Tommy Boy
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 25, 2005
- Posts
- 99
From: Bob Tyler
To: All_PIC; All_SIC
Sent: Tue Jan 17 17:14:05 2006
Subject: NMB's "laboratory period" information
January 18, 2006
To each Flight Options Pilot:
As indicated in my last letter, I will continue to share with you the
status of the Teamsters on-going union drive. As of this moment, the National Mediation
Board (NMB) has not authorized an election. We expect the NMB to make an announcement
sometime after January 20, 2006. If an election is authorized, we will let you
know immediately. For future updates, please access www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com
<http://www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com/> . In the meantime, I'd like to address
an issue of concern to a great many of us. That's the claim by union organizers
that the law requires the Company to announce and implement increases in pilot pay
during the election period.
TEAMSTERS STEER FLIGHT OPTIONS PILOTS OFF COURSE
It's no secret that, like our competitors, Flight Options is striving to turn a
profit. It's also no secret that, like our competitors, Flight Options continually
evaluates its employment compensation and benefit programs, as well as its policies
and procedures, with the goal of remaining true to our Go-Forward business plan.
However, unlike our competitors, our company finds itself faced with a representation
application filed by the Teamsters with the NMB. Many of you have asked me, "What
does that mean to the pilot group?" Essentially, it means the Company's hands
are tied. Among other restrictions, in order to comply with both the Railway Labor
Act and NMB precedent, Flight Options cannot announce or make changes in pilot pay
and benefits that were not finalized prior to the start of what the NMB calls the
"laboratory period" or "laboratory conditions." Given the Teamsters'
filing of the application, we are clearly under laboratory conditions.
However, we've been told union organizers are inciting our pilots by saying the
law requires the Company to move forward with finalizing its compensation program
regardless of the Teamsters' pending NMB application. If that's what you have heard,
it's simply not true. There's no other way to say it. The union knows, while in
the laboratory period, Flight Options is prohibited from giving unscheduled and
previously unannounced pay and/or benefit increases. Any claim to the contrary
has no basis in the law. It's only meant to confuse and anger you. It's really
unfortunate that by making this outrageous claim, the union organizers have diverted
your attention away from the real issue at the heart of this campaign. That is...do
you want the Teamsters Airline Division and its director, Don Treichler, to speak
for you or do you want to speak for yourself? It's that simple.
THE STATUS OF THE LAW
If you don't know who to believe on what the law requires of an air
carrier during a union drive, let the NMB's written decisions answer for you. There
are a number of decisions that deal with the issue of pay increases during a union
election. For example, in December of 2000, the NMB found that American Trans Air
(ATA) improperly interfered with the union election among its ramp employees due
to: (1) ATA's announcement of a wage increase and implementation of shift differentials
during the laboratory period and (2) the timing of the announcement which came on
the day the ballots for voting were mailed to employees. This decision is cited
as American Trans Air, 28 NMB 163 (2000).
In that case, the International Association of Machinists (IAM) lost an election
to represent the ATA ramp employees. Following the election, the IAM filed election
interference charges with the NMB claiming that ATA interfered with the election
by, among other things, giving a pay increase and implementing shift differentials
during the election. The IAM requested a re-run election. In its written decision,
the NMB said that increases in pay during the laboratory period will act to "taint"
an election, except in cases where the changes were planned before the start of
the laboratory period or if there is clear and convincing evidence of a compelling
business reason.
In response to the IAM's charges, ATA provided evidence that it had started the
process of evaluating increases in pay for ramp employees (and other employee groups)
nearly ten months prior to the union election, but was unable to complete the compensation
plan and gain final approval to implement the changes, prior to the election period.
This is almost exactly what happened here at Flight Options. We started evaluating
pay, domicile, working conditions, and other changes for pilots months ago, but
we had not completed the plan and so we had not received final approval prior to
the laboratory period.
ATA also claimed that severe attrition provided a compelling business reason to
implement the changes in compensation. Nonetheless, the NMB rejected ATA's arguments
and held that the carrier interfered with the election and overturned the results.
Specifically, the NMB found it relevant that: (1) ATA did not finalize its compensation
plan until after the laboratory period began; (2) the ramp employees were not aware
of the amount or timing of the increase prior to the announcement; and (3) the increase
coincided with the IAM's organizing efforts. As ATA did not finalize its compensation
plan until after the laboratory period began neither did we. Oh, so what happened
after NMB ruled that ATA had interfered? A re-run election was held and the IAM
won the re-run election.
There are other NMB decisions that discuss the legality of offering pay increases
and/or making changes in benefits and other working conditions during the laboratory
period. For example, Evergreen International, 20 NMB 675 (1993), involved a Teamster
pilot campaign and the issue of Evergreen's giving of per diem pay and reserve pay
for pilots after the Teamsters election was authorized by the NMB. The NMB found
that this factor, among others, undermined the pilots' "prospects for making
an independent judgment as to their choice of representative," and ordered
a re-run election. If the union disagrees with the status of the law as I just
explained it, we would invite them to provide you and the Company with legal authority
supporting its position.
FLIGHT OPTIONS PILOTS ARE URGED TO GET BACK ON COURSE
The tactics the union organizers have employed so far, specifically the name calling
and twisting of the truth, are not new. They are meant to provoke you into signing
up with the Teamsters. Maybe it happens in every union drive. It's just like a
political candidate who tries to skirt the issues and cast blame and doubt on his
opponent. I urge each of you to get back on course. Try to focus on the decision
before you. That is, do you want to be a Teamster? It's your choice and yours
alone to make. We hope you'll make a decision based on substantiated facts, not
rhetoric.
WHAT'S NEXT
The PMs, APMs and flight operations team members are learning about the realities
of Teamster representation; we urge you to do the same. We also understand that
you want the truth, not propaganda. So, in order to stop the spreading of misinformation
and half-truths, we invite you to speak openly with your fellow pilots and the PMs
and APMs about this union. Don't be afraid to ask the tough questions. If we don't
know the answer right away, we'll do the research and get back to you. In considering
whether to reject or accept union representation, we think it's critical you understand
the Teamsters' leadership, its past history in the airline industry, and the protracted
nature of collective bargaining. As this election process moves forward, we will
provide you with information about the Teamsters which will focus on their history
of representation; the length of time it takes on average to negotiate a first contract
with the Teamsters; the financial obligations that go with Teamsters' representation;
the loss of Teamsters' representation at other airlines; and how the Teamsters'
union spends its members' money.
Remember, this is Your Company and Your Options. For future updates, please access
www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com <http://www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com/> .
Best regards,
Bob Tyler
Vice President, Flight Operations
To: All_PIC; All_SIC
Sent: Tue Jan 17 17:14:05 2006
Subject: NMB's "laboratory period" information
January 18, 2006
To each Flight Options Pilot:
As indicated in my last letter, I will continue to share with you the
status of the Teamsters on-going union drive. As of this moment, the National Mediation
Board (NMB) has not authorized an election. We expect the NMB to make an announcement
sometime after January 20, 2006. If an election is authorized, we will let you
know immediately. For future updates, please access www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com
<http://www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com/> . In the meantime, I'd like to address
an issue of concern to a great many of us. That's the claim by union organizers
that the law requires the Company to announce and implement increases in pilot pay
during the election period.
TEAMSTERS STEER FLIGHT OPTIONS PILOTS OFF COURSE
It's no secret that, like our competitors, Flight Options is striving to turn a
profit. It's also no secret that, like our competitors, Flight Options continually
evaluates its employment compensation and benefit programs, as well as its policies
and procedures, with the goal of remaining true to our Go-Forward business plan.
However, unlike our competitors, our company finds itself faced with a representation
application filed by the Teamsters with the NMB. Many of you have asked me, "What
does that mean to the pilot group?" Essentially, it means the Company's hands
are tied. Among other restrictions, in order to comply with both the Railway Labor
Act and NMB precedent, Flight Options cannot announce or make changes in pilot pay
and benefits that were not finalized prior to the start of what the NMB calls the
"laboratory period" or "laboratory conditions." Given the Teamsters'
filing of the application, we are clearly under laboratory conditions.
However, we've been told union organizers are inciting our pilots by saying the
law requires the Company to move forward with finalizing its compensation program
regardless of the Teamsters' pending NMB application. If that's what you have heard,
it's simply not true. There's no other way to say it. The union knows, while in
the laboratory period, Flight Options is prohibited from giving unscheduled and
previously unannounced pay and/or benefit increases. Any claim to the contrary
has no basis in the law. It's only meant to confuse and anger you. It's really
unfortunate that by making this outrageous claim, the union organizers have diverted
your attention away from the real issue at the heart of this campaign. That is...do
you want the Teamsters Airline Division and its director, Don Treichler, to speak
for you or do you want to speak for yourself? It's that simple.
THE STATUS OF THE LAW
If you don't know who to believe on what the law requires of an air
carrier during a union drive, let the NMB's written decisions answer for you. There
are a number of decisions that deal with the issue of pay increases during a union
election. For example, in December of 2000, the NMB found that American Trans Air
(ATA) improperly interfered with the union election among its ramp employees due
to: (1) ATA's announcement of a wage increase and implementation of shift differentials
during the laboratory period and (2) the timing of the announcement which came on
the day the ballots for voting were mailed to employees. This decision is cited
as American Trans Air, 28 NMB 163 (2000).
In that case, the International Association of Machinists (IAM) lost an election
to represent the ATA ramp employees. Following the election, the IAM filed election
interference charges with the NMB claiming that ATA interfered with the election
by, among other things, giving a pay increase and implementing shift differentials
during the election. The IAM requested a re-run election. In its written decision,
the NMB said that increases in pay during the laboratory period will act to "taint"
an election, except in cases where the changes were planned before the start of
the laboratory period or if there is clear and convincing evidence of a compelling
business reason.
In response to the IAM's charges, ATA provided evidence that it had started the
process of evaluating increases in pay for ramp employees (and other employee groups)
nearly ten months prior to the union election, but was unable to complete the compensation
plan and gain final approval to implement the changes, prior to the election period.
This is almost exactly what happened here at Flight Options. We started evaluating
pay, domicile, working conditions, and other changes for pilots months ago, but
we had not completed the plan and so we had not received final approval prior to
the laboratory period.
ATA also claimed that severe attrition provided a compelling business reason to
implement the changes in compensation. Nonetheless, the NMB rejected ATA's arguments
and held that the carrier interfered with the election and overturned the results.
Specifically, the NMB found it relevant that: (1) ATA did not finalize its compensation
plan until after the laboratory period began; (2) the ramp employees were not aware
of the amount or timing of the increase prior to the announcement; and (3) the increase
coincided with the IAM's organizing efforts. As ATA did not finalize its compensation
plan until after the laboratory period began neither did we. Oh, so what happened
after NMB ruled that ATA had interfered? A re-run election was held and the IAM
won the re-run election.
There are other NMB decisions that discuss the legality of offering pay increases
and/or making changes in benefits and other working conditions during the laboratory
period. For example, Evergreen International, 20 NMB 675 (1993), involved a Teamster
pilot campaign and the issue of Evergreen's giving of per diem pay and reserve pay
for pilots after the Teamsters election was authorized by the NMB. The NMB found
that this factor, among others, undermined the pilots' "prospects for making
an independent judgment as to their choice of representative," and ordered
a re-run election. If the union disagrees with the status of the law as I just
explained it, we would invite them to provide you and the Company with legal authority
supporting its position.
FLIGHT OPTIONS PILOTS ARE URGED TO GET BACK ON COURSE
The tactics the union organizers have employed so far, specifically the name calling
and twisting of the truth, are not new. They are meant to provoke you into signing
up with the Teamsters. Maybe it happens in every union drive. It's just like a
political candidate who tries to skirt the issues and cast blame and doubt on his
opponent. I urge each of you to get back on course. Try to focus on the decision
before you. That is, do you want to be a Teamster? It's your choice and yours
alone to make. We hope you'll make a decision based on substantiated facts, not
rhetoric.
WHAT'S NEXT
The PMs, APMs and flight operations team members are learning about the realities
of Teamster representation; we urge you to do the same. We also understand that
you want the truth, not propaganda. So, in order to stop the spreading of misinformation
and half-truths, we invite you to speak openly with your fellow pilots and the PMs
and APMs about this union. Don't be afraid to ask the tough questions. If we don't
know the answer right away, we'll do the research and get back to you. In considering
whether to reject or accept union representation, we think it's critical you understand
the Teamsters' leadership, its past history in the airline industry, and the protracted
nature of collective bargaining. As this election process moves forward, we will
provide you with information about the Teamsters which will focus on their history
of representation; the length of time it takes on average to negotiate a first contract
with the Teamsters; the financial obligations that go with Teamsters' representation;
the loss of Teamsters' representation at other airlines; and how the Teamsters'
union spends its members' money.
Remember, this is Your Company and Your Options. For future updates, please access
www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com <http://www.yourcompanyyouroptions.com/> .
Best regards,
Bob Tyler
Vice President, Flight Operations
