Today's Deltanet Headline: "Unprecedented"
12-02-2015, 12:12 PM
#22
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Aug 2006
Position: A330 First Officer
Posts: 1,465
Originally Posted by Hrkdrivr
It's not even available if you drill down into the Deltanet news pages...totally gone.
12-02-2015, 12:15 PM
#23
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Oct 2007
Position: Fairly local
Posts: 1,461
Originally Posted by Hrkdrivr
It's not even available if you drill down into the Deltanet news pages...totally gone.
What DALMD88FO said...
12-02-2015, 01:40 PM
#26
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,124
Originally Posted by index
Balderdash.
Scoop and his rep should be posting that codicil any minute now.
Scoop and his rep should be posting that codicil any minute now.
While I do not believe the rep was told there was a codicil (or even a LOA or MOU), my fear is that we will be told that based upon "past practice/course of conduct," DALPA feels that we will not prevail and has elected to pursue this at the negotiating table rather than as a grievance.
12-02-2015, 08:28 PM
#27
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 360
Any lawyers out there know when the "status quo" provision can be invoked during negotiations? We haven't reached the amendable date on current contract so I'm wondering if status quo doesn't apply until that date. The company is so blatantly violating the meaning of the term that I have to wonder if they haven't already applied a heavy dose of lawyers to their moves already.
Of course, I know whatever the answer, "it's just business". The same premise adopted by the Wall Street thieves that caused the most recent economic meltdown. Seems like the term is used to justify unethical behavior when convenient.
Of course, I know whatever the answer, "it's just business". The same premise adopted by the Wall Street thieves that caused the most recent economic meltdown. Seems like the term is used to justify unethical behavior when convenient.
12-03-2015, 03:58 AM
#28
Straight QOL, homie
Joined APC: Feb 2012
Position: Record-Shattering Profit Facilitator
Posts: 4,202
There are multiple lawyers here....they can weigh in, but it's my understanding that status quo expectation starts when section 6 negotiations start.
The lawyers may be able to shed light on when, if left unaddressed, status quo violations become the new status quo.
The lawyers may be able to shed light on when, if left unaddressed, status quo violations become the new status quo.
12-03-2015, 04:00 AM
#29
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jun 2015
Posts: 3,124
Originally Posted by trustbutverify
Any lawyers out there know when the "status quo" provision can be invoked during negotiations? We haven't reached the amendable date on current contract so I'm wondering if status quo doesn't apply until that date. The company is so blatantly violating the meaning of the term that I have to wonder if they haven't already applied a heavy dose of lawyers to their moves already.
Of course, I know whatever the answer, "it's just business". The same premise adopted by the Wall Street thieves that caused the most recent economic meltdown. Seems like the term is used to justify unethical behavior when convenient.
Of course, I know whatever the answer, "it's just business". The same premise adopted by the Wall Street thieves that caused the most recent economic meltdown. Seems like the term is used to justify unethical behavior when convenient.
The legal issue here will be whether the derivative effect of the actions of the company with regard to non-contract employees violates the status quo provisions for contract employees in Section 6 negotiations.
There is no question that the company can change rates of pay whenever for non-contract employees as it sees fit but...can it do so knowing it will have a effect on an employee group involved in Section 6 negotiations? This will likely be a novel question for the NMB and/or courts.
12-03-2015, 04:33 AM
#30
Works Every Weekend
Joined APC: Dec 2007
Position: 737 ATL
Posts: 3,506
Originally Posted by trustbutverify
Any lawyers out there know when the "status quo" provision can be invoked during negotiations? We haven't reached the amendable date on current contract so I'm wondering if status quo doesn't apply until that date. The company is so blatantly violating the meaning of the term that I have to wonder if they haven't already applied a heavy dose of lawyers to their moves already.
It begins as soon as Section 6 notices have been delivered.
Railway Labor Act Section 156:
§ 156. Procedure in changing rates of pay, rules, and working conditions
Carriers and representatives of the employees shall give at least thirty days' written notice of an intended change in agreements affecting rates of pay, rules, or working conditions, and the time and place for the beginning of conference between the representatives of the parties interested in such intended changes shall be agreed upon within ten days after the receipt of said notice, and said time shall be within the thirty days provided in the notice. In every case where such notice of intended change has been given, or conferences are being held with reference thereto, or the services of the Mediation Board have been requested by either party, or said Board has proffered its services, rates of pay, rules, or working conditions shall not be altered by the carrier until the controversy has been finally acted upon, as required by section 155 of this title, by the Mediation Board, unless a period of ten days has elapsed after termination of conferences without request for or proffer of the services of the Mediation Board.
The question is whether by accelerating the non-contract employee raises, management has altered our rates of pay and working conditions in violation of the status quo.
Its obvious they did it to get around our contract and deny us the raise we would have received had they followed their usual practice. But is that permissible?
Only the NMB or the courts can answer. We'll see if ALPA wants to ask the question.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
