Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)
-   Regional (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/)
-   -   Union at SkyWest?? (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/regional/11279-union-skywest.html)

rickair7777 04-03-2007 03:56 PM


Originally Posted by JetJock16 (Post 143410)
The merger of SKW and ASA's pilot groups doesn't mean that the company has to merge into one Ops Cert. Look at RAH (Republic, Chautauqua & Shuttle America) and MAG (Mesa, Go, Air Midwest & Freedom), SKW can still keep the two separate Ops Certs and staff them with the same labor groups.

My card is in, lets at least take it to a vote. I don't want a merger of the pilot groups but I do want a legal TA to stop the company from changing their interpretation of our polocies overnight (cancellation polocy is one of many examples).

You are absolutely correct, I did not say that. You can merge the pilot groups without merging the operating certificates, but the company would never have a reason do that unless forced to by the SKW group voting in alpa.

Understand this, cuz I'm not sure you do: If SKW votes in alpa, the pilot groups are MERGED at that moment (since both are now alpa)...the default is by DOH, so most FO's at ASA will be ahead of most SKW FO's. You can negotiate some details (like fences) but ASA would have no reason to give up their DOH seniority...they would laugh in your face. You need to be real clear on how this works...

JetJock16 04-03-2007 04:09 PM


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 143491)
Understand this, cuz I'm not sure you do: If SKW votes in alpa, the pilot groups are MERGED at that moment (since both are now alpa)...the default is by DOH, so most FO's at ASA will be ahead of most SKW FO's. You can negotiate some details (like fences) but ASA would have no reason to give up their DOH seniority...they would laugh in your face. You need to be real clear on how this works...

I do understand, the merger of the two pilot groups would take time (i.e. US/AW) and it is the only part of voting ALPA in that I fear. I understand that ASA is a relatively senior airline and merging the two pilots groups would turn out bad for almost all SKW pilots.

rickair7777 04-03-2007 04:14 PM


Originally Posted by JetJock16 (Post 143497)
I do understand, the merger of the two pilot groups would take time (i.e. US/AW) and it is the only part of voting ALPA in that I fear. I understand that ASA is a relatively senior airline and merging the two pilots groups would turn out bad for almost all SKW pilots.


The US/HP thing bears watching...I'm VERY curious to see if cactus gets stapled in the end.

JetJock16 04-03-2007 04:20 PM


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 143502)
The US/HP thing bears watching...I'm VERY curious to see if cactus gets stapled in the end.

True, history has proven that any pilot group that mergers with US will get the short end.

bender 04-03-2007 06:36 PM

I thought the ALPA policy of list integration was no windfall for either group?

RedeyeAV8r 04-03-2007 06:49 PM


Originally Posted by JetJock16 (Post 143505)
True, history has proven that any pilot group that mergers with US will get the short end.


What a load of crap........
You have no idea what you are talking about.
The USAir/ PSA merger went DOH and so did the USAir/Piedmont merger (except there were fences on the Piedmont 767)

BTW, ever hear of the Allegheny/Mohawk clause in most ALPA contracts??
Care to Guess what USAir's name was before USAir?

RedeyeAV8r 04-03-2007 07:00 PM


Originally Posted by bender (Post 143572)
I thought the ALPA policy of list integration was no windfall for either group?

Care to state what ALPA merger policy is or what you think it is?

Generally all mergers go to a nuetral arbitrator.......who makes the final decison on seniority integration. If it is between 2 ALPA carriers, then ALPA National stays out of the Picture. If it is between an ALPA carrier and a NON ALPA carrier then ALPA National will provide RLA lawyers and staff to the ALPA group.
The Pilot group that isn't covered by a contract (i.e. UNION) is usually at a disadvantage. That is it in a nutshell.

ghilis101 04-03-2007 07:27 PM

a DOH integration with SKW and ASA definitly favors ASA because theyre a much more senior group, but that would take a long time to sort out. You probably wont be at SKW by the time that happens. So get your cad in to at least get the process started. Movement is starting to happen at ASA so that is also a good sign, so youll have a less disgruntled group over there.

YAKflyer 04-03-2007 07:58 PM


Originally Posted by rickair7777 (Post 143391)
SKW has no compelling reason to merge ASA and SKW into one list, and a great reason not to. A seperate certificate is pretty handy for avoiding issues like the UAL hub restriction.

If alpa gets voted in at SKW, seniority list integration with ASA will be mandatory at that point, regardless of what the company wants. The alpa policy is to integrate seniority by DOH, which would greatly benefit the more senior workforce at ASA.

If the company did merge the certificates, I'm not sure how the union issue would have to be resolved...perhaps a yes/no vote among the combined pilot group?

Rick you usually are spot on, but in this post you are incorrect on several points. First JA will NEVER merge the two companies because it will remove the ability to whipsaw the two pilot groups against each other. We can end any other discussion here for that reason, but I want to correct you on another points. Should SKW pilots vote ALPA to represent them, there WILL NOT be an automatic integration into one large seniority list without SKW management agreeing and they won't do that because of the first point I made. The only way to get one list without ASA and SKW companies being merged would be to sue for single carrier status with the National Labor Relations Board. This would be done by the pilots of both groups because they feel they would be stronger in dealing with management with a larger unified group. Should the board agree the two companies are a de-facto single entity they could award single carrier status at which time the two groups could join together. An example of this happening is when the different Eagle groups forced AMR to treat them as a single group. Lastly you are wrong about ALPA policy requiring DOH integration in the event of a merger. Point in fact is ALPA merger policy says one group can not be given a windfall over another group. The most common integration will have a pilot at the 50% of his list end up at the 50% of the merged list. At the big airlines this would be adjusted for aircraft size if one airline had bigger planes than the other airline. The sky will not fall for SKW pilots if they vote ALPA in.

JetJock16 04-03-2007 08:07 PM


Originally Posted by RedeyeAV8r (Post 143579)
What a load of crap........
You have no idea what you are talking about.
The USAir/ PSA merger went DOH and so did the USAir/Piedmont merger (except there were fences on the Piedmont 767)

BTW, ever hear of the Allegheny/Mohawk clause in most ALPA contracts??
Care to Guess what USAir's name was before USAir?

Easy, at your age you might have a heart attack. Simply correcting is enough, you don't have to blow out your depends! LOL :D


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:20 AM.


User Alert System provided by Advanced User Tagging v3.3.0 (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2024 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Website Copyright ©2000 - 2017 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands