Originally Posted by
Spoiler
By the way R57 - you have made several olive branch attempts and have drawn back a bloody stump (not that you are perfect
) so my hat is off to you
Thanks, I think.
My wife will wholeheartedly agree that I am not perfect. Sometimes thin skinned, often hardheaded.
Still not clear on your MB vs. ALPA merger policy question, but will take a stab at it.
I think ALPA merger policy is binding on the parties, but it seems that Lee Seham did find a loophole that no group had ever tired before. Seems that a NEW union has the right to negotiate any and all sections of the contract it inherits. That's the legal standing right now. The big caveat is that the new union has the duty of fair representation to ALL of it's new members. That's a new point of argument between east and west, what makes the new SLI "fair"? If the AA merger fails and we ever get to DFR II will DOH with conditions and restrictions be measured against the Nicolau award, or past integrations or what? Will the fact that our transition agreement called for a joint contract before the SLI could be used and we were at an impasse have any bearing? I have no idea and won't wade into that one.
MB is federal law that covers employees not in the same union. You are right that it is similar to ALPA merger policy(some think that it dictates DOH, which it doesn't). Doug Parker said in a crew news session(filmed management/crew powwow that happens about once a month in PHX and CLT training centers) that because it is federal law that it really would be binding. I don't know if that was his opinion, or his lawyers or what. More binding? I don't know.
The main thing that will be different in this merger than US/AWA will be that we will have a joint contract first. The SLI will come in last and pretty much go into effect. I don't know if USAPA has cleared the DFR hurdle or not, but I think a SLI that is put into place makes that hurdle much higher.
Everybody learned from our merger. Too late for us though.