Skywest

etflies said:
Our agreements are legally binding. Or was that missed in my first response to your question? SAPA is recognized as our official bargaining unit. They negotiate with the company and when an agreement is reached and signed by both sides it is legally binding. It cannot be changed "ten minuets later." Because said agreement is legally binding. Like I said in my first response to your question.

To my knowledge items agreed upon can be renegotiated at any time but cannot be changed willy nilly.

The outcomes of ALPA negotiations affect our pilot group as well, my original point stands.
Click to expand...

It isn't legally binding. You need to have a union be certified by the NMB to have a legally binding contract.
 
Seggy said:
Your negotiations are nothing more than a farce because even if the company and your student council agrees on something, the company can change their mind ten minutes later and your student council has no recourse.

You can't do that with a legally binding contract negotiated by a collective bargaining unit certified by the NMB.

Which brings me back to my original point. Unless you work at a unionized airline, you shouldn't be talking about what ALPA is doing right or wrong.
Click to expand...

If you are trying to win us over to the Union way of doing things, you sure do a crappy job of it. You are very disrespectful and demeaning. Seriously, how many times do you have to spout out "Student Council"? Your poor delivery just pisses me off and makes me want nothing to do with a union at SkyWest. If you're trying to win us over I recommend you read this book or something:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650
 
Seggy said:
It isn't legally binding. You need to have a union be certified by the NMB to have a legally binding contract.
Click to expand...

According to what I've found, that is not true. I'm all ears if you can provide something supporting what you say, but what I've found and what our student council website says is that according to the NMB all you need is a body chosen by the group to represent them and for it to be recognized by the company in order for any agreements between the two to be considered legally binding. SAPA meets both of these requirements.
 
@Seggy it is a loosely legally recognized 'contract' though I shiver a bit in stating that. If you and I shake hands on a verbal agreement about XYZ widget I'm selling, it constitutes a 'contract' in most cases. I try to ask my fellow reps not to call it a 'contract' since it isn't very enforceable and we don't have a dime in our name to enforce it if we tried. So yeah, it's weak in theory but also not entirely worthless as we've had success in enforcing some key aspects of it in house.

I'll argue that the company knows better than to negotiate in bad faith or willy nilly makes changes. I know you haven't worked here and don't fully understand the culture, but it would upset a precedent of over 40 years of tasty kool-aid that has worked to keep a real union at bay. Our execs are a smart bunch and should know better than to piss off the masses royally by doing something so irrational.

I'll actually say it can be changed 'ten minutes later' but it might be proverbial the nail in the coffin for our long standing good relations. Though apparently regulatory changes (FAR 117) may allow any contract to be unilaterally changed (even those with a recognized CBA). So everyone watch out come the turn of the year.

I'm no consumer of the SGU tasty drink, but it isn't as willy nilly as some outside the company think. I used to think the same until I became involved in SAPA but I also very clearly see our limits (you should see the self-inflicted forehead bruises from the last week). I'd still prefer us to start down the union path via self-certification but that is for another conversation.
 
bike21 said:
@Seggy it is a loosely legally recognized 'contract' though I shiver a bit in stating that. If you and I shake hands on a verbal agreement about XYZ widget I'm selling, it constitutes a 'contract' in most cases. I try to ask my fellow reps not to call it a 'contract' since it isn't very enforceable and we don't have a dime in our name to enforce it if we tried. So yeah, it's weak in theory but also not entirely worthless as we've had success in enforcing some key aspects of it in house.

I'll argue that the company knows better than to negotiate in bad faith or willy nilly makes changes. I know you haven't worked here and don't fully understand the culture, but it would upset a precedent of over 40 years of tasty kool-aid that has worked to keep a real union at bay. Our execs are a smart bunch and should know better than to piss off the masses royally by doing something so irrational.

I'll actually say it can be changed 'ten minutes later' but it might be proverbial the nail in the coffin for our long standing good relations. Though apparently regulatory changes (FAR 117) may allow any contract to be unilaterally changed (even those with a recognized CBA). So everyone watch out come the turn of the year.

I'm no consumer of the SGU tasty drink, but it isn't as willy nilly as some outside the company think. I used to think the same until I became involved in SAPA but I also very clearly see our limits (you should the inflicted forehead bruises from the last week). I'd still prefer us to start down the union path via self-certification but that is for another conversation.
Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks for the clarification.
 
GypsyPilot said:
If you are trying to win us over to the Union way of doing things, you sure do a crappy job of it. You are very disrespectful and demeaning. Seriously, how many times do you have to spout out "Student Council"? Your poor delivery just pisses me off and makes me want nothing to do with a union at SkyWest. If you're trying to win us over I recommend you read this book or something:

http://www.amazon.com/How-Win-Friends-Influence-People/dp/0671723650
Click to expand...

A lot of time and money has been wasted trying to bring Skywest into a union a couple of times. I know that a lot of folks (including yourself) at Skywest will have no problem coming to a union shop, so the onus is on the Skywest Pilots to wake up, look themselves in the mirror and understand that you are hurting yourselves greatly by not joining a union in one of the most heavily unionized industries in the world.
 
bike21 said:
@Seggy it is a loosely legally recognized 'contract' though I shiver a bit in stating that. If you and I shake hands on a verbal agreement about XYZ widget I'm selling, it constitutes a 'contract' in most cases. I try to ask my fellow reps not to call it a 'contract' since it isn't very enforceable and we don't have a dime in our name to enforce it if we tried. So yeah, it's weak in theory but also not entirely worthless as we've had success in enforcing some key aspects of it in house.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but how can it be a contract if it can't be legally enforced outside of a meeting with them asking them to reconsider what they put down on paper?

I'll argue that the company knows better than to negotiate in bad faith or willy nilly makes changes. I know you haven't worked here and don't fully understand the culture, but it would upset a precedent of over 40 years of tasty kool-aid that has worked to keep a real union at bay. Our execs are a smart bunch and should know better than to piss off the masses royally by doing something so irrational.
Click to expand...

I will buy that as I have heard the same thing from people at XJT and ASA.

I'll actually say it can be changed 'ten minutes later' but it might be proverbial the nail in the coffin for our long standing good relations. Though apparently regulatory changes (FAR 117) may allow any contract to be unilaterally changed (even those with a recognized CBA). So everyone watch out come the turn of the year.
Click to expand...

Interesting.

I'm no consumer of the SGU tasty drink, but it isn't as willy nilly as some outside the company think. I used to think the same until I became involved in SAPA but I also very clearly see our limits (you should see the self-inflicted forehead bruises from the last week). I'd still prefer us to start down the union path via self-certification but that is for another conversation.
Click to expand...

I know starting a union is an extremely difficult process. Hope you are able to get the ball rolling, but get out before you see your first legally recognized contract. :)
 
Seggy said:
Time out.

You work for a nonunion carrier, which, in negotiations, is used as an example of some where flying will be shifted to if cuts aren't made at unionized carriers.

So @juxtapilot, even though I may not agree with his expectations, can bitch and moan all he wants about the situation he's in 'thanks' to ALPA. You really can't critique what ALPA is or isn't doing.
Click to expand...

Just a friendly "well, actually" from the peanut gallery, just so you know, the poster in question comes from a long bloodline of airline pilots, all of which were ALPA and some were ALPA when it included flight attendants.

His father has an epic ALPAstache that is both impressive and still on the seniority list on the 757/767 for a major SouthernJet airline.
 
Derg said:
Just a friendly "well, actually" from the peanut gallery, just so you know, the poster in question comes from a long bloodline of airline pilots, all of which were ALPA and some were ALPA when it included flight attendants.

His father has an epic ALPAstache that is both impressive and still on the seniority list on the 757/767 for a major SouthernJet airline.
Click to expand...

Oh I know!

His father can bitch and moans all he wants!

Also, the fact of the matter is that the poster in questions company is brought up on where flying can go if these '...cuts aren't agreed to due to their lack of a union affiliattion'.
 
Last edited:
Seggy said:
Sorry, but how can it be a contract if it can't be legally enforced outside of a meeting with them asking them to reconsider what they put down on paper?
Click to expand...

I'd like to know this too! Apparently it is reality (we've sought legal advice on this), though I'd have to see us in court to fully realize the potential of this. Again, we ain'tz got no coin for it anyway so history and good relations are our leverage for the time being.

And yes, I hope I'm long gone before the next certification attempt...or heck, February. :)
 
bike21 said:
@Seggy it is a loosely legally recognized 'contract' though I shiver a bit in stating that. If you and I shake hands on a verbal agreement about XYZ widget I'm selling, it constitutes a 'contract' in most cases. I try to ask my fellow reps not to call it a 'contract' since it isn't very enforceable and we don't have a dime in our name to enforce it if we tried. So yeah, it's weak in theory but also not entirely worthless as we've had success in enforcing some key aspects of it in house.
Click to expand...

According to the head of representation at ALPA, at least as of about a year ago, your "contract" has absolutely no legal standing. The only thing holding it in place is the fear of a successful representation drive if the company were to disregard it.
 
bike21 said:
I'd like to know this too! Apparently it is reality (we've sought legal advice on this), though I'd have to see us in court to fully realize the potential of this. Again, we ain'tz got no coin for it anyway so history and good relations are our leverage for the time being.
Click to expand...

@BobDDuck answered it.
 
@BobDDuck that dude has an agenda like anyone else, so I have to consider the source. Like I say, I don't fully trust or condone the line of reasoning that we have a 'contract' but we've sought legal council (3rd party) and have been informed otherwise.

@Seggy

3sizt4.jpg
 
bike21 said:
but we've sought legal council (3rd party) and have been informed otherwise.
Click to expand...

Sorry for the multi reply... I missed this the first time around.

If you guys don't have any coin, how'd you pay for somebody to look at the situation and give you an opinion?
 
I can't remember the deets, it may have been pro-bono. It was just as I came on SAPA about two years ago if memory serves.
 
Last edited:
Seggy said:
Oh I know!

His father can bitch and moans all he wants!

Also, the fact of the matter is that the poster in questions company is brought up on where flying can go if these '...cuts aren't agreed to due to their lack of a union affiliattion'.
Click to expand...

@Seggy. Come on now. @Autothrust Blue has a valid opinion on the topic.
 
My understanding is the same as @etflies. Unless you can provide language in a law that specifies other Seggy, the language is binding. As he said, it can be RENEGOTIATED at any time. However it cannot be changed willy nilly. Also, I worked for an ALPA carrier that gave our planes to another company, thus giving away our scope, for a "flow through" that involved more pilots on the seniority list than were previously covered. I did not approve of that. Others didn't as well (I can't say the majority didn't agree because I don't know and can't prove that). Why can't I prove that? Because our ALPA MEC have away the planes and scope without pilot ratification.

I can bitch and moan about ALPA. I watched my dues money go to lawyers to keep a captain on property after his 6th suspension by the company for different instances of negligence of company policy. Another pilot was kept on property after being identified as a person who stole property from an airport shop. Another captain was not only brought back, but was awarded higher paying equipment upon his return, after choking out a flight attendant. I will admit, y'all have some damn good lawyers. But I don't want to pay dues every paycheck to keep jackasses on the seniority list.

After that, I watched my dues money go to concessionary negotiations. I didn't hold high expectations of these negotiations. The company was in bankruptcy. I believe I held reasonable expectations for those negotiations. On the roadshows for the TA agreed upon by the MEC, reps were saying that this was the best deal we could get. I believed them. A couple of the reps "had seen the fleet plan" and it was good. Ok great. You guys were briefed by the folks involved, and are saying this is the best we can do to get a newer, larger fleet. They sold it. TA passed. One month later, BAM! LAX closes as a domicile. 5 months after that another domicile closes. Returning aircraft to lenders, with no aircraft purchases or fleet replacement. One year after the vote, still nothing. But my ALPA reps saw the plan and said it was good! Real winner there.

I don't hate unions. Unfortunately I feel that ALPA has become a business that is afraid of being sued. They can't possibly keep the best interests of mainline AND regional pilots in mind. It's physically impossible. "Well Mr. Mainline pilot, we promise more restrictive scope and pay raises." "Well Mr. Regional pilot, we promise you lots of bigger planes and more pay." Doesn't work.

My previous ALPA regional had no holiday pay, no min day guarantee, 50% deadhead pay, and had mid-upper level pay rates. Skywest, non union, has holiday pay, min day, 100% deadhead pay, and is a top paying regional.

Will Skywest's pay change, based on what the other ALPA regionals are agreeing too, probably. But I REALLY don't know. I don't know anyone that is involved with SAPA, and if I did they wouldn't tell me anything.

P.S. @Seggy, the regionals that we were threatened might get additional flying if we don't vote this deal in: RAH and ExpressJet. NOT Skywest like you assume. If my memory serves right, those are two union regionals, one of them ALPA I believe ;). And on the last vote when we were threatened the regionals of choice were PSA and Mesa. PSA voted yes, but you know this already. Again, two more unionized regionals.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top