Originally Posted by
jacburn
Is history going to repeat itself?
AFA Wins Lawsuit over United Scope Violation
https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/air-transport
After 10 years of litigation, a federal arbitrator awarded United Airlines flight attendants $8.89 million in connection with a claim by the Association of Flight Attendants (AFA) that United’s 1992 purchase of the original Air Wisconsin violated a so-called scope side letter in its collective-bargaining agreement. The scope clause, included in a flight-attendant contract signed by AFA and United in 1986, required the airline to use flight attendants from the mainline seniority list for all its wholly owned subsidiaries. When United bought Air Wisconsin in 1992, it chose to ignore the provision, sparking a protracted court battle that finally ended April 27.
When AFA issued its grievance, United initially refused to submit to arbitration, sending the issue to court. After United lost the case, the violation went before United’s grievance hearing board, which in 1998 issued a finding that the airline had, in fact, violated the contract.
Been through all this before. Air Wisconsin, in 1992, is not the same AWAC of today. In fact, AWAC back then, was a part 135 air carrier flying 19-30 seat turboprops, like practically all commuter airlines were back then. That very fact goes to the three points of the FA Scope LOA. It is specifically written in there for this very purpose. But today, xjt, nor any regional airline today, is not a part 135 air carrier. And AWAC and all other regionals don’t do flying that has historically been done by UAL FAs, not even in 1992. And xjt or AWAC are not and we’re not alter ego airlines. Lastly, nothing legally, prevented UAL from instead of divesting itself of AWAC, to keeping AWAC and use UAL seniority list FAs to operate it.
The three points of the LOA still stand:
A) xjt (or any existing regional airline) do not do flying historically performed by UAL FAs; B) xjt (or any existing regional airline) are not a part 135 air carrier; and C) xjt (or any existing regional) do not fit the definition of an alter ego airline. So nothing prevents UAL from buying xjt (or any existing regional) and operating it with UAL seniority list FAs, IF they believe A or B or C applies or if they want to simply avoid litigation. Or they can also avoid litigation by mutually agreeing to something that allows UAL to buy a regional and also satisfy the FAs concerns, whatever they may be.