You should reconsider your tolerance for non-union airlines now

SpiraMirabilis

Possible Subversive
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/02/senate-dems-greenlight-key-anti-union-bill.php

It seems like caving is what Democrats do best, because they passed the FAA reauthorization bill in the senate. While the portion of the bill that said that people who didn't vote should be counted as No in union votes was removed a couple of sections that I consider to be anti-union has remained. The most important is a section that says that if a non-union airline acquires a smaller union airline airline the smaller union would be dissolved with no votes, and then the combined pilot group would have to go through the initial organization drive process, sending out cards and having a NMB vote if they want representation.

Basically if SkyWest had waited until this new authorization bill went into effect before buying ExpressJet or ASA they would both be non-union shops, regardless of what it says in the acquisition/merger section of their CBA.

Before you could say that whatever SkyWest pilots did was their own business and did not effect you -- now that is only true if your airline isn't bought by them.
 
I would think getting bought by a holding company would be the loophole to keep the union. Expressjet is still its own airline.

That is unless they plan to merge the companies.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using Tapatalk
 
No, you're reading it right. I didn't say that I was thrilled with our position on the bill. :) The reason we supported it was basically because it doesn't change the way we do organizing. We never file our cards for an election before we have a strong majority, anyway, so changing the limit to 50% doesn't really affect us. Frankly, it's silly for any union to file cards if they can't get at least 50%. Even if you somehow manage to get elected, there's no way that you'll have the unity to actually get anything done from a minimal majority. So, even though the compromise was less than ideal, it doesn't really change our operations, and there were enough benefits in the bill otherwise to make it worthwhile. That's the view of the administration, anyway.
 
I'm just wondering what would happen if a large non-union airline... say SkyWest bought a relatively small "mainline" airline under this law. Lets say Republic spins off Frontier, they don't do so well and end up close to bankruptcy... SkyWest could buy them, say 'Oh, your merger/acquisitions clause doesn't apply because we're incorporating you with SkyWest airlines which is non-union, and in fact you have no CBA at all now because now you are non union, so we are going to unilaterally change your payrate to CRJ-900 rates for your Airbus, have a nice day.'
 
It might have more to do with certain "allegiances" that we're solidified prior to the new chief taking office in Herndon concerning issues that don't relate to specifically pilots.

But I'm probably just talking out of my ass again! :)
 
I'm just wondering what would happen if a large non-union airline... say SkyWest bought a relatively small "mainline" airline under this law. Lets say Republic spins off Frontier, they don't do so well and end up close to bankruptcy... SkyWest could buy them, say 'Oh, your merger/acquisitions clause doesn't apply because we're incorporating you with SkyWest airlines which is non-union, and in fact you have no CBA at all now because now you are non union, so we are going to unilaterally change your payrate to CRJ-900 rates for your Airbus, have a nice day.'

Honestly, I'm not sure what would happen in that case. I'll have to hit up the attorneys for interpretations. I'm guessing that it's ambiguous, though. Lawmakers like to do that when they make compromises. :)
 
The Train mentioned NextGen, but we also got improvements on unmanned aerial vehicles, cockpit doors on cargo aircraft, laser events, protection of FDR and CVR data, etc. But perhaps most importantly, we finally have the FAA fully funded for the long-term instead of a series of short-term continuing resolutions. Most people don't realize it, but the FAA hasn't had a funding bill in years. They've just had their old budget extended over and over again. That's finally over after years of fighting.
 
I can't really find what I'm looking for, so I'll just ask....anyone know how the new bill addressed the Essential Air Service? I assume there will be cuts
 
Some changes to EAS:
  • No new cities; old cities grandfathered in
  • Have to average at least 10 people per day to maintain service
  • Funding slowly reduced by about 30% over the next 4 years
 
Back
Top