The single carrier status ruling is going to get reversed since there is a change in ownership of Frontier. The IMSL will then mean absolutely nothing. We can then vote in our own union.

Franke isn't stupid, if he knew there would be issues with IBT and the IMSL, he wouldn't have touched us with a ten foot pole.

The IBT wouldn't have done anything for F9 pilots if we wanted E190 or Q400 seats.

 

While I think we have a very strong argument (seven year fence, vacancies being filled via F9 DOH, IMSL hasn't been used for any purpose at F9) I won't be celebrating until we have a decision from the NMB and FAPA receives dues via check off again.

 

+1

 

Who will be filing a new single carrier petition? What is the craft/class of the people filing the petition?

 

38 NMB no. 42

This is the end of a response to an appeal filed by FAPA, seems like they were certainly able to petition and be heard even though they were no longer the representing body. There are more petitions on this website than I care to count in which the petitioner was the company


The facts and circumstances have certainly changed.

The following are some indicia of a single transportation system:

(1) published combined schedules or combined routes;
(2) standardized uniforms;
(3) common marketing, markings or insignia;
(4) integrated essential operations such as scheduling or dispatching;
(5) centralized labor and personnel operations;
(6) combined or common management, corporate officers, and board of directors;
(7) combined workforce; and,
(8) common or overlapping ownership.

Not sure why this would be denied a second time but you can keep on dreaming I guess.

 

The appeal you attached was filed before the representation election. Hence the NMB heard it.

Therein lies the problem. Now that IBT are the representatives they are the only party that can petition the NMB on behalf of the pilot group. As far as I can tell some random LLC cannot petition the NMB to reverse or reinvestigate single carrier status.

That's why it's going to take a long time to get this sorted out.

We may learn more about the sale on Tuesday when document 118 gets released in the LOA 67 lawsuit.

 

Good catch Ronaldo, My memory failed me on this one and I should have looked at the dates. I do not however see any thing in what I am finding that the carrier cannot file at least an appeal if not an outright petition to determine the existence of single carrier. Frontier did so in 1997. 25 NMB No 3

The only 50% rule I can find is for 1206.2 in determining representation dispute. I believe an argument can be made that this is not a representation dispute as of yet, this is a request for determining if we are still considered a single carrier under Republic Airways. I believe the NMB will hear this, but only time will tell.

§ 1206.2 Percentage of valid authorizations required to determine existence of a representation dispute.
(a) Upon receipt of an application requesting that an organization or individual be certified as the representative of any craft or class of employees, a showing of proved authorizations (checked and verified as to date, signature, and employment status) from at least fifty (50) percent of the craft or class must be made before the National Mediation Board will authorize an election or otherwise determine the representation desires of the employees under the provisions of section 2, Ninth, of the Railway Labor Act.
(b) Any intervening individual or organization must also produce proved authorizations (checked and verified as to date, signature, and employment status) from at least fifty (50) percent of the craft or class of employees involved to warrant placing the name of the intervenor on the ballot.
[77 FR 75549, Dec. 21, 2012]

Any links or text copies to rules you have supporting an opposite position would be very welcome.

What is Document 118?

 

I think that is one of the big problems with this fantasy.
Who is going to file this petition with the NMB? Bolo, Zooroopa and some of the boys would like the federal government to come in and bust up a union shop, a Teamster's shop?
This is going to be entertaining I would suggest putting the same legal experts on retainer that got you in to this mess....

 

A "craft and class" doesn't have to file. Anyone can petition the NMB. I realize the IBT has repeatedly claimed that only the IBT can petition, but this is simply not an accurate statement. I don't know if they are intentionally misleading you or if they just don't know but they are wrong. If zoooropa wanted to petition the NMB on Monday I could petition the NMB on monday.

 

Indigo did the "busting" and the holding company has fragmented. Frontier has absolutely no link to RAH. If you don't believe me maybe you will believe the IBT...

"According to press reports, the sale to Indigo is supposed to be finalized by the end of this month, November 2013. Indigo is a private equity firm, is not affiliated with RAH in any way, and intends to run Frontier as a stand alone carrier.

Given this recent significant change, the IBT ...asks the NMB to conduct an investigation of Frontier and Republic on the essential question of wether a single carrier still exists."

This is from a letter from the IBT to the NMB dated November 7th 2013. The IBT Airline Division was apparently trying to prevent the AFA from conducting an election prior to the closing of the sale of F9.

The F9 pilots will not be attempting to "bust up" a "union shop" any more than the IBT has just attempted to maintain their "union shop" with the RAH Flight Attendants. The IBT is trying to use the sale to insulate themselves from an election while the F9 pilots will use the sale to initiate an election. The fact that the IBT submitted this argument less than a month prior to FAPA petitioning the NMB with the same argument was an early Christmas present. Thank you very much IBT.

Finally, anyone can petition the IBT. The NMB Representation Manual states the following;

"Participants

Participants in a representation matter are: the carrier, any labor organization(s) or individual(s) seeking to represent a carrier’s employees or any incumbent representative of a carrier’s employees. The term “participant” includes parties defined below.

Parties are any labor organization(s) or individual(s) seeking to represent a carrier’s employees and any incumbent representative of the carrier’s employees.

One does not need to search too far back in history to find an example of an individual petitioning the NMB who is part of a class and craft that is already represented by a Union. These individuals were not "busting" a "Union shop", they were simply advocating for a different Union. In one well known case a Union member contacted the NMB asking how he could remove his current Union. The NMB sent the individual a representation manual and a template for Authorization Cards. The concept that "only a Union can petition the NMB" is ludicrous.

Thankfully we won't have to predict what the NMB will do for much longer. There are already three F9 craft and classes on the NMB's desk.