XJ to get 17 CRJ200's from 9E

[PCL_128]

Your buddy Occam said that a single carrier petition is the first step in merging carriers and that the NWA MEC was persuing it with NWA/Compass/Mesaba. Others, including ALPA national, have pointed out that a single carrier petition is only for determining the bargaining agent, and that if all carriers are already represented by the same agent, a single carrier petition does no good.

Enlighten us.... what is a single carrier petition for? Does it do any good for the NWA MEC to file one if NWA, Compass, and Mesaba are already represented by ALPA?

Occam has many more years of ALPA experience than I do, so I tend to defer to him on these matters. To answer your question, though, I have always had the impression that you were correct about the purpose of a single-carrier petition. That understanding wasn't based on a briefing from ALPA legal, however. That was just my personal understanding as a layman. I asked Occam about this a few weeks ago, and he's told me that my understanding is incorrect. I haven't had a chance to talk with legal about this yet, so I still don't have an "official" answer, but I tend to trust Occam's information. I'll be in Herndon next week, so hopefully I'll have some spare time to stop by and talk with someone from legal about this.

 

[JoeMerchant]

Occam has many more years of ALPA experience than I do, so I tend to defer to him on these matters. To answer your question, though, I have always had the impression that you were correct about the purpose of a single-carrier petition. That understanding wasn't based on a briefing from ALPA legal, however. That was just my personal understanding as a layman. I asked Occam about this a few weeks ago, and he's told me that my understanding is incorrect. I haven't had a chance to talk with legal about this yet, so I still don't have an "official" answer, but I tend to trust Occam's information. I'll be in Herndon next week, so hopefully I'll have some spare time to stop by and talk with someone from legal about this.

That is VERY interesting since ALPA legal has advised the ASA and CMR MECs that a single carrier petition is what you and I understand it to be. If that is incorrect, then ALPA legal has been misinforming the ASA and CMR MECs. Let me know what you find out.....

 

[YourPilotFriend]

I don't know what you guys are arguing about. The fate of these airlinks has already been determined. Single carrier, PID whatever....all has to be what management wants, ALPA does not run the company.

 

[PCL_128]

I don't know what you guys are arguing about. The fate of these airlinks has already been determined. Single carrier, PID whatever....all has to be what management wants, ALPA does not run the company.

Go back to your cubicle, little man.

 

[Occam's Razor]

Occam, you might've spoken to this topic on other threads, but in this thread, you've mostly been dookie-slinging and name calling.

I don't know much about the RJDC and ALPA, but you, sir, seem mighty belligerent.

Fair cop.

Perhaps you'll read the other posts I've made on the topic. It's tough being one of the legacy schmucks that supports integration of our Airlinks in a concert hall full of opera singers ("Me, me, me, meeee") who refuse to accept that there is a cost and risk to list integration. Most of them also believe that they shouldn't bear any of the cost of that process.

It gets old.

 

[N2264J]

So tell me, was Woerth knowingly misleading our attorney under oath or is he just ignorant?

Haber: Is it in fact management that defines when the merger takes place?
Woerth: Managements usually announce mergers, yes.
Haber: I mean in circumstances where it is where one is talking about operational integration and other indicia of that sort, but where there is not a formal legal merger?
Woerth: If there is a merger it is usually a management-announced merger and their plan to integrate is known to the public and to us and that is how mergers occur.
Haber: But ALPA merger policy is defined for something that is less formalistic?
Woerth: No, it is to recognize when it is a rumor of a merger and an actual merger, to distinguish the rumors of a merger and the likelihood of a real merger taking place.
Haber: So, then why would ALPA seek in some instances single carrier determinations from the National Mediation Board despite management's objection?
Woerth: Single carrier representation has nothing to do with mergers. It has that to with representational status of the unions.
Haber: But single representation would be another way of getting what you advocated; right?
Woerth: They are not related at all.
Haber: Why not?
Woerth: Because it just has to do with who is the collective bargaining representative in a single carrier case; teamsters, ALPA, independent. A single carrier just describes who is going to be the bargaining representative.
Haber: At Mesa, for example, ALPA represented all carriers involved, so what was the rationale for seeking National Mediation Board single carrier determination?
MR. MIGLIORE: Object to the form of the question; assumes facts that are not in evidence.
THE WITNESS: I don't know why we sought single carrier determination.​

http://www.rjdefense.com/2006/woerth_xscript.pdfhttp://www.rjdefense.com/2006/woerth_xscript.pdfhttp://www.rjdefense.com/2006/woerth_xscript.pdf

Delta unions disagree on single-carrier status: Delta Air Lines and its pilots union have asked the National Mediation Board for a determination that Delta and Northwest Airlines are now a single carrier -- a move opposed by unions representing Delta flight attendants and ground workers. A quick change in operating status would give Delta "the opportunity to de-unionize the rest of the labor groups," according to the International Association of Machinists. The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

So Razor, let's put aside the anti-union proclivity of the Delta MEC for a moment and ponder this: if a single carrier petition is only useful in determining the bargaining agent as Bill Roberts advised the Comair and ASA MECs and Woerth testified to under oath, why does Delta and Northwest need one? They're already both represented by ALPA.

 

[NuGuy]

So Razor, let's put aside the anti-union proclivity of the Delta MEC for a moment and ponder this: if a single carrier petition is only useful in determining the bargaining agent as Bill Roberts advised the Comair and ASA MECs and Woerth testified to under oath, why does Delta and Northwest need one? They're already both represented by ALPA.

Heyas,

Because this IS about representation...for the other employee groups, some of which are represented, while others are not.

As part of the new contract, ALPA agreed to support a single carrier petition.

Nu