7576FO

For those not following this. In 1997 written in our contract it says AA not to go below 7,300 pilots not including pilots added by way of merger or buyout (Reno or TWA pilots not included in count). If floor of 7,300 goes below 7,300 well here's the actual wording.

"In the event that the number of cockpit crewmembers employed by the Company on the American Airlines Pilots Seniority List goes below 7300, the parties agree that the commuter exception contained in this Section D. shall be terminable at the option of APA following a 90-day period to provide an opportunity for discussion. If APA elects to require termination of the commuter exception, the Company shall thereafter have a reasonable time to complete the disposition of the operations covered by this Section D. during which period the parties shall meet in good faith and discuss the issues related to such termination. Pilots added to the American Airlines Pilots Seniority List by way of seniority merger shall not count in calculating
the number of cockpit crewmembers for purposes of this section 4."


7,300 Cockpit Crewmember Floor Grievance Ruling

Your National Officers and Board of Directors are disappointed to inform you that the arbitrator presiding over the 7,300 cockpit crewmember floor presidential grievance, presented by the pilots' System Board of Adjustment, has ruled that AMR is NOT currently in violation.

In his ruling executed today, Arbitrator Herbert Fishgold explained to APA and AMR legal representatives that he has found that the number of “pilots employed on the seniority list” to be well in excess of the 7,300 limitation. Arbitrator Fishgold determined that furloughed pilots and those on leaves of absence count toward the cockpit crewmember floor limitation. His interpretation actually puts the number of pilots currently “employed” by American Airlines at more than 11,000. This finding is totally counter to the labor-protective provisions of the contractual language.

What is more telling is management’s total disregard for agreed-upon contract language. Both parties clearly knew the intent of the crewmember floor protection language when it was agreed upon in our contract, yet when faced with complying with the language, management rewrote history and was dishonest about their understanding of the agreement. Worse yet, the arbitrator allowed AMR’s arguments to divert him from ruling on the clear intent of the contractual language.

In response to this ruling, which ignores clear contractual language and the intent of the original agreement, the APA legal team formally filed a dissenting opinion, which will be attached to the final ruling paperwork. Both the arbitrator’s ruling and the APA dissent will be posted shortly to the members' home page of alliedpilots.org, under "Headliners." We urge you to carefully read both documents.

Additionally, the APA Board of Directors unanimously directed APA’s General Counsel to file a lawsuit to overturn the ruling. The suit against AMR will be filed in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C. within 24 hours.

When the clear intent of our contract language is blatantly violated, the union must take extraordinary measures to defend the contractual protections we agreed to and rely upon. This also highlights the need for our contract protections to be constructed in clearly defined language that offers no loopholes or room for interpretation. Some issues are worth the extra effort to defend. Surely this one, which involves the most basic protection of pilot jobs on the property, qualifies as one of those issues. While these kinds of suits are extremely difficult to win, your leadership is committed to protecting your interests and will use every tool available to do so. We will keep you updated as the lawsuit progresses.

So, we lost. Some of the thoughts are the arbitrator was afraid to give APA leverage. Some are writing that our union pres's "Blood money" letter to CEO Arpey really bothered the arbitrator.
I'm not going to jump to conclusions. I will say this. We have a very aggressive National Officers team that I voted for. I still support my union pres, vice pres and treasurer.

I personally feel for the furloughed pilots, this is a huge slap in the face to be termed "employed" by American Airlines when you've been furloughed 7+ years. When you've been receiving UNEMPLOYMENT checks. No BENEFITS.

I will donate money to the lawsuit to benefit the EMPLOYED but not EMPLOYED pilots of American Airlines.

More than ever I demand length of service pay rates for all time on furlough (EMPLOYED) for returning furloughees on the next contract.

I will more than do my part (legally and ethically) to make sure AA management pays these EMPLOYED but not working here and not receiving direct deposits or what are those things called ummm, uhhhh PAY CHECKS

There are many holes in this ruling. Our Part 1 (Flight Ops manual) says NO pilot EMPLOYED by AA can do any outside flying for compensation.
So all you furloughed but EMPLOYED pilots that are flying for other companies and receiving compensation.

Now I knew even if we won that they weren't gonna shut Eagle down. If we won we might have had some bargaining leverage. Managment could've dragged their feet for years on this even if we'd have won this.

Thoughts?
7576

Flyby1206

Wow big blow against APA....very surprised at the ruling. Thats some serious BS to consider ALL furloughed pilots as employed by AA. I figured it would be close, but arbitrator might rule one way or the other due to some small discrepancy, but this is a serious shock. I hope those "employed" by AA but not receiving any benefits of employment will have some success in the coming lawsuit.

MAXforwardspeed

I am still the new kid on the airline block however the lesion I take away from this is that management will always win! I would have to say all pilot unions need to learn from past mistakes to fix the future. Why would you try to repair the leaky roof on a house with a bad foundation? It seems too hard, expensive, and time consuming to fix the past. Invest the money in making a very strong contract for the future.

Thanks for the info.

Max (AE/FO)

Phlying Phallus

The initial post was a little long winded. What is tragic is that pilots from other airlines will miss the significance of this ruling.

Basically, no matter how egregious the violation, no matter how black and white the contractual language is, no matter how much of a slam dunk you think the grievance will be.....

Some idiot arbitrator will come along and make a ruling that defies all logic and reason.

Here's the Cliff's notes version - we had a contractual provision that gave us leverage when our seniority list dropped below 7300 pilots "employed by the company."

That happened. The company disputed it by saying furloughed pilots and pilots on medical disability were "employed."

The arbitrator ruled with the company.

So there you have it folks - any of you on furlough are currently "employed."

Un-freakin'-real.

I hope everyone makes note and blacklists this guy so that he never gets work as an arbitrator ever again.

757Driver

Time to pull a France and shut this miserable country down for the week with ALL Pilots participating in a general strike.

Let Mr. Fat-assed arbitrator try finding his way home during that.

NuGuy

Heyas,

If I were one of the "employed" (but furloughed) pilots, I'd start a immediate class action lawsuit for back pay and benefits.

Nu

AAflyer

I think some are talking about it... I would say when dealing with management .

Litigate..... DO NOT arbitrate!

I have seen not just us, but many pilots get screwed through arbitration process.

AAflyer

You are so right..... It is time.

AA

Whale Pilot

Wow,

I didn't know that I was still employed... oops I mean furloughed since Apr 2003

I guess I better give scheduling a call and find out when my next trip is....

Whale

chuck h

What a shock, the man wins again. It's sad that whatever you negotiate can be thrown away that easy. Whats the point of having contracts anymore? If the company didn't want to adhere to this they shouldn't have signed the original deal in the first place, when is an arbitrator going to hold up the letter of a contract? Never mind, I know the answer, when it favors the company.