Piklepausepull

Er...You just might want to investigate just who "Alfaromeo" really is, just how much experience he has in these matters, and just who might be "employing" him on their SLI team, before you casually dismiss his opinions!

I'm just sayin'.............................

crzipilot

Sure what's his name? Is be more concerned if I hired him that he is on a web board debating opinions of a bunch of pilots that really have no bearing on any of this. Sorta like a masterbation. Of opinions

sailingfun

Except for the fact he has more experience in this area and more success then perhaps any pilot on this board.

PurpleTurtle

The premise that an arbitrator would violate the prized foundational neutrality of their profession by pushing their thumb on the scales of justice to reverse what the courts have already settled numerous times... that is an interesting premise.

PurpleTurtle

If he is billing his client for posting on message boards then I would say that is indeed more success than "any pilot on this board."

But if he is such an expert, then maybe he can explain why an SLI arbitration panel will assume to themselves the authority and responsibility to determine the fairness and legality of the status quo...

R57 relay

I was surprised to read that you were in the top 15% of the DL list. In our past exchanges I would have sworn that you were a junior west guy. Just goes to show how assumptions can be made.

All the points you made are true, and you may be spot on about your predictions. But a few facts remain. At the time of the MOU the two pilot groups were completely separate, with separate seniority lists, fleets and contracts. The MOU called for a nullity to all that came before. So how does the board determine our career expectations? There was a high probability that someday we would have been a combined seniority list, but when, and what would it have looked like then? What if AOL lost their last appeal and decided to come to a compromise? What if we hit hard times and US divested part of the airline prior to a joint seniority list, like Frontier? What if we hit really hard times and filed chapter 7? Lot's of scenarios, so what does the panel use?

Hopefully they won't use the massively damaged crystal ball that Nic did. Did you ever read the US/AW dispatcher arbitration and read how Bloch came to a completely different conclusion about the value of the two airlines? And if you follow the rest of the airline business as well as you do SLIs, then you know that the period of separate operations showed that Bloch's vision was better than Nicolau's. So the new panel will uphold Nicolau's flawed work, just because they respected him? You ever fly with a guy that you respected, but saw him make a mistake? Would you say it wasn't a mistake just because you respected him? BTW, a manager of pilot scheduling recently said that the sole west base, PHX, was carrying about 20% more block hours than is necessary, only to meet contractual obligations of the MOU. Maybe he will be called to testify in the arbitration.

I've mentioned potential pitfalls for the west pilots going into this as a separate entity. Do you see any?

So, you have tons of experience and might be helping the west. Why? What's your interest in this? Justice? Pay? ALPA loyalty? Just curious.

If you are an ALPA loyalist looking for payback, a few questions. If the only problem with the Nic was the east pilot's reaction, why did it cause so many changes in ALPA policy, and pilot SLIs in general? Why did 3 guys from ALPA national tell me that they knew the Nicolau award was screwed up and they would fix the problem, they just couldn't do anything for us? "Sorry guys."

eaglefly

Again, we disagree. I think each SLI has its own factors and EVERY aspect of the UAL-CAL is not necessarily applicable to this one. You feel comfortable sharpshooting that particular basis and I'm saying it's not a guarantee. I understand though Leonidas is committed to a position of absolute certainty that the Nic is the only valid US Airways list as to even hint at it being optional tanks their very argument as to its validity.

As for the first arbitration, I don't think the issue of the Nic is even part of that per se. That argument will center around the Wests legal right to be a part of the SLI process as a recognized party in the first place. The arbitrators considering that question may maintain a narrow view of that question in strictly legal terms. Right now, the West doesn't exist and the train has already left the station with only two passengers, APA and USAPA. The PA provides for the 2 passengers to compile, quantify and clarify data of pilots from 3 SEPARATE LISTS (not two). Additionally, it was only those two passengers that picked the 3 conductors (arbitrators) on this train to steer them to the most proper destination of a final ISL. If the PAB denies the request of West pilots to activate their own NC, then that is final and binding and the train doesn't stop in PHX. If they do, the final arbitration will still have the 3 quantified lists presented and I suppose the Nic will be included as a side consideration.

We should know within a couple of months if the SLI train stops in PHX.

alfaromeo

I bolded the part above because it makes my point exactly. Judge Silver had no new seniority regime to measure against when she ruled. If you look at an extreme example, the new list at AMR could have all the West pilots stapled to the TOP of the list. If that occurs, then what would the West pilots have to complain about, what would their damages be?

The new list does not have to be the exact Nicolau. That is why I say "as good or better" for the West pilots. There was an agreement to merge the AAA/AWA lists through ALPA merger policy. That was done and the list was accepted by the company per the negotiated agreement. Now a new agreement is negotiated where the West pilots are in the minority. The company and the APA must have an "objective justification for its conduct". That is what the courts say.

So you are right, seniority lives in the contract. Contracts have to be fair to the minority as well as the majority. At some point there will be a list to measure that fairness. If that is not the Nicolau list then people are going to have some 'splainin to do. Maybe the courts will buy whatever story they come up with. Maybe this will drag out for another decade of court actions. Or, everyone can just use the Nicolau award, "strong evidence of a fair result" (as said by Judge Silver) and avoid this mess.

My guess is that "strong evidence of a fair result" will win.

eaglefly

I certainly don't have the answers to those questions in the context of how the arbitrators will actually weigh them. As for the PAB, it really doesn't sound like a Nic argument (which depending on if and how it is separated from the question of participatory legality in the process) will be the focus. It may just be that the PAB will simply answer a narrow legal question about legality and not moral compunction. It is possible the West would be denied that opportunity for separate status due to strict legal determination of a narrow question which essentially would result in them (unfortunately) "falling through the cracks"....or they may get a free ticket to board the SLI train, but still at that point should that occur, the focus as per the PA is on 3 separate lists, with the Nic being strictly a West assertion to the arbitrators for consideration. West or no West, the PA principally is centered around the concept of the 3 separate lists.

Will the final arbitrators turn them into two before forming their integration model ?

I don't think even the arbitrators know that at this point.

alfaromeo

The East guys have placed way too much emphasis on the economic factors in the award, and frankly the West tries to place too much emphasis on that also.

Nicolau mentioned the financial conditions of the companies briefly. If he had truly bought off on the idea that US Airways was worthless to the merged entity and brought nothing to the merger, he would have stapled the East pilots to the bottom of the list. Right, that is what you would have expected, if the East had nothing to offer the merger they would be treated as if they were already unemployed and could be new hires at America West; stapled onto the bottom of their list.

But Nicolau didn't buy it. He recognized that both carriers needed each other. The top of the list was 500+ US Air pilots. Both Delta and Northwest and United and Continental were equal in financial health and the lists were feathered together top to bottom. If Nicolau had truly bought into the financial arguments, then why didn't he put the East pilots much further down the list. In contrast, they owned the top of the list.

So Nicolau might have stated it differently than Bloch did but you can't find the difference in how they formed the lists. No matter what you believe about the chance of US Airways liquidating in 2005, it is clear that in order to survive the airline would continue to shrink. There was a clear schedule of aircraft reductions already through the court system. Despite the attrition at US Air, there was little hope that the furloughed pilots would come back to fly in the near future; in fact it was more likely that further furloughs would have followed there. That made a difference.

I have always maintained that the East pilots blew it big time by not offering an alternative solution to Nicolau. He told them that Date of Hire (LOS) was not fair and the East would not get it. He gave them three weeks to think about it and then come back. Instead of making a tough call for their pilots and thinking of a Plan B, the East MEC punted and just stuck with their politically popular position. If you don't want to leave your fate to the gods, then figure out what you want it to be and make it happen. If you just stamp your feet and leave it up to the arbitrator, then you deserve anything that comes out of that process.

The United MEC faced similar problems in their integration. Instead of making a chest thumping, politically popular position like Date of Hire, they came up with a Plan B for the arbitrators. Not only that, but they showed how their proposal could be modified if the arbitrators didn't like their initial proposal. That was a courageous thing to do and it paid off for them. It would have been easy for them to pound their chests and then blame it on the arbitrators. Instead, they made the tough choice and represented their pilots much, much, much better than the East MEC. That is the true lesson to learn here. If you leave it up to the arbitrator to come up with a new solution, then be prepared to live with whatever happens. Don't quit in the middle of the game, no matter how easy that makes life for you in the short term. Long term, the East has paid for their MEC's failures.