OK I am sorry for the Jerry Springer Head Line but.....

It does appear that some "Tougher Management Groups" may have an effective way to all but nullify the enforcement opportunities available to a Pilot Group Afforded in the "Bargained Agreement" .

Following is my best effort to explain.
I may have misunderstood some elements and therefore PLEASE TAKE THIS AS A SPRINGBOARD WITH WHICH DISCUSSION FOR CLARIFICATION CAN OCCUR WITH ALPA LEADERSHIP. DO NOT accept an explanation from anyone other than higher ALPA reps. If you are talking to a road show guy get them to CALL an UPPER ALPA REP then and there..... be SURE that someone who KNOWS the answer explains.

What if some negotiated points result in the contract actually having ZERO Enforceability ?

What if the Grievance Process actually DIDN’T EXIST !!!

Please ask Union reps to specifically explain the following questions.

1) Does the contract have an agreement in which there is a limit to the number of grievances which will be taken to higher levels of ALPA representation?
2) Are there agreements anywhere which might have a similar limiting effect.

(If 100 valid grievances were filed and none were settled at the “Meeting with Management” level, will 100 valid grievances be taken to a system board ?...and then to arbitration ?)
3) Do finances or budget limits result in some grievances not getting pursued?

Additionally please get a CLEAR explanation of the pilot protection / Grievance Process/representation process;
Action which cause grievance
Grievance Filed
Then Meeting with Management?... Then if not resolved
Then what?
What are the steps of representation and how far will ALPA go to protect a pilot?
PLEASE get the specific written references to the process.
Also, Can ALPA simply choose to not pursue a grievance without a pilots' approval ?

With respect to ALPA “intent to do good things” this issue MUST be clarified.

 

very good point w this mgmt

 

C'mon. You are just being like the folks in this video YouTube - Pinnacolaba Joint TA, Pinnacle, Mesaba, Colgan

EVERY SINGLE SECTION MUST be examined under a microscope. The Contract is our Armor. We must look for the chinks BEFORE management has a chance to find them.

I applaud your suggestion to question our reps. Unfortunately, our reps are NOT lawyers. While I DO think they have done fine work (and I applaud them in what is a thankless job), I DO NOT believe they have produced an iron clad TA.

Take the time to read EVERY line. Pretend you are management, and figure out how they can screw us. Then we can close those holes before we fall into them.

 

This has always existed. This has nothing to do with alpa but your "to the top" is in reference to system board hearings. Instead of trying to start tension at road shows why not first understand how the grievance process works, then read the contract sections that pertain to such situation.

 

localpro are your initials d.k.?

 

LocalPro you should follow Higney's advice and educate yourself further on the grievance process and the difference in handling between grievances and discharge cases.

That said, ALPA is not obligated to provide representation in ALL cases. Say, someone who leaves the line for management and then has pass travel fraud exposed. Or a check airman who threatens his first officer with busted checkrides if he talk to management after allowing some offline flight attendant to ride the jumpseat because he's hoping to get some.

Some people are bad and just don't deserve to have this job. In fifteen years, and several at EXA, there are very, very few people who I have not seen ALPA represent. Those who are refused are usually pretty notorious. Or odious.

 

Just a tidbit for this discussion.

The ALPA lawyer representing the pilots in this JCBA is the same one that XJ has been using for a long time, Jane Schraft. (sp?)

She is one of the best in the business.

Will this contract be loophole free? None are.

Will it be written as one of the better contract languages in the industry? Most definitely.

 

Thank you very much for the responses but;
Although the wording may have been weak in some areas a lot of research has been invested.
Also please re-read the questions
"Limits to number of System Boards". This is critical

 

It's imperative that everyone go to the road shows and get as educated as possible on this contract before the vote. I've heard some good rants and rumor spreading over the past couple of weeks on the XJ and 9E sides. What I've found out when asking those individuals about why they hate a certain part or parts of the new contract is they don't have the information to back up their frustration.




Remember to vote and talk to your reps.

 

I'm confused, have you got a copy of the full language TA or have you created this slippery slope from the wording of a very brief summary?