You mean like the recent email from the MEC ----- no wonder some people scurry when the lights come on. Would anybody care to step into the light and explain this or should we just chalk it up to "that's the way it's done around here".




March 14, 2014

This is an update from the ISL Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC).

At our meeting conducted on March 11, 2014, the full DRC determined that it has jurisdiction over L-UAL pilot Claims #2 and #3 which are described below. However, the DRC representatives deadlocked as to whether each claim has merit. As a result, these claims will be submitted to arbitration under the Dispute Resolution Procedures contained in Exhibit B of the EKN Award.

To date, the L-UAL DRC members have presented three claims from their pilots to the full DRC, each of which challenge actions by the Company that they claim are in violation of the EKN Award—specifically the Company’s actions in awarding positions based on legacy CAL bids 13-08, 14-02, and 14-02A after the implementation date of the ISL. Claim #1 challenges the Company’s award of training positions to CAL pilots in September, October, and November of 2013. Claim #2 challenges the Company’s award of displacement rights to CAL pilots in December, January, and February. Claim # 3 challenges the Company’s award of lateral positions/direct advancements, (e.g. IAH B737 CA to LAX B737 CA) in October and November of last year.

Under the Dispute Resolution Procedures, after a claim is presented to the full DRC, the DRC representatives must meet and make a decision as to whether (1) the DRC has jurisdiction to hear the claim, and (2) whether the claim has merit. If the DRC deadlocks over either issue, then the Procedures provide for arbitration (allowing a maximum of 5 hearing days) to resolve the dispute. If a claim is found to have merit, either by agreement of the DRC or through arbitration, it is then presented to the Company.

At earlier meetings, the full DRC determined that it has jurisdiction over Claim #1 but then deadlocked on the merits of the claim. The impasse will be resolved in hearings before Arbitrator Dana Eischen, the chairman of the ISL arbitration panel, and is scheduled to be heard in Washington, DC on May 23, continuing on May 27-29.

The Claim #2 hearings are scheduled to be heard in Washington, D.C., on July 7-11 before Arbitrator Dennis Nolan, another member of the EKN Arbitration Board. The DRC is currently in the process of selecting an arbitrator for Claim #3 and the dates for those hearings have yet to be determined.

The DRC procedures provide that the arbitrator shall make every effort to issue a written award within ten business days after the conclusion of the hearing, so we expect to receive a decision on Claim #1 prior to the arbitrations for Claim #2 and #3.

We acknowledge that this is a lengthy process. It is the same one that Delta and Northwest used following their SLI proceedings. The full DRC is handling these claims as expeditiously as possible.

The extended timeline has largely been caused by the scheduling difficulties associated with securing dates with high profile arbitrators. We appreciate your patience as the Dispute Resolution Procedure runs its course.



AIr Line Pilots Association, International
Air Line Pilots Association, International