ALPA Nat. DOES control MEC bargaining

[~~~^~~~]

For those of you who argue that each MEC is autonomous and that predatory scope is a "local" issue rather than abuse of the exclusive bargaining agent - here it is in ALPA's own words. ALPA National controls bargaining, even when the local MEC ratifies a contract, ALPA National will fight and win in Court to force ALPA National's agenda over the local MEC.

It is my understanding this decision will shut down CC Air resulting in all of their pilots hitting the streets. Oh well, more jets for jobs for mainline pilots...

Court Upholds ALPA’s Rejection Of Concessionary Contract in CCAir Suit

CHARLOTTE, N.C.---A federal district court judge yesterday rejected efforts by Mesa Air Group to judicially impose a concessionary collective bargaining proposal for pilots at its CCAir subsidiary.

The suit was initially brought by a CCAir pilot and then joined by management after the president of the Air Line Pilots Association indicated he would not sign the proposed concessionary contract amendment. Although the proposal had been accepted by CCAir local union leaders and members, ALPA’s Constitution and By-laws requires that its president review and approve each collective bargaining agreement before it can be effective.

 

[Tim47SIP]

Why?

Anyone know why DW has refused to sign the deal. I have hearde all kinds of rumors from retaliation for Freedom to to low of a pay scale for the aircraft. Whats the beef?

 

[MetroSheriff]

For those of you who argue that each MEC is autonomous and that predatory scope is a "local" issue rather than abuse of the exclusive bargaining agent - here it is in ALPA's own words. ALPA National controls bargaining, even when the local MEC ratifies a contract, ALPA National will fight and win in Court to force ALPA National's agenda over the local MEC.

It is my understanding this decision will shut down CC Air resulting in all of their pilots hitting the streets. Oh well, more jets for jobs for mainline pilots...

This is an interesting development. Not sure what the net effect will be. It does however shed some light on the legal interpetations and enforcibility of the ALPA's C&BLs. Goes to show that the judiciary views the Union's internal rules supercede the wants or needs of the individual units that they represent. Takes a bit steam out of the argument that ALPA is not liable for some of the harm it has allowed to be done to some of it members (regional in nature). I know that many that oppose the RJDC movement have argued that ALPA does not ratify a contract, the individual membership does and thereby ALPA is not liable for any damages that subsequently done to other units that they represent. To paraphrase the mainline standpoint on the issue, "ALPA does not negotiate/approve a contract, the individual MEC does, with ALPA acting as agent".

It would seem the judiciary does not agree.

If ALPA has the power to withhold ratification of a contract, it stands to reason that if the courts decide that a gain for one unit has come at the expense of another they do assume culpability (breach of DFR) and liability (financially and otherwise)for negotiating in bad faith.

That is a BIG "if" that has yet to be decided. All the arguing in the world, pro or con, is just hot air. Interesting and important, but at this stage, rhetorric none the less. Only the court can decide, and of that, time will tell.

While I have historically been a vocal opponent of the RJDC, it would seem that this line of reason lends some credibilty to some, not all of their (RJDC) claims, and causes of action.

In so much as the argument for liability, I would say that this sets an imporatant precedent for the courts view of ALPA's role in the collective bargaining process.

As sands thru the hour glass.....

 

[~~~^~~~]

He's got it!

If ALPA has the power to withhold ratification of a contract, it stands to reason that if the courts decide that a gain for one unit has come at the expense of another they do assume culpability (breach of DFR) and liability (financially and otherwise)for negotiating in bad faith.

In so much as the argument for liability, I would say that this sets an imporatant precedent for the courts view of ALPA's role in the collective bargaining process.

Exactly - could not have said it better myself. I believe there are two important points here. (1) The control of the exclusive bargaining agent is established both in law and the union's Constitution. (2) That the union's position is that they are willing to go to Court to enforce this power against a MEC.

This provides a stark contrast to what ALPA is claiming in the issues involving Comair and ASA pilots. Obviously actions speak louder than words.

Again, it is another instance of ALPA confirming the truthfulness of the RJDC's position. This time they did it in Court - even better

 

[csmith]

Re: Re: ALPA Nat. DOES control MEC bargaining

I think it is important to find out why Duane will not sign off on the deal. Much has been written about how ALPA cannot represent the regionals, and favors the majors. You think Duane is not signing it simply because he wants to screw the Mesa guys? That doesn't really make sense.

Does everyone know that Duane also did not/has not signed off on LOA 81 with USAirways? Has he signed off on the subsequest agreement with USAirways? What is the difference between the two agreements?? Think about it.

Many people jump on the sue ALPA bandwagon. I'm not really sure they are thinking it through clearly.


I will attempt to make it clear one more time:

The individual MECs are responsible for negotiating their own agreements. Duane has been quoted as saying that each MEC has wide latitude to negotiate their own agreements. CCAir agreement was negotiated and ratified. The Delta agreement was negotiated and ratified. The Comair agreement was negotiated and ratified. The president of ALPA must then sign off on it. I would imagine it gets the magnifying glass to ensure it complies with ALPA bylaws, does not conflict with another agreement already in place, etc.

A question, if ALPA Natn'l is responsible for negotiations, then why didn't Duane nip this in the bud during negotiations instead of after the TA and subsequent ratification?

Another question, who knows exactly the grounds upon which the agreement was not signed off?

I think quoting a newspaper, they certainly are never wrong, in order to start the uprising is a bit on the irresponsible side.

I have said beofre, the wholly owneds at USAir have a legitimate beef with LOA 81. I have not read enough on the J4J thing to comment intelligently.

More to follow....

CSmith

 

[Caveman]

Keep up the good work Duane! Heck, I might even contribute to ALPA-PAC after this brilliant legal move. ROTFLMAO

 

[ChinaClipper]

This IS smart...

The CCAir guys had been extorted by Jonathan Ornstein and his merry band of union busters in an attempt to find the "new" lowest bidder to fly 70/90 seat jets. Over the course of the ;ast 3 years, Mesa has shrunk CCAir into a manufactured "crisis" to set the stgage for low cost jet flying knowing that Mesa's pilots would soon be in Sec 6. DW saw the danger in this and wisely prevented the CCAir guys from allowing Ornstein a way to put his gazillion 70/90 orders to work for a POS agreement. An agreement BTW that was WORSE than the current Mesa pilots POS 6 year old contract. My biggest problem was the distasteful way that ornstein and Mike Lotz orchestrated the kneecap-busting of a fine group of folks so he can cash in BIG TIME! Fight the SOB now because greed doesn't sleep, and JO and his shysters will still be looking to make a buck, just look at Mesa's union busting Freedom Air. A few Mesa lifers, (approx. 30 Captains or so, out of 1300 pilots) and a slew of fuzzy-faced, 250hr. Mesa Ab initio students($45,000 a pop) as FO's and you have the newest alter-ego operation around. (Can you say "walk to work?")Things are gonna get interesting......

 

[~~~^~~~]

Re: Re: Re: ALPA Nat. DOES control MEC bargaining

I think quoting a newspaper, they certainly are never wrong, in order to start the uprising is a bit on the irresponsible side.

How about quoting direct from ALPA's own press release? The source for my post was none other than the named defendant, ALPA.

And no, it is not a sue ALPA bandwagon. We have tried for years and will continue efforts to resolve this within the union any time ALPA indicates a willingness to follow their Constitution and Bylaws and operate in good faith. Litigation is the last choice after all other possibilities are exhausted.

 

[Draginass]

All the more reason for the regionals to decertify their ALPA affiliation and go it on their own.

 

[csmith]

Re: Re: Re: Re: ALPA Nat. DOES control MEC bargaining

How about quoting direct from ALPA's own press release? The source for my post was none other than the named defendant, ALPA.

And no, it is not a sue ALPA bandwagon. We have tried for years and will continue efforts to resolve this within the union any time ALPA indicates a willingness to follow their Constitution and Bylaws and operate in good faith. Litigation is the last choice after all other possibilities are exhausted.

I nitice, Fins, that you quote the LEAST important part of my post, respond, and neglect to address the "meat" of the issues. I suggest that you read China's post above. You want leadership, I say that Duane is displaying the highest form of leadership.

CSmith