Goodbye usapa!!!!!!

[SWA Bubba]

While I agree with waveflyer on the East/West debacle, the above is certainly true. Binding arbitration and sticking to your word is apparently only important to waveflyer when he isn't involved.

Whether you like it or not, in the Southwest/AirTran SLI, the written agreements were stuck to. There was "hardball" played by both sides, but all the written agreements were adhered to. The only pending legal/NMB action is against your union (ALPA), and no one else.

Some people on both sides are unhappy, and bitch about the result. However, if we had gotten to binding arbitration as per the agreements (which we did not), then we would have gone along with the results. And arguably, the exact same people would still be unhappy and bitching.

By the way, how did this suddenly morph into an AirTran/Southwest thing? I thought this thread was about USAPA. Back to East vs. West: "You suck!".... "Well, you suck more!"

Bubba

 

[PCL_128]

Bubba (a fitting name), while what you say is technically true, the threat was that the agreements would not be adhered to. I didn't see you or waveflyer screaming about how that threat was dishonest or unfair. So you need to "own it." Chiming in on an Airways thread and taking USAPA to task for doing exactly what you threatened to do (not honor binding arbitration) is the height of hypocrisy.

 

[C Festerpuss]

I doesn't know much bout the law n such. I think that the Confederate Air Line Pilots association should represent all of the piluts. We can have a big barbeque, greased pig ketchen contest and after everbody is liquored up we can have a shoot off.

some guy done says this bout the merger

For those of you who "believe" that USAPA loses all representational rights if and when APA becomes the certified bargaining agent for all of us you might wish to read what Judge Silver read and the corresponding case law. I'll post the links but the important part is that the MOU controls who represents "the parties" going into it which is APA and USAPA. Reading section 26 of the MOU and corresponding case law it becomes legally clear that Agency Law is the controlling law and McCaskill-Bond leaves APA, AMR and the USAPA merger committee to finish what is already memorialized in the MOU.

Here is what Judge Silver READ (starting on page 33):
http://www.americanb...uthcheckdam.pdf

Here is Thomas v. Republic Airways Holdings, Inc.:
http://www.leagle.co...DCO 20120305528

By way of example:
Quote

"Thus, sections 3 and 13 of the CAB's labor protective provisions in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger became statutory law.

The Midwest/RAH merger closed on July 31, 2009. The Frontier/RAH merger closed on October 1, 2009.​

The unions representing the pilots of the six airlines formed merger committees to negotiate an agreement with RAH to resolve the issue of seniority integration in accordance with sections 3 and 13 of the labor protective provisions enacted by the McCaskill-Bond Amendment and provided in the collective bargaining agreements. Those negotiations resulted in an agreement, effective November 3, 2009, entitled Section 13(

Dispute Resolution Agreement (Agreement)."​

​

Here are two examples explaining the Law of Agency:

http://en.wikipedia....i/Law_of_agency

http://legal-diction...nary.com/agency

If you READ THE MOU USAPA will NOT lose it's right under the MTA to complete the process outlined under the Law of Agency as outlined in 5. 6. 10.f 10.g & 26. through 29.

Quote

"5. US Airways, and its successors, if any, shall continue to recognize and treat with USAPA as the representative of the pilots employed by US Airways until another representative for the pilot craft or class is certified by the National Mediation Board (the "NMB"). Subject to the provisions of Paragraph 27, negotiations to convert this Memorandum and the MTA into the JCBA and any implementation or other interim agreement, if any, shall be conducted with USAPA and APA jointly, until such time as one union is certified by the NMB to be the collective bargaining representative of the combined pilot craft or class. At that time, the duly-certified representative shall have exclusive authority to negotiate on behalf of the pilots with respect to the JCBA. It is the Parties' intention that the JCBA shall replace any and all prior collective bargaining agreements for USAPA; however, for APA, the JCBA shall be an amendment to the MTA.

6. During the period US Airways is obligated to bargain with USAPA, it will provide information requested by duly authorized representatives of USAPA's Negotiating Advisory and Merger Committees that is reasonably related to the Merger, subject to the execution of standard confidentiality agreements by USAPA and/or affected individuals upon US Airways' request. US Airways will similarly provide such information on such conditions to APA. Notwithstanding the foregoing, US Airways shall continue to supply information pursuant to Attachment M of the Basic East Agreement in matters unrelated to the Merger.


10f. A Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement ("Protocol Agreement") consistent with McCaskill-Bond and this Paragraph 10 will be agreed upon within 30 days of the Effective Date. The Protocol Agreement will set forth the process and protocol for conducting negotiations and arbitration, if applicable, and will include a methodology for allocating the reimbursement provided for in Paragraph 7. The company(ies) will be parties to the arbitration, if any, in accordance with McCaskill-Bond. The company(ies) shall provide information requested by the merger representatives for use in the arbitration, if any, in accordance with requirements of McCaskill-Bond, provided that the information is relevant to the issues involved in the arbitration, and the requests are reasonable and do not impose undue burden or expense, and so long as the merger representatives agree to
appropriate confidentiality terms.

10g. This Memorandum is not a waiver of any argument that participants may make in the seniority integration process. Nor do the provisions of this Memorandum constitute an admission as to the appropriate allocation of flying following the expiration of the protections in Paragraph 8 of this Memorandum, or the manner in which the respective pre-merger carriers would have operated in the absence of a merger, or the job entitlements or equities that arguably underlie the construction of an integrated seniority list, or for any other purpose. This Memorandum may be offered into evidence or shown to a mediator as background information and to describe the actual operations of the separate carriers prior to expiration of the protections in Paragraph 8 of this Memorandum.


26. APA shall file a single carrier petition with the NMB as soon as practicable after the Effective Date, when APA determines that the facts support the legal requirements for the filing of a petition but in no event later than four months after the Effective Date. If and when the NMB makes a single carrier finding, the single carrier acknowledged by the NMB and the certified representative shall be governed by this Memorandum.

27. If and when the NMB makes a single-carrier finding, the organization certified to represent the pilots of the single carrier, the single carrier acknowledged by the NMB and the certified organization shall promptly engage or re-engage in negotiations to achieve a JCBA to be applicable to the carrier that will be the product of the Merger. In the event that such negotiations are not completed within 30 days of the NMB's certification, New American Airlines will offer final and binding interest arbitration under Section 7 of the RLA, and the organization will accept such proffer, to resolve once and for all the terms of the JCBA. The arbitration decision shall be issued no later than 60 days after the close of the 30-day negotiation period. A panel of three arbitrators led by Richard Bloch shall serve as the arbitrators for this process. If Arbitrator Bloch declines to serve in this capacity or is unable to resolve the parties? dispute, the parties shall select another arbitrator. The arbitrator?s jurisdiction and award will be limited to fashioning provisions which are consistent with the terms of the MTA, including provisions which implement the terms of the MTA or facilitate the integration of pilots under the terms of the MTA. The arbitrator?s award specifically shall adhere to the economic terms of the MTA and shall not change the MTA?s Scope terms (Paragraph 25 of this Memorandum) or the modifications generated through the process set forth in Paragraph 24 of this Memorandum.

28. US Airways and USAPA agree to be bound and abide by the arbitration decision contemplated by Letter of Agreement 12-05 of the 2012 CBA. Nothing in the MTA shall modify the decision of the arbitration panel thereunder.

29. Attachment C summarizes the timelines prescribed by this Memorandum for the creation of the MTA, JCBA, and integrated seniority list and shall not prevent the Parties from developing the JCBA earlier."

​

I have posted here what the LAW says. Unfortunately, Judge Silvers "dicta" through all of this has been the driving force behind the FUD. DO NOT FALL FOR IT.

In sum total, whether APA survives as the representative or USAPA, both THE COMPANY AND THE SURVIVING REPRESENTATIVE ARE BOUND BY THE TERMS OF THE MOU.


I votes for the Confederate Airline Pilots Association!

 

[General Lee]

Bubba (a fitting name), while what you say is technically true, the threat was that the agreements would not be adhered to. I didn't see you or waveflyer screaming about how that threat was dishonest or unfair. So you need to "own it." Chiming in on an Airways thread and taking USAPA to task for doing exactly what you threatened to do (not honor binding arbitration) is the height of hypocrisy.

The Corndogs still think you should thank them profusely for them even allowing you to join their seniority list.....even though your airline brought 737s and options to the merger.... And nobody was allowed to remain left seat on the 737? And then they were subjected to a 42 day school to go to the RIGHT seat???? Huhh??? The FNWA guys on the 757 actually got to stay in their seats, and got to do touch and goes in an empty 767 before flying them, plus a 10 hour CD they had to do on the computer...... Hmmm.



Bye Bye---General Lee

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Enjoy the show,
Urkel just stepped into the octagon with The Rock. Oh yeah and the Rock has a flame thrower and doesn't mind a few flash burns. Getting the popcorn ready, a carafe of bourbon and the easy chair warmed up!

 

[becket]

USAPA has been ordered to evaporate when the APA takes over. Expect more lawsuits the second USCCABA refuses to believe that they have been destroyed.

 

[Bringupthebird]

Festers got it wrong (but what do you expect from folks who rely on their BPR for info). APA will be the duly elected representative. They will not have to be bound by the predecessor union's agreements (sound familiar?).

Tasty, isn't it?

 

[Guppiedriver]

in sum total, whether apa survives as the representative or usapa, both the company and the surviving representative are bound by the terms of the mou.

lol!....

 

[Guppiedriver]

I don't think they are trying to fight it, just assert that USAPA will be the representative for the SLI until it is complete. That is defined in the Allegheny-Mohawk LPP's which are mandated in the MOU. I think they are just clarifying that USAPA Will continue to be involved in the SLI if it's not complete before the NMB determines single carrier status for the new American Airlines...

I think the SLI will be completed before the NMB rules single carrier. Because of the laundry list items the NMB must determine, it's going to take a while. Probably 6 months as suggested...

The APA doesn't agree with you.


Petition for Single-Carrier Status

Your APA leadership has received several inquiries from members regarding our filing of a petition for single-carrier status with the National Mediation Board (NMB) earlier this week. Some members have also read the update that the US Airline Pilots Association (USAPA) issued yesterday, which characterized the filing as "premature" and asserted that a single-carrier filing would be timely only after an integrated seniority list is completed.
To be clear, APA's filing complies with the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) mutually agreed to by American Airlines, US Airways, APA and USAPA. The MOU stipulates the following:

APA shall file a single carrier petition with the NMB as soon as practicable after the Effective Date, when APA determines that the facts support the legal requirements for the filing of a petition but in no event later than four months after the Effective Date.


The term "Effective Date" refers to the date of the merger between American Airlines and US Airways, which was Dec. 9, 2013.
Consistent with that provision of the MOU and based on information American Airlines filed with the NMB last week, APA determined that the facts support the legal requirements for the filing of a petition. The completion of an integrated seniority list is not a mandatory pre-condition for a single-carrier finding by the NMB. Actually, in the vast majority of significant airline mergers, the NMB has found a single carrier before the completion of seniority integration.

The USAPA update also asserted that "the McCaskill-Bond Amendment contemplates the continued independent representation of each pre-merger bargaining unit throughout the process of seniority integration." This statement suggests that USAPA would continue to serve in its current capacity even after the NMB certifies a single bargaining representative. However, as Judge Silver notes in her Jan. 10 decision in the Addington case, "when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration."

The APA Seniority Integration Committee will continue to pursue the negotiation of a seniority integration protocol with USAPA and American Airlines, as required by the MOU. This protocol will establish the rules of engagement for APA and USAPA going forward.

APA will provide updates as appropriate during what will likely be a lengthy and complex seniority integration process.

 

[Bringupthebird]

The sweet sound of maturity.

 

[Boeing747Driver]

However, as Judge Silver notes in her Jan. 10 decision in the Addington case, "when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration."

 

[St. Nic]

Silver got it wrong. Shes a dingbat judge from the dessert. USAPA isnt going any where. Sorry to burst the westicles bubble

 

[Boeing747Driver]

St. NIC is getting the NIC.

 

[71driver]

Whether you like it or not, in the Southwest/AirTran SLI, the written agreements were stuck to. There was "hardball" played by both sides, but all the written agreements were adhered to. The only pending legal/NMB action is against your union (ALPA), and no one else.

Some people on both sides are unhappy, and bitch about the result. However, if we had gotten to binding arbitration as per the agreements (which we did not), then we would have gone along with the results. And arguably, the exact same people would still be unhappy and bitching.

By the way, how did this suddenly morph into an AirTran/Southwest thing? I thought this thread was about USAPA. Back to East vs. West: "You suck!".... "Well, you suck more!"

Bubba

Bubba,

You are forgetting a very significant part of that highlight. We were told "take the tird sandwich or you WILL ultimately lose your job"

Anywho I understand why the Southwest guys are unhappy....they didn't get their organic growth...I get that. Many of us at Airtran would have preferred to stay a stand alone airline and just swap out our CEO for someone with a set of balls.

What I don't understand.....is the collective inability of the Southwest Pilot to understand why many of us at AT are upset...losing 25%-33% of your seniority/quality of life/and Captani seat....and in many cases being to old to recapture it...in addition too that having ATL's base practically shut down forcing many of us to commute.
I don't know if it's denial, ignorance or arrogance but it has played a significant role in the anomosity between the 2 groups

buenes nachos

 

[SWA Bubba]

Bubba (a fitting name), while what you say is technically true, the threat was that the agreements would not be adhered to. I didn't see you or waveflyer screaming about how that threat was dishonest or unfair. So you need to "own it." Chiming in on an Airways thread and taking USAPA to task for doing exactly what you threatened to do (not honor binding arbitration) is the height of hypocrisy.

Union Thug (a very fitting moniker for you as well),

Nobody at Southwest ever threatened to "not honor binding arbitration." Ever. You're wrong about that, and it's nothing like USAir east, no matter how indignant you feel. Essentially, what Gary did was force you to put an agreement to a vote. And he did that only after ALPA made it clear that it had no intention of putting any agreement to a vote; its only desire was to wait it out until arbitration (ALPA: "the worst we'll get in arbitration is DOH."). And this was after all sides, including ALPA, agreed in the process agreement that they desired a negotiated settlement instead of arbitration, and after Gary made it clear that he wanted every pilot to vote. You played hardball; he responded in turn, forcing you to live up to what you agreed in the PA: Let the pilots vote.

If either agreement had been voted down by the pilots instead of just your gang of 7, then you would have gotten your precious arbitration, just as the agreement stipulated. In my opinion, it would have been similar to what was agreed upon, other than FAT guys who were senior enough to be captains on the overall list probably should be. Personally, I think they should have at transition, instead of waiting until Jan 2015.

Bubba

 

[SWA Bubba]

Bubba,

You are forgetting a very significant part of that highlight. We were told "take the tird sandwich or you WILL ultimately lose your job"

Anywho I understand why the Southwest guys are unhappy....they didn't get their organic growth...I get that. Many of us at Airtran would have preferred to stay a stand alone airline and just swap out our CEO for someone with a set of balls.

What I don't understand.....is the collective inability of the Southwest Pilot to understand why many of us at AT are upset...losing 25%-33% of your seniority/quality of life/and Captani seat....and in many cases being to old to recapture it...in addition too that having ATL's base practically shut down forcing many of us to commute.
I don't know if it's denial, ignorance or arrogance but it has played a significant role in the anomosity between the 2 groups

buenes nachos

Hey, I get it. I know why a lot of you are upset. A lot of us are upset as well. I know that a lot of you would have preferred to stay a stand alone company; but I bet an even higher percentage of us (Southwest pilots, that is) would have preferred that as well. However, that wasn't up to us, anymore than it was up to you.

I'm ready to move on as well; I'm just sick of people like PCL mischaracterizing certain things, to rationalize one of the biggest fukc-ups ever perpetrated on a group of pilots by its "leadership."

Bubba

 

[redflyer65]

What I don't understand.....is the collective inability of the Southwest Pilot to understand why many of us at AT are upset...losing 25%-33% of your seniority/quality of life/and Captani seat....

buenes nachos

And there's your problem 71driver.

Did you really think that you'd keep your 23-33% seniority coming across to a much larger carrier? Please. Your expectations were inflated if that's the case. A career at SW didn't equal a career at AirTran. I'm not saying AirTran wasn't a good gig for many, it just all changed when your CEO hit the cash register.

 

[Guppiedriver]

Silver got it wrong. Shes a dingbat judge from the dessert. USAPA isnt going any where. Sorry to burst the westicles bubble

Unless your union appeals her decision and wins, what she wrote is the law.

It's desert, numbnuts.

 

[PCL_128]

Union Thug (a very fitting moniker for you as well),

Thank you!

Nobody at Southwest ever threatened to "not honor binding arbitration." Ever.

You're either a bad liar or just really clueless. Not only did Gary threaten it, but your very own Steve Chase did as well. Hell, go back and look at the threads from 2010-2011 right here, and you'll see plenty of brethren threatening the same thing.

(ALPA: "the worst we'll get in arbitration is DOH.").

ALPA never said that. More lies.

If either agreement had been voted down by the pilots instead of just your gang of 7, then you would have gotten your precious arbitration, just as the agreement stipulated.

No, according to Gary, we would have been kept separate at best, or shut down and out of our jobs at worst. Not that I actually believe any of those crazy threats, but they were threats, and most of our pilots did believe them.

 

[PCL_128]

Unless your union appeals her decision and wins, what she wrote is the law.

It's desert, numbnuts.

Not quite. That part of the ruling was just her discussion about how she reached her decision. The only part that is "law" is the part at the end. But she certainly handed the APA a great argument on a silver platter.