Southern Air

Subscribe
26  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  46 
Page 36 of 84
Go to
I think the union has been trying to hold back this amalgamation thing in the hopes that the company would give up and negotiate. However management has done literally everything to see this thing through. Probably because the ability to merge endlessly into the future and never give pilots a chance to negotiate is just that appealing.

The negotiating teams had nothing to offer the company because the company wasn't interested in negotiating anything. They want to be able to hand a contract to the union dictated entirely by their wants and desires. How can any union negotiate when there is a way for a company to simply just get what it wants anyway?
Reply
Quote: To add this merger language isn't anything outlandish. When it was written it was top of the line for giving the union the ability to prevent whipsaw by forcing a merger if there's ever a situation like ABX/ATI where Atlas owns two airlines to pit against each other.

What wasn't expected is that the company could turn it around and use it to force the union to merge. The arbiter in the Southern case ruled they could and imposed a 45 day time limit on the SLI which wasn't anywhere in the contract language. Additionally it imposes Southern's merger language on Atlas which is still technically a separate pilot group and union. It would be like FedEx buying Southern and then forcing the FedEx pilots into the southern merger process (and ending up with something between FDX and Southern's contract, somehow). The FedEx pilots wouldn't even get a vote in the matter!

Its a shaky ruling that if allowed to stand is quite dangerous for the industry. It sets precedent where Atlas can merge with any airline and impose a wildly one-sided merger process on the pilots. Not to veer too much into politics but this is what happens when you have severely anti-labor politicians placing judges and arbiters in positions like the NMB where they can wipe out our bargaining ability with a simple court ruling.
That’s why I say to get both pilot groups together; negotiate an SLI, and make it effective upon ratification of a pilot ratified CBA. You’ve complied with the intent of the ruling.... yet it remains leverage to get section six concluded swiftly.

Not to wade into politics too much, but the NMB members are majority appointments by Democrats. I bet the current admin would likely eliminate agencies like the NMB as wasteful and interfering with free market negotiations by placing the thumb on the scale.... or in this case the full palm on the scale.
Reply
Quote: Are the two contracts identical? If so, then why not work out an SLI agreement amongst yourselves (Pilots, Atlas-Southern) and then hold it hostage for expedited full section six?

What is it the company wants to do? One CBA for both pilot groups at once?
That would've been a possibility but the ruling inserted a "45 day" time frame into Southern's Contract language. Complete BS.... So Southern has 45 Days to come up with their version of the list.
Reply
Quote: That’s why I say to get both pilot groups together; negotiate an SLI, and make it effective upon ratification of a pilot ratified CBA. You’ve complied with the intent of the ruling.... yet it remains leverage to get section six concluded swiftly.
That's not how this works at all. I don't know how to explain it to you any better.
Reply
Quote: That’s why I say to get both pilot groups together; negotiate an SLI, and make it effective upon ratification of a pilot ratified CBA. You’ve complied with the intent of the ruling.... yet it remains leverage to get section six concluded swiftly.

Not to wade into politics too much, but the NMB members are majority appointments by Democrats. I bet the current admin would likely eliminate agencies like the NMB as wasteful and interfering with free market negotiations by placing the thumb on the scale.... or in this case the full palm on the scale.
Also... The ruling states that the Union shouldn't be allowed to use the SLI as leverage at all. Thus the "45 Day" rule.
Reply
Quote: That's not how this works at all. I don't know how to explain it to you any better.
Well, the court just said you’ve got 45 days. Apparently it’s exactly how it works. You can roll with the punches and try to make it work for you; or keep doing what you’ve been doing. It’s been so effective thus far.

I wish you guys well, I’ll keep showing up, marching and holding signs when I can. I’m no friend of these types of unscrupulous vindictive unethical management teams.
Reply
Quote: Also... The ruling states that the Union shouldn't be allowed to use the SLI as leverage at all. Thus the "45 Day" rule.
Is would be completed within 45 days. Just an effective date that would coincide with the new ratified JCBA so as to minimize transition difficulties.
Do it and make them go back to court trying to say they need the SLI effective now while there are two separate pilot contracts and two separate pilot group representatives. That sure will sound reasonable.

It sounds like a real mess. In either event the court order throws a big new wrinkle into the mix.
Keep up the good fight.
Reply
Quote: Well, the court just said you’ve got 45 days. Apparently it’s exactly how it works. You can roll with the punches and try to make it work for you; or keep doing what you’ve been doing. It’s been so effective thus far.

I wish you guys well, I’ll keep showing up, marching and holding signs when I can. I’m no friend of these types of unscrupulous vindictive unethical management teams.
The court did not say we had 45 days. An arbitrator did. There is a very distinct difference. The arbitrator made up language to suit his ruling. A law suit to void his ruling is no doubt coming because of it. But our section 1 clearly states the union is to hand over a merged seniority list at which time the 9 month clock starts. Not a 9 month clock which can be voided I'd the union decides to change the date. This isn't the first time this has happened, this happened years ago already with Atlas/Polar and now management is trying to repeat history with Atlas/Southern. Our scope doesn't have any provision that allows for an effective date of the seniority list. So you can't keep it hostage.
Reply
Quote: The court did not say we had 45 days. An arbitrator did. There is a very distinct difference. The arbitrator made up language to suit his ruling. A law suit to void his ruling is no doubt coming because of it. But our section 1 clearly states the union is to hand over a merged seniority list at which time the 9 month clock starts. Not a 9 month clock which can be voided I'd the union decides to change the date. This isn't the first time this has happened, this happened years ago already with Atlas/Polar and now management is trying to repeat history with Atlas/Southern. Our scope doesn't have any provision that allows for an effective date of the seniority list. So you can't keep it hostage.
Stand corrected; thank you
Reply


Reply
26  32  33  34  35  36  37  38  39  40  46 
Page 36 of 84
Go to