US Airways snap-back?

[Crzipilot]

And I believe the 9th stated, simply non use of the NIC does not in itself constitute a DFR against the union.

DFR (when you finally have the right time to file as such) is a fairly high hurdle to cross. And past actions in Wake's court room has no bearing any more in future filings....So have fun.

 

[Crzipilot]

Until a few years from now when they buy republic.

I do agree with you though, baring another buyout or merger your not moving faster anywhere else and The QOL has to better than these regionals.

Yes, if you think about it. As a new hire on the east this year and next, why would you want a combined contract???? In 10 yrs or so, you'll be in the top 10% of the seniority list, enjoying a much better QOL and especially pay (if you were a Reg. F/O and even capt. in most cases)

The biggest factor being the QOL differences between here and the regionals.

 

[TWA Dude]

And I believe the 9th stated, simply non use of the NIC does not in itself constitute a DFR against the union.

No, they didn't say that. They said the case wasn't ripe yet without ruling on the case's merit. Read the complaint from the company's suit for declaratory judgment and see what they think.

 

[Carl S.]

I see the bottom feeders out East are buying USAPA's updates 100%! Do yourself a favor and go outside the USAPA box or you will be calling CIRP in the near future once again and asking what happen, the updates were so positive!

 

[Crzipilot]

Read the first red highlights. Seems to me it says, even if the proposal is not the NIC, that in itself does not work the disadvantages the Plaintiffs fear.

What's the line mean to you?


[8] Plaintiffs seek to escape this conclusion by framing
their harm as the lost opportunity to have a CBA implementing
the Nicolau Award put to a ratification vote. Because
merely putting a CBA effectuating the Nicolau Award to a
ratification vote will not itself alleviate the West Pilots furloughs,
Plaintiffs have not identified a sufficiently concrete
injury.2 Additionally, USAPA’s final proposal may yet be one
that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if
that proposal is not the Nicolau Award.3

3. We do not address the thorny question of the extent to which the
Nicolau Award is binding on USAPA. We note, as the district court recognized, that USAPA is at least as free to abandon the Nicolau Award as was
its predecessor, ALPA. The dissent appears implicitly to assume that the
Nicolau Award, the product of the internal rules and processes of ALPA,
is binding on USAPA. See Diss op. at 8021-22.

Indeed, the Supreme Court case that clarified that the DFR
was applicable during contract negotiations articulated its
holding in terms that imply a claim can be brought only after
negotiations are complete and a “final product” has been
reached. See Air Line Pilots Ass’n, Int’l v. O’Neill, 499 U.S.
65, 78 (1991) (“[T]he final product of the bargaining process
may constitute evidence of a breach of duty only if it can be
fairly characterized as so far outside a ‘wide range of reasonableness,’
that it is wholly ‘irrational’ or ‘arbitrary.’ ” (quoting
Ford Motor Co. v. Huffman, 345 U.S. 330, 338 (1953))).

[5] We conclude that this case presents contingencies that
could prevent effectuation of USAPA’s proposal and the
accompanying injury. At this point, neither the West Pilots
nor USAPA can be certain what seniority proposal ultimately
will be acceptable to both USAPA and the airline as part of
a final CBA. Likewise, it is not certain whether that proposal
will be ratified by the USAPA membership as part of a new,
single CBA. Not until the airline responds to the proposal, the
parties complete negotiations, and the membership ratifies the
CBA will the West Pilots actually be affected by USAPA’s
seniority proposal — whatever USAPA’s final proposal ultimately
is. Because these contingencies make the claim speculative,
the issues are not yet fit for judicial decision.


As to what the company thinks??? I'm sure their thinking will change upon the outcome of the LOA 93 grievance. If they win, their thinking will stay the same, in order to keep the lower pay scale on the east. If they lose, I'm sure there will be some clamoring to negotiate something....

 

[Sandhawk]

Just remember, all of the atttrition on the East will NOT be from the top of the seniority list.....

 

[Crzipilot]

Reading comprehension 101. I believe the original question was somebody looking to come here. And all the numbers posted the rhetoric to go with it, was stating that someone hired here this year. Hence, so all the retirements would be ahead of him.

Even someone in the middle of the list. 50-80% retirement rate in the next 10+ years, I don't care who you are, it's going to improve your QOL.....

I mean really, current bid shows 2600 active line pilots, Last seniority list I have seen Oct 09 shows 3494 Company seniority and 3463 Current seniority. This includes all mgmt LOA and Meds.

By 2025, there are 2700 retirements on the east. So obviously inside of there is some management types and MEDs etc......but essentially 2025 you have a mighty big churn of the seniority list no matter where you sit on it.

Even looking at just 10 years out 2022. 1993 retirements. 2600 pilots flying the line...3494 on current list. Or 57% of current seniority list or 76% or current on the line. So your best guess is somewhere between those two numbers.

Now explain to me why a new hire would want an extra 1800 pilots put on top of him? Before you mention the pay difference. Here's the year by year break down for Grp II (737 / 320)

2 6.00
3 7.00
4 3.00
5 8.00
6 8.00
7 7.00
8 6.00
9 6.00
10. 5.00

Or roughly 56k in 10 years, or 5600/year the west if paid more. BUT a new hire without a combined list will have what 2000 extra pilots below him at the end of that 10 years. To make up that difference of 5600/year at a low estimate average pay rate of 70.00/hr They would have to fly about an average of 8hours above rsv guarantee a month to make that difference up. I think the QOL of 2000 pilots below them at the end of 10 years far outweighs that 5600/year average pay diffference

But if they can hold 75 somewhere in there US pays more by this differential

2 4.00
3 3.00
4 9.00
5 4.00
6 3.00
7 6.00
8 7.00
9 7.00
10 9.00

 

[TWA Dude]

Read the first red highlights. Seems to me it says, even if the proposal is not the NIC, that in itself does not work the disadvantages the Plaintiffs fear.

What's the line mean to you?

Nothing. The court overturned the case based on ripeness, not merit. They made no ruling on the merits of the case.

As to what the company thinks??? I'm sure their thinking will change upon the outcome of the LOA 93 grievance.

I don't see the connection between the grievance and the seniority list. I fully expect the company to win but just for the sake of discussion if they lost I'd expect them to go through bankruptcy again to mitigate it.

 

[Guppiedriver]

Read the first red highlights. Seems to me it says, even if the proposal is not the NIC, that in itself does not work the disadvantages the Plaintiffs fear.

What's the line mean to you?


Additionally, USAPA’s final proposal may yet be one
that does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even if
that proposal is not the Nicolau Award.3

To me it means: The courts assume that USAPA is wise enough to submit a seniority proposal that does not disadvantage the west like the "DOH without adjustment for LOS dream list" that they already presented to the company.

Fortunately, USAPA is too arrogant to compromise on their "dream list", therefore making DFR II unquestionably ripe.

 

[Carl S.]

Pay is just a small part of the nightmare called LOA 93. Have you seen the work rules, vacation and forced 95 hour months. If a flight is canceled out East, hope a nice trip is in open time or there goes your pay! Seperate ops is not a solution for USAPA to avoid the NIC., but the WEST and the company will one day get to a joint contract with or without EAST participation, I'm betting on BK.