Really ?

The principle change to ALPA's merger policy as a result of the Nic was to include the addition of "longevity" (where the arbitrators here diluted its weight to arrive at a more fair award based on specific factors of THIS integration). Had that been applied (and depending on weight assigned to it), one could argue that West F/O's with DOH's between 1998 to 2005 wouldn't have as easily been mixed in with East pilots (many now captains) with DOH's between 1985 and 1987. That concept here would seem to go against bolstering the concept of pre-merger career expectations absent long and complicated fences. I'm for you guys having the ability to argue for the Nic, I just don't think it will be used in its pure form.

Had there been no merger with AA, I'd see a better chance to get that result (but still a major wildcard, which the arbitrators here may see too), but that would've hinged on Parker making some type of move to force resolution or in absence of that, over half the East list hanging up their spurs followed by a West coup d'état.

 

Ha ha ha. Like I said, you are reaching. Good luck. I hope you find some peace, someday.

 

Yes really, What you are suggesting is that the arbitrators will now apply alpa's new merger policy to the usairways pilots 2005 merger. The ual/cal used "single management" as the trigger, translate that to usairways and you get something very close to the nic

 

I think the arbitrators will closely follow the outline of the UAL-CAL process in looking at the 3 carriers present and future competitive and financial prospects. They will evaluate and weigh the "Economic Background" of the 3 carriers (more relevant then two, considering the SLI situation there) in the context of what pilots on each of the 3 lists could reasonably expect in their careers and the individual "Economic Status and Prospects at Merger Closing Date" of each of the 3 operations, including financial status and fleet composition (to include orders and options), which is even more relevant.

AA's bankruptcy was widely agreed to be a "housecleaning" move to gut labor, most notably pensions and retiree medical benefits and not the typical financial knee-buckling necessity usually seen. I'd be surprised if the arbitrators weighed AA negatively from a financial status or questionable prospects standpoint, at least in comparison to US Airways or America West (which is really what is being compared in this SLI and not say compared to Delta or Southwest). APA would have plenty of ammo for that argument considering last quarters financials and the projections going forward. As for the actual arguments by the 2-3 sides, I don't think the arbitrators will factor in "appeasing" anyone as that didn't occur in the UAL-CAL SLI. If done properly, it will be more of a straight valuation in what each of the 3 parties brought to the table in career prospects for their respective pilots and present and expected compensation

 

I didn't know we are merging 3 carriers. BTW I am not discussing the AA/us sli, I'm just discussing the order of usairways pilots.

 

No, I'm not suggesting they'll adopt ALPA merger policy. What I'm saying is that should they adopt the Nic, they'll then have no choice but to mitigate the inequities it would create for all pilots such decision would present with a slew of complexities to ensure all 3 groups pre-merger career expectations are maintained to the greatest extent possible or perhaps disregard that concept entirely. I simply don't see that. What you seem to be asserting is that the arbitrators will (or should) apply and give weight to "hypothetical" situations that didn't exist (whether right or wrong) before or in lieu of ACTUAL situations to unemotionally (but more accurately) arrive at a fair and equitable result for THIS SLI, the ultimate success being the maximum realization of pre-merger career expectations.

They could do it your way, but to be fair, it would have to be "fence city" for MANY years or instead they could devise a "hybrid" model just like the UAL-CAL result taking into account multiple factors with various weights to minimize or possibly even eliminate the undesirable aspect of fences.

 

Placing the usairways pilots in nicolau order actually simplifies the sli process. Why would more fences be needed if the usairways pilots are in nicolau seniority order? That makes no sense.

 

In order to accurately assess what each pilots pre-merger career expectations truly were (and not what they were SUPPOSED to be), it would seem the arbitrators would (for the purposes of SLI), examine each separate operation and separate list. Where could you have reasonably expected to be status and compensation-wise in 3 years, 6 years or 12 years, etc. ? Where would pilot X at AA or pilot Y at U East ? Had both your groups been actually integrated and one list at time of merger, it would seem to be different. This wouldn't seem to apply to "constructive notice" pilots on any of the 3 lists though.

I understand that should your merger committee see the light of day, that you'll undoubtedly argue that your pre-merger career expectations were really based on the Nicolau award even though not one aspect of it was ever realized, i.e., adoption of a hypothetical SLI model and not a reality-based model. I suppose they could adopt that, but the by-product would be extremely messy to correct what the Nic presents for integration with AA pilots, so you see, whether you agree or not, the "order of US Airways pilots" is relevant to this SLI and very much so. It doesn't exist in a vacuum and its inclusion will impact greatly on what the arbitrators might thus have to do to mitigate that inclusion should it occur.

 

Did they tell you that, or is that your conclusion? Could it be they don't like the negative light the Nicolau award brought to arbitration?

I don't know, but it brought a ton of changes and I had three ALPA national guys tell me it was f'ed up.

 

Really? I will have to read it again as I have to admit that I'm well into cocktail hour, but I don't re member it favoring the west POV.