West Merger committee update 6/26
 

Post West Merger Committee Update - June 26 2015
June 26, 2015

Fellow West Pilot:

In this final update before the commencement of the seniority arbitration proceedings, we have three items to discuss with you.

PRE-HEARING BRIEFS AND SENIORITY INTEGRATION PROPOSALS

As you are aware, on Friday June 19, all three merger committees exchanged and submitted to the arbitration panel pre-hearing briefs, exhibits, and proposed seniority lists. The pre-hearing briefs, proposed seniority lists, and witness lists are posted at the following locations:

The America West Merger Committee

https://public.alliedpilots.org/apa/...tegration.aspx

While we know that it is difficult to refrain from reacting to some of these proposals, it is important to remember that we are on very familiar ground here. Each proposal will be vetted by a 3-member arbitration panel after 12-16 days of witness testimony and exhibits, and history has consistently shown that unreasonable positions rarely, if ever, survive that degree of objective scrutiny. We therefore encourage all pilots to remain engaged in the process, and refrain from allowing it to become a matter of fruitless, and potentially divisive debate with folks with whom we will be sharing cockpits in the near future. History has also shown the extraordinarily detrimental effects of allowing seniority integration to spill outside the confines of the agreed-to process.

ARBITRATION HEARING INFORMATION

The first 9 of the 16 scheduled hearings dates will be held June 29 – July 3, and July 13-16 at the following location:

Grant Hyatt Washington DC
1000 H Street NW
Washington DC, 20001

The Grand Hyatt is easily accessible from DCA and/or layover hotels by taxi, Uber, or by Metro from the Metro Center Metro Station (Metro - Home page).

The hearings will run approximately 9am-6pm each day, and are open to all American Airlines pilots and their significant others (space permitting). Daily arbitration transcripts will be posted immediately upon receipt from the court reporter, usually the day following each hearing, to the West Merger Committee website as well as the APA Seniority Integration web page. Please remember that the transcripts that will be posted are the drafts and are subject to review and modification to the extent they do not accurately report the testimony.

During these first 9 days of hearings, each committee will be afforded 21 hours to put on their direct cases; including: opening statements, closing arguments, direct examination of its witnesses, and cross examination of the other committees’ witnesses. Witnesses will be subject to cross-examination by the other committees. The first day of the hearings, June 29, will begin with procedural matters followed by opening statements from each party. Following opening statements, USAPA will present its direct case first, which should be complete either Wednesday July 1 or Thursday July 2. Immediately thereafter, the West Merger Committee will begin its direct case, which will likely conclude sometime early in the second week of hearings (on or around Tuesday, July 14). Upon completion of the West’s case, AAPSIC will present its direct case, completing no later than 6pm on Thursday, July 16.

OBJECTIVE OVERVIEW OF THE POSITIONS

We thought it might be helpful to provide you an objective summary of each committee’s proposal. The purpose of this summary is to provide you with a general overview of the main arguments presented by each committee, so that you have a bit more focus on the issues as you follow along the arbitration proceedings. It is not our purpose here to mischaracterize any positions, or otherwise promote or diminish any of the positions; we simply attempt to explain them as we understand them.

First, it is worth mentioning one important element of the proposals upon which all 3 committees do completely agree: timely implementation of the seniority award. Therefore, all 3 committees have proposed that the arbitration panel adopt the following language as a condition and restriction to the award:

Effective as soon as practicable, and in no event later than the first day of the third flying month following the issuance of the award, the Company shall apply the ISL issued by the Board, including any attendant conditions and restrictions (the “ISL”) as the Pilot System Seniority List for all American Airlines Pilots (i.e. American Airlines and US Airways pilots) provided for by Section 13.G. of the Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement between American Airlines and the Pilots in the Service of American Airlines (“JCBA”) and shall apply the ISL to all events as to which system seniority is applicable under the JCBA.

Although the proposed list themselves are quite disparate, the methodologies use to derive each proposed list have a few tenets in common. A brief description of each tenet is as follows:

Status & Category

This tenet is used to create ratios based upon the number of jobs each pilot group brings to the merger. Status refers to either captain or first officer, and category refers to an equipment type or equipment grouping. Generally a status & category methodology involves creating a number of status & category “tiers” ranked according to the desirability of the seat and equipment; e.g. widebody captain, narrowbody first officer, etc. Consider the following examples from previous arbitration awards:

Nicolau Award
Tier 1: A330 Captains & First Officers
Tier 2: B767/757 Captains
Tier 3: A320/B737 Captains
Tier 4: B767/757 First Officers
Tier 5: A320/B737 First Officers
Tier 6: Furloughees

Delta / Northwest
Tier 1: Widebody Captain
Tier 2: Narrowbody Captain
Tier 3: Widebody First Officer
Tier 4: Narrowbody First Officer
[Note: neither airline had furloughed pilots at the snapshot date]

United / Continental
Tier 1: 747CA, 777CA, 787CA, 350CA
Tier 2: 767/757CA
Tier 3: 321/320/319CA/737CA
Tier 4: 747FO, 777FO, 787FO, 350FO
Tier 5: 767,757FO
Tier 6: 321/320/319FO, 737FO
Tier 7: Furloughees

The parties in our case have proposed status & category tiers as follows:

West Committee
Tier 1: Large Widebody Captains (B777 & A330)
Tier 2: Small Widebody Captains (B767/757)
Tier 3: Narrowbody Captains (B737, A320, S80)
Tier 4: Large Widebody First Officers (B777 & A330)
Tier 5: Small Widebody First Officers (B767/757)
Tier 6: Narrowbody First Officers & E190 Captains (B737, A320, S80, E190CA)
Tier 7: E190 First Officers
Tier 8: Furloughees

USAPA
The USAPA submissions do not spell out in any detail their proposed tiers, however, their pre-hearing brief describes their proposed tiers as being based upon JCBA groupings, much like the West and AAPIC proposals.

AAPSIC
Tier 1: Large Widebody Captains (B777 & A330)
Tier 2: Small Widebody Captains (B767/757)
Tier 3: Narrowbody Captains & Large Widebody First Officers
Tier 4: Small Widebody First Officers (B767/757)
Tier 5: Narrowbody First Officers & E190 Captains (B737, A320, S 80, E190CA)
Tier 6: E190 First Officers
[AAPSIC has not proposed a separate tier for furloughees]

Longevity

Longevity is generally defined as a pilot’s date of hire to the merger snapshot date, less furlough time, and this tenet is therefore much less complicated than status & category. Both “date-of-hire” and “length-of-service” seniority lists are examples of pure longevity-based seniority lists.

Hybrid methodology

A “hybrid” seniority is a combination of a status & category list and a longevity-based list. Creating a hybrid seniority list involves separately creating a status & category and a longevity-based list, and then merging them according to relative weighting of the lists. Consider the following examples from previous arbitration awards:

Nicolau Award
Although the Nicolau Award is largely a status & category list, Arbitrator Nicolau established the “supersized” first tier of 517 East pilots (and zero West pilots), based upon the number of A330 captains and first officers, to credit East pilots for their superior longevity and attrition.

Delta / Northwest
A status & category list, however, the arbitration panel provided for the greater longevity of the Northwest pilots by adjusting the status & category tiers to Northwest’s favor, and by utilizing a pull-and-plug methodology to construct the list.

United / Continental
A hybrid methodology, 65% allocated for status & category, 35% for longevity.

The parties in our case have proposed integration methodologies as follows:

West Committee
A 65% status & category, 35% longevity hybrid list, identical to that in United / Continental.

USAPA
A purported 50% status & category, 50% longevity hybrid list, constructed using a computer program developed by its committee, along with some manual adjustments.

AAPSIC
No credit for longevity.

Career Expectations

Pre-merger career expectations is a highly subjective topic, and is therefore frequently a heavily litigated topic in seniority integration proceedings. The parties have taken positions regarding pre-merger career expectations as follows:

West Committee
No adjustment to the proposal based upon career expectations. From the West pre-hearing brief, pages 21-22: “By reason of the competitive state of the airline industry following the Delta-Northwest and United-Continental mergers, neither American pilots nor US Airways pilots could legitimately assert that they had realistic distinct or superior stand-alone career expectations based on the economic health of their carrier. Therefore, there is no reason why the Board should place a “thumb on the scale” in favor of either pilot group in weighing the groups’ respective status-and-category or longevity equities based on this factor.”

USAPA
No adjustment to the proposal based upon career expectations. From the USAPA pre-hearing brief, page 3: “The USAPA Merger Committee proposal is based on the reality that the American-US Airways merger is a merger of equals, with each carrier contributing strengths to the new American Airlines and each carrier having needs that were best addressed by the merger. It is also based on the reality that the pilot groups are moving forward on a level playing field in the merged carrier.”

AAPSIC
A 50% increase in status & category ratios to the favor of pre-merger American Airlines pilots due to their superior pre-merger career expectations, in terms of (i) a superior network (ii) a superior fleet and growth opportunities, (iii) a superior competitive position, and (iv) superior compensation and benefits.

Widebody Protections (Fences)

Following are widebody protections from previous arbitration awards:

Nicolau Award
Reservation of 161 A330 Captain positions and 262 A330 First Officer positions for East pilots, expiring at the sooner of: (i) 4 years following the date of the award, or (ii) a change in the mandatory retirement age from 60 to 65.

Delta / Northwest
For the period of five (5) years beginning with the first bid period after the issuance of the Single Operating Certificate (SOC), no pre-merger Northwest pilot may be awarded or displaced to a vacancy on a B777 aircraft or category and no pre-merger Delta pilot may be awarded or displaced to a B787 or B747 vacancy.

United / Continental
For a period of five (5) years beginning with the Bid Period in which the ISL is first implemented, or until the carrier takes delivery of its twenty-fifth (25th) B787 aircraft, whichever occurs sooner, no premerger Continental pilot may be awarded a Captain or First Officer vacancy on a B747 or A350 aircraft or displaced to one and no premerger United pilot may be awarded a Captain or First Officer vacancy on a B787 aircraft or displaced to one.

The parties in our case believe that their list construction largely obviates the need for additional conditions and restrictions, and have proposed only the following widebody protections:

West Committee
None. However, “out of fairness and a concern for parity, if AAPSIC proposes that a fence be imposed for the B-787s that were on order for American Airlines, and if the Panel is inclined to impose that fence, the West Committee proposes that a fence be imposed for the A-350s that were on order for US Airways for the same duration as any fence on the B-787 but commencing on the date that the Company issues the first vacancy bid for the A-350.”

USAPA
None.

AAPSIC
“AAPSIC proposes a transitional fence provision, effective until the amendable date of the JCBA, providing that the US Airways Pilots (East and West) continue to hold the proportion of the Group IV Captain bid positions that they hold on the date on which the integrated seniority list is implemented.”

Nicolau Award

All three committees have taken positions regarding whether or not the Nicolau Award should be incorporated into the seniority award:

West Committee
The Nicolau Award should be used as the starting point to integrate US Airways pilots with American Airlines pilots.

USAPA
The arbitration panel is prohibited from using the Nicolau Award because the McCaskill-Bond statute cannot be applied retroactively to past mergers.

AAPSIC
A purported “middle-ground” between the East and West positions: (i) the proper starting point for the seniority integration is the three pre-merger lists in effect as of December 9, 2013; (ii) the West pilots’ claim to the Nicolau Award is one equity to be weighed between the East and West pilots, but not at the American pilots’ expense; and (iii) all US Airways “Third List” pilots should be junior to all original East and West pilots.

Glad you posted this.
I had been searching for the comparisons of the NWA/ DL & CAL/ UAL merger methodology.
Clears up a few things.

"The West pilots’ claim to the Nicolau Award is one equity to be weighed between the East and West pilots, but not at the American pilots’ expense; and (iii) all US Airways “Third List” pilots should be junior to all original East and West pilots."

Fine with me.

Frisco727,

I have been reading your past posts and it seems to me (and probably to most other readers) that you are going through an emotional situation right now and it's taking its toll. This forum is a great resource to share options and information but it's not a healthy place to quiet your inner demons.

Here are some resources:

How to vent in a healthy way

Overcoming feelings of inadequacy from the subconscious mind

I'm fine. Do you get emotional support from the toy in you avatar?

I understand your defensive position right now but I'm not saying you can't be a part of this community. I'm just saying the manner you're interacting it's not healthy and is annoying to most users.

“By reason of the competitive state of the airline industry following the Delta-Northwest and United-Continental mergers, neither American pilots nor US Airways pilots could legitimately assert that they had realistic distinct or superior stand-alone career expectations based on the economic health of their carrier. Therefore, there is no reason why the Board should place a “thumb on the scale” in favor of either pilot group in weighing the groups’ respective status-and-category or longevity equities based on this factor.”


Say the clowns that just a few years ago, were on the government "free cheese/Obama phone" type support program known as a ATSB loan and for my nearly quarter century, were a drag on my pay and benefits by providing the company and example to point to during contract negotiations regarding what pilots will work for.

From what I've seen, the west never had the expansion opportunities of an airline with an international network nor would have succeeded growing one on their own. Their solution is to take the upgrades on the east and now they want to insert their group into top Group IV seniority down the road in a larger proportion that they should reasonably share.

THAT was funny!

HAHA, the eastholes just lost in the 9th circuit.. Karma's a *****...

http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastor...6/14-15757.pdf Page 56

USAPA’s manifest disregard for the interests
of the West Pilots and its discriminatory conduct towards them constitutes a clear
breach of duty. Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s conclusion that
USAPA did not breach its duty of fair representation and remand with instructions
to enjoin USAPA from participating in the McCaskill-Bond proceedings except to
the extent that USAPA will advocate the Nicolau Award. On remand, the district
court should consider the West Pilots’ claim for attorneys’ fees.

Definitely complicates things for USAPA. It would seem they must now overhaul their SLI proposal with LAA pilots. Of course, if the East committee is now REQUIRED to advocate for the Nic, I can only wonder to what purpose would be for the requirement for a separate West committee ?

It would seem to me, the two separate committees return to a previous make-up of one committee that includes both East and West pilots along with a new pre-hearing position statement adjusted for the Nic. It's important to note the McCaskill-Bond process is still the controlling guide in this SLI and this latest development does not compel the present arbitration panel to use the Nic. The LAA committee still has a strong argument for pre-merger career consideration and that LAA pilots should not be casualties of this fracas. I think it may have only exacerbated the likelihood of AA/U pre-merger fences though if the SLI panel doesn't prefer a more simple resolution to that disparity.

Still reviewing their pre-merger positions, but I looked to see how I personally would fare in both the LAA and West proposals. Looking at the pilot from the West that is next most junior to me on the LAA proposal which is a West Group II F/O (only a few numbers), that pilot is about my age and whose seniority (DOH) is a year prior to my OCC AA seniority, which I assume is to compensate for "pre-merger" career expectation differences, those being better at AA. I then looked for where the West proposal would place that same pilot (I knew it would be senior to ne, but how much ?). The West proposal places that pilot about 4000 numbers senior to me on the ISL. That means this Group II PHX F/O (absent fences) will be able to immediately bid and hold a 767 Captains status in MIA, a status it would take me about 7 years to match (maybe). The immediate income increase from where this pilots pre-merger career expectation was on 12/8/2013 would be 2.5 times above that he could have reasonably expect to have obtained absent this merger and once he bid that status his income as a result of this merger would FAR outpace mine.....in fact, it would blow mine out of the water.

I found that quite interesting.

The West has a history of advocating and arguing for pre-merger career expectations as indicated in this (and other) documents and it's interesting that in THIS case, they now belittle that consideration as inconsequential. My example of their SLI placement of a similar pilot clearly demonstrates a windfall for him at my expense and it will be interesting to see how this SLI develops. Of course, it will be more interesting in the immediate future to see what USAPA's response will be considering they're on record as saying they will never adopt the Nic.

On the Nicolau award that west pilot can hold a group 3 captain. Why can't you understand that?

Because doing so on the LAA side is a benefit it will take me many, many years to enjoy, especially now with thousands of new previously non-AA pilots to get their first and as importantly, it's a result that WOULD NOT HAVE OCCURED FOR THAT PILOT ABSENT THIS MERGER as there was no mechanism in sight that would have made this dispute "ripe" ABSENT THIS MERGER AND SLI.

Why can't you understand THAT ?

I think it's possible the consideration of long fences may just become a more simple solution considering what appears the West's (and I suppose now the East's as well) intransigence in believing a pre-merger West F/O making $100/hour who had no pre-merger expectation of pole-vaulting to an American Airline Group III captains slot making $280/hour as a result of this merger when a similarly situated pre-merger legacy LAA pilot must wait many, many years to match that West pilot meteoric financial blast-off.

Again, it's interesting to note how the West chooses merger concepts based on value to them in a given SLI. With US Airways East, pre-merger career expectations as well as individual and carrier financials were fair game, but now in an even MORE differentiated merger and integration, they somehow don't matter.

Interesting. :cool:

Eagle,

I think you need to get used to the idea of the NIC being used in its undiluted state. This will prevent any big disappointments in the future. The reason the group 2 west FO is still an FO is because the west has been marooned in PHX due to East tyranny of the majority for 8 years now. It doesn't matter what you think is fair it matters what the 9th and the arbitrators determine to be fair. Whatever that West FO can hold on the NIC is what he brings to the merger. Your argument won't hold in front of an arbitration panel. But I hope your committee thinks exactly like you do because they will get their clocks cleaned just like US Air ALPA did 8 years ago.

The only viable option for APA at this point is to argue that the AA career is a more valuable one and they should be given more credit for superior career expectations. That might work to an extent. But getting caught up in supposed windfalls for west pilots who have had a boot on their neck for the last 8 years won't get you very far. Not only will you be trying to undo the work of Nicolau but you would be saying you are smarter than the 9th. Shaky ground. It would be a massive waste of political capital and credibility to try and reorder the NIC award. I'm surprised APA tried it in their opener. Now they have egg in their face with a proposal that is very much aligned with the jihadis on the East

I have no concerns about the Nic being argued for in its pure "undiluted" state by whatever committee is arguing for it in the upcoming arbitration. Just so you understand that is NOT the same as it being adopted by this arbitration panel in that undiluted state and that's something YOU should consider. Look, I understand you and some of the other West pilots are intoxicated with glee over today's ruling and I'm sure there will be plenty of hangovers and sick calls in PHX tomorrow, but don't confuse this courts ruling with the final ISL determined by the upcoming arbitration.

Remember my friend, that wonderful little statute that you waved valiantly in the air when it suited YOUR needs still is guiding us and windfalls to West pilots at LAA pilots expense are still windfalls. All the more reason that I think fences might simply HAVE to become a stronger consideration now and they might be longer then previously needed or needed at all.


If you read the LAA pre-hearing position, you'd note that is EXACTLY what the LAA committee is arguing (and a pretty good one at that, if you ask me). No one disputed the "boot" you've had on your neck for 8 years, but believing it gives you carte blanche to do to LAA pilots what was done to you is as misguided and greedy (and quite frankly, little different from what USAPA advocates). CLEARLY, many West pilots are now drooling with lust after today's ruling ravenously eyeing the smorgasbord of the LAA statuses as they think the Nic will propel them into.

All the more reason to have no choice but to revert to the dreaded fence. It appears you misread what the 9th appeal said and that is that there is NO requirement for THIS arbitration panel to do ANYTHING about the Nic. NOTHING. The 9th CANNOT compel the arbitrators HERE to do that. Why ?

Because McCASKILL-BOND is STILL the litmus my friend and if the arbitrators decide that West pilots have or will receive a windfall based on not only what they HAD pre-merger, but could EXPECT pre-merger WITHOUT this merger, then THAT is the basis for the ISL. If they must integrate us based on the Nic, fences are almost a certainty now -or- (and this may sting a little) feather pilots in Nic order more disparately to protect West pilots from windfalls at LAA pilots expense, especially those more junior. In other words, in the latter situation, blocks (or individual pilots) on the US Airways list will just be lower then they would have been in a three-list feathering exercise.

Again, congrats on your victory and enjoy, but I'd caution you on getting TOO intoxicated or on it or ravenous as a result of it and believing the 9th's ruling is giving something it may not.

I'm not intoxicated or salivating over a windfall from the AA pilots. But your proposal placed thousands of East pilots who are JUNIOR to me on the NIC list senior to me. That will not fly. If you want to argue I don't have the expectation of flying a 777 then go ahead. As long as East pilots who are junior to me on the NIC remain junior to me I will not complain.

But just so we are clear you did not have the expectation of making 280/hour flying as 767 captain. Absent the merger your expectation was shrinkage and pay cuts. Certainly not a large pay raise and growth. We have a list of witnesses who worked on the AA ch11 who will testify to that fact. You can't claim that without Doug Parker you would magically get industry leading wages. It's spelled out quite clearly in our brief that both US Airways and AA would have suffered a slow death as stand alone carriers.

Again I don't think fences will fly. Us Airways has been steadily increasing the 330 fleet and has plenty of A350's on order. US Airways pilots both east and west had expectations to fly widebody jets. The ruling by the 9th confirms that the tyranny of the majority would not last into perpetuity.

Are these the same "experts" who because of their belief that we had no (or little) career expectations that formulated you list and feathered AA pilots with those in the West ? :cool: Yes, I'm sure your "experts" will give their opinions on our "slow death" without you and I'm sure the LAA committee will offer equally competing opinions. I suppose on the same subject, where would a stand alone US Airways end up considering it was neither fish (a legacy) nor fowl (a low cost LCC) ?

I would expect that a fair argument would be made for your even faster demise than ours. :eek:


But neither will the tyranny of the weak rise from the ashes of the destruction of the tyranny of the majority. Look, clearly, this development only WIDENS the differences the various segments of this future pilot group have about what they believe to be fair and equitable and it may just be that if the arbitrators might find fences the least objectionable of what will clearly be a VERY difficult decision, they will use them, otherwise a different feathering ratio. The fact remains that IF the Nic is used in pure form against LAA pilots AND it propels West pilots to a more advantageous position at THEIR expense, THAT is a windfall and the arbitration process is designed to prevent that. Not even the 9th can change what the sacrosanct position of an NMB arbitration rules and isn't that the whole crux of what they just ruled on in YOUR FAVOR ?

They reaffirmed that arbitrated results are valid and even if one side believes it unfair (like East pilots did), it IS the award. After reading the LAA committees PMP, I'm comfortable with where the LAA committee will position themselves both from a fair and balanced proposal position as well as a defense one regarding the expected attacks by West witnesses to belittle our pre-merger carrier, it's future and our pre-merger expectations. I would expect some alterations now as the previous proposed list does not use a Nic assumption.

Legal Postings: Addington II, Appeal to the Ninth Circuit


This morning we received a decision from the United States Court of Appeals in Addington II, reversing Judge Silver’s decision on the duty of fair representation claim and remanding the case to the District Court to enter an injunction against USAPA. The opinion reads in part: “Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s conclusion that USAPA did not breach its duty of fair representation and remand with instructions to enjoin USAPA from participating in the McCaskill-Bond proceedings except to the extent that USAPA will advocate the Nicolau Award.”
The opinion and the dissent by Judge Tashima is now posted in the Legal Library.
USAPA is considering its response to the decision at this time with respect to the SLI Hearing and we will provide more information as soon as possible.
USAPA Communications



The ruling is quite clear that the US Airways list must be the NIC. The East is going to be under an injunction to argue for the NIC. The arbitrators can do whatever they want in feathering AA into the NIC but the NIC cannot be re-ordered. The AA proposal has re-ordered the NIC. So your team will have to modify their proposal. They are free to argue that the NIC should be stapled beneath the bottom Eagle flow through. i'm not sure how well that will go over but it's certainly your right to make that argument.

I agree that AA can argue absent a merger US Airways would have struggled more than AA. There is a compelling argument to be made there. But I don't think the disparity is as great as you make it out to be. Some people will benefit from the merger more than others. That is the case in all mergers. There is no way around it. The idea is to get as close to fair as possible. Thankfully the West represents about 10% of the new pilot group. I think it's a waste of your energy to go after the west. You should be trying to go after the Airways group as a whole. Just my $.02

I've advocated no "reordering" of pre-merger lists from the beginning and the LAA position was the same. If the Nic is used, I don't see it being reordered and thus the foundation of my comments. I certainly don't think the LAA committee would be stupid enough to mention a staple, but clearly, this complicates their whole pre-merger career expectation position, a position which has substantial precedence in multiple past SLI's and was even advocated by AWA pilots against US Airways pilots.

Yes, I read the Wests PMP and they too belittle and attempt to minimize competing financial positions of the two carriers. The arbitrators will separate the wheat from the chaff despite the efforts at argument as they are capable of looking at hard data and weighing various opinions. Yes, some benefit more than others, but the goal is to minimize that, if unable to eliminate it and the majority of the pilots are legacy AA and the majority of those at potential disadvantage are junior at legacy AA, so do you hurt a minority (hundreds of junior West) or a majority (thousands of junior LAA) with a disparity if one or the other must get hurt ?

That's arbitration and know one know that answer in this case yet. The fences or feathering required will decide that and it might be a combination of them, if one alone is insufficient and that's just my .02. As for "going after the West", I'm only reacting to their PMP and list. It's really all I have to go on and tells a clear story of their philosophy regarding not just their position toward the East (which is understandable), but LAA especially mixing their list as they did and then advocating no obstructions to prevent them from running freely throughout the LAA system unimpeded. If a close equivalent West pilot to my age, relative seniority and status gets something like a 7 year jump on my side of the fence only because we merged, that's tough not to see as a windfall.

While the LAA committee will likely have to reformulate their proposed list, I would think it apt for the new combined U pilots to factor something more reasonable as simply adopting the West proposal (as it already includes the Nic) has all the hallmarks of a windfall at multiple junctures in that list absent mitigators.

The defensive ones mock aircraft crashes. Just ask corkscrew goose about rudder control. Perhaps it's today's developments most likely put you on the defensive and easily annoyed.

Well unfortunately that's a part of mergers. You get to fly what they brought and they get to fly what you brought. We have fences, but 90% of pilots can't hold 747, 777 or A-350 Captain so the fences end and that guy who should have been a Jumbo Captain now waits while the guys integrated ahead of him go to those seats.

Understood. I think fences are possible here as both LAA and West proposals touch on that (787-A350), but for whom and how long is one question. Arbitrators are loathe to erect fences anymore and thus the resolution to this new paradigm is likely how pilots will be feathered in. The Wests "hybrid" 35% Longevity/65% Stat & Cat philosophy seems weighted in their favor. The junior LAA pilots have suffered as well with substantial furlough times and this proposal just stands to agonize an already badly damaged career path for thousands of them. We also have 1000 junior pilots still on elective furlough, many of which are unlikely to return leaving those still here and junior at even more disadvantage depending on feathering, weighting and ratios as most of them simply may be nothing more then ghosts.

I don't think this ruling means what people think it means. Read the dissent and the majority's footnotes. It very directly and intentionally does NOT order that the Nic is the list. It specifies very clearly that the final result may not be the Nic, and that the Nic is not a necessary outcome to avoid further DFR. All the ruling does is enjoin USAPA from arguing a position other than the Nic. It's a gag order, and as the dissent notes, the point may be moot because Usapa no longer controls the outcome, it only has influence over it.

No one should count their chickens just yet. Next up. En banc (before the entire 9th). This three judge panel was 2 right leaning/ one left leaning. The entire Bench is left leaning majority.

Yes, that appears to be the ruling, but if USAPA (East committee) can't argue any ISL proposal unless it is the Nic and the West proposal already has the Nic, where does that leave the U pilots ?

It would seem by default regardless of the make-up of their committees or committee, the only thing left to put forward regarding their list is the Nic, which again already is the proposal by the West. It would seem the only alteration they could make would be integration philosophy with LAA pilots like a modification to their "hybrid" integration methodology.

I don't know what the future brings but I have a suspicion that the East committee could potentially decide to withdraw completely rather than advocate the Nic, leaving the West and AAPSIC to fight it out over the Nic and APA at risk of DFR to the East.

APA claims neutrality and the LAA committee is autonomous from APA, so I don't see how APA would be in jeopardy from East pilots if their committee excused themselves. Anyway, that would mean the two competing proposals would be the LAA and West (Nic) proposals and arguments.

APA (and maybe the company) could be at risk of DFR for proceeding with an integration process where all parties are not fairly represented. That's why they wanted the West there in the first place even though APA has no love for the Nicolau. The West committee and the AAPSIC committe have no duty to fairly represent the East, only APA as a whole does as and the committees are a way for APA to show that they treated everybody fair by giving everybody their chance to advocate their position.

USAPA can fairly claim that this ruling states they can't represent the East pilots position so they withdraw, leaving no one to represent the East pilots at all. If APA allows that farce to proceed, they are at risk of DFR.

Long story short expect this process to become even more drawn out the arbitration hearings to be rescheduled.

Well, I agree about the possibility or even probability of delay, but hasn't USAPA (East pilots) tried this tack before ? It wouldn't be much different then when they first agreed to the MOU provisions and then claimed that the very provisions they agreed to were detrimental to their interests and used delay tactics until they got capitulation.

Come to think of it, I now expect exactly that to occur. USAPA (or their core players) are masters of delay and accepted wrench throwers themselves, so I could see that. I don't see the tack of choosing a delay strategy and then blaming APA for it as being a successful one. I can't see USAPA (or their core players) ever being treated with anything less than contempt from any judicial body in the future. Any delay tactics other then short-term ligitimate ones to regroup I'm sure will be vigorously countered and all that takes $$$, much of which that belongs to West pilots is likely to soon be stripped.

Who is going to pay for that this time ?

I wouldn't expect the APA to, nor AAG.

I'm curious as to how "left leaning" or "right leaning" judges play into this?

USAPA can't "fairly claim that they can't represent the East" just because they don't like the ruling.

From the dissent:

Such a sweeping injunction also needlessly hamstrings USAPA’s ability to put forward a position on the key question at issue in the arbitration: how to combine the US Airways seniority lists with the pre-merger American Airlines seniority list. The phrasing of the majority’s instructions to the district court makes it unclear whether USAPA will be allowed to put forth a position on merging the lists at all, since doing so has nothing to do with “advocat[ing] the Nicolau Award.” Maj. Op. at 55. If USAPA does try to put forward a position on integration with the pre-merger American pilots, its efforts will no doubt by hindered by concerns about whether any given position goes beyond advocating the Nicolau Award. And the arbitrators, knowing USAPA is being coerced by a court order, will have little reason take its suggestions seriously. The majority’s injunction, which will effectively eliminate USAPA’s ability to function as a significant participant in the seniority integration proceedings, is overbroad..........

On the other hand, the injunction has the potential to work significant mischief. APA designated three merger committees to participate in the upcoming arbitration: USAPA, a West Pilot merger committee, and a merger committee representing the pilots of the pre-merger American Airlines. As the majority notes, APA likely intended the USAPA merger committee to represent the interests of the East Pilots......

By cutting off USAPA’s speech rights, the majority upsets this balance. For all those pilots who were part of US Airways, but not the West Pilots, there will be no voice to represent them before the McCaskill Bond arbitration board.

It would appear the only approach the East committee can do at this point is seek a different feathering methodology with LAA pilots than the Wests 35/65 weighting yet includes the Nic that might put them in a better position.

That sounds like a winning strategy. Hoping for a liberal bench which isn't hard to find at the 9th circus.

Simple solution
Make it a two step process: confirm U list then combine that with LAA
Avoids legal action
Signed Not a Lawyer nor Wants to be

From an outsider looking in, it seems like USAPA has to start with the Nic. They can still advocate for different aircraft grouping tiers for status & category, different career expectations, whether to use a a pure stovepipe methodology, pull & plug methodology, DOH, hybrid methodology, etc, different C&Rs, how to treat furloughs, and different fences, than what the West committee advocates for. So for the dissenting judge to say that USAPA has no speech rights and the arbitrators wont take USAPA's proposal seriously is a little much.

Good luck to all. Remember, it is what it is and it's not worth ruining your life over it.

Hey I though our SLI was a goat-rope. This is a cluster hump of major proportions. Three party SLI is bad enough and now this?

They might as well do the SLI based on date of birth. At least that way everybody ends up #1 on the seniority list for at least a day.

That Court has been a mess for many years. Usually a 6 to 3 split. 6 left leaning/ 3 more sort of "rightish" leaning, and the sides don't really get along well. The last appeal went to USAPA by "leftist" majority. They gave Judge Silver a template to follow. She did that. Now two of the "right" judges threw water all over that. I suspect USAPA will ask, and receive is a expedited En banc hearing by the full Bench. That is why they want a delay to SLI. They will win if the entire Bench hears this and it will be back to the three way (as I believe it should be). Let the arbitrators sort it out. Mean while, the Attorney retirement fund continues. Kaaaaa ching!

One note- there is a chance the USAPA attorneys could bypass the Ninth and go straight to the on call Supreme for a quick ruling. They are from DC and know the drill. Luck of the draw who is scheduled on call. That would stop it in its tracks. The Ninth I feel is a sure thing, but it might take time. I am sure they are working with a local appellate firm with knowledge of the Bench.

Funny post. Really. But all three judges are the same from the last time. Lol