US Airways Pilots Sue American Airlines Pilots

[L-16B]

He's top notch. Probably the best SLI arbitration guy around. And he commands the dollars for it, too.

Of course, George Nicolau is also one of the best and most respected arbitrators around, too, and you saw how USAPA threw their little hissy fit after his reasonable ruling.

And I'm guessing Bloch still gets paid additionally every time 9E goes back to him for clarification ? He is a lawyer correct? I have no beef with the guy but had I been hired one day later at Colgan I would have lost 26% seniority and would have hated him.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

I'm not familiar with the 9E dispute resolution process, so I couldn't tell you if they're required to go back to Mr. Bloch every time or not. Maybe @Seggy or @amorris311 could answer that one.

Seniority integrations are never easy. As Mr. Bloch would tell you, there will always be pilots on every integrated list who get the short end of the stick as individuals. The goal of the integration, however, is to ensure that the list is integrated fairly as a whole.

 

[hcaeborev]

On a serious note, I still don't quite understand what's going on. I've read on other boards that once the APA is in charge and USAPA is gone, the APA can avoid Mcaskill-Bond by representing both sides and doing things 'in-house'. If that's true, which I'm not sure it is, then I'm glad USAPA is trying to stop it. If its not true, well then its just another stupid stunt by the leaders...err...idiots in USAPA.

USAPA issues aside this is what I understood, APA trying to get around M-B. Can anyone clarify? If it is true then perhaps USAPA is just scared of a "TWAing".

edit: apparently I missed ATN's post.....disregard

 

[wheelsup]

From my understanding the way the East+West pilots were initially integrated with the Nic award the furloughs on the East were disregarded. They were put below the most junior active west pilot.

If this is the case, is this standard procedure? How would a new US hire fare in the overall integration using Bloch? I would think the furloughed guys, if they decide to come back, should go above any new hires since their furlough date. After all, they earned that seniority spot when they got hired initially.

I guess what I'm wondering is, will the 1000+ furloughed guys go above any new hires? Those hired after the Merger was complete in Dec? I have this bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that guys hired a couple months prior to me will be thousands further up the list than me.

 

[wheelsup]

http://christinenegroni.blogspot.com/2011/07/pilots-versus-pilots-years-of-waiting.html

When it comes to the merger of American Airlines and TWA 10 years ago, a federal jury has determined that the TWA

pilots were indeed done wrong by their union, the Air Line Pilots Association.

Just how the union sold its members down the river is described in court documents. But in brief, the TWA pilots claimed that ALPA betrayed them by promising not to fight American Airline's in-house union, the Allied Pilots Association, even though APA was insisting all the TWA pilots must go to the bottom of the seniority list.

Sound familiar?

I hate to say it, but with the TWA/AA lawsuits, West-East lawsuits, and now US/AA law-suits, but I'm actually a little unnerved about the whole thing. The TWA/AA issue has been going on for a decade.

 

[CamYZ125]

It's an interesting case. The MOU signed between the company, USAPA, and APA states that there will be a request to the NMB as soon as possible to certify a single transportation system. So, the APA did that a couple of weeks ago. In RLA parlance, a "single transportation system" would basically mean that one union represents all of the pilots. Since the APA is so much bigger than USAPA, it is unlikely that the NMB will call for an election, and will probably just certify the APA as the single bargaining agent. That usually takes a little while, though, so we're probably looking at another couple of months before it's done.

So, the question becomes, if the APA is representing all of the pilots, then how can USAPA represent the Airways pilots in an integration? USAPA would no longer exist as a legal bargaining agent for anyone. That's basically the way that the APA is looking at it, and it's also how Judge Silver looked at it last month when she discussed the issue in making her ruling that the America West pilots were not entitled to their own separate representatives in the SLI process.

USAPA is arguing that this violates McCaskill-Bond, but I'm not seeing how. McCaskill-Bond simply states that Section 3 & 13 of the Allegheny Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions (LPPs) have to be used to integrate seniority lists. But Section 13.B. states that the employee groups can reach a mutual agreement on a process to use, and I'd say that their MOU qualifies as that alternative process. USAPA basically agreed to allow APA to become their representative.

It will be interesting to see how it works out. But USAPA definitely has the weaker argument of the two.

Thanks for the informative reply. If the bold part happens, and APA then represents all of the pilots, can they essentially come up with a SLI that favors the American pilots and screws the Airways guys and get around McCaskill-Bond that way? Or will they still be subject to McCaskill-Bond rules/regulations even if the APA does the SLI themselves?

 

[L-16B]

From my understanding the way the East+West pilots were initially integrated with the Nic award the furloughs on the East were disregarded. They were put below the most junior active west pilot.

If this is the case, is this standard procedure? How would a new US hire fare in the overall integration using Bloch? I would think the furloughed guys, if they decide to come back, should go above any new hires since their furlough date. After all, they earned that seniority spot when they got hired initially.

I guess what I'm wondering is, will the 1000+ furloughed guys go above any new hires? Those hired after the Merger was complete in Dec? I have this bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that guys hired a couple months prior to me will be thousands further up the list than me.

The east guys claim the Nic is dead the west guys say it will still happen.

When u say furloughed guys I assume u are talking about AA. on this its hard to even formulate an opinion while still being neutral. How long have the junior furloughed AA pilots been on property? When were they hired? I don't know. But I've heard that there are third listers that have been on property longer. No clue what happens.

 

[wheelsup]

Thanks for the informative reply. If the bold part happens, and APA then represents all of the pilots, can they essentially come up with a SLI that favors the American pilots and screws the Airways guys and get around McCaskill-Bond that way? Or will they still be subject to McCaskill-Bond rules/regulations even if the APA does the SLI themselves?

This is the only thing I could find in the APA contract:

N. Successorship

1. Agreement Binding on Successor. The Agreement shall be binding upon any Successor. The Company shall not bring a single step or multi-step Successorship Transaction to final conclusion unless the Successor agrees, in writing, to recognize the Association as the representative of pilots on the American Airlines Pilots Seniority List consistent with the Railway Labor Act, to employ the pilots on the American Airlines Pilots Seniority List in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement, and to assume and be bound by this Agreement.

2. Seniority List Merger. If the Successor is an Air Carrier or an affiliate of an Air Carrier, the Company shall, at the option of the Association, require the Successor to agree to integrate the pre-transaction pilot seniority lists of the Company and the Successor in a fair and equitable manner within 12 months of the Successorship transaction pursuant to Sections 3. and 13. of the Allegheny- Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions ("LPPs"). The requirement of this provision does not apply to the Company's acquisition of all or part of another Air Carrier in a transaction which includes the acquisition of aircraft and pilots.

==============================================

I have a hunch that anyone hired after Dec 12 2013 will go below every one, including the furloughed guys. Only fair, but sounds like those hired prior to that on the US side will win the lottery.

 

[Polar742]

DCN will determine placement on doh for those hired after.

Above? It'll be interesting. If a certain airline tries to protect it's senior folks on a handful of widebodies again, they'll get the same outcome.

I'd say look at the UAL/CAL award for the latest integrated list trend.

 

[wheelsup]

DCN will determine placement on doh for those hired after.

Above? It'll be interesting. If a certain airline tries to protect it's senior folks on a handful of widebodies again, they'll get the same outcome.

I'd say look at the UAL/CAL award for the latest integrated list trend.

What is DCN

 

[wheelsup]

Also I assume most if not all of the AA furloughs are ex-TWA. If that is true they are also probably a pretty old group, and have also found employment elsewhere, maybe enjoying some of the senior positions at jetBlue, or higher up the list at SWA, etc. In that case I doubt lots of them will come back. Also they will retire a good 10-15 years prior to those guys getting hired now.

 

[jtrain609]

From my understanding the way the East+West pilots were initially integrated with the Nic award the furloughs on the East were disregarded. They were put below the most junior active west pilot.

If this is the case, is this standard procedure? How would a new US hire fare in the overall integration using Bloch? I would think the furloughed guys, if they decide to come back, should go above any new hires since their furlough date. After all, they earned that seniority spot when they got hired initially.

I guess what I'm wondering is, will the 1000+ furloughed guys go above any new hires? Those hired after the Merger was complete in Dec? I have this bad feeling in the pit of my stomach that guys hired a couple months prior to me will be thousands further up the list than me.

They already are. Anybody hired after the merger was announced is a constructive notice pilot, or a third lister as you guys say. Constructive notice pilots are always below pre-merger list pilots, included those that were furloughed.

Thanks for the informative reply. If the bold part happens, and APA then represents all of the pilots, can they essentially come up with a SLI that favors the American pilots and screws the Airways guys and get around McCaskill-Bond that way? Or will they still be subject to McCaskill-Bond rules/regulations even if the APA does the SLI themselves?

You can't contract around statute. If McCaskill-Bond applies, then it applies.

So here's the million dollar question; has anybody actually taken a look at McCaskill-Bond to see what's going on, or if this is even allowable?

The APA is likely getting at the bolded section:

a) LABOR INTEGRATION.—With respect to any covered transaction involving two or more covered air
carriers that results in the combination of crafts or classes that are subject to the Railway Labor Act
(45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.), sections 3 and 13 of the labor protective provisions imposed by the Civil
Aeronautics Board in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger (as published at 59 C.A.B. 45) shall apply to
the integration of covered employees of the covered air carriers; except that—

(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

(2) the requirements of any collective bargaining agreement that may be applicable to the
terms of integration involving covered employees of a covered air carrier shall not be
affected by the requirements of this section as to the employees covered by that agreement,
so long as those provisions allow for the protections afforded by sections 3 and 13 of the
Allegheny-Mohawk provisions

The APA probably told USAPA that McCaskill-Bond doesn't apply because a single agent represents both groups of pilots, but this is disingenuous. I have to imagine that this has more to do with two labor unions that are different locals, but under the same union, are being combined. This isn't the case here. Instead, two groups, from two different airlines, with two different unions are being combined.

 

[wheelsup]

They already are. Anybody hired after the merger was announced is a constructive notice pilot, or a third lister as you guys say. Constructive notice pilots are always below pre-merger list pilots, included those that were furloughed.

By announced do you mean in Feb 2013 when they announced their plans to merge, or Dec 2013 when it was finalized? Just trying to get a baseline here.

 

[jtrain609]

By announced do you mean in Feb 2013 when they announced their plans to merge, or Dec 2013 when it was finalized? Just trying to get a baseline here.

Announced.

A constructive notice pilot has, as you can imagine, been given notice, through a constructive process; that they will be behind everybody else at the two companies on the date that the merger is announced because they have no expectations to be ahead of anybody once that merger is announced.

 

[derg]

They'd better handle this equitably and fairly, else the discontent and infighting will absolutely destroy the future of the company.

Speaking of that, I'd better go check on the SouthernJets forum to see if that MSP 7ER FO is still complaining about someone moving his cheese and how it's all my fault. BRB.

 

[Polar742]

What is DCN

Date of Constructed (Constructive?) Notice.

Basically the date after which anyone hired at either company knows the intention to merge into one.

 

[L-16B]

Announced.

A constructive notice pilot has, as you can imagine, been given notice, through a constructive process; that they will be behind everybody else at the two companies on the date that the merger is announced because they have no expectations to be ahead of anybody once that merger is announced.

I have been asking about this in writing since day 1. Nobody ive talked to has seen this. I remember with continental and United this was the case, and I assume it will be here as well, but I cannot find this anywhere.

 

[jtrain609]

I have been asking about this in writing since day 1. Nobody ive talked to has seen this. I remember with continental and United this was the case, and I assume it will be here as well, but I cannot find this anywhere.

This explains it pretty well.

The Delta Representatives accurately describe “Constructive Notice” as shorthand for a bright line test to determine which pilots, if any, hired by two separate but merging airlines should be treated as though they were hired by the merged airline.37 The assumption is that, at some point -- normally the date of the merger announcement -- a new hire at one of the merging carriers will be on “Constructive Notice” that his or her career expectations are reasonably considered to be those of someone hired by the new carrier. For that reason, Constructive Notice pilots are typically placed in date-of-hire order below all other pilots from the two merging airlines.

https://crewroom.alpa.org/ual/DesktopModules/ViewDocument.aspx?DocumentID=45376

 

[WMostellar]

@BobDDuck - Gingers are reactionary, not analytical.

@Polar742

You'll see "reactionary" when one of them reads your post.

 

[derg]

You'll see "reactionary" when one of them reads your post.

"In G-World…"