Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Friendliest aviation Ccmmunity on the web
  • Modern site for PC's, Phones, Tablets - no 3rd party apps required
  • Ask questions, help others, promote aviation
  • Share the passion for aviation
  • Invite everyone to Flightinfo.com and let's have fun

AA Pilot Leader Wants America West Pilots in Seniority Talks - Article

Welcome to Flightinfo.com

  • Register now and join the discussion
  • Modern secure site, no 3rd party apps required
  • Invite your friends
  • Share the passion of aviation
  • Friendliest aviation community on the web

Heavy Set

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 28, 2002
Posts
2,277
See article below.


American Pilot Leader: 'America West Pilots Should Join Seniority Talks'

Two unions and a series of federal judges have tried unsuccessfully to fix the problems unleashed by a controversial arbitrator?s pilot seniority ruling following the 2005 merger of America West and US Airways.

Now the Allied Pilots Association, which represents the 15,000 pilots at American Airlines, will have its turn.

The first step, said APA President Keith Wilson, is to give the America West pilots a seat at the table, allowing them to present a list and argue in its favor in seniority integration discussions.

We will make sure everybody gets a shot, Wilson said, in an interview. We have a duty of fair representation, to be sure all the members are equally represented. We will remain neutral in a lot of ways, but we will sure all members are represented in the arbitration process.

Wilson understands the difficulty of the eight-year battle over seniority integration at US Airways, and during an hour-long interview he scrupulously avoided providing any indication of his feelings on the controversial 2007 Nicolau seniority arbitration ruling, which has divided pilots ever since.

The flawed ruling, which resulted from binding arbitration, has never been implemented resulting in separate seniority lists within the pilot ranks at US Airways, nine years after the merger.

The arbitration was conducted under the aegis of the Air Line Pilots Association. Afterwards, US Airways pilots voted to leave ALPA and create the US Airline Pilots Association. America West pilots, who represented about a third of the pilot group, were dragged along.

The APA process will likely involve two arbitrations. In the first, three arbitrators will decide whether America West pilots should be involved in merger discussions. Wilson said he helps that process will be completed by the end of the year.

The second arbitration will proceed if, as seems likely, the pilot groups fail to develop a list in merger discussions. Wilson wants America West pilots involved in those discussions.

As a model for seniority integration, Wilson said he looks to the Delta/Northwest integration.

In that case, he said, the list was developed in such a way that ten years down the road it will be fair and equitable. He noted that pilots? career expectations were generally met. Now, he said, Delta is running on all cylinders. That is what we want to do.

Among the problems arbitrators confronted was that many senior Delta pilots retired before the bankruptcy, which ?put younger guys at Delta on a higher level, Wilson said. But the final list generally met the goal of satisfying pilots who had widebody expectations when they were hired.
It is the arbitrators, not pilot leaders, who make the final determinations, Wilson noted. But he said that what he wants, in the end, is a list that American pilots generally view as fair.

APA already has collected 3,400 applications from US Airways pilots, the vast majority of active pilots.

Wilson declined to comment specifically on the other major recent pilot seniority ruling, which followed the United/Continental Continental merger. In that case, arbitrators decided that a proposal from Continental pilots was overly ambitious and therefore generally accepted a proposal from United pilots leaving some pilots unhappy.

Some pilot sources say that in the American/US Airways seniority discussions, all three likely parties will take the lesson of the United/Continental case to mean they should seek moderate solutions.

That could help to provide arbitrators in the APA process with a situation where they can craft a broadly acceptable seniority list an outcome that so far has eluded everybody else.


Link below:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed...should-join-seniority-talks/?partner=yahootix
 
Last edited:
I am not sure I trust the AA pilots who were so "generous" with the Reno Air and TWA pilots...
 
Last edited:
APA hates the Nic. They understand it was a flawed list and want to bury it deep in a hole. Nic is gone forever.
No lottery ticket for the America West pilots.
 
APA hates the Nic. They understand it was a flawed list and want to bury it deep in a hole. Nic is gone forever.
No lottery ticket for the America West pilots.

If they are included in the negotiations their situation will likely improve over the status quo. Everyone inherently knows that agreeing to having a binding arbitration process and then disagreeing with/nullifying the result just because you don't like that ruling is unfair...
 
See article below.


American Pilot Leader: 'America West Pilots Should Join Seniority Talks'

Two unions and a series of federal judges have tried unsuccessfully to fix the problems unleashed by a controversial arbitrator?s pilot seniority ruling following the 2005 merger of America West and US Airways.

Now the Allied Pilots Association, which represents the 15,000 pilots at American Airlines, will have its turn.

The first step, said APA President Keith Wilson, is to give the America West pilots a seat at the table, allowing them to present a list and argue in its favor in seniority integration discussions.

We will make sure everybody gets a shot, Wilson said, in an interview. We have a duty of fair representation, to be sure all the members are equally represented. We will remain neutral in a lot of ways, but we will sure all members are represented in the arbitration process.

Wilson understands the difficulty of the eight-year battle over seniority integration at US Airways, and during an hour-long interview he scrupulously avoided providing any indication of his feelings on the controversial 2007 Nicolau seniority arbitration ruling, which has divided pilots ever since.

The flawed ruling, which resulted from binding arbitration, has never been implemented resulting in separate seniority lists within the pilot ranks at US Airways, nine years after the merger.

The arbitration was conducted under the aegis of the Air Line Pilots Association. Afterwards, US Airways pilots voted to leave ALPA and create the US Airline Pilots Association. America West pilots, who represented about a third of the pilot group, were dragged along.

The APA process will likely involve two arbitrations. In the first, three arbitrators will decide whether America West pilots should be involved in merger discussions. Wilson said he helps that process will be completed by the end of the year.

The second arbitration will proceed if, as seems likely, the pilot groups fail to develop a list in merger discussions. Wilson wants America West pilots involved in those discussions.

As a model for seniority integration, Wilson said he looks to the Delta/Northwest integration.

In that case, he said, the list was developed in such a way that ten years down the road it will be fair and equitable. He noted that pilots? career expectations were generally met. Now, he said, Delta is running on all cylinders. That is what we want to do.

Among the problems arbitrators confronted was that many senior Delta pilots retired before the bankruptcy, which ?put younger guys at Delta on a higher level, Wilson said. But the final list generally met the goal of satisfying pilots who had widebody expectations when they were hired.
It is the arbitrators, not pilot leaders, who make the final determinations, Wilson noted. But he said that what he wants, in the end, is a list that American pilots generally view as fair.

APA already has collected 3,400 applications from US Airways pilots, the vast majority of active pilots.

Wilson declined to comment specifically on the other major recent pilot seniority ruling, which followed the United/Continental Continental merger. In that case, arbitrators decided that a proposal from Continental pilots was overly ambitious and therefore generally accepted a proposal from United pilots leaving some pilots unhappy.

Some pilot sources say that in the American/US Airways seniority discussions, all three likely parties will take the lesson of the United/Continental case to mean they should seek moderate solutions.

That could help to provide arbitrators in the APA process with a situation where they can craft a broadly acceptable seniority list an outcome that so far has eluded everybody else.


Link below:

http://www.forbes.com/sites/tedreed...should-join-seniority-talks/?partner=yahootix







As it should be . USAPA was an abortion clinic
 
Ahh, Nicky. Time to check around your seat and grab your things... the east gravy train is approaching the station.
 
APA hates the Nic. They understand it was a flawed list and want to bury it deep in a hole. Nic is gone forever.
No lottery ticket for the America West pilots.

Oooohhhhh SNAP! This is gettin good! Looks like the APA Chairman wants them involved, something you said wouldn't happen. The first of many things you were and are wrong about. Fannnntastic.



Bye Bye---General Lee
 
It is the arbitrators, not pilot leaders, who make the final determinations, Wilson noted.

If this statement was true, then the Nic would have been implemented nine years ago.

Kieth Wilson better wake up and take notice that the USAPAs of this world can hold a pilot group hostage for going on nine years now.
 
The EASTHOLES are getting the Nic on turbo charged steroids this time around. They were the ones that wanted the do-over. Be careful what you wish for.
 
If they are included in the negotiations their situation will likely improve over the status quo. Everyone inherently knows that agreeing to having a binding arbitration process and then disagreeing with/nullifying the result just because you don't like that ruling is unfair...


Frankly I don't mind if the West gets to participate in the SLI Arbitration pursuant to the Protocol Agreement. It is not an arbitration of past disputes.
 
I am not sure I trust the AA pilots who were so "generous" with the Reno Air and TWA pilots...

I agree.

You've got to read between the lines. This all revolves around attempting to cut-off a potential DFR down the road.

I don't believe for one second that the APA gives two hoots about how and where east or west USAir pilots are slotted relative to each other - only how AA pilots are slotted relative to an overall USAir group. APA doesn't care if their pilot touches an east or west pilot, so long as they're getting the better deal. Everyone will be represented at the table - however, in the event a group gets cornholed, they can't say they weren't given a voice.
 
APA hates the Nic. They understand it was a flawed list and want to bury it deep in a hole. Nic is gone forever.
No lottery ticket for the America West pilots.

Actually it may be helpful if the Nic goes away. No reason for those 517 east pilots to populate the top of the combined list the way they do in the Nic.

The combined arbitration integration will probably be more favorable to the west pilots without the Nicolau list.
 
APA hates the Nic. They understand it was a flawed list and want to bury it deep in a hole. Nic is gone forever.
No lottery ticket for the America West pilots.

Is there a cogent, rational, reason why APA would "hate" a non-implemented ruling which they had nothing to do with? In my opinion, it's as irrational as saying APA "loves" the Nic award.

It would be like me saying, "I really hate that picture frame that my brother received for his birthday from my great uncle 8 years ago." It's a total non sequitur.

The fact that USAir pilots aren't coming to the table with any existing integration, not united as a group, really opens up the overall group for dividing and conquering. In fighting will be a distraction that APA will likely exploit.
 
The EASTHOLES are getting the Nic on turbo charged steroids this time around. They were the ones that wanted the do-over. Be careful what you wish for.

Stupid westicle. Nic is dead. AoL is dead. The rats in PHX are going to take a hit for the greed. The Arbitrators and AA all know who the problem is. You westicles are done.
 
Is there a cogent, rational, reason why APA would "hate" a non-implemented ruling which they had nothing to do with? In my opinion, it's as irrational as saying APA "loves" the Nic award.



It would be like me saying, "I really hate that picture frame that my brother received for his birthday from my great uncle 8 years ago." It's a total non sequitur.



The fact that USAir pilots aren't coming to the table with any existing integration, not united as a group, really opens up the overall group for dividing and conquering. In fighting will be a distraction that APA will likely exploit.


You have a point. It's not part of the status quo and is thus a non sequitur, regardless of who claims emotion over it.

At any rate it is virtually certain to come down to what three arbitrators say.

And everyone will be generally ok with the result, accept for those eager to use arbitration as a way to get payback for perceived past wrongs (whatever they may be, or whoever may have caused them).

The SLI arbitration is about status quo and fair and equitable moving forward.
 
My prediction is that the Nic will stick and the whole of USAPA will be out-USAPA'd.
 
I'm sure you can count on AA's pilots devotion to a fair and equitable merger. Unless you consider the TWA mess.
 
NOT TRUE.

USAPA proved it is possible to Veto an arbitrators ruling

A lot of folks are not clear about what USAPA actually did. USAPA did not "veto" an arbitration award. USAPA in fact did nothing with the Nicolau Award, and doing nothing with it is what made folks upset.

Former members of ALPA merely read the contract carefully and followed an option in it (the 2005 TA that governed the merger)... they chose to do nothing with the Nic....and doing nothing with the Nic was indeed an option legally provided for in the 2005 TA. (The courts have ruled so several times).

The West failed to understand that arbitrations do not have any inherent power.

The contract is what matters. The West never had a DFR because USAir and USAPA both followed the contract... and but for some political grandstanding judges from Arizona, the West would have been able to come to grips with reality sooner.

In the present merger the governing contract requires that a NEW JCBA Contract will be completed before arbitration is started, and once the arbitration award is complete it will immediately be incorporated into the JCBA.

Its all about the contract. The company and the unions know exactly what made the Nicolau Award irrelevant, and they agreed to terms that will avoid those pitfalls.

Just like with every merger since USAir/AWA, the SLI negotiations will be completed, by arbitration if necessary, after the JCBA is finished, and the results will immediately be incorporated into the contract.
 
My prediction is that the Nic will stick and the whole of USAPA will be out-USAPA'd.

Status quo. Three lists. East, west and AA. Relative slotting. The 2005 AWA hires with 8 pilots hired after them should be happy being slotted in with 2013 hires on the east. :D
 
Turtle, what was it that the court said? Something like, "the case was not 'ripe' because there wasn't a change to the status quo - and thus it was difficult to prove demonstrable harm.

I would not be surprised one iota if an arbitration panel treats this as a three-way merger of seniority lists - because as of right now... well, it's three lists.

Personally, I think the whole process of evading implementing the initial award was quite "disingenuous" - but the law isn't concerned with such things.

As a result, I don't believe an arbitrator would force a previous decision made years prior - because that decision was rendered upon the circumstances at that time - a snapshot. The award made the assumption that it would be implemented approximately at that period in time, not 2014/15. Now, to attempt to push all the toothpaste back in the tube is a bit of a tougher task.
 
The problem here is that the Easties didn't like the award, and made sure there was no contract agreed upon unless the Westies gave in on their demands. They wanted the status quo because it kept them separate and the Westies weren't allowed to claim future upgrades in the Eastie's backyard. That's the truth.

And Spaulding, the seperation of the groups kept integration from happening, which kept the Westies in PHX with fewer upgrade opportunities. It's really not much different there in PHX as it was after the binding award. Everyone, including Parker and the Easties, agreed to abide by the award beforehand, and signed on the bottom line. The East and West both had Nicolau as a choice for the arbitrator, and both agreed to his appointment. I think the next 3 arbitrators will pick that up very quick and see the Easties for what they did, which was avoid a binding award by not agreeing to a joint contract unless the Westies gave in on their demands. That doesn't mean the NIC award wasn't fair, he gave a great written explanation, you should read it.



Bye Bye---General Lee
 
Last edited:
Turtle, what was it that the court said? ..


The 9th said (and SCOTUS let stand) that the West lawsuit was not ripe for adjudication until a new contract. A few more lawsuits occurred buy no West claims were sustained. Both USAir and USAPA prevailed in all cases.

But at this point the opinions of the courts are of limited effect because there is a contract that governs how all parties are proceeding. No one is contesting or suing about the provisions of the contract, the Protocol Agreement.

....
I would not be surprised one iota if an arbitration panel treats this as a three-way merger of seniority lists - because as of right now... well, it's three lists.

Personally, I think the whole process of evading implementing the initial award was quite "disingenuous" - but the law isn't concerned with such things.

As a result, I don't believe an arbitrator would force a previous decision made years prior - because that decision was rendered upon the circumstances at that time - a snapshot. The award made the assumption that it would be implemented approximately at that period in time, not 2014/15. Now, to attempt to push all the toothpaste back in the tube is a bit of a tougher task.
As you say there are three lists. Not only are they the status quo, but also the Protocol Agreement stipulates that all participating merger committees indeed agree that the three lists are the status quo. In other words there is by contract no dispute regarding the fairness or equity of the status quo, and thus no arbitration in that regard.
 
A lot of folks are not clear about what USAPA actually did. USAPA did not "veto" an arbitration award. USAPA in fact did nothing with the Nicolau Award, and doing nothing with it is what made folks upset.

Former members of ALPA merely read the contract carefully and followed an option in it (the 2005 TA that governed the merger)... they chose to do nothing with the Nic....and doing nothing with the Nic was indeed an option legally provided for in the 2005 TA. (The courts have ruled so several times).

The West failed to understand that arbitrations do not have any inherent power.

The contract is what matters. The West never had a DFR because USAir and USAPA both followed the contract... and but for some political grandstanding judges from Arizona, the West would have been able to come to grips with reality sooner.

In the present merger the governing contract requires that a NEW JCBA Contract will be completed before arbitration is started, and once the arbitration award is complete it will immediately be incorporated into the JCBA.

Its all about the contract. The company and the unions know exactly what made the Nicolau Award irrelevant, and they agreed to terms that will avoid those pitfalls.

Just like with every merger since USAir/AWA, the SLI negotiations will be completed, by arbitration if necessary, after the JCBA is finished, and the results will immediately be incorporated into the contract.

Since when is it fine to enter into a binding arbitration agreement and then back out of it (or not enforce it) when you don't like the result? How do you define "binding?"

Should not surprise me since so many in our industry get divorced because of infidelity. I see it everywhere. Evidently, "binding" agreements mean little to pilots.
 
Since when is it fine to enter into a binding arbitration agreement and then back out of it (or not enforce it) when you don't like the result? How do you define "binding?"

Should not surprise me since so many in our industry get divorced because of infidelity. I see it everywhere. Evidently, "binding" agreements mean little to pilots.

A contract is a contract. Its terms are truly binding, the fine print and all.

Indeed the 2005 TA that governed our merger was obviously binding... just not in the way the West assumed (and it cost them millions in their failed attempt to force their assumed wishes contrary to the binding contract).

The contract had contingencies that the West demanded (and didn't like when the East used them). To the West's chagrin, they have been bound by court order twice to abide by those contingencies... and a federal judge was bound by court order also.

The contract is binding. Assumptions are not.
 
I would not be surprised one iota if an arbitration panel treats this as a three-way merger of seniority lists - because as of right now... well, it's three lists.
No the arbitration is between the AA list and the US list. They have no reason to re-do the HP/US seniority list as it was completed per all signed agreements and protocols and accepted by the company as the list. USAPA chose to drag out contract implementation my failing to negotiate in good faith, but that doesn't make the NIC invalid. USAPA's feeble argument "that was the other union, not us" (when the members are exactly the same) will be laughed out of court immediately. So too will their so-called "Legitimate Union Purpose" doublespeak which has not been evidenced by any tangible benefits to the membership (including the promised new contract) since it's inception.

If they want to open up the HP/US arbitration, why can't AOL demand that all previous SLI integrations be re-arbitrated?

The panel's choice will be very obvious : NIC+APA= combined SLI using whatever integration methodology they choose. Anything else sets up a protracted and indefensible battle.
 
A contract is a contract. Its terms are truly binding, the fine print and all.

Indeed the 2005 TA that governed our merger was obviously binding... just not in the way the West assumed (and it cost them millions in their failed attempt to force their assumed wishes contrary to the binding contract).

The contract had contingencies that the West demanded (and didn't like when the East used them). To the West's chagrin, they have been bound by court order twice to abide by those contingencies... and a federal judge was bound by court order also.

The contract is binding. Assumptions are not.

If the contract is binding, then why did USAPA disagree or not enforce the Nic award?
 

Latest resources

Back
Top Bottom