Originally Posted by
Scoop
I am not sure about this. 3B4 consists of two parts:
1. A triggering event - a raise to other employees.
2. An industry comparison. Used to be with a few airlines, but due to mergers just looks at some kind of blended 757 CAPT rate with UAL and AMR.
If UAL passes their TA we will definitely be behind UAL and AMR in pay-rates but we still need a triggering event.
I read the language and it talks about a rolling 18 month window. IMHO this is the problem - loose contractual language that is not clear. We can argue that the 01DEC15 raise to the non-contracts is the trigger but the company will certainly argue that it is not a trigger.
I personally think us winning a 3B4 is a crap-shoot at best, and certainly not a fait accompli.
Scoop
I agree this is not a fait accompli. This is however a duty of our union to apply and defend our contract and its administration under C2012. If that benefits our negotiating position that would be an opportunistic benefit. We are operating under C2012 and may be for some time. We may eventually have another CBA if the PWA is not vigorously defended. The original intent of the language written 12 years ago can not be dismissed. The application of this key benefit will be noticeable and applicable near the end of the PWA around the amendable date because it continues to raise pay rates during negotiations. In effect it removes the time penalty of the RLA.
This language is something I'm sure management has subject matter experts pouring over. Obviously they have identified 3B4 as a problem needing to be addressed. This language much like profit sharing, if changed or removed will permanently alter its benefit for the future. Once its gone it will never return.