I posed this question on another thread as I am very curious, but didn't get any feedback. So here it is.
"If the pilots at American were to say, "**** you management, we'll let the judge decide this", can the judge impose pay/rules, etc., that is/are substantially less than your peers in the industry (Delta, United)? Or is he required to consider all those, and apply something that reflects their contractual pay/rules so that American can be considered competitive again?
It seems to me that if the judge were to impose lower pay/work rules than at current competitors (Delta & United, UsAir is not really a direct competitor), he would hypothetically make American much more competitive with their cost structure, so much that it would be to the detriment of the other legacies.
Is this possible, or does he have to apply rules/pay that are in line with the competitors, ie. reduce Americans cost only to a point where it is on par with their competitors? And if said work rules/pay are already sub-par, can the judge even touch these, as that is obviously not the reason that brought the company to bankruptcy?"
Thanks.
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
I posed this question on another thread as I am very curious, but didn't get any feedback. So here it is.
"If the pilots at American were to say, "**** you management, we'll let the judge decide this", can the judge impose pay/rules, etc., that is/are substantially less than your peers in the industry (Delta, United)? Or is he required to consider all those, and apply something that reflects their contractual pay/rules so that American can be considered competitive again?
It seems to me that if the judge were to impose lower pay/work rules than at current competitors (Delta & United, UsAir is not really a direct competitor), he would hypothetically make American much more competitive with their cost structure, so much that it would be to the detriment of the other legacies.
Is this possible, or does he have to apply rules/pay that are in line with the competitors, ie. reduce Americans cost only to a point where it is on par with their competitors? And if said work rules/pay are already sub-par, can the judge even touch these, as that is obviously not the reason that brought the company to bankruptcy?"
Thanks.
The judge can void the contract at AMR's request and impose a "work order". Once out of BK, then there is no contract and management can then alter terms as they see fit. They can also terminate pilots with no grievance recourse as it's though you're back to the point before your very first contract.
Of course under those conditions, AA wouldn't survive very long and would be complete chaos. Stiil though, it's a distinct possibility as if the term sheet is imposed, there's little left to stay for anyway.
A work order at AA for the pilots would be a complete disaster for all parties.
Self help in bankruptcy court? Not legal and certainly economic suicide. Both parties will come to an agreement, hopefully that will be beneficial to each side, and the company can exit Chapter 11. Then all the merger/acquisition speculation can begin for real.
Not DURING, but after emerging from BK. How long would the court order last? What recourse does labor have? How does a court order play within the RLA? These are valid questions. I believe THIS would be a first in the airline industry.
I think post-BK, you are back to Section 6 openers; both parties talk until the NMB declares an impasse and the 30-day "cooling off" release to self-help.
I think post-BK, you are back to Section 6 openers; both parties talk until the NMB declares an impasse and the 30-day "cooling off" release to self-help.
Would the AA pilots THEN be free to seek "self help"?
Judging by the example set with the NW F/A's, I would say no. I think it's unethical, but the judge in that case ruled that self-help was not a legal option.
I think post-BK, you are back to Section 6 openers; both parties talk until the NMB declares an impasse and the 30-day "cooling off" release to self-help.
GF
Self help is an option upon emergence from BK since no contract has been signed and no cooling off period is required...You are not in "ammendable" status since your contract was thrown out by the Judge.. The judges authority ends with emergence from BK....The reason that the NWA fa's couldn't CHAOS was because the were still in BK and therefore subject to the judge's rulings.
Similar Threads
What if it's left up to the judge?
Linear Mode
