Originally Posted by
Andy
Lee, after reading the entire ruling with respect to Delta's pilots working overtime - the appeal, not the original verdict - I believe that the current legal system will consider mass voluntary resignations to be a coordinated job action in violation of the RLA.
Over the last 15 years, the chips have become heavily stacked against labor unions that fall under the RLA. We are now threading a very small needle on the actions that we can take.
With that in mind, unions need to reconsider how contracts are constructed. Management can go in slowdown mode, dragging out negotiations for years. Rather than attempt to get retro pay, I think all new union contracts should have automatic payraises built into them at the amenable date. For instance, an automatic pay raise of CPI-W plus 3% annually until a new contract is signed. This would eliminate the need for retro pay. Also, it's crucial that the figure be tied to a CPI metric rather than putting a finite number such as 4% annual pay raises. We have no idea if we'll be in a low or high inflationary environment when the amenable date occurs.
Just imagine putting in a clause where we get a 4% pay raise annually at the amenable date but the inflation rate is running at 8%+ when we reach the amenable date. Management would have even greater incentive to drag out contract negotiations.
Andy,
Many interesting points and I agree with much regarding pay raises post ammendable date.
Otherwise, the company could claim a coordinated work effort if every LCA and PI decided to return to the line. The burden of proof is on them. And, while ALPA would be named in the suit, they'd have to ammend to name everyone once the proper argument was made regarding the voluntary nature of the positions. Sure, they have perks, but they are voluntary nonetheless.
After 100 or so guys were questioned and stated THEY decided to vacate the position for x, y, and z reasons.....the company's stance would be moot. Case dismissed.
Historical stats the company could provide only goes so far when those positions are an INDIVIDUAL volunteer status. Now, you say, what about JRM activity. That, sadly, does represent a status quo across the full list of pilots based on historical activity. That activity has many ebbs and flows however. With no MEC activity to the contrary and continued reminders of the injunction, if every pilot got so ****ed off they all declined JRM, the court couldn't do a thing if there was no proof of a union effort. Again, proof such as the information the company used in it's case to win the current TRO. Was it iron clad, no. It was sufficient to shift the judge toward the company in that instance. That TRO tells a UAL pilot and the union they can do nothing but follow the RLA. The RLA defines disputes as major and minor. Seriously, if every pilot worked the contract by the letter, the court could do nothing....that is unless the company can prove that it was because of a coordinated effort to change the status quo.
See the difference?
Frats,
Lee