And I keep trying to point out you're not the first pilot with that idea. And you wouldn't be the first pilot (or group of pilots) to suffer legal consequences for it.

In any event, realize that current market conditions are very much in your favor and some grand mx slowdown plan is unnecessary.

Or not.

"Life is hard. It's harder when you're stupid."

 

No you haven't pointed anything out at all. What consequences would there be if 1/2 the pilot group participated in a non union sanctioned event, or what if an airline had no union and 1/2 of the pilots participated in an event. Who will the company sue? Who will the judge rule against? Is it one court case or 500 individual court cases? Does the company just fire 1/2 the pilot group in today's climate?

You need to provide a workable answer or theory to support your position. You make it sound like what you have to say is a forgone conclusion and its not so far.

I'm making an argument and I expect you to do the same if you are going to take on my position.

 

To your first hypothetical, the company sues the union, union leadership is subject to jail time, and the company can ask for an award that has to be paid out of union funds, which means it comes out of your check. See APA in 1999, and the New York Transit strike of 2005.

Now, ask yourself this: if the absence of a union under the RLA granted an employee group strike at will, then why the hell does any airline have a union? The overall answer is the courts have ruled that the lack of a union does not absolve employees from their responsibility to exhaust all avenues of bargaining and negotiation before self help. See ASI, Inc vs IBT in 2014.

As to what the consequences of the latter would be, I honestly don't know, but at a minimum you're out of a job. But since you work at a union carrier it's irrelevant to your current situation.

To your last question, does the company just fire 500 people today? Well, that first assumes you can actually get 500 people to go along with your plan, and do so quietly enough that the company doesn't get wind of it before hand. How likely is that? Not very.

But what you should really be asking yourself is what would you be able to accomplish that market forces aren't already doing?

Not much.

 

First Class,

Try reading this:

AMERICAN AIRLINES INC v. ALLIED PILOTS ASSOCIATION | FindLaw

Beyond law, study up on some economics, too.

GF

 

And this one on ASI vs. IBT

AIRCRAFT SERVICE INTERNATIONAL INC v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS AFL CIO 117 | FindLaw

And NYC Transit strike here at Wiki

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2005...transit_strike

You are not unique, others have blundered down the same path, in aviation we try to learn from others mistakes, not keep repeating them.

BTW, I was on the EAL MEC in 88-89 and was sued, as part of the MEC, personally. The process came to apartment, issued the service and offered my furniture in the event the company won the 1 billion dollars sought.

GF

 

duplicate

filler

 

There is nothing that can be done to stop individual pilots from applying their will. Your regional airline needs you to have a union, its their free police department to keep you in line. The union is your weakness, its what keeps you attached to the RLA, the topic of this thread. I would much rather engage alpa or lawyers and pay a $500 one time fee to negotiate a new contract when needed then cut them loose.

Let's say your have 1000 pilots on the payroll. If 500 of them decide to apply pressure and there is either-

1.) No Union
2.) A disbanded union
3.) A union that strongly does everything in its power to stop the actions (something APA and DALPA never did)

The company will unsuccessfully attempt to deal with pilots collectively, but there is no single structure to do so. It's why those animals in the middle east are so successful with their misdeeds- there is no central organization to deal with.

500 of 1000 pilots cannot be fired for just doing their jobs extremely well, cannot be sued for just doing their jobs, there is no organization to sue, there is no organization to deal with.

That's my argument.

 

Both of those cases had union involvement, something I am not advocating. The union is why you cannot strike, its tied to the RLA. Both the union and RLA are a rope around your neck. Simply rid yourself of both by eliminating the union.

 

Go ahead and try it. The courts have been clear--concerted activity, union or not, can be found be looking at changes in employee behavior from past records. Start writing up altimeters, adding 30 minutes to a 1 hour flight, sudden changes in sick calls will be found illegal self-help. I've almost doubled flight times JFK-MIA, flew TPA-MCO taking 40 minutes flying the procedure turn. None if this is new. Windshields? EA MX must have replaced half the 727's fleet windshields in 3 months. The Max Safety program very carefully unconnected to the union, but still charged with corrupt practices.

They'll just fine everybody.

GF

 

No, there's not. But that's not the same as saying there are no consequences.

So one the one hand, your company needs you to have a union so they can be the company's enforcers. But on the other hand, the only reason that the "animals in the middle east are so successful with their misdeeds" is that there's no union.

You don't get to have it both ways.

BAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!

You think labor lawyers work for a $500 one time fee? Try $500 per hour. If you hire cheap.....

So I guess all those pilots at VX and B6 are so dumb for giving up their right to strike because they put a union on property. And all those ten of thousands of pilots at AA, DAL, UAL, FDX, UPS, SWA, etc, etc, etc have done the exact same thing for decades.


From the link that GF provided about ASI vs IBT:
"The employees have not voted to be represented by any union, so no labor union is involved. So far as the record shows, no one is authorized to speak for Popescu but Popescu himself, and the company's attempt to speak with him failed because he walked out and slammed the door. One of the adverse parties in this case is “Working Washington,” which is not a union, but a group that describes itself as “a coalition of individuals, neighborhood associations, immigrant groups, labor unions, civil rights organizations, and people of faith.” Working Washington's “Campaign Director” says that although Working Washington “is not seeking to become the bargaining representative” of the employees and has not sought recognition, it advocates for better treatment of workers at the airport." - See more at: AIRCRAFT SERVICE INTERNATIONAL INC v. INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF TEAMSTERS AFL CIO 117 | FindLaw

Again, under the RLA, not having a union doesn't mean you can strike whenever you want.