "shop," much like separate factories.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I don't think you understand. Under the NLRA, which is where we would fall if the RLA was repealed, the definition of a bargaining unit is quite different. Each domicile at each airline would constitute its own bargaining unit. Furthermore, we would no longer be protected from state "right to work" laws, so domiciles in "right to work" states would have their agency shop provisions disappear. Imagine the Delta ATL domicile having a different union than the Delta DTW domicile, and half of the ATL domicile deciding that they're not going to be members at all, and they don't have to pay dues.

If you want to see how ugly things can get, look to Ryan Air in Europe, where O'Leary has taken advantage of a mish-mash of labor laws and spread crews all over Europe, making it virtually impossible for the employees to organize under a single contract and a single set of labor laws. That's a taste of what we would experience with no RLA.
Click to expand...

That's assuming that everyone does not want an environment like that. In our case, we have pretend unity. And I would argue that our current seniority system gives us a taste of what you say would happen if we mirrored the NLRA. So, while we are regulated into unity, we actually are NOT necessarily unified and everyone finds out when (and if) a group is released.
 
falconvalley said:
That's assuming that everyone does not want an environment like that. In our case, we have pretend unity. And I would argue that our current seniority system gives us a taste of what you say would happen if we mirrored the NLRA. So, while we are regulated into unity, we actually are NOT necessarily unified and everyone finds out when (and if) a group is released.
Click to expand...

I...ahhmmm....have no idea how you come up with that. Can you explain?
 
Would you say being ALPA is in your best interest as an ExpressJet pilot? Would you look at it differently if your seniority were universal?
 
Again, I have no idea what you're saying, or what you're asking.

EDIT: The confusion might come from your understanding of the NRLA. Under the NRLA, there are MORE seniority lists because there are MORE bargaining units. Imagine if you were a part of Republic Airlines IND, and only had seniority within that base, and you were hired INTO THAT BASE, and couldn't bid or work in another base.

That's how the NLRA is setup.
 
BobDDuck said:
Repealing the RLA is a terrible idea. I'm all for modifying it (which would be all but impossible unless Democrats controlled both parts of Congress and the Whitehouse), but putting airlines under the NLRA would be disastrous.
Click to expand...

Considering the laws/regulations already implemented by this congress/administration I am for one not willing to allow them to have another bite at the apple. There comes a time a person needs to know whats going on in order to make a inform decision as oppose to a foolish one!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top