Protocol Agreement Reached per USAPA
05-04-2014 | 07:23 AM
#32
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Jan 2013
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Exactly. The APA hasn't come out and said they were still actively negotiating seniority issues with USAPA. But it was revealed in a recap of a special meeting the APA had late last month.
05-04-2014 | 11:25 AM
#33
Banned
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
05-04-2014 | 12:23 PM
#34
Banned
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
Stephens Decl. ¶¶ 33-34. According to Stephens:
APA and [the American pilot merger committee] were unwilling to agree to [USAPA’s insistence on] a reservation of rights, for the precise reason that USAPA had argued to the court in Addington v. US Airline Pilots Ass’n, No. 13- cv-00471, Doc. 298 (D. Ariz. Jan. 10, 2014), that only the certified bargaining representative is a proper party to the seniority list arbitration, albeit with separate committees representing the pre-merger seniority list pilots, and that APA would be that representative when the arbitration would occur under the MOU. The court held that it “has no doubt that—as is USAPA’s consistent practice— USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court’s patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration.” Stephens Decl., Ex. 11 (quoting Addington v. U.S. Airline Pilots Ass'n, CV-13-00471-PHX-ROS
APA and [the American pilot merger committee] were unwilling to agree to [USAPA’s insistence on] a reservation of rights, for the precise reason that USAPA had argued to the court in Addington v. US Airline Pilots Ass’n, No. 13- cv-00471, Doc. 298 (D. Ariz. Jan. 10, 2014), that only the certified bargaining representative is a proper party to the seniority list arbitration, albeit with separate committees representing the pre-merger seniority list pilots, and that APA would be that representative when the arbitration would occur under the MOU. The court held that it “has no doubt that—as is USAPA’s consistent practice— USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court’s patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration.” Stephens Decl., Ex. 11 (quoting Addington v. U.S. Airline Pilots Ass'n, CV-13-00471-PHX-ROS
05-04-2014 | 01:15 PM
#35
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
The only thing revealed in the communique I read was that Stephens made a presentation to the BOD on the present situation regarding SLI issues. i.e., a status report and NOT necessarily that any interaction took place with USAPA. That was (and apparently still is) an assumption that has been confirmed by no one.
05-04-2014 | 01:18 PM
#36
Banned
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 8,350
Likes: 0
Stephens Decl. ¶¶ 33-34. According to Stephens:
APA and [the American pilot merger committee] were unwilling to agree to [USAPA’s insistence on] a reservation of rights, for the precise reason that USAPA had argued to the court in Addington v. US Airline Pilots Ass’n, No. 13- cv-00471, Doc. 298 (D. Ariz. Jan. 10, 2014), that only the certified bargaining representative is a proper party to the seniority list arbitration, albeit with separate committees representing the pre-merger seniority list pilots, and that APA would be that representative when the arbitration would occur under the MOU. The court held that it “has no doubt that—as is USAPA’s consistent practice— USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court’s patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration.” Stephens Decl., Ex. 11 (quoting Addington v. U.S. Airline Pilots Ass'n, CV-13-00471-PHX-ROS
APA and [the American pilot merger committee] were unwilling to agree to [USAPA’s insistence on] a reservation of rights, for the precise reason that USAPA had argued to the court in Addington v. US Airline Pilots Ass’n, No. 13- cv-00471, Doc. 298 (D. Ariz. Jan. 10, 2014), that only the certified bargaining representative is a proper party to the seniority list arbitration, albeit with separate committees representing the pre-merger seniority list pilots, and that APA would be that representative when the arbitration would occur under the MOU. The court held that it “has no doubt that—as is USAPA’s consistent practice— USAPA will change its position when it needs to do so to fit its hard and unyielding view on seniority. . . . The Court’s patience with USAPA has run out. . . . And when USAPA is no longer the certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration.” Stephens Decl., Ex. 11 (quoting Addington v. U.S. Airline Pilots Ass'n, CV-13-00471-PHX-ROS
05-04-2014 | 10:06 PM
#38
Line Holder
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 1,557
Likes: 31
From: B777/CA retired
Did you even read the BPR update? What I posted is the summation of what has happened.
I will make this prediction, SCS will mean USAPA goes away. I also believe there will be some big changes after that date.
05-04-2014 | 10:31 PM
#39
Gets Weekends Off
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,967
Likes: 0
The APA appears intent on using errant dicta, among other things, to delay or manipulate as much as possible. They are grabbing at everything they can and are throwing everything at the wall hoping something will stick. They have nothing to gain by negotiating or by going into MB arbitration so they may as well go all out trying to avoid both. I don't blame them.
The more hostility the APA demonstrates, the more obvious it becomes that MB indeed has a legitimate purpose.....
05-04-2014 | 10:56 PM
#40
Banned
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Likes: 0
It's not just the apa. the company also has it out for usapa. Didn't you read the MOU? No jcba until usapa is gone, no SLI until JCBA. The company wrote that into MOU and you agreed thus fulfilling the MB requirements. What you east scum did to the west is about to be done to you.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
