I will immediately offer full disclosure and state that I am not an American nor a USAir pilot. I am, however, a 17 year veteran of the industry, and have been with United for a little over a year. I was hired just prior to the SLI announcement, and I did not have a dog in that fight anymore than I have one in the USAir/AMR one.

That said, my late father was an attorney and an arbitrator/mediator, and we discussed his work extensively, so I have a bit of a deeper understanding of the way the process works than most, and one thing I get really tired of hearing is the accusations of the arbitrators being "bought off" by one side or the other. In truth, that just doesn't happen.

That said, as the US/AMR SLI process unfolds, I'd like to offer the following concept.

Instead of arguing the SLI merits in front of a single group of 3 or 5 arbitrators, go ahead and pay the money to argue the case in front of 4 separate sets of 3 or 5 panel arbitrators. Each would act as though they are deciding the case.

Once the arguments are complete, each panel will go into deliberations and decide the case as they see fit.

When all 4 groups have completed their work, one will randomly be selected as the the final decision, and they will present it as such. Once the decision is rendered, the remaining panels will present their own decisions.

The point is this: the chances are that all 4 panels will render decisions that are either the same or very nearly so. This should--in theory--alleviate concerns of the non-existent "buy off," and demonstrate that the appropriate law (and case law) will have been applied equally, fairly, and properly.

It's just food for thought, and it will not eliminate the crazy conspiracy theories that will inevitably come up, but it will help all parties to provide the most focused arguments they can, while at the same time providing some reassurance that, under the law and NOT UNDER THE CLOUD OF EMOTION, nobody is getting an unfair deal.

I'm not planning on doing a lot of responding to the replies to this thread. I'm simply using it as a conversation starter for something outside the box, a new tool that might be used in this and future mergers.

Ladies and gentlemen....start your engines!

 

Its a great idea, but the fact is that APA and USAPA have no motivation to do an SLI because AMR and the East are the ones with all the retirements, so DOH just clicks along the longer this is tied up in court. Why rush off to arbitration?

By the way, I'm not planning on doing a lot of responding to the replies to this thread.

 

How many billable hours would that be for 4 separate panels?

3 panels of say 3 each = say $300 per hour. X 2 weeks. 8 hours per day including lunch.

It is a great idea. $30K ish.

Runaway Jury was on TBS last night.

 

The point of arbitration is not primarily fairness. It is partly about efficiency and finality. Not sure the proposal helps that.

Secondly, the issues here are complex so I think there really could be a fair bit of divergence in awards.

Anyways, this already is getting sucked into court. USAPA in particular needs to drag this out if they can, and the company agreed to provided the raises pre-SLI so what's the rush to arb?

SCS is the next milestone. Let's see if/when that happens. We're getting up there in dates.

 

So here's a question that probably has no answer.... I'm a new hire that is completely lost in this process. What is the outlook on SLI completion? Does this go to arbitration a certain time after JCBA? I've heard claims between 6 months to 2 years, but I'm not sure what the determining factor will be.... Any simple explanation for the clueless?

 

The end of 2015 is the absolute earliest, the most likely is several more years due to lawsuits holding it up it court. That is not what you want to hear but it is reality.

 

Everything is based off the "effective date" which is Dec. 9th 2013(I think?). The MOU has provisions to end the SLI process 24 months after the effective date.

I'm sure USAPA will find a way to stall it though.

 

You don't have a clue. APA does not worry about their WB flying (opinions of three different formerly senior Captains now happily retired). It will be protected. Your "regional" does not have enough WB flying to even make an effort to go after. APA's primary concern is allowing USAPA labor crap on their property and USAPA's idea that they will matter after SCS. USAPA is but a flea to be kept away. It will be. And the Native American pilots will have their WB flying.

 

You don't understand how arbitration works. The billable time is not just while the arbitrator holds formal talks with the parties, the majority of time is researching and studying the data and compiling the results . Even with a army of paralegals THAT takes a lot of time. That is where the cost comes from. For something like a SLI for major airlines, plan on at least 2-4 million dollars.

 

This is correct. "Fairness" is NOT a promise that can be kept. You do the arbritration as fair as possible for all involved, but that does not mean it will be "fair" to all involved. Or any for that matter.