Law Signed on Seniority Integration ALPA-backed Seniority Integration Legislation Protects Pilots, Contracts, and ALPA Merger Policy
ALPA, along with the Association of Flight Attendants and the AFL-CIO’s Transportation Trades Department, worked closely with labor’s allies on Capitol Hill to enact seniority integration legislation that protects U.S. ALPA pilots’ career interests, the Association’s merger policies, and ALPA labor agreements in future merger integrations.
Signed by the president into law in late December 2007, this legislation ensures that if two ALPA pilot groups merge, the Association’s internal Merger Policy and the pilots’ collectively bargained merger-integration protections will continue to govern as before. If an ALPA pilot group merges with a non-ALPA pilot group, the ALPA pilots involved will also retain the hard-won labor protective merger provisions of their collective bargaining agreements.
However, the legislation goes further and also guarantees ALPA pilots involved in a non-ALPA merger, and all unionized employees under the Railway Labor Act, at least a minimum standard of protection in future transactions with merging employee groups outside of their union by ensuring a “fair and equitable” seniority integration process under the Allegheny-Mohawk merger provisions, which are incorporated in this law.
These provisions, like ALPA Merger Policy, provide a process that includes negotiation, and if necessary, arbitration concerning seniority integration. The required integration procedures of the new law, like ALPA Merger Policy, do not provide for, or guarantee, any specific standard of integration in seniority integration arbitrations, which in the absence of an agreement would be decided by an arbitrator. The standards applied by arbitrators under both ALPA Merger Policy and the seniority integration procedures included in this legislation have typically included consideration of career expectations for the pilots at the two airlines at the time of the merger, and have been implemented through various methodologies.
This legislation, which applies to covered mergers that occur after Dec. 26, 2007, was originally proposed by AFA and supported by ALPA. It stems from the inequities that arose when the independent unions that represent the flight attendants and pilots of American Airlines forced the flight attendants and pilots of the former TWA to forgo a merger seniority arbitration process and suffer imposed seniority terms that disfavored these groups. This legislation corrects that situation and will prevent outside groups from simply dictating seniority terms to ALPA pilots.
In addition to securing this important new protection for ALPA pilots in the law, ALPA insisted upon legislative provisions for protection of ALPA Merger Policy in an ALPA-ALPA merger and for retention of any additional protections for ALPA pilots beyond Allegheny-Mohawk procedures that may exist in ALPA labor agreements. The ALPA-drafted language on these key provisions accomplishes all of these goals and was adopted by Congress and signed by the president. This important legislative success demonstrates ALPA’s leadership role on Capitol Hill.
Advertising above will not show if you are a registered user.
Read that fourth paragraph, to me it says, "ummm, yes we have this new law but no, nothing is set in stone, every merger will be handled differently...". ALPA has screwed me and others a few too many times to believe this thing is even worth the paper it's written on.
I think this is just another example of a why an AA/TWA type merger screw up cannot happen in todays world. People keep using that merger as an example of why mergers are bad. I don't think anything like AA/TWA could happen today.
I think this is just another example of a why an AA/TWA type merger screw up cannot happen in todays world. People keep using that merger as an example of why mergers are bad. I don't think anything like AA/TWA could happen today.
You're wrong. It absolutely could happen again, and that's why Congress allowed this bill to pass.
Not to cause a stir but do you think this is a good thing or bad thing? If my company purchased someone I'd hate to lose my seniority because of their bad management. Many hate age 65 because it slowed their seniority. Merging then forcing several hundred people would be along the same lines. Age 65 might keep people from progressing but this would force many to move backwards.
Like I said I'm not trying to start an argument or anything. I'm curious as to what many feel about this. If Skybus was ALPA and went bankrupt and AA/CAL/DAL/etc. bought them wouldn't you want them to go to the bottom? Or any airline your company purchased for that matter? If Company A is losing money and about to close it's doors why should company B be strong armed into how they should save them? What if it's a different union like Teamsters that buy ALPA, do you think it would make companies not as likely to merge? One pilot group willing to fight against it?
__________________
Proudly Chemtrailing the United States since 2007.
Does anyone know what ALPA-ALPA's internal merger policy is? That is the real question here since the four major merger contenders right now (DAL, U, NW, CAL) are all ALPA.
Does anyone know what ALPA-ALPA's internal merger policy is? That is the real question here since the four major merger contenders right now (DAL, U, NW, CAL) are all ALPA.
Over all the alpa-alpa merger policy is essentially the same as alpa-non alpa. That would be still a bit vague but "fair and equitable under the totality of circumstances" . That set of circumstances is supposed to take into account career expectations at the origional airline, date of hire, percentage of the origional seniority list, percentage standing of respective bid lists, equipment size and respective pay scales..... nature and character of the respective carriers.....and a whole lot more. Ask ten thousand pilots who have been involved in merger process and you will get an even greater number of definitions as to what is fair and equitable. And virtually no one will be happy with it.
Like I said I'm not trying to start an argument or anything. I'm curious as to what many feel about this. If Skybus was ALPA and went bankrupt and AA/CAL/DAL/etc. bought them wouldn't you want them to go to the bottom? Or any airline your company purchased for that matter? If Company A is losing money and about to close it's doors why should company B be strong armed into how they should save them?
If Company A bought less than 50% of Company B, then A can choose not to integrate ANY employees. If they purchase more than 50% of airline B's assets, they have to integrate employees via binding arbitration, because of AA and their unions previous 'un'integrations.
It protects employees who otherwise would have no voice, no due process and no equitable integration when purchased/merged by a larger airline.
The twist in this is it comes from the good senators from Missouri. No doubt a reaction from the AA/TWA merger. APA was against it of course (not surprisingly).
On the other hand it's believed that the USAir and American West merger arbitration results will be the template for future integrations. In that case the furloughed USAir pilots were placed at the bottom of the list because the arbitrator didn't "see" them as employees.
If AA mergers with another airline tomorrow and the integration goes to arbitration, it could be all the TWA pilots still on furlough could get stapled...
again.
It would be an unfortunate outcome from an otherwise well meaning piece of legislation.
__________________
I love this job, it just doesn't love me back
Similar Threads
Merger Law Signed
Linear Mode
