First of all, a scab is basically someone who has either refused to join a union, or who has crossed a picket line and gone to work during a strike.

Your coworker thinks that because people go to work for lower than standard wages that they are considered scabs. That's not the definition of a scab. I'm not the one that started the scab topic.

Here's my take: RP and F9 pilots are all on the same master seniority list. However, there are currently two different CBAs. With that said, if the majority pilot group votes for a strike and it's an approved NMB strike than it's the pilot group that falls under the CBA, in which is being struck, that would have to be the ones to stop work and picket.
However, since F9 pilots are also represented by the same union, if the union requests that all pilots it represents to support the strike than any IBT Local 357 pilot that goes to work would be considered crossing the picket line and labeled a scab. If the Local doesn't than by all means go to work. Do I personally think that you need your union to tell you that? No. You should support your union and fellow brothers and sisters.

I don't think any FFD carrier has any clause in their contract that would make the main carrier honor a strike. That's why each carrier has more than 1 FFD carrier operating for them. Not so sure you can classify Frontier in this group.

Once again that's not the definition of a scab. Different company, different union, and different pilot group.

If a strike vote is authorized and it's a FFD labor group, the company, whose pilots are on strike, could more than likely lose their FFD contract.

If RP pilots were to strike, the F9 pilots would not be obligated to strike with them unless the union made it clear that all pilots on the seniority list will honor the strike, since there's two different CBAs. I would think it would be in the best interest for F9 pilots to support their union.

 

Thank you for the response. There is a lot of blustering on this subject, by some that don't have an understanding of the situation so I do appreciate your response. This is a very unique situation, two airlines, represented by one union, with one master seniority list, and two separate contracts.

In order to strike under the RLA (Railway Labor Act), the NMB (National Mediation Board) must release the group to strike (after a 30 day cooling off period). Only then can workers strike.

In our current situation, the IBT is only negotiating one contract for one group (FFD). If released to strike, it would only be for that group. Frontier has a contract. If Frontier pilots struck, it would be an illegal job action and would be grounds for termination.

I here a lot of talk that Frontier pilots should (or must) go out on strike as a show of solidarity. To me that lacks a basic understanding of the labor and the RLA.

Along this line, would the local be within their rights to also ask all other airlines represented by the IBT (i.e. Omni) and other labor groups (truck drivers, janitors) to strike as a show of solidarity?

 

First, let me say that I support your efforts to gain a better contract. I strike is necessary to that end, you again have my support. However, I do take issue with your last statement " I would think it would be in the best interest for F9 pilots to support their union." Your union should honor and represent the wishes of your group. I find it ironic Frontier pilots are being sued by their union (the same one) against their wishes.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think the issue is between IBT and FAPA not the pilots. The council reps that the F9 pilots voted in are the ones that are dealing with all of these issues. Do you think you would have been better off taking WN's proposal? Instead, FAPA allowed for a regional airline holdings company to come in and take you over. Look what happened to Midwest. Not the kind of company I would want to take my company over. That's just my opinion.

But now we're all in this together. Like I said before, if you're not asked to honor the strike (hypothetically) by your union, then I see no issue. However, if they do ask you and since we are all under one union and one list then I see that the F9 pilots should follow in support for their union brothers and sisters.

We both need each other right now. Without Frontier, many RP pilots would be furloughed and without Republic, Frontier would probably end up closing its doors, again. This is why I think it is in the best interest for all pilots to stand together.

 

The current EXCO Chair has discussed this issue MANY times in person and on the 357 message board (according to emails I have received). He clearly states that the F9 pilots are not legally allowed to strike in support of the pilots covered by the CHQ CBA.

That's from your current union leadership, no telling what the new EBoard and President's take on the will be.

It is simply against the law for the F9 pilots to walk (strike) for the RP 357 contract negotiations. Even if we were all members of 357, which we're not, the separate CBAs do not allow it.

An honest question that I don't know the answer to: If the pilots of one Airline represented by IBT Local 1224 strikes, do the other pilots under 1224 strike?

 

Because you choose not to be? Seems that there was a vote and it is the IBT that won. Why continue to fight the vote? YOU ARE A MEMBER OF THE IBT! FAPA is not recognized, nor is it a bargaining entity, unless you call pillow talk and backdoor deals a recognized group. Why hold on to this? You want the IBT to uphold your CBA, but yet you continue to throw them under the bus and say you are too good for them. I am glad that I am not there! There are mainline guys that will support the strike better than you, and they aren't even brothers and sisters! Just fellow pilots that see the good in this.

 

Only something between 13 and 25 Frontier pilots are members of 357.

The IBT won a fixed election, then promptly sued our membership. They are still trying to steal our money and continue to harass the Frontier pilot group in every way they can. What part of that encourages cooperation and unity?

The ONLY reason their are "upholding" (administrating) our CBA is that they have a legal obligation to do so. To do otherwise would be laying a DFR suit wrapped with a bow on FAPA's doorstep.

I'm glad, for you, that you aren't here also. It's an untenable situation for all CHQ, F9 L4 and MEA pilots.

An honest question that I don't know the answer to: If the pilots of one Airline represented by IBT Local 1224 strikes, do the other pilots under 1224 strike?

 

No. As has been stated by those on here that are more informed, only pilots covered by the CBA being negotiated and released from the NMB can legally strike.

The only the thing that the F9 pilots can be asked to do by 357 that they could legally do is to refuse to fly "struck work." The trick to that is deciphering what routes are "struck work" when RAH shuffles the same flights between both sides. This is no accident as DL and other mainline carriers do this as well to prevent us from labeling any of their routes as ours and thereby allowing other regionals to refuse them. Most CBA's have a provision allowing a pilot to refuse to cross a picket and fly a struck route.

Probably what you'll see is if a route has been flown 4X/day by F9 and 2X/day by RP, 357 would insist that any frequency greater than 4X/day flown during a strike would constitute crossing the line. I really don't think 357 is going to focus a lot of attention on the F9 side. There are some FFD routes that are clearly only flown by us that inflict a lot more damage on RAH and their partners that will be easier to enforce, and not produce more stress and discord between F9 and RAH pilots.

Hopefully, any routes that were declared struck work and clearly were wouldn't be flown by our brothers in this dysfunctional CF of a family.

There's been enough ill will and anger. I'm ready to move on, together, separate, whatever. I'm tired of this pointless bickering.

Peace out.

 

Thank you for one of the more reasoned (and correct) replies from the Republic side of the house.

It is absolutely correct that Frontier can NOT legally strike if the FFD side is released. Two different contracts. I hear that the ExCo has communicated this but by my estimates about half of the Republic pilots I talk to seem to think that Frontier pilots are obligated to strike with them.

If Republic does go out on strike, the issue of struck work will be an interesting one-affecting United, Delta, American, US Airways, and Frontier. While your definition of struck work may seem logical, that doesn't mean that's how it will work. Delta (and every other airline) will argue that it is their flying, their colors, their route, and entirely their decision as to what company flies what aircraft at what time and what frequency.

 

I don't see it FIXED as they had the numbers, would it be fixed if F9 had the numbers? That is a question to ask yourself. It just is that it seems, you guys need to cut the rhetoric, and go forward. From reading posts here, F9 is chopping at the bit to file the DFR, but you, yourself just said that they are upholding their end of the bargain. They are doing their legal obligation with F9 holding a gun to their head is what it seems, but albeit they are doing it. Is this fair?

The lawsuit, from an outsiders prospective, is that RAH mgt and F9 entered into agreements without considering the IBT and their dealings with this mgt. RAH is not a pilot friendly environment from what I have seen or been told. Far from what you guys had in the past. The wool is being pulled over your eyes. Sad to say, but the truth hurts sometimes. For all of us, I would love to see F9 give it a chance and go from there. You guys can always push for a new union if they don't hold up to their end of the bargain. Give it chance and quit the resistance. What is done is done. The ruling and the results are out. Its like beating a dead horse.