I called all of this stuff on a previous thread someplace. I may need glasses but I could see this coming a mile away. The company really must think this pilot group is stupid.
The letter called for another concentrated period of negotiations (60-90 days) attended by the necessary principal participants who have the authority to reach an agreement.
OK, good. You have the ability to meet very frequently to get a deal done. Fine. ALPA is ready to do it and will agree to that.
The letter also called for the two parties to agree to submit any issues that remain open after the concentrated negotiation period to final and binding arbitration before a mutually acceptable arbitrator.
Why would we agree to that? There is no incentive for the company to negotiate in good faith on anything that might cost them money.
We received a quick response from the company, telling us that they were disappointed in our response. Their letter said that ALPA had rejected a plan that would have guaranteed a Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement by year’s end, and that the pilots’ and the company’s interests would have been protected appropriately by the proposal presented in their August 15, 2011 letter.
They also said ALPA’s outright rejection of binding arbitration was premature and missed the fundamental point of the Company’s two-step process proposal. They went on to say that ALPA’s rejection of the Company’s two-step proposal voids ALPA’s claim that the Company is “foot dragging” regarding the pace of negotiations. They said ALPA’s rejection removes our ability to claim that it is management’s actions that are delaying an agreement. Obviously, we will point out “foot dragging” when it is appropriate based on the actions or lack thereof at the negotiating table.
No, it's premature to even consider binding arbitration with so many open items right now and the lack of will on the company's part to negotiate. How long has the company been holding certain proposals in their possession again?
The company made two offers: negotiate aggressively, more often and binding arbitration. We agreed to one (the one that gets us making progress on the contract), but not the other. We made a counter proposal and a compromise. Well, not really since we have always said we are willing to meet more often to get this done. We just want the agreement sent to the pilot group for a vote. So either the company has the ability to and is serious about meeting or it isn't and won't without strings attached.
ALPA is still eager and willing to meet more often as always. United-Continental, why can't you do the same? You obviously have time in your schedule the next couple of months from what your own letter stated. Are you going to "man up" and actually follow through anyway? Didn't think so.
You can try to spin this anyway you want, but "foot dragging" is as plain as the nose on my face.