![]() |
Originally Posted by drinksonme
(Post 1695336)
Directly from the union update yesterday: "The NMB asked the parties"
Then this today: NMB agrees with flight attendants that American Airlines and US Airways are ?single transportation system? | Dallas Morning News I thinks it's more of a realization by USAPA, then a worry about SOC 18 month countdown, that they are not really making a case that is going to win over the courts and NMB. If they lose those battles, then they have no legs to stand on. Yes, finishing SOC would put more pressure on the situation, but that seems like protection the company afforded itself IF things went way south, and appeal after appeal racked up over the years. USAPA can TRY to come to an agreement with APA and move forward without all the ugliness with this mediation. I am probably wrong, but this "movement" is a positive thing and hopefully cooler heads are prevailing, but time.....and maybe the courts (hopefully not) will tell. The NMB declared single carrier status as it pertains to the FA's. If you read the update from the APFA https://www.apfa.org/hotline/hotline...s/3207-7-29-14, it's interesting how it will happen and the involvement of both unions after the APFA takes over. Interesting read at the bottom. It says that AFTER the 30 days the APFA will become the new union. HOWEVER, the AFA will STILL represent the US Airways FA's until a JCBA. And even after that, the AFA will continue to process grievances that arose under US Airways. I guess it's different for a pilots union opposed to a FA union. I mean how can the NMB allow another union to have ANY input after the APFA is declared the union? Unless that's how it's supposed to work... :) I'm betting it's stuff like that which will be defined by a protocol agreement for the pilots. The AFA is on the way out. But they will still be involved even after they are no longer the union. I guess it's not unheard of for USAPA to expect the same... And the NMB doesn't seem to object to this. |
Originally Posted by porqueno
(Post 1695382)
I thought the MOU had a no furlough clause
|
Originally Posted by algflyr
(Post 1695370)
There is a no furlough clause in the MTA. It will be a part of the JCBA. It will also extend beyond the amendment date of the JCBA while in negotiations for a new contract that will come after the JCBA they are currently working on...
Read paragraph 11 of the MOU... |
Originally Posted by fosters
(Post 1695400)
It's my understanding that the MTA is valid only for 18 months after SOC
And it was 18 months after SOC OR a JCBA and SLI become effective, whichever is earlier. While it's possible a SLI will not be reached before the 18 month limit, I honestly believe it will. The mediation begins in less than a week. A lot will become known after that process runs its course. |
Originally Posted by algflyr
(Post 1695412)
The MTA is a transition agreement that gets us to a JCBA. Then the JCBA will be in effect. The only thing that had ties to an 18 month countdown was certain protections contained in paragraph 8 of the MOU. The no furlough clause is NOT one of those protections.
And it was 18 months after SOC OR a JCBA and SLI become effective, whichever is earlier. While it's possible a SLI will not be reached before the 18 month limit, I honestly believe it will. The mediation begins in less than a week. A lot will become known after that process runs its course. I understand why USAPA is dragging their feet but also at some point they need to have a come to Jesus moment. |
Originally Posted by algflyr
(Post 1695387)
The NMB declared single carrier status as it pertains to the FA's.
If you read the update from the APFA https://www.apfa.org/hotline/hotline...s/3207-7-29-14, it's interesting how it will happen and the involvement of both unions after the APFA takes over. Interesting read at the bottom. It says that AFTER the 30 days the APFA will become the new union. HOWEVER, the AFA will STILL represent the US Airways FA's until a JCBA. And even after that, the AFA will continue to process grievances that arose under US Airways. I guess it's different for a pilots union opposed to a FA union. I mean how can the NMB allow another union to have ANY input after the APFA is declared the union? Unless that's how it's supposed to work... :) I'm betting it's stuff like that which will be defined by a protocol agreement for the pilots. The AFA is on the way out. But they will still be involved even after they are no longer the union. I guess it's not unheard of for USAPA to expect the same... And the NMB doesn't seem to object to this. I did read the article. It's the bigger picture. NMB says FA's are one, I highly doubt they will say pilots are not. With regard to grievences, it makes sense that the AFA should handle the grievences THAT AROSE UNDER US AIRWAYS. Why would the APFA handle US AIRWAYS grievences when they never were under US Airways contracts, nor the bargaining agent when those grievences arose. I can easily see the same thing happening with the pilots. |
Originally Posted by porqueno
(Post 1695382)
I thought the MOU had a no furlough clause
|
Originally Posted by drinksonme
(Post 1695430)
I did read the article. It's the bigger picture. NMB says FA's are one, I highly doubt they will say pilots are not. With regard to grievences, it makes sense that the AFA should handle the grievences THAT AROSE UNDER US AIRWAYS. Why would the APFA handle US AIRWAYS grievences when they never were under US Airways contracts, nor the bargaining agent when those grievences arose. I can easily see the same thing happening with the pilots.
The mediation is more red tape, but maybe, just maybe the APA will commit to abide by the law rather than telegraph their intention to flout it at SOC. There is a lawsuit in D.C.... APA won't want to add evidence against themselves, but the delay is marvelous.... What a fine line.. |
Originally Posted by drinksonme
(Post 1695430)
I did read the article. It's the bigger picture. NMB says FA's are one, I highly doubt they will say pilots are not. With regard to grievences, it makes sense that the AFA should handle the grievences THAT AROSE UNDER US AIRWAYS. Why would the APFA handle US AIRWAYS grievences when they never were under US Airways contracts, nor the bargaining agent when those grievences arose. I can easily see the same thing happening with the pilots.
Some think USAPA MUST immediately dissolve once the NMB rules single carrier. That's just not how it works. They will have to remain for certain things until everything is settled. Namely grievances and SLI. That's what a protocol agreement will define... |
Originally Posted by PurpleTurtle
(Post 1695438)
There are min block-hours flown for each list, as well as equal reduction language, etc.
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:03 PM. |
Website Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands