AOL update
#52
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Uspa and the apa negotiate seniority protocols, is that not clear?. I suggest you ask usapa to show you the letter that Paul Jones sent to the NMB where the company says they are bound to the Nicolau award, don't take my word for it call a rep.
#53
Line Holder
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A330 F/O, KC-135 AC
Posts: 76
You guys kill me. It won't be DOH & it won't be a Nic list. You can all cry and litigate but that won't change anything. You're dealing with a new master in APA where they greatly outnumber us. Ask a TWA guy what to expect.
#54
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Isn't that the east way? Majority dictates seniority.
#55
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,293
I'll take your word for it on the Jones letter(that name doesn't ring a bell), but if that is so then why hasn't the company said so? Judge Silver gave them all the needed to do just that. They could have said "We see no legitimate union purpose and cannot negotiate away from the Nic." Could there be something else?
We'll see, of course all of this was supposed to be settle by last April, in your favor, right? According to you?
#56
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,483
#57
Big picture view from an outsider. A merger agreement now exists. An SLI will now be required by law. APA operates for American under a single list and a single operation. USAPA operates for USAirways under two lists and two completely separate operations. Since the two operations have never been combined, any gains by any group have been enjoyed by only that group. Any pain for one group has also only been suffered by that group. So now the question before any judge will be: Why would it be unfair to bring the 3 lists to an arbitrator and integrate the 3 lists? Who is harmed by the use of that methodology as a starting point for arbitration?
If your answer is that you want to start with an arbitrated award that was never implemented with an operation that was never combined, I would ask you why? What's the difference? The only credible answer is that you want it because it advantages you in some way. And that is the very definition of a windfall that SLI's are supposed to minimize. It's interesting, but the harder one side pushes for the Nic award, the more it proves that the Nic really was a significant windfall. And a significant windfall will be a hard sell in civil court as you'll be saying: "We will be irreparably damaged...unless you let us have a significant windfall." Good luck with that argument guys. I think you'd come out quicker and look more interested in fairness if you brought all 3 lists to the arbitrator.
Carl
If your answer is that you want to start with an arbitrated award that was never implemented with an operation that was never combined, I would ask you why? What's the difference? The only credible answer is that you want it because it advantages you in some way. And that is the very definition of a windfall that SLI's are supposed to minimize. It's interesting, but the harder one side pushes for the Nic award, the more it proves that the Nic really was a significant windfall. And a significant windfall will be a hard sell in civil court as you'll be saying: "We will be irreparably damaged...unless you let us have a significant windfall." Good luck with that argument guys. I think you'd come out quicker and look more interested in fairness if you brought all 3 lists to the arbitrator.
Carl
#58
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,483
The final SLI will be determined from the lists presented from each side. The M - B process will govern the final SLI. What we are seeing here is the argument for what list is presented from the LCC side. There will be nothing like the TWA debacle here. Federal law prevents that and there is zero that can be done to get a staple job here.
#59
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
No it's not because I don't take that to mean which seniority list(s) we submit and work from. Did we do that in our merger, or did both sides submit them?
I'll take your word for it on the Jones letter(that name doesn't ring a bell), but if that is so then why hasn't the company said so? Judge Silver gave them all the needed to do just that. They could have said "We see no legitimate union purpose and cannot negotiate away from the Nic." Could there be something else?
I'll take your word for it on the Jones letter(that name doesn't ring a bell), but if that is so then why hasn't the company said so? Judge Silver gave them all the needed to do just that. They could have said "We see no legitimate union purpose and cannot negotiate away from the Nic." Could there be something else?
We'll see, of course all of this was supposed to be settle by last April, in your favor, right? According to you?
#60
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: B777/CA retired
Posts: 1,483
If your answer is that you want to start with an arbitrated award that was never implemented with an operation that was never combined, I would ask you why? What's the difference? The only credible answer is that you want it because it advantages you in some way. And that is the very definition of a windfall that SLI's are supposed to minimize. It's interesting, but the harder one side pushes for the Nic award, the more it proves that the Nic really was a significant windfall. And a significant windfall will be a hard sell in civil court as you'll be saying: "We will be irreparably damaged...unless you let us have a significant windfall." Good luck with that argument guys. I think you'd come out quicker and look more interested in fairness if you brought all 3 lists to the arbitrator.
Carl
Carl
We cannot negotiate off the Nicolau because it dilutes our case for a DFR. The fact that the company used an inferior contract on the east to whipsaw the pilot groups does not constitute an advantage for one group over the other. That supposed advantage for the east was the result of an artificial scenario, and would last only until an actual contract with pay raises and new terms better than LOA 93 was put forth. The MOU is that new contract. There is no other path now other than a new JCBA between LCC and (now) AAG.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post