This........

Yes...That.

Unintended irony:

Our merger website www.differentworks.com no longer works :D

Excellent post, I agree 100%. Looking forward to working with you guys!

Check out alaskaNair.com See where that takes you.

The name “Icy Strait” (at the bottom of the list) has nice ring to it, eh?

The RLA does not tie your hands anywhere near as much as you think it does. In fact, it hands you a metric ton of leverage if only you and your union knew how to use it.

What is the only real leverage any airline union truly has year in and year out regardless of any other circumstances? The answer is the credible threat to one day in the future pose the threat of legally resorting to self help under the framework of the RLA.

The steps to self help are:

A. Enter into federal mediation with the NMB. This is the longest and most drawn-out part of the process. There is not set time limit for mediation. However, the courts have made pretty clear in their rulings that if your union plays the game right (bargaining in good faith and being willing and available to meet regularly), at around the 2 to 2.5 year point is where you might feasibly get released from mediation if the two sides are at an impasse. If your union does not play the game right, then you can expect a much longer stay in mediation. There's no getting around the fact that mediation is the really torturous part about the RLA but it is not as one-sided as is commonly reported.

B. Turn down arbitration

C. Enter into a 30-day cooling off period

D. Depending on the size of your airline and the potential impact upon interstate commerce, expect a 60 day Presidential Emergency Board to be convened. Effectively, this acts as an additional 60 days of cooling off for a total of a 90 day cooling off period.

E. If, after the 90 days, either side does not agree to a settlement, the union is free to resort to self help and the company is free to lock you out.

The President has no power under the law to stop you from striking. He/she can only delay a strike by 60 days.

It's worth mentioning that Congress, after a PEB, has the power to intervene and impose a settlement. However, this has NEVER happened in the history of the RLA in the case of an airline. That doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. It just never has happened. The last time Congress intervened in the case of a railroad was 1994 when they simply extended the status quo period (which is effectively extending the cooling off period). Of 250 PEB's convened in the history of the RLA, Congress has intervened 18 times, all railroad cases.

Assuming a union has its stuff together, at some point during mediation or even earlier, it will take a strike authorization vote. How much leverage your union will have against your company will hinge on the outcome of your vote. If it's close to 100%, you have a tremendous amount of leverage. If not, the company will not see you as posing a credible threat of ever striking and you might as well pack it in. Give up and sign a mediocre new contract because you will get tooled by your company without a very high strike vote.

A strike authorization vote does not mean you are striking any time soon. If the vote is taken at the beginning of mediation, for example, you guys have a minimum (if everything goes perfectly) of 2 years, 3 months until you would ever possibly be on strike. It will likely be closer to 3 or 4 years if it ever goes that far.

The cool thing is the closer the strike vote is to 100%, the less likely it is the company will ever let your negotiation get anywhere near a strike. If they truly believe you guys will really strike, they will be very interested in wrapping things up sooner than later, especially if you ever enter into a cooling off period. The opposite is true if you have a weak strike vote.

Once the cooling off period begins, that's when the company starts to really feel the heat Why? Because as soon as the media starts reporting that Alaska Airlines might go on strike in 30 days, customers are going to book away from Alaska Airlines so that their travel plans are not disrupted by a possible work stoppage. Why buy a ticket on Alaska next month when that ticket might be no good when you can just as easily buy a ticket on Delta or Southwest? The company starts losing money. Important caveat! They may be willing to suffer through that to break your will if they perceive you are not credible in your threat of going all the way.

How long will they be willing to let that go if they really believe you guys are committed to really striking and they believe the number of scabs will be minimal as evidenced by a near-100% strike vote? Who do you think is going to blink first?

In that sense, it's almost better if a PEB is established because it extends the period during which customers are booking away from Alaska. It increases the pressure on the company.

All of this can be likened to deterrence, or peace through strength. What happened in 1979 when the Iranians perceived that we had a weak President? They acted on what they saw as weakness and won a major propaganda victory for themselves. Think of a mediocre strike authorization vote as identifying yourself as a weak Jimmy Carter to your company.

Why did Khrushchev pull his missiles out of Cuba? From all accounts, it's because he realized we were serious about going nuclear if our demands weren't met. Think of that as similar to the effect a near-100% strike authorization vote has on the company.

Why has Kim Jong Un not launched any missiles at us yet? Why have we not yet attacked North Korea despite all of their violations? The examples could continue on all day.

The point is the RLA does not tie your hands the way people seem to think it does.

You lost the whole rest of your argument at bullet point A.

The national mediation board has to declare an impasse before anything else can happen. All they have to do is not declare an impasse and you will never get to a cooling off period. In recent history this has been their response to prevent strikes. Spirit wasn't released until they started to charge for carry on bags and given a strike as a punishment for it.

All this union talk brings back memories of watching the ALPA initiation training videos.

Yes, an impasse has to be declared before you can move on to further stages of the RLA process. That is a fact.

However, the NMB does not have an unlimited to ability to simply avoid declaring an impasse forever before a union can file a motion in federal court petitioning for a release from mediation. The bar for overcoming the NMB's position that two parties are not at an impasse in federal court is very high. That is why the union has to play the game right during mediation.

The RLA's charter is to avoid an interruption of interstate commerce. That charter, though, is balanced with labor's right to self-determination. Congress never intended the RLA to completely strip labor of that right. But don't believe me, believe what federal judges have said in previous cases involving the RLA (from IAMAW, AFL-CIO vs NMB 425-F.2d-527 (1970)):
Even if the NMB fails to recognize the above, the federal courts do recognize the ultimate rights of workers to EVENTUALLY strike under the RLA. But your union has to be willing to play the RLA game correctly. The courts can compel the NMB to declare an impasse.

In other cases, the courts have hinted at approximately a minimum 2-2.5 year timeframe for being released from mediation if still at an impasse. However, as I said, that requires that your union's conduct be impeccable during mediation. "Impeccable" conduct means bargaining in absolutely good faith, and never stalling or appearing to stall.

It is also a fact, that like it or not, playing the RLA game correctly is the only consistently strong leverage that pilot unions have. If, like an-already defeated Eeyore, you insist on resignedly believing the myth that the NMB can put you on ice forever with no recourse available, you will get results that go along with that belief system.

There are loads of complaints on the Alaska threads about how they don't like this or that about their situation. Unfortunately, your management is unlikely to seriously address any of your concerns without your union having some significant leverage. You dismantle your own leverage before you even begin by holding onto a largely false belief that the NMB is all-powerful.