Originally Posted by
Gundam
Have you guys ever considered the inability to clearly communicate directives to the pilot group is a failure of the pilot unions to exercise or gain political leverage to change legislation? Like, maybe pilots would be less likely to break ranks if they were more clearly defined sometimes, and told explicitly? Maybe in this case your guys were very clear, even for the "do my job, go home, and go fish" types that aren't on Facebook or whatever else you guys use. If not, I think the importance of clear direct communication in the flight deck should be considered.
I don't have all the history, but keep in mind violations of the status quo is something that labor unions can be sued for under the RLA. So if there's a union out there suggesting that the group should change its behavior as a way to impact the company to achieve leverage in negotiations, understand that's illegal and the union could be sued, and if my memory serves APA has had to pay some fines related to similar lawsuits in the past.
If there's anything that drives cautious communication from APA, it's this, and my understanding is that if a group of pilots attempts a job action APA is still liable.
Again, still an outsider looking in, but it still looks like the overall environment is still in favor of the pilot group.