ALPA Administrative Manual Section 40 - Collective Bargaining

I. The President shall appoint a subcommittee of the Collective Bargaining Committee dedicated to scope within extended airline families (the “Scope Subcommittee”), subject to Executive Council approval of appointments.

1. The Scope Subcommittee is charged with pursuing the following general goals:

a. Increasing Association knowledge on the function and operation of scope provisions.

b. Enhancing cooperation among ALPA pilot groups within each system of mainline and express carriers in formulation of scope proposals for protection and allocation of flying within that system.

2. In pursuing its assigned general goals, the Scope Subcommittee shall:

a. Comprehensively review and analyze (in conjunction with appropriate Association resources) existing scope clauses of both ALPA and non-ALPA carriers in terms of whether they advance scope goals with respect to the preservation and allocation of flying within extended airline systems.

b. Prepare guidelines with respect to standards and principles concerning scope negotiations, including but not limited to: (i) enhancing career protections and (ii) defending against use of alter egos. Further, the Scope Subcommittee may develop independent approaches to addressing scope language or concepts without necessarily being limited to existing scope language or concepts.

c. Track industry changes in scope clauses.

d. Develop contract models for scope clauses.

e. Consult with Negotiating Committees of ALPA pilot groups within the extended system prior to commencement of negotiations, as provided in subsection 3 below.

f. Communicate with non-ALPA pilot groups within the airline family on scope issues.

g. Be available to consult with Negotiating Committees during negotiations concerning scope, and receive updates on status of scope negotiations as provided in subsection 3 below.

h. Report regularly to the Executive Council, Executive Board and Board of Directors and recommend changes to ALPA policies as it deems necessary.

3. Prior to commencement of any bargaining for any ALPA pilot group within a mainline/express system, the applicable Negotiating Committee will meet with the Negotiating Committees of other ALPA pilot groups in the mainline/express system to review opening scope proposals and how they advance ALPA’s scope goals and guidelines. The committees will work with each other to develop a consensus on proposals; if, however, they are unable to do so, subsection 3a below will apply.

a. Following consultation as specified above, and prior to submission of the scope proposal to the airline, the applicable Negotiating Committee will report to the Scope Subcommittee that ALPA pilot groups have consulted with one another and have or have not reached consensus that the planned scope proposal meets ALPA’s scope goals and guidelines; if the latter, Negotiating Committees of other ALPA pilot groups in the system can submit statements of agreement or disagreement to the Scope Subcommittee, which can recommend changes following consultation with the Negotiating Committees involved.

b. The applicable Negotiating Committee and ALPA pilot groups within the mainline/express system will develop in conjunction with the opening proposal agreed reporting benchmarks with respect to developments in on-going scope negotiations which will require that the Negotiating Committee provide updates on the status of scope negotiations to the Scope Subcommittee. In the absence of consensual agreements concerning benchmarks, the Scope Subcommittee will determine reporting benchmarks.

4. During the period that final approval of a collective bargaining agreement is subject to Presidential review under the Constitution and By-Laws, MEC designated representatives of all ALPA pilot groups within the mainline/express system may submit comments prior to the Presidential signature concerning conformity of negotiated scope provisions with recommendations of the Scope Subcommittee and Association policy.

 

Seham was not a lawyer in the TWA case. The plaintiff TWA pilots did try unsuccessfully to get Seham qualified to testify as an expert witness at trial, and he issued the report that is floating around the web as a proffered basis for that testimony.

ALPA objected to his being qualified as an expert witness. The following is an excerpt from what the judge had to say in an oral ruling barring the Lee Seham report and his potential testimony.

For the foregoing reasons, defendant's motion to
strike the reports of McCormick and Seham and bar their
testimony as experts at the trial is granted. Their opinions
are based far more on speculation than on their "knowledge,
skill, experience, training or education." Their purported
testimony is not the product of discernible, let alone
reliable, principles and methods.

So what other untruths do you have for us today, Carl?

 

As a PMNWA pilot the red/green crap is over...... I heard it from both sides for almost 15 years prior to the Delta merger. We are all now Delta pilots not red, green, blue, or anything else. You speak of unity yet you post of spending a lot of time explaining your differences due to history. Time to look forward instead of aft.

 

I say that we adopt a new color. orange

21 days until football season

 

I guess it depends on how you measure it. If size is all that matters, well okay, you make a valid point.

After bankruptcy, TWA went from the bottom of the industry in on time performance to the top... in a very short period of time. TWA also received several J.D. Powers Awards (I don't remember the specifics). We had an excellent product and were winning back many of the customers we lost during the slash and burn days of Icahn and bankruptcy. When Flight 800 went down, it was just more than an airline in TWA's position could handle, IMO. Icahn had sold off most of the assets. And even though the company was making good progress, the finances were still fragile. I don't know if TWA would have ultimately made it or not. But without Flight 800, I think we had some good momentum going. In my opinion, the quality of a company is more important than its size.

So how's Delta doing? Yeah, we're big. But we also have serious operational/customer service problems and we recently were selected as one of the most hated companies. It's not all bad. All of us are trying very hard to make this the best airline on the planet. And I think we will succeed. But I sure wouldn't just evaluate how things are going based solely on our size relative to our competitors.

Okay. Maybe you were just using the fact that I worked at TWA as a way to make your point. Even though I'm skeptical, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt on that one. But if that wasn't the case, it would not be the first time one of your cohorts has thrown that in my face. The thing is... I'm very proud of the fact that I worked for TWA and wouldn't trade the experience and the opportunity to learn from some of the finest aviators on the planet for just about anything. I don't consider it a negative at all.

 

Don't you ever get embarrassed about just making stuff up?

Carl

 

I think reroute believe what he wants to believe.

 

Is he a racist too Reroute?

Carl

 

So that makes it OK that Delta pilots get back less than half the money we send to ALPA national?

Carl

 

Did not say that he was. Here is exactly what I did say:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl Spackler

We're very lucky to have Lee Seham's firm at DPA. I know you hate him because he decertified ALPA at UsAir. And his evidentiary report showing ALPA's abuses at TWA was instrumental in securing a verdict against ALPA.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slowplay

The plaintiff TWA pilots did try unsuccessfully to get Seham qualified to testify as an expert witness at trial, and he issued the report that is floating around the web as a proffered basis for that testimony.

Seham's report was one of the basis' for the TWA pilots to investigate. It was a comprehensive report that laid out what ALPA did. The TWA attorneys got to use it as a road map of investigation. ALPA objected and convinced the judge to not allow it as direct evidence, but it wasn't needed as direct evidence. Its tool as a road map was plenty to help the TWA pilots gain their verdict against ALPA.

No untruths at all slowplay, however you should pay attention better as opposed to reading only enough to refute, then jump on the keyboard. Just trying to spread the truth about Lee's work and his firm...and I do it all with no flight pay loss.

DPA is very lucky to have a firm that fights extremely hard and beats ALPA...not that it's that hard.

Carl