Current State of USAPA
 

Another take on the state of the East dominate union, USAPA>

USAPAWATCH: "Outmaneuvered"
USAPAWATCH.COM published a new post entitled "Outmaneuvered" on 2/1/2014 2:40:18 PM, written by TheEye.
Outmaneuvered

It has been a while since TheEye has blogged, but we couldn’t resist commenting on the denouement of the USAPA saga.

We encourage all US Airways and American pilots to read Judge Silver’s final Order. Contrary to what Hummel and the BPR is spouting off to the east membership, it's clear that Judge Silver completely neutered USAPA. Her ruling effectively ended USAPA’s participation in the upcoming seniority list integration with American. If this reality hasn’t sunk in yet, we suggest you actually read Judge Silver’s Order. You will read that USAPA waived their right to participate in the McCaskill-Bond process with the ratification of the MOU which requires the Allied Pilots Association (APA) to file for single carrier status within four months of the merger.

Silver stated :

“As contemplated by the MOU, in the very near future an election will take place and a new representative will be chosen by all the post-merger pilots. It is almost certain USAPA will lose that election. Once that happens, USAPA will no longer be entitled to participate in the seniority integration.”

With this in mind, it's laughable that the USAPA Merger Committee believes that they have any meaningful purpose. Apparently, they missed APA's filings with the NMB a few weeks ago seeking a single carrier declaration. TheEye’s legal consultants believe that the NMB could rule as soon as March on the single carrier question. At that point USAPA and any other challengers will have thirty days to submit cards to force an election. At the end of thirty days (sometime in April) the APA will be the bargaining agent for all US Airways and American Airlines pilots.

We know this is contrary to what the USAPA leadership has been telling you, but rest assured, they are wrong. We had to laugh when we heard Steve Bradford telling pilots in the crew room that he believes there will be an election as many APA pilots are dissatisfied with their union.

Amazing Steve - did you not read Silver’s Order where she gave the keys to the seniority integration to the APA?

The end of USAPA is almost upon us. Once they are gone, the APA will be responsible for establishing a fair process to integrate the East, West, and American lists.

USAPA - you’ve been outmaneuvered.

An election, huh? Hmm, let's see…

usapa dues: 2.45%
APA dues: 1.0%

Yeah, that's gonna be a tough choice..

So the East says that the MOU neutered the West's Nic ambitions and the West says the MOU neutered USAPA's participation in the SLI ?

Man, it's tough to be a cat at US Airways. :rolleyes:

morecowbell—great handle, but why create a redundant thread when this has already been discussed?

Silver has no jurisdiction over if and when USAPA dissolves. She is just making an observation. The Merger Protocol Agreement is being negotiated as we speak and for all we know they'll enact a clause that guarantees the USAPA Merger Committee role going forward. MCB will also preserve the USAPA Merger Committee.

USAPA WATCH has a worse record of predictions than cacti or WD.

East Pilots - Amazing how they can still go out in public, such a shameful bunch. No integrity at all. Much like 6 year olds that didn't like the game and had to cheat.

Time to see which group has more Integrity: The American Pilots (APA), or the East Pilots(USAPA).

Who knows, maybe they will get along just fine. American Pilots showed no shame screwing the TWA pilots, and the East Pilots show no shame not committing to a "binding arbitration". Fun times ahead.
__________________________________________________ _________
From the nicisthenic web site:


February 4, 2014

Fellow West Pilots:

On Saturday, the four East pilots on the USAPA Merger Committee posted a Merger Committee Update announcing what we had already announced – that we had resigned from the USAPA Merger Committee. That part of their Update was accurate. But that was the only part. The purpose of this letter is to correct the flat inaccuracies and to fill in the gaps of information in that Update. The quotes below come directly from the Update, followed by the truth.


• “While this Committee has always had differences regarding the equity and fairness of the unmodified Nicolau award, the West members have always told us they would consider other methods of integration once the courts ruled. They gave that assurance at the time they were appointed to the Committee and reaffirmed that commitment after their appointments.”


WRONG – When we were interviewed by the BPR for positions on the Merger Committee, we made clear in no uncertain terms that our role – and our only role – was to see to it that the Nicolau Award was the basis for any seniority integration with any other airline. When members of the BPR repeatedly quizzed us on this point, Pat Szymanski – one of USAPA’s lawyers – piped in and told the BPR that our position was perfectly clear and that the BPR should either appoint us or not, but that trying to change our minds through their interrogation was a waste of time. He was right. Our position on the Nicolau Award was clear from the start and never wavered.
• “We have, of course, considered the unmodified Nicolau list and our thorough review clearly demonstrates that it doesn’t satisfy the fair and equitable requirements of McCaskill-Bond, nor is it fair for our pilot group as a whole.”


WRONG – We have seen no analysis presented to, or produced by, the Committee demonstrating that the list produced by the Nicolau Award is not a fair and equitable basis for integrating the US Airways pilots with the American pilots. It was developed under a “fair and equitable” standard by the most respected seniority integration arbitrator in the country for the reasons and under the circumstances that were fully and accurately laid out in his Opinion. No one – no court, arbitrator or serious commentator, other than the East pilots - has said it is not a fair and equitable list. And by the way, as we hardly need tell you, since the Nicolau list was created, West pilots have not enjoyed its benefits and East pilots – who were on the brink of losing their jobs entirely before the merger with America West – have moved happily up the promotion ladder while West pilots have suffered furloughs and displacements. Dave Odell – who was a West first officer when list was issued – was furloughed for a period and is now back flying as an A-320 first officer. And East pilots who were below Dave and were on furlough when the list was issued and had no prospects of ever flying for US Airways again before the merger – are now flying as Captains.


• “During the meeting, the East members repeatedly offered to have [the two of us] review and consider a series of potential SLI methods.”


This is a correct, but a telling statement. We have been on the Merger Committee for eight months. At no point at any meeting that we were at did the Committee develop any integration scenarios; we never even discussed any. But obviously someone had; quite plainly the four East members of the Committee, apparently behind our backs, have developed a “series of potential SLI methods.” If we were supposed to be working collaboratively, how did it come to be that by January 29 there were a “series of potential SLI methods” already developed that we had never heard about?


• “The West members offered as a solution, that they be assigned to a West-only committee to advocate for the unmodified Nicolau award. The East members do not have the ability to approve or disapprove that request, but we told them we would present that request to the BPR. The next morning, before we had the chance to present this request to the BPR, they abruptly resigned via email in a letter that contained numerous inaccuracies.”


We did tell the four East members of the Merger Committee that, if the Committee itself was not going to use the Nicolau Award as a basis for the integration with American, the only fair way to proceed was to create a procedural framework under the Protocol Agreement it was negotiating with APA and the Company that provided for three Merger Committees – an American Committee, an East Committee and a West Committee – thereby allowing the West pilots to advance the Nicolau Award as a basis for integration with the American pilots. That process would put to rest, once and for all, claims that the Nicolau Award was not a fair basis on which to integrate the US Airways list with the American list. If it wasn’t fair, the arbitrators in that case would say so by not using it. The four East Members of the Merger Committee did tell us that they did not have the power to do that (although we do not know why they didn’t have that power – they have been developing and negotiating all other terms of the Protocol Agreement) and would present it to the BPR. But, to quote them “before [they] had the chance to present this request to the BPR” they submitted a proposed Protocol Agreement to APA – over our stated objection – that called for only two Merger Committees – a USAPA Merger Committee and an APA Merger Committee. What is more, they rejected our extremely modest request to put into their proposed Protocol Agreement a provision that would have required the identification of a pilot who was on the Nicolau list and where he would be on that list in the collection and exchange of data with APA. When they sent that proposed Protocol Agreement to APA over our objection, we felt we had no option other than to resign from a Committee that, from the start, had no intention at all in representing the West pilots’ interests.



Perhaps the East pilots on the Merger Committee will present our three-committee proposal to the BPR and perhaps the BPR will adopt it and offer it to APA (who, by their proposed draft seem to have endorsed at least the idea of such an approach). If it does and if APA and the Company accept it, there will be no need for us to serve on the East Merger Committee – the West will have its own Committee. If it does not, we have no interest in serving on a USAPA Merger Committee that will not consider the West pilots’ legitimate interest in having the Nicolau Award at least considered in the upcoming seniority integration process. The point is that either way the BPR decides to go on this point, our usefulness on the Merger Committee, to whatever extent it might have ever been useful, was over.

The BPR has solicited other volunteers from among the West pilot group. Of course, every pilot has to decide for him or herself whether to accept that invitation. But before anyone does consider it, we urge you to read this letter again carefully and think about whether – in light of our experience – you truly feel that the USAPA Merger Committee is headed in a direction that you can endorse.

I guess this is what happens when you go all in with a bad hand. You have to ride it to the end and pray for a miracle. I believe Stravers was a big supporter of the protest filed over the Nic last summer, wasn't he? Maybe the westies were putting some heat on him for getting this submitted into evidence:

"101. In August, 2013, in response to Section 22.C protests filed by Phoenix based pilots , US Airways stated as follows:
This will acknowledge receipt of the letter of protest you filed
pursuant to Section 22.C of the America West Pilots' Collective
Bargaining Agreement concerning the July 1, 2013 seniority list
posted by the Company. In that protest, you contend that the
Company is obligated to implement the Nicolau Award as soon as the
MTA/MOU becomes effective. That contention is meritless, and your
protest must be denied.
Section 22.C of the America West Pilots' Collective Bargaining
Agreement only applies to disputes regarding a West Pilot's seniority
relative to other West Pilots as set forth on the West Pilots seniority
list. Challenges to the East/West integrated seniority list, which will
be created after there has been a merger and the federally-required
McCaskill-Bond seniority integration process has been completed, are
beyond the scope of Section 22.C.
Moreover, even if the Section 22.C process applied to disputes
regarding the future East/West integrated seniority list, your claimthat the MTA/MOU amounts to a single labor agreement obligating the Company to apply the Nicolau Award immediately is contrary to the express provision in the Transition Agreement (Section XII.B)
that any of the Transition Agreement's provisions "[m]ay be modified
by written agreement of the Association and the Airline Parties
collectively."
By its terms, the MOU constitutes a written agreement between
USAPA and the Company which modifies the provisions of the
Transition Agreement relating to implementation of an integrated
seniority list. Paragraph 10.h. of the MOU specifies that "US Airways
agrees that neither this Memorandum nor the JCBA shall provide a
basis for changing the seniority list currently in effect at US Airways
other than through the process set forth in this Paragraph 10." The
Paragraph 10 process provides for seniority-list integration in
accordance with the standards and procedures of the federal
McCaskill-Bond law, and that process will not even begin until after
the merger has been consummated. Modifying the seniority lists
immediately, as you have requested, would violate the MTA/MOU."

AA guys, this was a response from US management.

Sounds wonderful until you remember that the Nicolau is the only list accepted by US Airways management. Not DOH, or DOH with conditions and restrictions, or ordered by height or last name or any combination of the above. The Nicolau still exists, it did not get swept away. It is still to be determined if it will be in play.

You reference a grievance filed by west pilots and ruled on by East managers and not taken to arbitration. Notice please that those managers will be gone. And also notice that USAPA controls how the grievances are processed. We have been ill served by USAPA on every grievance we have filed. Of course the east has as well which begs the question as to why the east has put up with USAPA since they have never done anything except stall a contract. Highest union dues in the business for the least amount of effectiveness. Yep, that's the mentality there.

I do not say that the Nicolau will be used. I don't make predictions since none of us know how this will play out. Silver did not give any clarity to either side except to put the burden back on the company and the final CBA to ensure the process was followed properly. Lots of precedents being set with this merger, since it is so f'ed up going into it.

My 1998 contract was accepted by the company. Can I pick what I want to from it? No, it was modified by LOA 93 and then the MOU. Captain Hogg is our boss for now, US Airways management and he told you how it works. Judge Silver told you, but you hang on to AOL catchphrases.

I'm not making predictions either. The Nic has proven hard to kill. Just pointing out what I see as flawed logic.

10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 - ok

Notice please it was a letter of protest not a grievance.

Furthermore, it was written by the PHX Chief Pilot ( a West pilot ) who has already been announced to remain to be the New American Director PHX.

More desperate hopes. Yawn.

I will admit to being a bit fuzzy on this thing, but didn't you fellas agree to be bound by the findings of the Nic?

From what I've been able to understand, the fact they agreed to it doesn't count if they disagree with the result. Apparently, accepting "binding arbitration" is just agreeing to a discussion between parties with a difference of opinion followed by a suggestion of resolution from a neutral observer. If you disagree with the observer, you simply disregard the suggestion.

Current State of USAPA
 

I am not taking sides here, but Silver did rule that USAPA won it's case against the Nic, but DFR suits will likely follow. Binding arbitration apparently only bound East and West to the pervious merger language that will never be completed.

That said, USAPA is not signing an ISL protocol agreement that does not preserve the current USAPA membership committee and associated union leadership. MCB implies that each certified collective bargaining agent will be represented and USAPA is in no hurry.

USAPA is also filing for an extension with the NMB for SCS. No SCS without a protocol agreement.

No, our former CBA did.

The contract stating an agreement to enter into arbitration was subject to re-negotiation in its entirety. It was. The new contract is controlling, as all previous agreements are a nullity. Compliance according to the new contract is required to the same extent as it was to the previous.

When, if ever, would you say the "binding arbitration" should not be binding? No one ever thought that the arbitration was just a suggestion. In this case, it was more than simply disagreeing with the decision. The majority of the pilots believed that the Nic was not only a windfall for the West, but is was a windfall for the West at the expense of the East. So as long as the question is always framed in a way that leaves this fact out, we will ALWAYS be arguing two different arguments. That said, in the end, the USAirways pilots opted to not combine the seniority list and basically ran out the clock - at great financial loss. I think legally so- but I would never claim to know and apparently great legal minds had differing opinions on the subject, so I'm not alone. This alone, is evidence of the complexity of this case, beyond, " binding is binding." I do think that the clock ran out with the MOU- again I could be wrong so I won't debate this point either. The point- the "binding is binding" argument only addresses one of many aspects of this conundrum. If it were that simple this would have been over long ago.

So usapa if isn't bound by alpa's contracts and can renegotiate anything they want, why can't the apa ?

What the majority of the pilots of one side believe was unfair regardless of the degree isn't my point. That litmus is a subjective one. By the same token, USAPA could argue for DOH with AA pilots in arbitration and win and AA pilots would most certainly believe that to be a windfall as well and could elect to decertify APA, form their own union, subvert the award and thus continue the new AA as three separate pre-merger pilot groups and operations. If that were to become reality, then that subjective position would be just as valid as what the pre USAPA East pilots did.

Of course, In that case I'm sure the "other" side in that hypothetical situation would then cry foul and blame AA pilots for not living up to the possible consequences of a process that they agreed to before hand......and IMO would be correct. THAT was my point. Of ALL my comments on this issue, I've not taken sides on Nic vs. DOH. My ONLY assertions have involved agreeing to the RISKS of an uncertain process and then subverting it when you are unhappy with the result, The DEGREE of unhappiness isn't the issue. Then, after that was successful, attacking and undermining the minority that was conquered to the point of destroying themselves.

That's known as a Pyrrhic Victory and what Silver was talking about. It's also interesting that certain people periodically attempt to use various parts of Silvers ruling when it meets their needs, yet belittle her as some sort of dizzy old battleax when she indicates she does so holding her nose. In reality, I think Silvers ruling adds more questions then it answers.

I don't think that can happen with the way the MOU was written. If we (121 pilots) learned anything from the disastrous US/AWA merger, it's JCBA first, SLI second.

[QUOTE=kingairip;1584626]
This is correct. Different agreement, different integration protocol. Don't tell eagle or cacti that though. You'll confuse them.

The APA can renegotiate the MOU to include the Nic, and ratify it too, to implement the Nic. Good luck .

That doesn't help much...legally speaking, the CBA is you.

So, in other words, before it became a "nullity"...you agreed to be bound by binding arbitration, then didn't....its becoming a little less fuzzy.

Agreed. The JCBA comes first (probably this fall) and then the SLI (arbitration award probably next summer) and so in reality decertifying APA at that point wouldn't nullify the SLI award. I was speaking of a parallel similarity of mimicking what occurred in the Nic arbitration, i.e., 'it would be like", if AA pilots COULD do that.

USAPA will soon be vaporized and then can not legally participate in the SLI arbitration and so there would be little point in subverting the SLI. If anything, I think the only options for those that disagree with whatever result the SLI arbitration produces is to sue APA for DFR and then it would have to be a valid argument that they failed to properly represent a particular sub group based on what their position on that sub group was. McCaskill-Bond requires a "fair and equitable" integration with no windfalls, but that is subjective. The other concept of meeting various "career expectations" seems more easy to quantify and thus both concepts will be in play. As for Nic/No Nic, I think APA will allow it for consideration, but take a neutral stance on its ultimate inclusion. I have no idea what the arbitrators will do, but if I were a betting man, I'd bet against the Nic being used in its pure form.

I think it will be the arbitrators who decide the fate of the Nic, not the APA. Don't tell brakechatter though or you'll confuse him. ;)

USAPA, or someone else representing the US Airways pilots, will have to be involved with the SLI. If they don't, who is going to sit down in front of the arbitrators and say "this is what we want" when the APA says "this is what we want". It's actually ludicrous to say the APA will represent US Airways pilots in a SLI with American pilots. (Granted, third listers and West pilots will only get marginally better representation with USAPA than APA...the West Pilots might even argue worse.) But, the fact remains...you can't have an arbitrator if there isn't two parties to arbitrate.

According to the MOU and APA, once APA is certified as the SOLE Collective Bargaining Agent for ALL AA pilots, USAPA as an entity will cease to exist. They will have no legal right to participate in the SLI because they will not exist. That doesn't mean US Airways pilots wont have a seniority integration committee (or committees) to do what you are saying, it just means it wont be USAPA or any other recognized union.

How do you know the won't exist? Have you read their C&BLs?

You are aware of the company's request to Judge Silver, right?

I'm thinking the 3rd listers may want to petition for their seat at the table. If the west can have one, why not you?

Actually, I want my very own seat at the table to represent MY unique interests. I will present a list with me on top and everyone else gets slotted in by inverse order of post count on APC.

In seriousness, to be fair to the Westies, the MOU does call for "lists in effect" to be merged and IMHO it would be reasonable to have a separate committee to represent each list. The so called "3rd listers" don't actually have a separate list, they are all on either the East or West list.

If USAPA was smart, they would have embraced this concept and called for separate USAPA committees to represent the east and west group in the protocol. Probably APA and the company would have accepted it, then negotations reach impass, then arbitration. That's where it's going anyway, might as well retain some semblance of control.

The danger in allowing APA to control the committees is they may find a way to stack the east and west merger committees with APA ringers.

Usapa is being smart, they know they will get killed in an arbitration if west is allowed to show a neutral what the east has done.

What about when USAPA shows the panel your DFR claim, you know, the one you lost? I don't see why they would worry about the west having their own merger committee. Separate committee, separate seniority list, separate fleet.

Go read what Silver said so you don't embarrass yourself further, management and apa are taking her words seriously. Btw, if the west having its own reps isn't a big deal why is usapa fighting it with everything they got?

Silver went paragraphs and paragraphs saying "Boy, I feel for you guys, I really do", then finished it by saying none of that matters and here's the law.

I've heard that myself in the courtroom. Sucks.

This has been settled, you need to move on.

This is all true.

Embarrassing is going to five courts over ten years and losing. Embarrassing is paying dues and donating to both sides of the legal argument, and losing.

Embarrassing is voting 98% to ratify an agreement that nullifies your own position in order to claim ripeness so you can spend more money in trial, only to have the judge say she has nothing to compare.

Embarrassing is going to a meet and greet in PHX for AOL, and wearing either your Harry Potter wizard costume or your Spartan soldier costume.

Embarrassing is USAPA and 8+ years of LOA 93.

America West pilots talking about salary. That is funny. :cool:


http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/D...20Copilots.pdf