1. How can any union (ALPA, Teamster, IBEW, whoever!) provide equal representation to everyone? Is that even physically possible?
It may not be possible, nor is it required. A union must treat its members fairly and provide fair representation, not necessarily equal.
"A union breaches its duty of fair representation if its actions "can fairly be characterized as so far outside a 'wide range of reasonableness' . . . that [they are] wholly 'arbitrary, discriminatory, or in bad faith.'" O'Neill, 499 U.S. at 67 (quotation omitted). Judicial review of union action, however, "'must be highly deferential, recognizing the wide latitude that [unions] need for the effective performance of their bargaining responsibilities.'" Gvozdenovic v. United Air Lines, Inc., 933 F.2d 1100, 1106 (2d Cir. 1991) (quoting O'Neill, 499 U.S. at 67).
"[A] union's actions are arbitrary only if, in light of the factual and legal landscape at the time of the union's actions, the union's behavior is so far outside a 'wide range of reasonableness,' . . . as to be irrational." O'Neill, 499 U.S. at 67 (quoting Ford Motor Co., 345 U.S. at 338). A union's reasoned decision to support the interests of one group of employees over the competing interests of another group does not constitute arbitrary conduct. See, e.g., Haerum v. Air Line Pilots Ass'n, Int'l, 892 F.2d 216, 221 (2d Cir. 1989); Jones v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., 495 F.2d 790, 798 (2d Cir. 1974)."
2. That being said, might it not be a better plan to have smaller unions that have a "tighter" coverage area, so they are not having to be all things to all people?
Economies of scale. ALPA provides resources that would otherwise be prohibitively costly to a small independent union. ALPA also provides a structure which empowers each individual MEC to seek its own contractual goals. Of course each pilot group can decertify ALPA whenever it wants.
3. Supposing this lawsuit succeeds, then what?
Pilots would not be allowed to prevent their company from outsourcing their flying. The dirty little secret at the RJDC is that the entire purpose of the litigation is to put money in their pockets and eliminate scope.
