US Airways Pilots Sue American Airlines Pilots

Derg said:
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.
Click to expand...
"You were acquired, not hired!" ;)
 
jtrain609 said:
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.
Click to expand...
Thanks

And if they were going to fence people off, one would conclude that any new hires after that date should not be included in the fences? Or does it not work like that?
 
Also, let me say this:

Outside of a few iron clad rules, such as the constructive notice doctrine or application of Mohawk Allegheny protections, SLI's have almost no rules. I believe it was Bloch who wrote this:

“There are four basic lessons to be learned…; that each case turns on its own facts; that
the objective is to make the integration fair and equitable; that the proposals advanced by
those in contest rarely meet that standard; and that the end result, no matter how crafted,
never commands universal acceptance. (Federal Express and Flying Tiger Pilots, (1990)
at pp. 27-28.)
 
CamYZ125 said:
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?
Click to expand...

I'm sure the APA would tell you that they aren't "getting around" McCaskill-Bond, they're just applying it as it's supposed to be applied. Whether that is actually the case will probably be up to a judge to determine, but it would seem that the APA has the upper hand with the way the MOU was written.

But as far as the APA just intentionally screwing over the Airways guys, they would be wise not to do that. Once they represent Airways pilots, they have a duty of fair representation (DFR) to those pilots, which prohibits them from acting in a way that is "discriminatory, arbitrary, or in bad faith." In other words, they would need to have a rational basis for whatever way that they merge. Just screwing over one group of pilots that they represent in favor of another group would be a clear DFR violation.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
I'm sure the APA would tell you that they aren't "getting around" McCaskill-Bond, they're just applying it as it's supposed to be applied. Whether that is actually the case will probably be up to a judge to determine, but it would seem that the APA has the upper hand with the way the MOU was written.

But as far as the APA just intentionally screwing over the Airways guys, they would be wise not to do that. Once they represent Airways pilots, they have a duty of fair representation (DFR) to those pilots, which prohibits them from acting in a way that is "discriminatory, arbitrary, or in bad faith." In other words, they would need to have a rational basis for whatever way that they merge. Just screwing over one group of pilots that they represent in favor of another group would be a clear DFR violation.
Click to expand...

Rational basis isn't the same as discriminatory, arbitrary or in bad faith. Rational basis has to do with a standard the Supreme Court uses in assessing the constitutionality of a law.
 
Maximillian_Jenius said:
You should though. You'd make a good labor law attorney!
Click to expand...

Thanks. Had a few ALPA attorneys tell me I should give it a try, but they all told me that I'd be back making $50k working for someone like the AFL or NLRB for a while before I'd even have a chance at a decent paying gig. That career is a grind, man. Just not many good jobs available for labor attorneys.
 
The snapshot thing is being debated. I think AA is pushing for December and I know some 3rd listers are pushing for February. It's far from over and decided.
 
Kingairer said:
The snapshot thing is being debated. I think AA is pushing for December and I know some 3rd listers are pushing for February. It's far from over and decided.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't the majority of the 3rd listers benefit from having a later date? Why fight the AA desired date of Dec? A lot of hiring took place last year, probably more than any other year. 260 IIRC.

Example hired in April 2013.

If you use the AA snapshot date of Dec, you'd go above all the AA furloughs. If you use the 3rd lister desired date of Feb 2013, you'd go below all the AA furloughs.

For someone like me I was hired after Dec 2013, I am SOL. Sucks because I know a couple buds hired in the 4th quarter of 2013 who will be a thousand numbers higher than me where they are now just 50-60 numbers higher. Apparently luck wasn't on my side. I kinda have a mini version of US-East-West Nic award.
 
Why should furloughs be stapled?

Bloch gave Mesaba furloughs slotting as if they were on property prior to the purchase. I think it is 100% fair.

@jynxyjoe ... Is that correct re XJ furloughs?
 
cencal83406 said:
Why should furloughs be stapled? Bloch gave Mesaba furloughs slotting as if they were on property prior to the purchase. I think it is 100% fair. @jynxyjoe ... Is that correct re XJ furloughs?
Click to expand...

Furloughs are almost always stapled. ALPA Merger Policy changed and required longevity to be factored in to a certain extent, which is why it wasn't a pure staple at UAL/CAL, but the arbitrators still heavily weighted category and status over longevity.
 
ATN_Pilot said:
Furloughs are almost always stapled. ALPA Merger Policy changed and required longevity to be factored in to a certain extent, which is why it wasn't a pure staple at UAL/CAL, but the arbitrators still heavily weighted category and status over longevity.
Click to expand...
Our furloughs weren't stapled. Now. with the last of the recalls coming back and going to bases and categories that their seniority can hold, some post merger hires are griping about "their lost seniority."
 
Cptnchia said:
Our furloughs weren't stapled. Now. with the last of the recalls coming back and going to bases and categories that their seniority can hold, some post merger hires are griping about "their lost seniority."
Click to expand...

I ran into a bypass guy who came back with damned near captain seniority.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top