Originally Posted by
PCL_128
Section 2, First of the Railway Labor Act, clarified by the decisions in Japan Air Lines Co. v. International Association of Machinists & Aerospace Workers, 538 F.2d 46, 51-52 (2d Cir.1976) (appellate court affirming district court's application of mandatory-permissive distinction in case arising under RLA and rejecting union argument that labor and management should meet and negotiate with respect to any proposal advanced by either party); and Elgin, Joliet & Eastern Railway v. Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, 302 F.2d 540, 543-44 (7th Cir.) (discussion of whether pension agreements constitute subjects of mandatory collective bargaining under the RLA).
Both of the above cases ported the NLRA concept of mandatory and permissive subjects of bargaining to the RLA, and further clarified that the only mandatory subjects of bargaining under the RLA are those specifically delineated in Section 2, First of the Act, which only lists pay rates, work rules, and working conditions. Job security is not included, and is considered by the courts, and therefore the NMB, as a permissive subject of bargaining.
I understand your need to talk about pensions and other topics, but here is what you said earlier:
Originally Posted by
PCL_128
Under the law, scope is a permissive subject of bargaining. That means that management doesn't have to bargain over it unless they want to, and the NMB isn't permitted to release you to strike over it. That's the law.
Since you're the one making the statement, I'll ask the question again: State the source or document that shows
the NMB is not permitted to release you to engage in self help over scope? Try and focus PCL. Focus.
For the rest of the thread that doesn't live in the land of OZ, can you imagine how great it would be for management if this were true? Management could agree with every single demand of ours and leave just one item left on the table. That item would be to require scope to allow the outsourcing of every pilot position. Now since that's the only item left not agreed to, PCL says that the NMB could never allow self-help because only scope was left on the table.
Maybe management's lawyers never realized this before.
Carl