Skywest, ASA DOH integration?

[front9]

SKYW pilots WILL have a seat at the table come Nov. 6. where the hell have you been?

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Hold on a min... you sir are the one that is totally clueless. Please read my post again...you missed the sarcasm (you see where I said "But seriously")

BTW, did you even read my post or just cut and past and get all emotional like you always do? I did not say I would put my life in BH or JA's hand. Do you even work for SKYW or ASA? Do you have a dog in this fight or are you just some flamer?

Have a nice day

Wellll,
I read your post, completely missed your reference to sarcasm. I am quite clueless, I just can't resist jousting with the drinkers of kool-aid. Your sarcasm sounded like kool-aid to me. My dog is in the fight(see left), and he has a vested interest in the fight, you see his food comes from my paycheck.
PBR
P.S. chalk this one up to a hair trigger keyboard!

 

[No.W.]

No matter what, a merger would be hard. With ALPA at both companies...it's going to be better than without. IMHO JA and friends would simply do what costs the least both in time and money. There would be the typical SAPA(if there is no SKWALPA) spin on the agreement and the typical people would bite off on it. There would be some kind of campaign to keep all the SAPA lovers happy. Then, after all is said and done, we would be integrated.

HOWEVER, if ALPA is voted in at SkyWest...things will be at least slightly different. It is my belief that things would be better. That is why I voted yes...at least one reason.

 

[front9]

Its always tough to be sarcastic with just written words alone. The Kool-Aid drinkers such as DL ME and JB will soon be out of their cushy SAPA job. Most likely they will have some management position waiting for them at Skyw come NOV. 6 (special projects just like TF)

I see that you indeed have a vested interest and I for one am in this to protect the interests and career development of SKYW pilots not ASA.

ASA pilots on this board use buzz-words like unity, brotherhood etc etc when they were first bought by SKYW in 05'. They talk about how they would fairly integrate the list had ASA bought us instead.

Now all I see are vicious attacks and threats against SKYW pilots and how they(ASA) are going to merge DOH. Over my dead body they will. Sorry if I get a little passionate about this debate but I strongly believe in SKYW pilots and our future and work hard to make sure that we are protected as a pilot group.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Its always tough to be sarcastic with just written words alone. The Kool-Aid drinkers such as DL ME and JB will soon be out of their cushy SAPA job. Most likely they will have some management position waiting for them at Skyw come NOV. 6 (special projects just like TF)

I see that you indeed have a vested interest and I for one am in this to protect the interests and career development of SKYW pilots not ASA.

ASA pilots on this board use buzz-words like unity, brotherhood etc etc when they were first bought by SKYW in 05'. They talk about how they would fairly integrate the list had ASA bought us instead.

Now all I see are vicious attacks and threats against SKYW pilots and how they(ASA) are going to merge DOH. Over my dead body they will. Sorry if I get a little passionate about this debate but I strongly believe in SKYW pilots and our future and work hard to make sure that we are protected as a pilot group.

Hey,
The only way to insure that we have a seat at the table is to be collectively bargained. SKYW success is in part due to the pilots, and I for one am tired of being looked at as a line item cost. JA and et al started looking at us as a commodity, units that produce a profit margin. They used to care about us, no longer! PBS reserve bucket system, systematic dismantling of our health insurance, all in the interest of profit. If we don't look out for each other who will? BH, DL, DA, TF, KB, et al. Whatever happens will happen, I am a firm believer that the single carrier petition is just on the other side of the vote, only time will tell. I don't listen to St George, I just watch for what is happening and wait to see how it will affect me.
PBR
P.S. Good luck, we are gonna need it if the vote fails. I see the extra delux cornholeing coming our way.

 

[CFI2766]

I know that we're all fairly boring people, with not much going on in our lives, but do you think it might be just a little premature to be discussing this topic with this much passion?

 

[Nevets]

But seriously, if you want to start with DOH at the negotiating table I will make sure we at Skywest start negotiations with STAPLE, cant wait to see you at the table J.P. I have a feeling the judge will throw out the one list anyway and keep us separate.

First, let me start by saying that I don't really have a dog in this fight.

Second, it is NOT premature to have this conversation since Skywest Inc can decide to merge the seniority list tomorrow.

Third, like I said in my previous post, if the seniority list is merged AND Skywest pilots are NOT represented by a union certified by the NMB, then the Skywest pilots would be represented by Skywest management in negotiations, mediation, arbitration, if applicable, with ASA pilots (NOT ASA management). [apologies for the run on sentence] The two parties would be bound by the A-M LPP sections 3 and 13. Which means that the seniority integration has to be "fair and equitable" (section 3) and if they cannot come to an agreement they would go into mediation and arbitration if necessary (section 13). The definition of "fair and equitable" is left to the two parties, Skywest management and ASA pilots. All this because ASA's CBA says so.

Now, if Skywest pilots were represented by ALPA, ALPA Merger Policy must be used. ASA pilots would negotiate seniority integration directly with Skywest pilots (management NOT involved). [FONT=&quot][/FONT]The Skywest pilots and ASA pilots w[FONT=&quot]ould "attempt to [/FONT]match equities to various methods of integration until a fair and equitable agreement is reached, keeping in mind the following goals, in no particular order:

a.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]Preserve jobs.

b.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]Avoid windfalls to either group at the expense of the other.

c.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]Maintain or improve pre‑merger pay and standard of living.

d.[FONT=&quot] [/FONT]Maintain or improve pre‑merger pilot status.[FONT=&quot][/FONT]

[FONT=&quot]e. Minimize detrimental changes to career expectations"[/FONT]


Which means that the two parties can use fences, staplers, DOH, combination of them, etc. to reach a fair and equitable solution keeping in mind the above list in whatever priority the two parties decide. If there is no agreement, the two parties go to mediation and arbitration if necessary.

The point is that unless Skywest pilots are represented by a union certified by the NMB, they will NOT have a seat in negotiations for seniority integration.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Nev,
I read the AMLP posted on various places on the internet. The only pilot groups I read about that were addressed were collectively bargained units. The stuff I was reading was mind numbing and I could have missed it but the Act reads as if it only relates to collectively bargained units. Since ASA is collectively bargained, the absolute minimum that would apply to their merger solution would be the provisions to the Act. If they negotiated a deal that exceeded the provisions to the Act(staple of SKYW to the bottom) the Act would be satisifed. If SKYW wanted to staple the ASA guys the AMLP Act would be invoked. I am not a lawyer, so someone with a law education can post a summary showing how the SKYW pilot group is protected by the Act.
PBR

P.S. Found this at our favorite law firm Ford and Harrison, who has been retained by SKYW.

http://www.matkovsalzman.com/shownews.aspx?show=2888

After deregulation, the CAB announced that it would no longer require LPPs as a matter of course, but only under special circumstances. When the Department of Transportation (DOT) acquired jurisdiction over the airline mergers in 1985, it reiterated the policy against LPPs and consistently rejected requests for their imposition. The DOT has repeatedly stated that mandatory LPPs are inconsistent with deregulation and that if employees want merger protections they should obtain them through collective bargaining. Accordingly, airline unions have routinely negotiated merger and succession provisions into their labor contracts.

 

[PCL_128]

PBR, the reason that the LPPs would be invoked is due to the merger language in the ASA CBA. Their current contract, as well as their TA, both contain a clause that requires the LPPs to be used to determine integration with a non-union pilot group. This is standard ALPA contract language.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

PBR, the reason that the LPPs would be invoked is due to the merger language in the ASA CBA. Their current contract, as well as their TA, both contain a clause that requires the LPPs to be used to determine integration with a non-union pilot group. This is standard ALPA contract language.

Agreed, but the SKYW pilots don't even have any hope of any protections via the AMLP. The AMLP would only apply to the integration formula as if applies to the ASA guys, if the ASA guys were stapled to the bottom of the list the LPPs would apply, and negotiations would ensue right up to arbitration. If the SKYW pilots were stapled to the bottom of the ASA list, they have no recourse., infact there could be SKYW furloughs, Capt or F/O, there is no contract to prevent furlough out of seniority. This is really so huge, that I cannot believe that more SKYW guys aren't getting concerned! I applaud the ASA guys who protect themselves. As well as all the other ALPA pilot groups who avail themselves of the collective bargaining shield. As far as the SKYW pilot group, this vote will be decided by the junior pilots, if the vote fails, it will be their fault and the consequences of that failed vote will fall on them(delayed upgrades). Since a single carrier petition would almost be a certainty, and the ensuing representation vote would include the ASA pilots , ALPA would most likely be successful. The junior ASA pilots would then be able to upgrade ahead of the junior pilots at SKYW.
PBR
You hear this jea? your fast upgrade, in fact your very employment may not be as secure as you think! I hope you are our first furlough(out of senority, because you are a $hithead!)

 

[Nevets]

Nev,
I read the AMLP posted on various places on the internet. The only pilot groups I read about that were addressed were collectively bargained units. The stuff I was reading was mind numbing and I could have missed it but the Act reads as if it only relates to collectively bargained units. Since ASA is collectively bargained, the absolute minimum that would apply to their merger solution would be the provisions to the Act. If they negotiated a deal that exceeded the provisions to the Act(staple of SKYW to the bottom) the Act would be satisifed. If SKYW wanted to staple the ASA guys the AMLP Act would be invoked. I am not a lawyer, so someone with a law education can post a summary showing how the SKYW pilot group is protected by the Act.
PBR

ASA contract
Section 1 Recognition and Scope
2. If the Company acquires a carrier whose pilots are not represented by the Association, the pilots of the Company and the pilots of the acquired carrier will each operate pursuant to their own collective bargaining agreement or terms and conditions of employment, with their respective seniority lists until the first day of the first month following:


a. conclusion of negotiation of only such provision(s), if any, as may be necessary to cover such acquired carrier’s flying under this Agreement, and


b. integration of the seniority lists of the respective pilot groups. Such seniority integration will be accomplished in a fair and equitable manner, including, where applicable, negotiations between the Company and the representatives of the pilot groups affected. There will be no “system flush” as a result of seniority integration. In the event of failure to reach a negotiated resolution, the seniority integration dispute will be resolved as provided in Sections 3 and 13 of the Labor Protective Provisions specified by the Civil Aeronautics Board in the Allegheny-Mohawk Merger.


3. Upon the announcement of any transaction that is intended to result in the consolidation of the Company with another carrier that affects the seniority rights of pilots on the Seniority List, the parties will meet promptly to discuss the appropriate steps to be taken consistent with this Agreement, e.g., to negotiate an appropriate fence agreement and to implement a seniority integration process as provided for in paragraph E.1. or E.2., above.


4. During the period between the announcement of any transaction described in paragraph E. and the conclusion of the process as provided therein, no pilot who was on the Seniority List and who had completed his probationary period as of the effective date of this Agreement will be furloughed as a result of such transaction.



Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions
Section 3
Insofar as the merger affects the seniority rights of the carriers' employees, provisions shall be made for the integration of seniority lists in a fair and equitable manner, including, where applicable, agreement through collective bargaining between the carriers and the representative of the employees affected. In the event of failure to agree, the dispute may be submitted by either party for adjustment in accordance with section 13.

Section 13
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica](a) In the event that any dispute or controversy (except as to matters arising under section 9) arises with respect to the protections provided herein which cannot be settle by the parties within 20 days after the controversy arises, it may be referred by any party to an arbitrator selected from a panel of seven names furnished by the National Mediation Board for consideration and determination. The parties shall select the arbitrator from such panel by alternatively striking names until only one remains, and he shall serve as arbitrator. Expedited hearings and decisions will be expected, and a decision shall be rendered within 90 days after the controversy arises, unless an extension of time it is mutually agreeable to all parties. The salary and expenses of the arbitrator shall be borne equally by the carrier and (i) the organization or organizations representing employee or employees or (ii) if unrepresented, the employee or employees or group or groups of employees. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica](b.) The above condition shall not apply if the parties by mutual agreement determine that an alternative method for dispute settlement or an alternative procedure for selection of an arbitrator is appropriate in their particular dispute. No party shall be excused from complying with the above condition by reason of having suggested an alternative method or procedure unless and until that alternative method or procedure shall have been agreed to by all parties.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

 

[PBRstreetgang]

ASA contract
Section 1 Recognition and Scope
2. If the Company acquires a carrier whose pilots are not represented by the Association, the pilots of the Company and the pilots of the acquired carrier will each operate pursuant to their own collective bargaining agreement or terms and conditions of employment, with their respective seniority lists until the first day of the first month following:


a. conclusion of negotiation of only such provision(s), if any, as may be necessary to cover such acquired carrier’s flying under this Agreement, and


b. integration of the seniority lists of the respective pilot groups. Such seniority integration will be accomplished in a fair and equitable manner, including, where applicable, negotiations between the Company and the representatives of the pilot groups affected. There will be no “system flush” as a result of seniority integration. In the event of failure to reach a negotiated resolution, the seniority integration dispute will be resolved as provided in Sections 3 and 13 of the Labor Protective Provisions specified by the Civil Aeronautics Board in the Allegheny-Mohawk Merger.


3. Upon the announcement of any transaction that is intended to result in the consolidation of the Company with another carrier that affects the seniority rights of pilots on the Seniority List, the parties will meet promptly to discuss the appropriate steps to be taken consistent with this Agreement, e.g., to negotiate an appropriate fence agreement and to implement a seniority integration process as provided for in paragraph E.1. or E.2., above.


4. During the period between the announcement of any transaction described in paragraph E. and the conclusion of the process as provided therein, no pilot who was on the Seniority List and who had completed his probationary period as of the effective date of this Agreement will be furloughed as a result of such transaction.



Allegheny-Mohawk Labor Protective Provisions
Section 3
Insofar as the merger affects the seniority rights of the carriers' employees, provisions shall be made for the integration of seniority lists in a fair and equitable manner, including, where applicable, agreement through collective bargaining between the carriers and the representative of the employees affected. In the event of failure to agree, the dispute may be submitted by either party for adjustment in accordance with section 13.

Section 13
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica](a) In the event that any dispute or controversy (except as to matters arising under section 9) arises with respect to the protections provided herein which cannot be settle by the parties within 20 days after the controversy arises, it may be referred by any party to an arbitrator selected from a panel of seven names furnished by the National Mediation Board for consideration and determination. The parties shall select the arbitrator from such panel by alternatively striking names until only one remains, and he shall serve as arbitrator. Expedited hearings and decisions will be expected, and a decision shall be rendered within 90 days after the controversy arises, unless an extension of time it is mutually agreeable to all parties. The salary and expenses of the arbitrator shall be borne equally by the carrier and (i) the organization or organizations representing employee or employees or (ii) if unrepresented, the employee or employees or group or groups of employees. The decision of the arbitrator shall be final and binding on the parties.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]
[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica](b.) The above condition shall not apply if the parties by mutual agreement determine that an alternative method for dispute settlement or an alternative procedure for selection of an arbitrator is appropriate in their particular dispute. No party shall be excused from complying with the above condition by reason of having suggested an alternative method or procedure unless and until that alternative method or procedure shall have been agreed to by all parties.[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]


[FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica][FONT=Trebuchet MS, Arial, Helvetica]
[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

Nev,
Again, the ASA pilots have a contract that specifies the merger policy/procedures. The SKYW pilots have no such expectation for protection. See the F&H website, who SKYW has on retainer. I reiterate the ASA pilots have specific contractual language that deals with mergers, the SKYW has no contract, and it appears that the AMLP would not even be applied as a litmus test for the "fair and equitable" portion of the merger. It would only be applied to the ASA perspective as it pertains to the merger formula. If the litmus test found that the formula for senority integration was meeting the "fair and equitable" standard as it applies to the ASA pilots then that satisfies the AMLP Act for the purposes of the act. Also it would appear that the SKYW pilots would be financially responsible for the costs of the arbitration, should the AMLP act apply and be invoked.
PBR
Even then the best that the SKYW pilots could expect would be DOH and possibly some fences, if BH wants to hold out for them. SKYW pilots how does DOH sound to you?

 

[Nevets]

Nev,
Again, the ASA pilots have a contract that specifies the merger policy/procedures. The SKYW pilots have no such expectation for protection. See the F&H website, who SKYW has on retainer. I reiterate the ASA pilots have specific contractual language that deals with mergers, the SKYW has no contract, and it appears that the AMLP would not even be applied as a litmus test for the "fair and equitable" portion of the merger. It would only be applied to the ASA perspective as it pertains to the merger formula. If the litmus test found that the formula for senority integration was meeting the "fair and equitable" standard as it applies to the ASA pilots then that satisfies the AMLP Act for the purposes of the act. Also it would appear that the SKYW pilots would be financially responsible for the costs of the arbitration, should the AMLP act apply and be invoked.
PBR
Even then the best that the SKYW pilots could expect would be DOH and possibly some fences, if BH wants to hold out for them. SKYW pilots how does DOH sound to you?

First let me say that I'm not an attorney or an expert.

Since the A-M LPP is in the ASA contract, it would be used. Its up to ASA pilots and Skywest management to define "fair and equitable." Whether its DOH, stapling, fences, ratios, combination thereof, etc, would be up to the two parties to decide in negotiations.

As for the portions you highlighted, let me start at the first one and work my way down.

Skywest pilots do not have "their own collective bargaining agreement" but they do have "terms and conditions of employment."

The "representatives of the pilot groups affected" would be ALPA for the ASA pilots and Skywest management for the Skywest pilots.

As for "collective bargaining between the carriers and the representative of the employees affected" reference the previous paragraph.

As for who pays Skywest pilots half of the negotiations, I guess it would be Skywest management. I don't know how much incentive they have in a long protracted seniority integration negotiations other than to make sure to minimize other costs such as training, moving, etc. They will have the bottom line as their first priority.

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Nev,
We are arguing from the same side of the table! My argument is this, and we do agree, SKYW pilots will ONLY get what SKYW management gives them. This result may not always be in the pilot groups best interests. If the merger that would be in the best interests of the pilots would cost SKYW corp. $25,000,000, SKYW may or may not decide to favor the pilots. My point is the only pilots sitting at the table will be ASA, not SKYW. I do not trust SKYW corp. to represent my best interests, they have proven that my welfare is secondary to overall profits time and time again.It could be entirely possible to have TF, DL,DA, KB, and BH at the table negotiating my seniority merger deal, and we all know what kind of pilot advocates they are!
PBR

 

[PBRstreetgang]

Skywest pilots do not have "their own collective bargaining agreement" but they do have "terms and conditions of employment."

Which on the first page of the terms and conditions of employment are non binding on the company. "And does not constitute a contract."
PBR

 

[PBRstreetgang]

The "representatives of the pilot groups affected" would be ALPA for the ASA pilots and Skywest management for the Skywest pilots.

BH and SAPA, Oh joy, we can only fantasize how that will go!
PBR

 

[PBRstreetgang]

As for who pays Skywest pilots half of the negotiations, I guess it would be Skywest management. I don't know how much incentive they have in a long protracted seniority integration negotiations other than to make sure to minimize other costs such as training, moving, etc. They will have the bottom line as their first priority.

I do not think SKYW mgmt. pays the AMLP states the employees affected will incur the costs of the arbitrator. Sec 13(ii) see above!
PBR

 

[Nevets]

Nev,
We are arguing from the same side of the table! My argument is this, and we do agree, SKYW pilots will ONLY get what SKYW management gives them. This result may not always be in the pilot groups best interests. If the merger that would be in the best interests of the pilots would cost SKYW corp. $25,000,000, SKYW may or may not decide to favor the pilots. My point is the only pilots sitting at the table will be ASA, not SKYW. I do not trust SKYW corp. to represent my best interests, they have proven that my welfare is secondary to overall profits time and time again.It could be entirely possible to have TF, DL,DA, KB, and BH at the table negotiating my seniority merger deal, and we all know what kind of pilot advocates they are!
PBR

Yes, but I do believe that the A-M LPP would apply to Skywest pilots. Its just up to management to decide what is "fair and equitable" to Skywest pilots.

 

[Nevets]

Which on the first page of the terms and conditions of employment are non binding on the company. "And does not constitute a contract."
PBR

Than that would be pursuant to your terms and conditions of employment.

 

[Nevets]

BH and SAPA, Oh joy, we can only fantasize how that will go!
PBR

Which is ONE good reason for Skywest pilots to vote for ALPA. If Skywest pilots were represented by ALPA, ALPA Merger Policy would apply but the most important thing is that Skywest PILOTS (NOT management or SAPA) would negotiate directly with ASA pilots.