US Airways & American

[Turtle21]

wow. this only gets better. entertainment at its finest.

oh by the way this is from wikipedia:

US Airways Attorney Robert A. Siegel made the following statement to the court on 2/21/12 Court Document 164:
Given that the integrated seniority list was accepted by US Airways as required by the Transition Agreement, which is binding on US Airways’ pilots (whether represented by ALPA or USAPA)

The Transition Agreement established a process for integration of the seniority lists – namely, “final and binding” arbitration between the East Pilots and West Pilots “in accordance with ALPA Merger Policy.” (Sep. Stmt. [Doc. No. 156-1] at ¶¶ 10-11.) But it also created an obligation on the part of US Airways to accept the integrated seniority list generated through that agreed-upon process so long as the specified conditions were met, and it thereby created prospective substantive rights that inured to the benefit of the pilots and not just process rights. (Doc. No. 156-1 at ¶ 10.) Once ALPA (as the pilots’ representative) presented the integrated seniority list to US Airways and US Airways accepted it, if not sooner, those substantive rights materialized and were not, as USAPA would have it, a mere “tentative agreement between ALPA and US Airways on a bargaining proposal.” (Doc. No. 152 at 16:27-17:1.) Thus, even if USAPA’s proffered distinction between “substantive rights” and “process elements” had support in the RLA jurisprudence, which it does not, the Transition Agreement undeniably created “substantive rights” with respect to seniority integration and USAPA inherited that status quo when it replaced ALPA as the pilots’ representative.


now lets get the lunchroom and layover laywers present their sides of the argument.

Wikipedia..... Really?

 

[Turtle21]

St Nic,

If we do merge, USAPA will be squashed by APA. Simple numbers fact. So your USAPA bylaws will not apply. Yes, we would probably go to arbitration and it would most likely come out relative seniority (most likely the fairest way given the demographics of both companies.) What, are you guys gonna try to form ANOTHER union if you don't like the outcome? C'mon man. If you guys agree to binding arbitration, we expect you to honor that.

Hey, we are no saints, given what we did to TWA, so I don't claim to sit here and preach holier than thou. But believe me, most of us at AA realize the conditions that led to the creation of USAPA, and it ain't impressive. In fact it's lame: you guys all agreed to binding neutral arbitration, and when you didn't like the outcome, you went off and did your own thing. We won't stand for that here. APA will become the bargaining agent if we merge, and we can all move forward from there. But good luck trying to run off and from your own union. What, 5000 Easties vs 8000 AA pilots?

All speculation anyway. Let the merger be announced, then we can grab each others throats.

APA was formed because the pilots at American didn't agree with ALPA's willingness to give up the pilots on the engineer seat due to modern two pilot planes.... and you are throwing stones about the poor reasons to start a union? :lol:

(by the way, I'll give the AA pilots a pass... any reason to $h!tcan ALPA is a good reason)

 

[Guppiedriver]

Apples and Oranges, my friend. What you want to ignore and what you forget is the fairness of integrating by time served. You want to leapfrog your fellow pilots under the excuse of "well, you were going bankrupt so your just lucky to have a job". I say BS!!! AMR will want nothing with your bid to get another lottery ticket! I have friends there and they are well aware of the nic fiasco and you westies and how you operate

Tell me St. Nic, how does the west operate? Do you mean stuff like, keeping our word and following a process to the letter?

 

[Superbird]

Tell me St. Nic, how does the west operate? Do you mean stuff like, keeping our word and following a process to the letter?

He lives in a fantasy world, you're only going to confuse him.

 

[Turtle21]

Tell me St. Nic, how does the west operate? Do you mean stuff like, keeping our word and following a process to the letter?

Dear Mr. Integrity,

If the long legal battle eventually ends in a certain result that the Nic must be submitted as a portion of the CBA for a pilot ratification vote, does your integrity also support the "agreed to" stipulation that there is an independent ratification requirement from both sides (i.e. the ALPA process that provides for both sides having a veto)?

Your kind attention and honest reply is most greatly appreciated and requested for the furtherance of your most steadfast integrity.

Yours truly,

B.R.
(Binding Ratification, the most glorious tribute To our beloved ALPA, and their prized luminaries, John Prater, Duayne Woerth, and Christopher Bebe.)

 

[Guppiedriver]

Wikipedia..... Really?

Oh for crying out loud...it's a copy and paste of the documents that the Company filed with the Arizona District Court. Just to make you feel better, I did a copy and paste from the actual documents.

The Transition Agreement established
a process for integration of the seniority lists – namely, “final and binding” arbitration
between the East Pilots and West Pilots “in accordance with ALPA Merger Policy.” (Sep.
Stmt. [Doc. No. 156-1] at ¶¶ 10-11.) But it also created an obligation on the part of US
Airways to accept the integrated seniority list generated through that agreed-upon process
so long as the specified conditions were met, and it thereby created prospective
substantive rights that inured to the benefit of the pilots and not just process rights. (Doc.
No. 156-1 at ¶ 10.) Once ALPA (as the pilots’ representative) presented the integrated
seniority list to US Airways and US Airways accepted it, if not sooner, those substantive
rights materialized and were not, as USAPA would have it, a mere “tentative agreement
between ALPA and US Airways on a bargaining proposal.” (Doc. No. 152 at 16:27-
17:1.) Thus, even if USAPA’s proffered distinction between “substantive rights” and
“process elements” had support in the RLA jurisprudence, which it does not, the
Transition Agreement undeniably created “substantive rights” with respect to seniority
integration and USAPA inherited that status quo when it replaced ALPA as the pilots’
representative.​

 

[aa73]

APA was formed because the pilots at American didn't agree with ALPA's willingness to give up the pilots on the engineer seat due to modern two pilot planes.... and you are throwing stones about the poor reasons to start a union? :lol:

(by the way, I'll give the AA pilots a pass... any reason to $h!tcan ALPA is a good reason)

Here is the history of the formation of APA, for further reading: APA was formed for a good cause.

http://alliedpilots.org/Public/AboutAPA/Background/apa_the_details.asp

I don't think the same could be said for USAPA. Agree to binding neutral arbitration, then renege and form a separate union?

 

[Guppiedriver]

Dear Mr. Integrity,

If the long legal battle eventually ends in a certain result that the Nic must be submitted as a portion of the CBA for a pilot ratification vote, does your integrity also support the "agreed to" stipulation that there is an independent ratification requirement from both sides (i.e. the ALPA process that provides for both sides having a veto)?

Your kind attention and honest reply is most greatly appreciated and requested for the furtherance of your most steadfast integrity.

Yours truly,

B.R.
(Binding Ratification, the most glorious tribute To our beloved ALPA, and their prized luminaries, John Prater, Duayne Woerth, and Christopher Bebe.)

Yes, I would prefer independent ratification.

 

[Hpilot]

Hello Hpilot,

I would venture to say that APA would NOT, nor could not, cut throats and staple. That ship has sailed, sunk and no longer exists. Ours would most likely be a merger - or heck, even USAir purchasing AMR's assets, for all I know - and any integration will either be agreed upon by both parties or submitted to BINDING neutral arbitration. I'll give you this - if USAir purchases AMR's assets, I'm pretty sure I will end up as toast. Just the nature of the beast, I harbor no illusions.

And yes, we have our own fair share of delusional idiots here too. Every airline has their 10%...

Good luck to us all.

Agreed, good luck to all of us.

 

[abefly]

Nobody walked away from anything. THe arbitration was a seniority proposal from the previous CBA WHICH IS NOW HISTORY! REally, catch a clue and get updated on things. There is no legal precedence to use an arbitrated list from a former CBA that was expelled from the property. Bottom line, DOH is coming because it is in the USAPA bylaws and AMR pilots either arbitrate or take DOH. They will take DOH any day rather than put a bunch of kids from a regional airline ahead of them on a seniority list, sanctioned by a senile arbitrator. Been there done that. not again!

As set forth in US Airways’ opening brief (​

​

​

​

see Doc. No. 156 at 13:23-14:8) and its
response (see Doc. No. 164 at 7:2-10:16), the case law makes clear that the Transition
Agreement is a binding collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) between US Airways
and its pilots, and the pilots’ selection of a new collective bargaining representative did
not affect the binding nature of their pre-existing CBAs. Indeed, even USAPA has
admitted to another federal court that “[a]s the certified, exclusive bargaining
representative of the now merged US Airways pilots, USAPA became a party to the East
CBA and West CBA . . . .” (US Airline Pilots Ass’n v. US Airways, Inc., et al., Case 1:11-
cv-02579-ARR-SMG (E.D.N.Y.) (Amended Compl. [Doc. No. 12] ¶ 22 (attached hereto​

as Exhibit A).) That principle is equally applicable in this case.