CLT Domicile Chairman’s Update

Details Created on Wednesday, 03 September 2014 15:19


By now you have received the Merger Committee's update with the attached Protocol Agreement that they are requesting the BPR to approve and the request for you to contact your Representatives to discuss. I am writing this update as a singular Chairman’s update since your CLT Representatives are not in agreement on whether to approve the PA or not. Since I have been your Chairman I have never attempted to influence the vote of either Vice-Chair and I will not now. I believe in articulating my view in a compelling way so as to earn support for my position. With that said, I am writing to inform you that I plan to vote against the approval of the Protocol Agreement.

As many know, up until now I have been an ardent supporter of the Merger Committee. I have gone on record as having “Ultimate Confidence” in the committee. I helped pass resolutions giving them a degree of autonomy so as to not be influenced by any one seniority group. Over the last six months I have watched what at first was a fairly solid Protocol Agreement become watered down to a document that I believe essentially does one thing; allow a process that basically guarantees a West Merger Committee. Let me state for the record that I want all pilots at US Airways and American Airlines to be treated fairly in the seniority process. You could make a valid argument that it is hypocritical to say that APA would not treat us fairly if they solely represented us in seniority talks but USAPA could fairly represent the West in the same talks. I get it, but the Nicolau Award presents a different dynamic. Given the chance to stand before an arbitration panel as a full participant and present their case to implement the Nic, or a close substitute based on the argument that it was previously awarded by an arbitrator, is a potentially career ending chance that we cannot accept. Although we have won numerous court cases rejecting the Nic, arbitration is different and uncertain. The rules of law that apply to the decision making process of courts do not apply to arbitration. If there had not been a Nicolau Award I would have no problem with a West Merger Committee. In fact I would embrace it!

Here is a direct quote from the Merger Committee’s letter:

“Judge Silver decided the McCaskill-Bond Amendment does not give any subgroup of US Airways pilots a right to separate representation in the McCaskill-Bond process”.

It does not get any clearer than that. Under the federal law, USAPA and APA are the parties, period! If APA, the West pilot class, or the Company wants another group, they would have to argue in court that the West should have that ability. The law does not provide for it. Additionally, if the APA wants to open that can of worms of allowing a separate pilot class, then the TWA pilots would be able to request the same. In the Protocol Agreement the APA has put in wording to prevent that. With the Protocol Agreement I believe we voluntarily create a process that essentially guarantees a West Committee because the standard the panel will use is: Can they (the West) be treated fairly by USAPA in a combined list? Since we have had a long running dispute and spent millions on lawsuits between each other, I think it is clear the arbitration panel will allow a West Committee. Once we sign the Protocol Agreement we are now under section 13B of the McCaskill-Bond Amendment, which means that we have agreed to an alternative to the McCaskill-Bond 13A section that is governed by the federal law.

I want every pilot involved in this merger to be treated fairly. We had West pilots as members of the USAPA Merger Committee. They resigned because they indicated it was their obligation to only consider the Nicolau Award in a US/AA combined list. Unfortunately, that would severely harm thousands of our pilots and potentially create an environment where the APA capitalizes on this disagreement and irreversibly harms all US Airways pilots. It is my belief that this Protocol Agreement language was contemplated two years ago during the MOU talks and conveniently swept under the rug so as to not influence voting on the MOU. The same attorney that is responsible for the loose MOU language has written the Protocol Language. For those that say “trust your advisors,” let me say that USAPA’s general counsel has been 180 degrees in disagreement with the Merger Counsel in many areas. This is phase one of the merger process. We all want to start talking about the merged list and see what our career has in store for us. We will get there, but we must ensure that haste does not cause errors in our judgment. I have more confidence in the Merger Committee in respect to the actual math and methodology of combining the list than that of the legal wrangling’s of the Protocol Agreement.

Thank you for taking the time to read this letter and understand my concerns for your future.

Bob Frear
Charlotte Chairman
[email protected]
352-639-0815