Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- American (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/american/)

- - Nic ... (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/american/83676-nic.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by R57 relay (Post 1726407)

Frisco,

I've asked the question, but no one took a bite at it. Maybe you know. I'd come to believe that the APA would just wait until SCS then appoint a west merger committee. Any idea why they didn't?

It's funny that the west cries about the law and cacti likes to talk about the east striking for Nicolau then not accepting his decision(true). But the west has tried and failed twice with Silver(they requested her this time, I believe) but doesn't want to take her word.

"Meaning of McCaskill-Bond
With the limited amount of guidance from CAB, and the parties offering no other legal authority or materials that might help illuminate Congressional intent, the Court is left to arrive at the meaning of McCaskill-Bond on its own. Section 3 requires carriers provide a “fair and equitable” integration process. And Section 13 requires arbitration between “the organization or organizations representing the employee or employees.” The Court is persuaded this statutory text should be interpreted in harmony with those CAB decisions allowing participation only by the employees’ certified representatives. When a certified representative exists, that representative owes a duty of fair representation to all employees.
A “fair and equitable” integration process will involve that representative acting on behalf of the represented employees. And when a certified bargaining representative exists, introducing an independent group, such as the West Pilots, would “interfere with the established representation format” and also “tamper with and inevitably complicate the
procedures used to negotiate seniority list integration.” In addition, allowing the involvement of any employee or group of employees with sufficiently distinct interests would be an invitation to chaos; the seniority
integration process cannot accommodate the participation of whoever might be affected by the final result. Therefore, the process contemplated by McCaskill-Bond allows only the certified bargaining representatives to participate in seniority integration proceedings."

The west pilots point out that Judge Silver said that SCS, USAPA would have not rights. Could it be that the APA's and company's attorneys disagreed with that point? In any case, all party agreed with USAPA's participation, not with the west's.

I don't know the answer to your question. I have a feeling a lot is going to happen in the next week. Rumor is the NMB will rule again as soon as Monday. I'm curious how Wilson will respond to the letter published in the Cactuspilot update. I hope things will be clearer by this time next week.

Quote:

Originally Posted by GrapeNuts (Post 1726448)

Frisco, quit teasing... We'll get 3500 any minute now :D

If it happens when OU and Tennessee are playing, I won't be here to notice:rolleyes:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hueypilot (Post 1726441)

I think most 3rd list guys would agree that using 2005 positions while also giving credit for LOS (to avoid completely trashing the furloughed guys careers) would be fair. It's not the Nic, but it's also not DOH. And yes, it's basically going back to the drawing board WRT an east/west combined list.

Ok, even though I disagree I can accept that train of thought. If and that is a big "if" the west gets a seat, I can't see how the arbitrators will go back in time to redo Nicolaus work.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Frisco727 (Post 1726470)

I'm curious how Wilson will respond to the letter published in the Cactuspilot update. I hope things will be clearer by this time next week.

That letter was required per the PA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cactiboss (Post 1726484)

That letter was required per the PA.

I see.

Pursuant to the terms of the Protocol Agreement between APA, USAPA and American Airlines....

Quote:

Originally Posted by cactiboss (Post 1726435)

Start over? As a third lister do you believe the west shouild start from dec 2013 positions or september 2005 positions?

The PA clearly says Dec. 9th, 2013.

Quote:

Originally Posted by cactiboss (Post 1726484)

That letter was required per the PA.

CAPT. Cactiboss help me with this question, the west pilots that were furloughed from the west and now have a new hire position on the east list. In june 2013 USAPA moved them up the list in front of all the so called third listers. Now with three list going to the arbitrators and now those west/ east pilots have 700 pilots below them on the east list, 100 below them on the west list what list, would you pick to be on? How do the west pilots just senior to the west/east pilot feel about a relative position seniority integration? Thank you in advance.

Quote:

Originally Posted by algflyr (Post 1726493)

The PA clearly says Dec. 9th, 2013.

You think that we have to begin from the dec. 2013 lists don't you? I know you probably won't believe me so maybe one of your eastie brothers can enlighten you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Flyin the Flag (Post 1726498)

What a GREAT question! Let's brake it down so I don't miss anything

Quote:

the west pilots that were furloughed from the west and now have a new hire position on the east list

So 3 years after the merger closed and after we had a single operating certificate and we were ONE company, the west furloughed and the east hired pilots that already had an employeee number as pilots at the same company

Quote:

In june 2013 USAPA moved them up the list in front of all the so called third listers.

So usapa having forced the furloughs and then violating it's own constitution, placed the west pilots below new hires on the east for 5 freakin years, decides to move those pilots up the seniority list by their doh on the WEST side in an effort to help their chances in court. Never mind the contract clearly says all third listers are junior to all pre merger pilots

Quote:

Now with three list going to the arbitrators and now those west/ east pilots have 700 pilots below them on the east list, 100 below them on the west list what list, would you pick to be on?

Well let's see here, a furloughed west pilot can go east and have better career expectations than the west pilots that were never furloughed and are senior to the furloughed pilot. Now let's not forget that all these pilots work for the same company on the same certificate since before the first west pilot was furloughed, also ignore the fact that every pilot hired post september 2005 is junior to all east/west pilots and placed on a third list.

Quote:

How do the west pilots just senior to the west/east pilot feel about a relative position seniority integration? Thank you in advance.

So how does the west feel by doing a "relative" position integration using dec 2013 positions now that every west pilot has moved backwards and the pilot group is 500 pilots smaller than it was in 2005. In other words west pilot O'dell hired in 2004 has about the same bidding horsepower as a east new hire hired in august of 2014.

I'll answer you with a question. What do you think a reasonable Arbitrator will do with the information above? That is the answer to your question

That is an amazing set of facts Cacti, and it will be interesting to see how the usapian merger committee will treat the west whether they are allowed their own representation or not...Think about it, if the west comes under the purview of USAPA they will still be treated, effectively, as a separate group within a group in competition with the east list as well as APA for SLI positions...still the 3 lists scenario...just a slight conflict of interest there...USAPA (being, effectively an "east" entity) lobbying both for and against factions coming under its legal purview....i.e. -in that scenario absolutely no possibility of fairness for the west. Even my longtime friend R57, in his infinite, unbiased opinion (and no doubt, in his infinite joy at seeing me re-enter the fray in this argument) has acknowledged his semibeloved USAPA might not be the best advocates for the west position...

On the other hand...separate reps for the west advocating the Nic will assuredly be met by the black-hearted pirates of Usapia with an attempt at total delegitimization of the Nic...which will lead into the same arguments presented leading up to the Nic...a rehashing of the relevant pilot demographics of each airline AT THE TIME OF THE ORIGINAL MERGER....which, of course would be the only legitimate timeframe from which to argue the merits/deficiencies of the Nic.

Now, in either scenario it seems Usapians will be forced, by their own central position at the center of the universe...manifested as an innate disregard of all human ethical concepts excepting where it applies to their own benefit, -to advocate regarding the west as a Johnny-come-lately group who suddenly appeared on the scene at the time of the AA merger....-a group whose star has been falling...a meteoric, arcing plunge over the past 7 years that has seen a base closing and across the board cutbacks and furloughs...all that, of course, having nothing whatsoever to do with anything inside the lofty, rarefied central atmosphere of Usapia...

Seriously though, how will USAPA advocate the placing of its 3rd listers below the west (giving them credit that they will at least recognize the sanity of that move)...and yet pretend that the SLI should be a complete do-over from scratch, starting at the time of the AA merger? It seems the bounds of self-centered hypocrisy stand a good chance of being stretched beyond the historical limits of even usapian rational thought.