Search

Notices
Regional Regional Airlines

PNCL Scope Ruling

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 02-21-2008 | 06:23 PM
  #51  
ToiletDuck's Avatar
Che Guevara
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by DMEarc
Because most of their pilots are pro-ALPA.
Doesn't do anything for the union though. They can't vote for or against anything that's going on in negotiations.
Reply
Old 02-21-2008 | 06:30 PM
  #52  
The Juice's Avatar
ULTP-Ultra Low Tier Pilot
 
Joined: Dec 2007
Posts: 3,228
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by ToiletDuck
Doesn't do anything for the union though. They can't vote for or against anything that's going on in negotiations.
If they merge the lists, Colgan will become ALPA. This will create 400+ more union voices which will help carry more power for the PNCL cause. PNCL Corp will now have their entire pilot group under one union with the power of a unified single group rather than one union and one not, or both having two seperate ALPA shops.
Reply
Old 02-21-2008 | 06:33 PM
  #53  
dingo222's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Default

No staple, here is the legislation:


(c) AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND EXPENDITURE
AUTHORITY.—
(1) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 9502(d) of such
Code is amended—
(A) by striking ‘‘October 1, 2007’’ and inserting ‘‘March
1, 2008’’, and
(B) by inserting ‘‘or the Department of Transportation
Appropriations Act, 2008’’ in subparagraph (A) before the
semicolon at the end.
(2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Paragraph (2) of section
9502(f) of such Code is amended by striking ‘‘October 1, 2007’’
and inserting ‘‘March 1, 2008’’.
(d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by this section
shall take effect on October 1, 2007.
SEC. 117. LABOR INTEGRATION. (a) LABOR INTEGRATION.—With
respect to any covered transaction involving two or more covered
air carriers that results in the combination of crafts or classes
that are subject to the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.),
sections 3 and 13 of the labor protective provisions imposed by
the Civil Aeronautics Board in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger (as
published at 59 C.A.B. 45) shall apply to the integration of covered
employees of the covered air carriers; except that—
(1) if the same collective bargaining agent represents the
combining crafts or classes at each of the covered air carriers,
that collective bargaining agent’s internal policies regarding
integration, if any, will not be affected by and will supersede
the requirements of this section; and
(2) the requirements of any collective bargaining agreement
that may be applicable to the terms of integration involving
covered employees of a covered air carrier shall not be affected
by the requirements of this section as to the employees covered
by that agreement, so long as those provisions allow for the
protections afforded by sections 3 and 13 of the Allegheny-
Mohawk provisions.

(b) DEFINITIONS.—In this section, the following definitions
apply:
(1) AIR CARRIER.—The term ‘‘air carrier’’ means an air
carrier that holds a certificate issued under chapter 411 of
title 49, United States Code.
(2) COVERED AIR CARRIER.—The term ‘‘covered air carrier’’
means an air carrier that is involved in a covered transaction.
(3) COVERED EMPLOYEE.—The term ‘‘covered employee’’
means an employee who—
(A) is not a temporary employee; and
(B) is a member of a craft or class that is subject
to the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 151 et seq.).






In a nutshell, absent any contractual protections, airline employees will have A-M as a default protection of their seniority.

ALPA-ALPA merger, ALPA policy.

ALPA-non ALPA, A-M policy

A-M, has as its goal a fair and reasonable integration. Like ALPA policy it doesn't favor any particular integration methodolgy and absent a negotiated agreement A-M utilizes binding arbitration to settle disputes.

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-...764enr.txt.pdf
Reply
Old 02-21-2008 | 06:35 PM
  #54  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 246
Likes: 0
Default

Nevermind then! Must have had bad info.
Reply
Old 02-21-2008 | 06:42 PM
  #55  
dingo222's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Default

Seg, maybe not. I'm a layman reading this mumbo-jombo! That's the way it reads, but who knows. PCL has pretty iron clad scope, but it's still up for arbitration. Craphouse lawyers can read anything into anything
Reply
Old 02-21-2008 | 07:58 PM
  #56  
ToiletDuck's Avatar
Che Guevara
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 6,408
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by The Juice
If they merge the lists, Colgan will become ALPA. This will create 400+ more union voices which will help carry more power for the PNCL cause. PNCL Corp will now have their entire pilot group under one union with the power of a unified single group rather than one union and one not, or both having two seperate ALPA shops.
I have to admit I'm not sure on this point. I don't know if it's possible to force a union on someone. Is it?
Reply
Old 02-21-2008 | 08:21 PM
  #57  
exp96's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 294
Likes: 0
From: 737 FO
Default

Originally Posted by dingo222
LABOR INTEGRATION.—With
respect to any covered transaction involving two or more covered
air carriers that results in the combination of crafts or classes
that are subject to the Railway Labor Act
Is a non union carrier subject to the RLA?
Reply
Old 02-21-2008 | 08:31 PM
  #58  
Banned
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
From: Captain
Default

Just remember how seniority works Girls. Colgans pilots merge then take part in the fast track upgrade program to the left seat they will upgrade prior to Pinnacle Pilots on the list pre-merge.
Reply
Old 02-22-2008 | 02:31 AM
  #59  
usmc-sgt's Avatar
Moderator
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 4,077
Likes: 40
Default

Are we merged yet? Im getting tired of waiting and debating the issue. Send me my PNCL uniform and my alpa card, ill GLADLY mail in my alpa dues check and we can push forward as a group.
Reply
Old 02-22-2008 | 04:47 AM
  #60  
dingo222's Avatar
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 555
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by exp96
Is a non union carrier subject to the RLA?
yes, we are still covered under the protected class, category, all that jazz.
Reply
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
DC8DRIVER
Cargo
49
04-26-2008 08:11 AM
Toccata
Cargo
2
08-09-2007 09:40 AM
purple101
Cargo
3
08-05-2007 05:25 AM
Freighter Captain
Cargo
1
09-28-2005 05:40 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices