Originally Posted by Globemaster2827

It's 22 pages but the long and short of it is this... The issue as to whether we will merge (amalgamate... whatever) the Southern Bankruptcy Contract and Atlas/Polar Merger Contract goes to a Management Grievance where it will likely end up in Step 3 Arbitration. That process will probably take the rest of 2018 to resolve. Maybe longer.

All that is confusing so I'll just break down what it means... It means that the Atlas/Southern Pilot NC and Company are so far apart on what they think the new work rules should be that it will all likely go to arbitration. Getting to that point will take several years.

Once we get to Arbitration we can expect that the company's argument will be what it was last time in Arbitration. The company will likely argue that the court is bound by the limits of the Southern Bankruptcy Contract and the Atlas/Polar Merged contracts and win. SO... The best you will see is current Atlas Book on Work Rules and retirement. There's even the possibility that the rates could be current book or even less if they end up in Arbitration. Atlas's current work rules/retirement are some of the worst in aviation and will be merged with Southern's Bankruptcy rules that are even worse.

You will not get to vote on the TA when it comes to determine if it compensates you what you're worth. It will be dictated to you by an Arbitrator. There will be no possibility of Self Help either. Those are at least 10 years away now. If you've got 20 years left that's 50% of your career. If you accept a job at Omni, Kalitta, Alegient, Spirit, or ATI they've got new contracts and are closer to voting on a new TA than Atlas.

This is not bias. It is fact. If you choose to come here expect a new contract 3 years from now and very few gains (if any). We were all sent a letter by management less than 2 years ago bragging that they gave Atlas a 10% pay raise in the last contract. Ask yourself... Is a 10% raise 2 or 3 years from now in exchange for a 5 year contract enough to support your family and pay off the debts you've incurred getting your ratings and fighting up the ranks of lesser airlines? That's your decision.

Originally Posted by Davetastic

This is absolutely NOT what this latest ruling was about! The latest decision was to determine if this court was going to rule whether or not we will be allowed to negotiate our contracts separately or if we must arbitrate our contracts. The court decided that this motion was a "minor dispute" as defined by the RLA and as such minor disputes are subject to arbitration. Consequently, that decision (whether we will arbitrate our next contract or separately negotiate) will be decided by an arbitrator.

The court made zero reference to how "far apart" the company and the union are in work rules. In fact, the court even said that it is undisputed that the Atlas and Polar pilots are subject to their respective CBA's. The judge even went on to say that the terms of the JCBA are not at issue and neither Southern nor Atlas are seeking to change the provisions of the CBA!

The APC forum is so infested with union plants that will say anything to further an irresponsible and ineffective narrative to drive an attrition based tactic to force the company into negotiating a contract. Even THE JUDGE said that in this latest filing that the UNION position to argue against this latest motion that the company filed was ineffective!

If you are going to quote lawsuits, at least keep it FACTUAL!

Originally Posted by DC8DRIVER

Actually, what the APC forums are infested with are opinions.

Globemaster's opinion is the same opinion that the vast majority of pro-union supporters believe. Your opinion is what the few anti-union people believe.

Readers can clearly see from your stubborn, unceasing posts which side of that fence you sit on.

Originally Posted by Crusoe

.... the attempts to re-open and alter the current CBA through appealing to the old arbitrator....

Originally Posted by Davetastic

I don't sit on any side of a fence.

Originally Posted by zerozero

Interesting comment from someone who finds constant fault in union tactics, but only excuses the company.

"Boys will be boys..."

Originally Posted by Davetastic

... It is not to say that the company didn't sue us or didn't sue the wife of a deceased pilot on a layover (btw, in that case, the company sued because it is a business and it has insurance.....it is not personal....it is about loss mitigation), ...

Originally Posted by DC8DRIVER

Companies that have good relationships with their employees do not deny widows the legal benefits due to them for their deceased spouses work related death. Especially companies that have a net worth north of 4 billion dollars.

That is the sort of thing that creates a toxic work environment.

Unless, of course, your goal is to defend the company at all costs.

Loss mitigation ... really ??

WTF?

Originally Posted by Davetastic

Furthermore, you can't possibly discuss the case of the deceased widow because you don't nor do I have all the facts. So it is all speculation as to what happened. You sound desperate when you use that case or other emotionally based arguments to get others to see your point of view because NONE of them have any bearing on our negotiations.