Originally Posted by aa73

R57,

I didn't read APA's protocol letter as "controlling the situation." Perhaps you did. All I interpreted from the letter is that APA is laying out a foundation that includes usapa, AA and USair on the road to arbitration. How is that "controlling the situation?"

Originally Posted by DrivinTheDash

The single element of the APA proposal that gives me pause, and that I would consider "controlling the situation," is paragraph 16:



This provision, it seems to me, gives APA wide latitude to modify almost everything being agreed to without input/approval/consent of the USAPA side of the house. In the US/HP merger, there was a provision for separate ratification of the JCBA, and, I believe, for changes to the transition agreement. That is, even after SCS was declared, the TA could not be changed without agreement of both east and west. I would be very comfortable with this proposal if paragraph 16 were changed to require consent of both sides of the house to agree to changes after SCS. For example:

Originally Posted by Surprise

What's the latest on Single-Carrier Status? Wasn't that supposed to be decided already?

Originally Posted by eaglefly

Already ruled as such regarding the agents petition. In approving it, the NMB noted the pilots MTA as one supporting document. It would appear a favorable ruling of Single Carrier for the pilots is imminent. If the JCBA is held up beyond MOU provisions, it goes to arbitration (where we all will likely lose ). There's a 24-month deadline for SLI arbitration as well, unless USAPA is successful in nullifying the MOU or Parker seeks its nullification as a response to USAPA's path of choice.

Originally Posted by R57 relay

I don't have a philosophical problem with the west pilots having their own merger committee, I've said that with the separate seniority list provision of the MOU/MTA I can see the logic in it. However, I can see a potential for legal issues and I sure have a problem with the APA controlling the whole process. This is why:

http://www.americanbar.org/content/d...thcheckdam.pdf


Read the bottom of page 24, top of 25 if nothing else. I can't cut and paste my copy.

USAPA Merger Committee Update


"Click here to read the proposed Protocol Agreement from the APA, which you may have seen posted elsewhere after its release by the APA. Our Merger Counsel sent our proposals for Protocol, Union Transition, and Global Settlement Agreements to APA Counsel on April 29. This week’s APA proposal came to us unannounced, with no prior communication to our Merger Counsel. Needless to say, we were surprised to see the APA’s proposal, given APA's recent refusal to negotiate, and after we were told there would be no counterproposal.

Contrary to what you may have heard from APA communications, this APA Protocol Agreement proposal does not incorporate the compromises we offered back on April 29. In fact, the APA proposal rejects virtually every item we included in our April 29 proposal, which protected your McCaskill-Bond rights, while also resolving the impasse in the negotiations.

For example:



(1) The APA proposal continues to provide that once APA becomes the certified representative, it controls the Seniority List Integration (SLI) process, thus allowing it and the Company to make wholesale changes to the Protocol Agreement. This means US Airways pilots would waive their protections under McCaskill-Bond and only be protected by APA's Duty of Fair Representation. This was the reason we could not agree on a Protocol Agreement back in February, and is what led to the need for USAPA to file a lawsuit in the federal court in the District of Columbia compelling APA, AA and US Airways to follow the requirements of the McCaskill-Bond Amendment.



(2) The APA proposal adds a new requirement that the integrated list resulting from the M-B process would be implemented only through a Joint Collective Bargaining Process, completely controlled by APA. If this requirement were allowed, USAPA and our Merger Committee would be cut out of the process.



(3) The APA proposal requires USAPA to withdraw its opposition to the NMB single carrier determination, paving the way for APA to become the sole bargaining representative for the combined pilot group and eliminating USAPA’s right to separately represent our pilots, thereby allowing APA to implement its plan to unilaterally control the SLI process.



(4) The APA proposal requires USAPA to withdraw the M-B Injunction Action currently pending in federal court in the District of Columbia with prejudice. “With prejudice” means the claims in the lawsuit cannot be refiled and that we give up our right under McCaskill-Bond to proceed to arbitration now.



(5) The APA proposal includes no guarantee whatsoever that APA will refrain from interfering with USAPA’s relationship with the USAPA Merger Committee.

The TWA pilots waived their contractual language which would have ensured Allegheny-Mohawk Section 3 and 13 protections. The Merger Committee has resisted any effort to forfeit our M-B rights to ensure those protections, and rest assured, we will continue to do so.

In short, the APA proposal is regressive. It is a step backwards from the proposal we rejected in February.

Additionally, the APA posted its proposal on the web just hours after providing it to us, after agreeing to keep protocol negotiations confidential. We fully appreciate the need for appropriate transparency, but productive negotiations do not happen on the internet. While we intend to honor the confidentiality of protocol negotiations we agreed to, you should know our compromise proposal was a reasonable solution to the impasse. We cannot accept a proposal that separates us from our M-B rights and effective representation in the SLI process.

We assure you we are committed to gaining a fair and equitable result for all US Airways pilots in the SLI process. We will keep you informed of any developments in this matter as they occur.

USAPA Merger Committee"

Originally Posted by aa73

R57,

I didn't read APA's protocol letter as "controlling the situation." Perhaps you did. All I interpreted from the letter is that APA is laying out a foundation that includes usapa, AA and USair on the road to arbitration. How is that "controlling the situation?"

Originally Posted by R57 relay

Maybe I'm reading too much into it, but have the same concerns as Drivin. Perhaps the APA should clearly state their intentions. The paper I posted and posts from eaglefly make me nervous.

Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle

SCS in the last merger did not resolve the SLI dispute and it won't solve it in this merger.

Originally Posted by cactiboss

You forget last scs put usapa in charge, this scs will oust the east pilots, very different.