RJDC 05-10-07 Industry Update

[701EV]

ALPA has postponed calling for a NMB ballot of the Skywest pilots it will insteadt wait for a larger margin.

Are you kidding me!

Larger margin my a$$!

What is ALPA afraid of?

It sure looks like ALPA F*#ked this up.

No wonder the Skywest pilots don't want ALPA.

701EV

 

[braveheart]

Any updates on the actual lawsuit?

Additional legal info has been posted at:

http://www.rjdefense.com/legal_info.htm

 

[WWEfan]

ALPA Files Motion to Dismiss ASA and Comair DFR Lawsuits


Pursuant to the 11-09-06 litigation schedule, ALPA has filed their motion for summary judgment asking that both the ASA and Comair lawsuits be dismissed with prejudice. Per the schedule, Plaintiffs have until January 16, 2006 to file their written response.





That was a cut/paste from the article. You may want to check your dates or have someone proofread this stuff before it goes public. I doesn't really help your cause when I find mistakes in the first couple paragraphs on your website.​

 

[~~~^~~~]

WWE: How is that a misprint? The Court sets the deadlines, then the parties submit their arguements and wait for rulings. The wait can be more than 6 months depending on what arguements and counter arguements are allowed and considered by the Court. This is not a one hour Television show.

ALPA has postponed calling for a NMB ballot of the Skywest pilots it will insteadt wait for a larger margin.

Are you kidding me!

Larger margin my a$$!

What is ALPA afraid of?

It sure looks like ALPA F*#ked this up.

No wonder the Skywest pilots don't want ALPA.

701EV

ALPA has lost its previous 4 representational votes. ALPA does not want to make it 0/5, so they are waiting for a clear majority.

Yes, ALPA did screw this up. If they had fought for OneList when ASA was acquired ALPA would have the momentum and would be widely percieved of having taken the correct aggressive action to best represent its members.

ALPA was afraid they would not win a representational vote taken from the combined ASA/SkyWest group. They want the SkyWest pilots to vote ALPA and remove the risk. I think asking the SkyWest pilots to save ALPA from its own representational quagmire was foolish. Now the numbers of SkyWest pilots have increased while the number of ASA pilots has decreased. The ASA pilots are now a minority. (and I made these arguements to our LEC / MEC Representatives)

I don't know how to save ALPA from ALPA's own management. We have tried suing them, some say we should decertify. I don't think ALPA can be threatened into action unless you are the Delta MEC, which obviously we aren't.

It is frustrating. We know that ALPA is the best way to restore our profession, but they just refuse to provide small jet carriers the same representation that our mainline brothers enjoy.

If ALPA was effective, if ALPA would fight to stop alter ego replacement flying, if ALPA would quit selling us out for "bargaining credits" then SkyWest pilots would want to join. ALPA should put one hell of a pro-ASA scope section on the table and see what effect it has on the SkyWest pilots.

The SkyWest pilots will want a seat at the table when they see evidence that the ability to sit at the table is worth while.

But after DHL and AStar, TWA/AA candidly I'm concerned to the point of seeking other employment.

The best advice for any of us is to call our Representatives and beg them.

 

[JoeMerchant]

WWE: How is that a misprint? The Court sets the deadlines, then the parties submit their arguements and wait for rulings. The wait can be more than 6 months depending on what arguements and counter arguements are allowed and considered by the Court. This is not a one hour Television show.

ALPA has lost its previous 4 representational votes. ALPA does not want to make it 0/5, so they are waiting for a clear majority.

Yes, ALPA did screw this up. If they had fought for OneList when ASA was acquired ALPA would have the momentum and would be widely percieved of having taken the correct aggressive action to best represent its members.

ALPA was afraid they would not win a representational vote taken from the combined ASA/SkyWest group. They want the SkyWest pilots to vote ALPA and remove the risk. I think asking the SkyWest pilots to save ALPA from its own representational quagmire was foolish. Now the numbers of SkyWest pilots have increased while the number of ASA pilots has decreased. The ASA pilots are now a minority. (and I made these arguements to our LEC / MEC Representatives)

I don't know how to save ALPA from ALPA's own management. We have tried suing them, some say we should decertify. I don't think ALPA can be threatened into action unless you are the Delta MEC, which obviously we aren't.

It is frustrating. We know that ALPA is the best way to restore our profession, but they just refuse to provide small jet carriers the same representation that our mainline brothers enjoy.

If ALPA was effective, if ALPA would fight to stop alter ego replacement flying, if ALPA would quit selling us out for "bargaining credits" then SkyWest pilots would want to join. ALPA should put one hell of a pro-ASA scope section on the table and see what effect it has on the SkyWest pilots.

The SkyWest pilots will want a seat at the table when they see evidence that the ability to sit at the table is worth while.

But after DHL and AStar, TWA/AA candidly I'm concerned to the point of seeking other employment.

The best advice for any of us is to call our Representatives and beg them.

Fins,

The USAirways MEC is now threatening decertification of ALPA. Along with ASTAR, now maybe the time to put pressure on ALPA. ALPA won't change until it's very existence is threatened.... a little "self-help" within ALPA CAN work.....

 

[Rez O. Lewshun]

Fins,

The USAirways MEC is now threatening decertification of ALPA. Along with ASTAR, now maybe the time to put pressure on ALPA. ALPA won't change until it's very existence is threatened.... a little "self-help" within ALPA CAN work.....

Hi Joe!

I heard the same rumblings over at UAL for a while but that seems to have settled down....

The ol' saying goes... Don't change the union...change the leadership. In addition, an increase in membership particaption would't hurt either....


Rezfully yours...

 

[flyboyike]

It is frustrating. We know that ALPA is the best way to restore our profession, but they just refuse to provide small jet carriers the same representation that our mainline brothers enjoy.

From the looks of it, our mainline brothers haven't enjoyed much either.

 

[braveheart]

Ask SkyWestALPA (In ALPA's own words)

Submit a question to Ask SkyWestALPA​

Question:The website: www.rjdefense.com, doesn't give ALPA many accolades for their attention to the needs to regional pilots in light of their major partners. How can we be assured our interests will be protected in regard to the scope clauses, etc. promoted by ALPA to their major airline pilots to settle their contracts, which then ultimately influence us?

Answer:Short answer is that this is small group of pilots that have been working for change in ALPA for many years now. ALPA is imperfect and these pilots have the right to pursue change in ALPA because of the democratic structure of the union.

Fins,

Although the Skywestalpa.org web site is more courteous towards the RJDC than some of ALPA's other publications, it does more harm than good to the organizing effort as it's obvious to the reader how hard ALPA is kicking the rudder to avoid the real issue of its own conduct.

For example, while it refers to the RJDC has "working for change" it omits the glaring fact that it's is categorically opposed to the very changes it says the RJDC is advocating. Similarly, the more the response attempts to avoid the issue of ALPA's conduct (by citing the union's safety efforts and non-pertinent points) the more apparent it is that there's something ALPA doesn't want to discuss.

Anyone who's done organizing drives understands the importance of maintaining credibility when addressing a skeptical pilot group. Unfortunately, ALPA's conduct has put them well behind the power curve as their own writings and statements are used with great effect by the opposition. For example:

1. An ALPA Vice-President has admitted to withholding pertinent information from the Allegheny and Piedmont pilots during their concessionary negotiations (the fact that ALPA knew there would be no jets for them in its the Jets-for-Jobs agreement.)
2. At last count, the US Airways MEC had unilaterally changed the terms of the PSA J4J agreement three times (slotted bidding, definition of eligable pilots, etc.)
3. At Mesaba, an ALPA MEC Chairman/Vice-President writes the Mesaba pilots defending the NWA MEC's decision to prohibit Mesaba from getting any of the additional CRJ's authorized in the 2005 agreement.

The moral of the story is that the only way for ALPA to address this issue is to show how credible reforms have been enacted. Telling prospective members that they should join ALPA so they can "help fix it" is a loosing argument that merely affirms ALPA's refusal to enact reforms.

 

[PCL_128]

An ALPA Vice-President has admitted to withholding pertinent information from the Allegheny and Piedmont pilots during their concessionary negotiations (the fact that ALPA knew there would be no jets for them in its the Jets-for-Jobs agreement.)

For starters, that VP was an MEC Chair at the time who was under a confidentiality agreement. Many MEC Chairs have confidentiality agreements that don't even allow them to share some information with their own MEC members, let alone pilots from their feeder carriers.

Besides that, if memory serves, the VP didn't state that he knew for sure that there would be no jets for ALG and PDT; I believe he stated that he didn't think that there would be jets for them. Big difference.

At Mesaba, an ALPA MEC Chairman/Vice-President writes the Mesaba pilots defending the NWA MEC's decision to prohibit Mesaba from getting any of the additional CRJ's authorized in the 2005 agreement.

Do you have a copy of that letter? I don't recall it.

 

[braveheart]

For starters, that VP was an MEC Chair at the time who was under a confidentiality agreement. Many MEC Chairs have confidentiality agreements that don't even allow them to share some information with their own MEC members, let alone pilots from their feeder carriers.

Besides that, if memory serves, the VP didn't state that he knew for sure that there would be no jets for ALG and PDT; I believe he stated that he didn't think that there would be jets for them. Big difference.

Do you have a copy of that letter? I don't recall it.

PCL,

Confidentiality agreements cannot be used as an excuse for knowingly disseminating false information nor as a pretext for violating the union's duties to its members. While confidentiality agreements may limit the sharing of certain information, they do not dictate the union's conduct or permit official misconduct.

The suggestion that the ALPA Vice President wasn't certain about the information is disproved by his own attempt to use that very same information as an excuse for not acting upon the lawful objections of the ALG and PDT pilots. According to the transcripts, the question was why didn't ALPA act upon the objections of the PDT and ALG MEC's to J4J? The answer was (incredibly) that there wasn't any reason because ALPA knew the jets wouldn't be going to those carriers. See: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/beebe_xscript.pdf

More important however is that ALPA attempted to use this information to skirt the larger issue of the unilateral negotiation and imposition of super-seniority rights for the union's mainline pilots that violated numerous sections of the ALG and PDT working agreements (the integrity of which ALPA, as the bargaining agent, is supposed to defend.) ALPA's unilateral negotiation of J4J and the related misconduct has absolutely nothing to do with the existence of an industry-standard confidentiality agreement.

As for ALPA's letter to the Mesaba pilots defending ALPA's diversion of small jets to other alter ego carriers, here's the link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2004/msa_hotline_102704.pdf

Nonetheless, your post illustrates the point that ALPA's ill-advised efforts to defend its conduct (rather than implementing reforms) seriously undermines its ability to bring other pilot groups into ALPA.

Imagine how much easier the SkyWest and Colgan drives would be if ALPA could say, "Yes we were wrong, but here's the safeguards we've put in place to ensure it can't happen again."

 

[acarpe3448]

Cool! So youi guys are ready to drop the monetary damages part? It's all about "representation"...right?

Let's hear it!

Sure they will drop the monetary damages claim as soon as it is decided that all scope is droped and Comair can add 737s, 757s, 767s to their fleet. They would also drop their monetary claims if they are allowed date of hire senority integration with Delta! Hey Captain Ford do you know how stupid you look carrying this failed attempt on?

 

[braveheart]

Sure they will drop the monetary damages claim as soon as it is decided that all scope is droped and Comair can add 737s, 757s, 767s to their fleet. They would also drop their monetary claims if they are allowed date of hire senority integration with Delta! Hey Captain Ford do you know how stupid you look carrying this failed attempt on?

Acarpe,

Did you know that prior to 9/11, ALPA was warned that its mainline bargaining practices were fundamentally flawed and would prove harmful to "mainline" and "regional" pilots alike?

These warnings went unheeded and less than a year later thousands of ALPA pilots lost their jobs while non-ALPA and non-union alter ego carriers proliferated. Worse, ALPA continues to bargain and sell its members the same contractual provisions it knows won't work.

Yet, certain uninformed members would rather accept ALPA's vitriolic rhetoric than implement reforms. Until that attitude changes, there's little hope that ALPA can recoup its losses.

http://www.rjdefense.com/bsicsub.pdf
http://www.rjdefense.com/2003/10_Things_About_Scope.pdf

 

[PCL_128]

PCL,

Confidentiality agreements cannot be used as an excuse for knowingly disseminating false information nor as a pretext for violating the union's duties to its members. While confidentiality agreements may limit the sharing of certain information, they do not dictate the union's conduct or permit official misconduct.

Captain Beebe neither distributed false information, nor took part in any official misconduct.

The suggestion that the ALPA Vice President wasn't certain about the information is disproved by his own attempt to use that very same information as an excuse for not acting upon the lawful objections of the ALG and PDT pilots. According to the transcripts, the question was why didn't ALPA act upon the objections of the PDT and ALG MEC's to J4J? The answer was (incredibly) that there wasn't any reason because ALPA knew the jets wouldn't be going to those carriers. See: http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/beebe_xscript.pdf

Here's the actual testimony:

Haber: You were aware, were you not, that no RJs were going to go to Allegheny or Piedmont?

Beebe: That was not an absolute. The company was weighing many different options at that point...It might be fairer to say that, the company was weighing all of their options at this point, but it didn't look as though they were placing small jets at Allegheny.

Haber (referring to possibly coming to a J4J agreement): If they had come to an agreement, would they have gotten jets?

Beebe: Perhaps they would. Perhaps things would have changed. I don't know the answer to that.


Seems to me that Captain Beebe had no absolute certainty that jets would not go to either of the WO feeders. He had an educated guess that was based on confidential information that he couldn't share with the other MECs, but no certain information. In other words, he did nothing wrong.

As for ALPA's letter to the Mesaba pilots defending ALPA's diversion of small jets to other alter ego carriers, here's the link: http://www.rjdefense.com/2004/msa_hotline_102704.pdf

Thanks for posting a link. I'd nearly forgotten about that episode. Regardless, I agree with Captain Wychor's statements in the letter.

Nonetheless, your post illustrates the point that ALPA's ill-advised efforts to defend its conduct (rather than implementing reforms) seriously undermines its ability to bring other pilot groups into ALPA.

Imagine how much easier the SkyWest and Colgan drives would be if ALPA could say, "Yes we were wrong, but here's the safeguards we've put in place to ensure it can't happen again."

Honestly, I do a lot of organizing work, and I can't say that any pilot has ever asked me about any of the convoluted things that you and your buddy Joe Merchant (and his older girlfriend) always bring up on this board. Pilots in organizing drives are much more concerned about what their dues will be, seniority integrations (in relation to the Colgan and Skywest drives), how the voting process will work, etc... The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Honestly, I do a lot of organizing work, and I can't say that any pilot has ever asked me about any of the convoluted things that you and your buddy Joe Merchant (and his older girlfriend) always bring up on this board. Pilots in organizing drives are much more concerned about what their dues will be, seniority integrations (in relation to the Colgan and Skywest drives), how the voting process will work, etc... The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd.

Then you must not read the questions that are submitted by Skywest pilots to the organizing committee. Here is an actual question from a Skywest pilot to the OC.... are you telling me you never saw this question or this answer from the OC?


Ask SkyWestALPA (In ALPA's own words)

Submit a question to Ask SkyWestALPA​

Question:The website: www.rjdefense.com, doesn't give ALPA many accolades for their attention to the needs to regional pilots in light of their major partners. How can we be assured our interests will be protected in regard to the scope clauses, etc. promoted by ALPA to their major airline pilots to settle their contracts, which then ultimately influence us?

Answer:Short answer is that this is small group of pilots that have been working for change in ALPA for many years now. ALPA is imperfect and these pilots have the right to pursue change in ALPA because of the democratic structure of the union.

The conclusion that ALPA does not give much attention to the regional carriers fails to give weight to the fact that the Comair pilots got millions in strirke funds in 2000 during their time of great need. Also regional carriers represented by ALPA now have a huge voice in the Association and with growing numbers will have an even bigger voice in the future.

ALPA Safety has been mainly focused on regional carriers for the last ten years to help make improvements in pilot training, and equipment flown by regional carriers. ALPA's infuence and support in the area of Safety has benefitted the regionals both indirectly and directly over the years.

So could some things be improved, yes, but remember the influence of ALPA is the very reason that we enjoy many of the features we have at SkyWest in our pay and work rules. Wouldn't it be nice to have all of what we have worked for over the years protected by a binding contract?

 

[PCL_128]

Then you must not read the questions that are submitted by Skywest pilots to the organizing committee. Here is an actual question from a Skywest pilot to the OC.... are you telling me you never saw this question or this answer from the OC?

No, I haven't seen that question or answer, and your link isn't working. I don't doubt your claim, however. If a pilot has indeed asked that question, then it's extremely rare. As I stated, I have yet to be asked anything in reference to the RJDC at a Skywest or Colgan event.

 

[JoeMerchant]

No, I haven't seen that question or answer, and your link isn't working. I don't doubt your claim, however. If a pilot has indeed asked that question, then it's extremely rare. As I stated, I have yet to be asked anything in reference to the RJDC at a Skywest or Colgan event.

It came right off the Skywest organizing website.... go have a look.... even the OC tapdanced around the answer. They didn't exactly defend ALPA on this issue as much as you do....

 

[PCL_128]

It came right off the Skywest organizing website.... go have a look....

I tried, but I can't get the website to work tonight for some reason. Keeps telling me that the site can't be found.

even the OC tapdanced around the answer. They didn't exactly defend ALPA on this issue as much as you do....

I'm not a member of the Skywest OC, so I don't answer for them. They are free to tell the Skywest pilots whatever they feel is appropriate. If I was asked this question at a Skywest event, I can guarantee you that I wouldn't be nearly as gracious towards the RJDC as the OC apparently was in this answer.

 

[JoeMerchant]

I'm not a member of the Skywest OC, so I don't answer for them. They are free to tell the Skywest pilots whatever they feel is appropriate. If I was asked this question at a Skywest event, I can guarantee you that I wouldn't be nearly as gracious towards the RJDC as the OC apparently was in this answer.

Most regional pilots understand there is a conflict of interest within ALPA.... you are blinded by the ALPA aura.... your approach isn't going to get more regional members on board..... in fact ALPA is going to be doing good if it keeps what it has......

 

[braveheart]

"Captain Beebe neither distributed false information, nor took part in any official misconduct."

"Seems to me that Captain Beebe had no absolute certainty that jets would not go to either of the WO feeders."

"The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd."

PCL,

Thank you for illustrating my point. As a purported ALPA organizer, you defend the indefensible and while failing to tell the whole story. More importantly, the whole tenor of your response suggests to non-members that the union is unwilling to address these questions in a direct and forthright manner:

(1) In the transcripts, Captain Beebe states:

"In fact though in my discussions with management, there was never to be the placement of jets at Allegheny. Allegheny was to remain as a turbo prop carrier."

In a follow-up question, Captain Beebe goes on to say:

"Because I told you that the discussions we were having, were indicative that neither Piedmont nor Allegheny were going to get jets."

(2) Captain Beebe admits that he attended a meeting with Captain Woerth and the objecting PDT and ALG MEC's, yet he withheld the pertinent information:

Question: "Didn't Captain Woerth host a meeting or more than one meeting, concerning issues raised here a meeting that I believe you attended at least one of?"
Answer: "I attended one meeting and I can't recall if it was just with some of the MEC chairmen of the wholly owns or Captain Woerth was there or not."
Question: So why --
Answer: "I didn't disclose that to them at the time. That was information being held closely by the company."

(3) You say as an ALPA organizer "The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd."

You overlook the fact that as you make such a claim, ALPA's SkyWest organizers are fielding questions about the RJDC on the official SkyWest organizing web site (see the re-prints in this same thread.) Likewise, you overlook the fact in the failed drives at Colgan and Chicago Express, ALPA's own organizers downloaded and distributed materials from the RJDC's web site.

If ALPA's conduct isn't an issue, why would ALPA's organizers see the need to field questions about the RJDC on its official organizing web site(s) and quote from the RJDC's materials?

(4) Finally you overlook the point that ALPA is 0-4 in "small jet" organizing drives and that it now has postponed calling for another vote at SkyWest. It must be pointed out that any assertion that you or the folks in D.C. are attuned to the concerns of the SkyWest and Colgan pilots is not being reflected at the ballot box.

So to recap, if ALPA is expected to win organizing votes, it cannot continue to ignore the issue of its own unfair conduct and it must demonstrate credible reforms.

 

[PCL_128]

More importantly, the whole tenor of your response suggests to non-members that the union is unwilling to address these questions in a direct and forthright manner:

We're more than happy to address the concerns in the proper forum. A courtroom is not the proper forum. You had the opportunity to voice your concerns on multiple occasions, and you even had the opportunity to speak with the BSIC on at least one occasion. Suffice it to say that no one was very impressed with you or your cohorts, and your claims had no evidence to back them up.

(1) In the transcripts, Captain Beebe states:

"In fact though in my discussions with management, there was never to be the placement of jets at Allegheny. Allegheny was to remain as a turbo prop carrier."

In a follow-up question, Captain Beebe goes on to say:

"Because I told you that the discussions we were having, were indicative that neither Piedmont nor Allegheny were going to get jets."

(2) Captain Beebe admits that he attended a meeting with Captain Woerth and the objecting PDT and ALG MEC's, yet he withheld the pertinent information:

Question: "Didn't Captain Woerth host a meeting or more than one meeting, concerning issues raised here a meeting that I believe you attended at least one of?"
Answer: "I attended one meeting and I can't recall if it was just with some of the MEC chairmen of the wholly owns or Captain Woerth was there or not."
Question: So why --
Answer: "I didn't disclose that to them at the time. That was information being held closely by the company."

We've both posted several quotations from the depositions, but the true context of everything can be seen by reading the entire deposition. I urge everyone to read these documents. If you read them in their entirety, it becomes quite clear that Dan's claims of impropriety are ridiculous.

(3) You say as an ALPA organizer "The idea that a Colgan or Skywest pilot is paying any attention to your silly little lawsuit is absurd."

You overlook the fact that as you make such a claim, ALPA's SkyWest organizers are fielding questions about the RJDC on the official SkyWest organizing web site (see the re-prints in this same thread.) Likewise, you overlook the fact in the failed drives at Colgan and Chicago Express, ALPA's own organizers downloaded and distributed materials from the RJDC's web site.

If ALPA's conduct isn't an issue, why would ALPA's organizers see the need to field questions about the RJDC on its official organizing web site(s) and quote from the RJDC's materials?

Again, I personally have not received a single question in relation to the RJDC on any organizing event at either Colgan or Skywest, and I've talked with hundreds of pilots. If a Skywest pilot emailed this question, then he's a rarity. Most pilots have more important questions on their minds.

(4) Finally you overlook the point that ALPA is 0-4 in "small jet" organizing drives and that it now has postponed calling for another vote at SkyWest. It must be pointed out that any assertion that you or the folks in D.C. are attuned to the concerns of the SkyWest and Colgan pilots is not being reflected at the ballot box.

You have to look at each drive individually. The Colgan drive has been unbelievably successful so far. In just a few weeks, we have already collected far more cards than are required to petition for a vote. The ALPA staff has been very pleased with our progress, and I expect that we'll have received our goal on the cards within a few short weeks. Skywest hasn't gone nearly as quickly, but we're still making progress. I'm hoping that we'll be able to petition for a vote early this fall. We already have well over the minimum number of cards, but we like to have a strong majority. Not to mention that the Capital Cargo pilots have just merged with ALPA, the Evergreen pilots have stated their intent to merge with us, and the JetBlue pilots have had several meetings in Herndon to get the organizing process started. Other efforts are also underway. I think we'll see our membership roster grow considerably in the next few years.