Originally Posted by
shiznit
Meet and confer conversation:
ASA/CMR/CPZ guys: "We object to your cutting of permitted outsourced feed, our guys will get furloughed."
DAL NC guys: "Thanks for telling us. Duly noted, but we don't care, it's what our pilots want and we are the exclusive bargaining agent with Delta Air Lines, no one else can legally change that. We do have a preferential hiring agreement for ALPA carriers, so you will the ability to interview at Delta as we transfer the flying back to mainline, and you'll make more and more days off too!"
ASA/CMR/CPZ: "But we strenuously object."
DAL NC guys: "Oh. Well, if you strenuously object then we should take some time to reconsider."
DAL NC guys: "Yeah, we're going to rein in permitted types, deal with it. Thanks for coming to the meeting."
Comair/ASA/Compass have no ability to enforce their will on the Delta Pilots in any way, shape or form . That meet/confer language protects mainline scope.
Can you reference any instance where ALPA has intervened in the interest of a feeder airline rather than upholding the mainline pilot group interest?
He is dead accurate. It is meet and confer. They have no say in whatever we want to do. This is the language that was agreed to in the settlement. I will let Bar answer why Ford-Cooksey decided to agree on weak worded language, but the reality is that it has no strength and cannot force this pilot group, or any pilot group to bend to the RJ side of the Ford-Cooksey working in the Policy Manual.
Originally Posted by
exeagle
Comair/ASA/Compass have no ability to enforce their will on the Delta Pilots in any way, shape or form . That meet/confer language protects mainline scope.
Then why was the whole addition to the manual a result of the settlement of the Ford/Cooksey case? To protect us?
It was a settlement over a lawsuit against ALPA. They agreed to the weak worded language that would never hold any mainline mec's feet to the legal fire, so of course ALPA agreed to put it in there. It is fluff at best.
Can you reference any instance where ALPA has intervened in the interest of a feeder airline rather than upholding the mainline pilot group interest?
No, I can not. But the fact that it is even a possibility and could imaginably happen, is alarming. Just because something hasn't happened, doesn't mean it won't.
The only power that ALPA National has over any pilot group is the President's refusal to sign a CBA. As shiz stated, that will never happen for a major airline. If LM even thought about doing that at one of the majors within ALPA, even I would be ready to dump em, and he knows that. He is politically savvy, as is anyone who has made it to that position. No President would want to be over ALPA when they lost a 12K pilot group.
It is a straw man. The power is at the MEC level. Just look at some of the stupid stuff that ALPA carriers have done. None of it has been at the direction of National, and generally the advice was the opposite.