Pineapple Guy

First, off, I'm not an "East hater". I simply have ZERO respect for a group that doesn't live up to its word.

Second, I would have no problem with the scenario as you hypothesize. That is their right.

Of course, they aren't doing that now are they??? So, let me turn the question on you. Do YOU have a problem with them refusing to abide by a binding arbitration they voluntarily entered into, knowing full well that an independent arbitrator may decide something other than what they perceive as "fair"?

That was why the DAL MEC went to great lengths to avoid binding arbitration, but in the end, was willing to take our chances.

brakechatter

They are doing the same thing, effectively. They hold the SLI in the abyss with USAPA or with ALPA. Interestingly enough, even the senior guys seem to be in line with the philosophy. I don't agree that the majority of pilots are "siding" with the West on this. I can imagine that just about any DOH minded group might have an ear to lend to the east.


My opinion: The arbitrator does not have carte blanche. They have to stick with the rules of the road with respect to ALPA merger policy. IMO, the case can be made that they he indeed did NOT. Again, just my opinion. We can and have argued over how and why, but the bottom line is that IMO the arbitrator gave a windfall to the west at the expense of the east. Thus, policy is violated, and thus "binding" is up for grabs. I completely agree that this sets a very bad precedent for ALPA, and frankly it should IMO. The policy was outdated--and still is.

USAir never was on its deathbed, and AWA was not a polished gem. Basing somebody's "career expectations"-- and thus how it effects where they should fall on a seniority list-- on a single day is both capricious and arbitrary IMO. That's neither here nor there though.

The simple fact is that the east could have held the list in limbo via ALPA merger policy or some other way. They chose the latter. They have to live with the fallout. I don't hold zero respect for them, as I also got the chance to see a few west pilots act in a very similar manner.


As for Delta, we had a caveat. We did the CBA first, and then the list. We went off the reservation, utilizing the provision in ALPA merger policy which allowed prenups. In effect, we learned from the flawed policy that is ALPA merger.

That's about the size of it. IMO if our arbitrator had placed an active 17 year captain below a 4 month Delta pilot, all hell would have broken loose as well. Additionally, giving an widebodyless airline almost instant access to an international fleet was the other undoing. Again, IMO. Many don't agree, and that's ok. A court, however, did not put a stop to it.

..and so it goes

sailingfun

USAIR East was awarded the first 500 plus positions on the seniority list because they had a small widebody international fleet. Their actual CA requirements for international at the time were only about 260 Captains.

slowplay

Just curious, isn't your wife a furloughed East pilot?

brakechatter

Heh, heh. Go bark up another tree. The answer is no.

CVG767A

I've met few people that are not connected to the east group think that ALPA merger policy wasn't followed. That argument was presented to neutral parties, and found to not be valid.

brakechatter

Sorry, I don't agree. Doesn't really matter here in APC, or with what is going on in the actual world.

CVG767A

You're right; "career expectations" is a vague notion; nobody knows what the future holds. That's why I find it so tough to argue against relative seniority during a seniority list integration.

With the exception of the top 500 spots, the Nicolau list was relative seniority. Where's the windfall? Unless you had a crystal ball at that time, you couldn't have determined when-- or if-- any USAirways (east) F/O would be upgrading.

CVG767A

You're right; nothing will be decided based on what is said here. As far as I can tell, the SLI at USAirways is only awaiting a joint contract. I'm wondering if that will ever happen.

brakechatter

The same could be said of the West pilots, and their job security, IMO. I respect your point of view. My point is that I do not vilify the East pilots for pursuing all options. Apparently, the courts do not either.

BTW, it was a ratio down to a certain point--where active USAir pilots were tacked to the bottom. The windfall came from no effective fence for the wide bodies and the bottom positions on the list of the East, IMO.

I'm not really interested in rehashing the methodology, as I think that there are valid points to either side. My beef is with ALPA merger policy, which is where I feel the blame should squarely be aimed.