A Modest Proposal

[DashTrash400]

Ah ok. So you're saying that if the purpose was to increase attrition, it would be illegal, but if you have a defensable excuse as to how it benefits your pilots other than putting pressure on mgmt, it's legit.

Can anybody think of a potential alternative excuse for a hiring moratorium? Maybe "we're concerned that members who join us soon would be in their probationary year during any strike or lockout, so we strongly advise pilots to not accept employment with XYZ airlines until the threat has abated." Mind you, that's not as strong as "Don't sign up or you'll be considered the equivalent of a scab," but the pilot force could fill in the blanks.

 

[A-V-8]

While I support your efforts, anything that changes the Status Quo is an illegal work action. I would think that this would be illegal. Delta's ALPA instructed its union members to stop picking up open time. Flight Cancellations soon followed. ALPA was successfully sued by Delta. It changed the Status Quo. I am no lawyer but I think that ALPA legal will shoot this down.

What we really need in my humble opinion is language that restricts the amount of time a union can be forced to mediate. Like 60 or 90 days and then release would be mandatory. If the union sees the company is negotiating in good faith then they could voluntarily extend mediation.

Just my 2 cents worth.

 

[PCL_128]

Ah ok. So you're saying that if the purpose was to increase attrition, it would be illegal, but if you have a defensable excuse as to how it benefits your pilots other than putting pressure on mgmt, it's legit.

Keep in mind, lots of RLA law is highly theoretical. Only a few sets of circumstances have ever actually been tested by the court system. When ALPA advises against a certain action, it's usually based on legal theory that the Legal department comes up with. Now, this is usually very good theory since the ALPA Legal department has the best RLA attorneys around, but it is still theory. It's not necessarily right, and many ALPA reps feel that Legal is too cautious in many cases. In the case of the career fairs especially, there is dissenting opinion about whether this is a breach of status quo. Until it's tested before the courts, it's all just theory. Legal is only there to provide advice. They don't make policy, and they don't dictate the Association's actions. If the Association decided that it was worth while to take a risk and go against Legal's advisement, then they are certainly free to do so.