ABX spooling down
#282
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,803
Just looking at that language and absent any other information, an argument could be made that it applies only to those pilots on furlough as of the date of the letter. (That doesn't mean it's a winning argument,
but the language is certainly susceptible to pushback from the parent.) There is no language that clearly makes it applicable to pilots furloughed in the future. One good feature is that the parent company is on the hook for damages if the owned carrier refuses to take the ABX guys.
but the language is certainly susceptible to pushback from the parent.) There is no language that clearly makes it applicable to pilots furloughed in the future. One good feature is that the parent company is on the hook for damages if the owned carrier refuses to take the ABX guys.
#283
New Hire
Joined APC: Nov 2017
Posts: 8
#285
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2016
Posts: 492
Nothing you mention is preclusive.
And the point is not that the argument on either side would be guaranteed to win, because nobody can predict that with absolute certainty. The fact is that all the company needs is a colorable argument that wouldn't get the lawyers disbarred in order to tie the union up in litigation/arbitration for years before Person 1 was hired at ATI or Omni. Look at what 1224 is doing on the Atlas/Southern combination: (admittedly oversimplifying) it is saying that the plain wording of two contract provisions should be ignored. I doubt the lawyers are making that "creative" an argument because they're confident they're gonna win that one; I presume they're making it because: (1) like every Hail Mary pass, there is a slight possibility that they might win; and (2) it ties things up and interferes with the company, which is leverage towards a negotiated settlement.
My only point in engaging about any discussion of all of this is just to say that if ABX management is as devious as people believe, one might not want to just assume that other ATSG airlines will ever actually be forced to give jobs to ABX pilots.
And the point is not that the argument on either side would be guaranteed to win, because nobody can predict that with absolute certainty. The fact is that all the company needs is a colorable argument that wouldn't get the lawyers disbarred in order to tie the union up in litigation/arbitration for years before Person 1 was hired at ATI or Omni. Look at what 1224 is doing on the Atlas/Southern combination: (admittedly oversimplifying) it is saying that the plain wording of two contract provisions should be ignored. I doubt the lawyers are making that "creative" an argument because they're confident they're gonna win that one; I presume they're making it because: (1) like every Hail Mary pass, there is a slight possibility that they might win; and (2) it ties things up and interferes with the company, which is leverage towards a negotiated settlement.
My only point in engaging about any discussion of all of this is just to say that if ABX management is as devious as people believe, one might not want to just assume that other ATSG airlines will ever actually be forced to give jobs to ABX pilots.
#286
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,803
Nothing you mention is preclusive.
And the point is not that the argument on either side would be guaranteed to win, because nobody can predict that with absolute certainty. The fact is that all the company needs is a colorable argument that wouldn't get the lawyers disbarred in order to tie the union up in litigation/arbitration for years before Person 1 was hired at ATI or Omni. Look at what 1224 is doing on the Atlas/Southern combination: (admittedly oversimplifying) it is saying that the plain wording of two contract provisions should be ignored. I doubt the lawyers are making that "creative" an argument because they're confident they're gonna win that one; I presume they're making it because: (1) like every Hail Mary pass, there is a slight possibility that they might win; and (2) it ties things up and interferes with the company, which is leverage towards a negotiated settlement.
My only point in engaging about any discussion of all of this is just to say that if ABX management is as devious as people believe, one might not want to just assume that other ATSG airlines will ever actually be forced to give jobs to ABX pilots.
And the point is not that the argument on either side would be guaranteed to win, because nobody can predict that with absolute certainty. The fact is that all the company needs is a colorable argument that wouldn't get the lawyers disbarred in order to tie the union up in litigation/arbitration for years before Person 1 was hired at ATI or Omni. Look at what 1224 is doing on the Atlas/Southern combination: (admittedly oversimplifying) it is saying that the plain wording of two contract provisions should be ignored. I doubt the lawyers are making that "creative" an argument because they're confident they're gonna win that one; I presume they're making it because: (1) like every Hail Mary pass, there is a slight possibility that they might win; and (2) it ties things up and interferes with the company, which is leverage towards a negotiated settlement.
My only point in engaging about any discussion of all of this is just to say that if ABX management is as devious as people believe, one might not want to just assume that other ATSG airlines will ever actually be forced to give jobs to ABX pilots.
Would hold up again. The wording future implies not what is currently available. No where does the agreement say crewmembers who are "currently on furlough " just says furloughed crewmembers in seniority order. If they did not hate it they would not be trying to negotiate it out of a new contract...won't happen!
No brainer.
Last edited by nitefr8dog; 01-05-2019 at 01:30 PM.
#287
Already happened...past precedence.
Would hold up again. The wording future implies not what is currently available. No where does the agreement say crewmembers who are "currently on furlough " just says furloughed crewmembers in seniority order. If they did not hate it they would not be trying to negotiate it out of a new contract...won't happen!
No brainer.
Would hold up again. The wording future implies not what is currently available. No where does the agreement say crewmembers who are "currently on furlough " just says furloughed crewmembers in seniority order. If they did not hate it they would not be trying to negotiate it out of a new contract...won't happen!
No brainer.
November 4, 2009 Captain Joe Muckle, President Teamsters Local 1224 2754 Old State Route 73 Wilmington, OH 45177 Dear Captain Muckle: Air Transport Services Group and its successors (ATSG) shall secure the commitment from each air carrier within its corporate structure, presently Capital Cargo, Inc. and ATI, Inc., and from any other airline that may come within its corporate structure in the future, that in lieu of new hires, the carriers shall recall crewmembers who occupy a position on the ABX Air, Inc. Crewmember Seniority List, including Professional Flight Engineers (Professional Flight Engineers can be recalled only to PFE positions). The recall shall be in order of seniority (Date of Hire), and the recall procedure shall be that as set forth in the collective bargaining agreement between Airline Professionals Association, Teamsters Local 1224 and ABX Air, Inc. (“ABX”), except that bypassing a recall to another ATSG carrier shall not be considered a refusal under Article 7(G). ABX crewmembers who are recalled under this Letter of Agreement shall maintain their years of longevity accrued at ABX for purposes of pay and benefits at the other ATSG carrier. Their relative seniority with the carrier to which they are recalled shall start at the bottom of that carrier’s crewmember seniority list. ABX crewmembers who are recalled under the provisions of this Letter of Agreement shall retain their recall rights to ABX, except that such crewmembers shall not be eligible for recall to ABX for a period of two years from the date of recall to another ATSG carrier. Additionally, any recalled crewmember who successfully upgrades either in position or equipment will be subject to any seat or equipment freeze that applies at that carrier and will not be eligible to transfer back to ABX Air, Inc. until the end of that freeze. Sincerely, Agreed to and accepted this 4th day of November 2009: Article 26 (264) 2009 Contract
#288
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,803
I am not going to write all that again....look at post 271. Again why in the world do you even care? It costs the carrier nothing and only would happen if they are hiring....and winding down means furloughs.....also you would not be in a position for recall unless furloughed. Wow is it that tough....
#289
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Dec 2017
Position: B767 Capt.
Posts: 171
Already happened...past precedence.
Would hold up again. The wording future implies not what is currently available. No where does the agreement say crewmembers who are "currently on furlough " just says furloughed crewmembers in seniority order. If they did not hate it they would not be trying to negotiate it out of a new contract...won't happen!
No brainer.
Would hold up again. The wording future implies not what is currently available. No where does the agreement say crewmembers who are "currently on furlough " just says furloughed crewmembers in seniority order. If they did not hate it they would not be trying to negotiate it out of a new contract...won't happen!
No brainer.
#290
I am not going to write all that again....look at post 271. Again why in the world do you even care? It costs the carrier nothing and only would happen if they are hiring....and winding down means furloughs.....also you would not be in a position for recall unless furloughed. Wow is it that tough....
Could ask you the same....
I care because I don’t want to see guys making plans thinking there is a guarantee that isn’t really there.
Winding down doesn’t mean furloughs. It means reducing flying and staffing (attrition) until you reach a point of telling everybody, don’t come in to work anymore. Company ceases operations. That’s not a furlough.
Last edited by Cujo665; 01-06-2019 at 12:19 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post