Originally Posted by
DAL 88 Driver
I agree. The DALPA guys like to make the argument that we are represented solely by our MEC and that it cannot be influenced by ALPA National. Well, what about the advice and general legal work we get from ALPA National's attorneys? When those attorneys are responsible for providing legal work and advice to other pilot groups with competing interests to ours, can we really afford to rely on their advice? How's that working out for us so far?
Here's some interesting food for thought that I found along these lines:
Conflicts of interest related to the practice of law
In the legal profession, the duty of loyalty owed to a client prohibits an attorney (or a law firm) from representing any other party with interests adverse to those of a current client. The few exceptions to this rule require informed written consent from all affected clients. In some circumstances, a conflict of interest can never be waived by a client. In perhaps the most common example encountered by the general public, the same firm should not represent both parties in a divorce or child custody case.
A prohibited or undisclosed representation involving a conflict of interest can subject an attorney to disciplinary hearings, the denial or disgorgement of legal fees, or in some cases (such as the failure to make mandatory disclosure), criminal proceedings. In the United States, a law firm usually cannot represent a client if its interests conflict with those of another client, even if they have separate lawyers within the firm, unless (in some jurisdictions) the lawyer is segregated from the rest of the firm for the duration of the conflict. Law firms often employ software in conjunction with their case management and accounting systems in order to meet their duties to monitor their conflict of interest exposure and to assist in obtaining waivers.
ALL of that is correct (as far as I know in my limited legal knoweldge, but I do have a friend who knows an attorney who stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night).
The interesting part is that the Delta Pilots are the ONLY parties who are legally able to negotiate with Delta Air Lines. How that affects the ability of SkyWest Holdings, Trans States Holding, Pinnacle Holdings, etc.. to do business is not our problem.
The pilots under Trans States Holdings, SkyWest Holdings, Pinnacle Holdings can fight their management as to who operates their respective aircraft, but when it comes to Delta Air Lines they don't get to sit at across the table.
ONLY Delta Pilots negotiate scope with Delta Air Lines.
ONLY Pinnacle Pilots negotiate scope with Pinnacle Airlines.
Delta Pilots
do not negotiate scope with Pinnacle Airlines.
Pinnacle Pilots
do not negotiate scope with Delta Air Lines.
Put another way:
The Delta Pilots have an
exclusive contract with Delta Air Lines to provide pilot labor.
The ASA PILOTS have an exclusive contract with ASA Corp. to provide pilot labor.
ASA Corp. has a contract with Delta Air Lines that allows ASA to conduct flying as "permitted" given the
exceptions outlined in the Delta Air Lines Pilot Working Agreement.
The PILOTS of ASA
do not have a contract, or any ability to contract with Delta Air Lines. The ASA Pilots
cannot legally make an agreement with Delta Air Lines.
People tend to mix that up, just wanted to clarify. There isn't a conflict of interest because the pilots of a different carrier do not have the authority to sit at the table with a corporation that they do not have a labor agreement.