Quote:
I've spent time reading the updates on the Leonidas site. Click on those links:
September 2014.
Today, the NMB certified the Allied Pilots Association as the exclusive bargaining agent for all flight deck crewmembers of US Airways. You can read the NMB determination here. Effective immediately, USAPA no longer has the legal status of a collective bargaining agent.
USAPA is still in possession of a substantial amount of dues monies, collected from US Airways pilots for the purpose of collective bargaining - a purpose which they cannot fulfill anymore. A demand letter was sent on Friday September 12th to USAPA officers and counsel which notices USAPA for the remittance of all funds in excess to concluding USAPA's business as a exclusive bargaining agent required under the law. You can read the demand letter here.
Additionally, a Litigation Hold Letter was sent to USAPA attorney Brian O’Dwyer for the retention of all USAPA records.
Finally, we encourage all West pilots to apply for membership to our new collective bargaining agent. The APA has a convenient online application, which you can access here.
Thank you all for your continued support.
The APA has a DFR obligation to the West pilots as well. There are a lot of lawsuits, hold letters, demand letters and trouble in general I don't want to see the APA a part.
Originally Posted by Frisco727
Liability primarily. Do all parties include the West pilots? Was the West included in the compromise? Initially, the APA was opposed to USAPA continuing as an entity. Now they are free to take all dues money under protest from the West pilots and continue business as usual? I've spent time reading the updates on the Leonidas site. Click on those links:
September 2014.
Today, the NMB certified the Allied Pilots Association as the exclusive bargaining agent for all flight deck crewmembers of US Airways. You can read the NMB determination here. Effective immediately, USAPA no longer has the legal status of a collective bargaining agent.
USAPA is still in possession of a substantial amount of dues monies, collected from US Airways pilots for the purpose of collective bargaining - a purpose which they cannot fulfill anymore. A demand letter was sent on Friday September 12th to USAPA officers and counsel which notices USAPA for the remittance of all funds in excess to concluding USAPA's business as a exclusive bargaining agent required under the law. You can read the demand letter here.
Additionally, a Litigation Hold Letter was sent to USAPA attorney Brian O’Dwyer for the retention of all USAPA records.
Finally, we encourage all West pilots to apply for membership to our new collective bargaining agent. The APA has a convenient online application, which you can access here.
Thank you all for your continued support.
The APA has a DFR obligation to the West pilots as well. There are a lot of lawsuits, hold letters, demand letters and trouble in general I don't want to see the APA a part.
We're not even a week from APA's new status as CBA, and AOL has already popped this off to USAPA? This is not realistic. USAPA has long running financial agreements, which it must fulfill. There is also a continuity of civil matters, which USAPA may continue to oppose. I'm afraid for West Pilots. This letter strikes me more as a targeted marketing campaign for fundraising monies, than it is an effective threat.
West pilots may face more exposure in this integration than just losing Nic. I do highly encourage the West Pilot Class to settle with USAPA, APA, and American in exchange for a SLI pre-agreement that guarantees, among other things, that third-list pilots will not be placed above west pilots in this integration. Such an settlement could also vacate the Nicolau award, and establish a West Class Merger Committee.
Please note that I do not advocate that third-list plots should go ahead of any West pilots, but we are getting down to the 11th hour, and everything is on the table. ie. AOL wants Nic, and USAPA may go to great lengths to represent all of the pilots on the "status quo lists."
Quote:
Again, IMO, use of the Nic will require an extensive and lengthy fence construction or a massive chunk of the Nic list going surprisingly junior on the ISL.
Cacti, eagle fly has been making a series of accurate posts this week, which is wonderful. Originally Posted by eaglefly
No, the Nic hasn't technically been abandoned and it will be decided by arbitrators. The APA and USAPA have a very short time to exchange "status quo" lists. The APA will give USAPA one list and USAPA will give APA two lists. That's what presently exists. If the first arbitration panel grants APA ability to appoint a West committee AND they do, the West can negotiate from any position it sees fit and absent an agreement (a virtual certainty if the Nic is in play from the West), the final arbitration panel will decide to use the Nic or reject it based on the facts of the PRESENT case record and the absence of ALPA merger policy past or present. The undeniable fact NOW, is that the only reason the Nic is even in consideration now is the merger with AA and integration with AA pilots. That fact cannot be denied and again, I think the arbitrators will have to assess whether the Nic creates more damage to AA pre-merger pilot expectations and if so, which ISL priority carries more weight and which negatively impacts the greatest number of pilots.Again, IMO, use of the Nic will require an extensive and lengthy fence construction or a massive chunk of the Nic list going surprisingly junior on the ISL.
That being said, lets zoom out, and get away from this minutia. The ultimate customer of SLI is American Airlines. The arbitrators would provide a very poor product if upset the majority of pilots (AA+East) by awarding Nic... Don't you think?
Is it reasonable to assume that West pilots would be harmed by the Nicolai award is East+AA pilots collectively burned the house down? Obviously, this would never happen, but arbitrators and company will seek the most mutually beneficial solution.
Quote:
Everyone pre 12/9/13 would have a pre-merger career expectation based on their separate carriers as opposed to the combined entity. That expectation would include the aircraft they would have the opportunity to fly, the routes they would have the opportunity to fly, the timeline (if any) they'd have those opportunities based on their seniority and known retirements and their expected pay based on their then CBA, etc.......among other things. It would be the pre-merger pilots that will require the arbitrators to fairly dovetail together (some in blocks, others individually), but again, the complication is to benefit one group, you'll hurt another. For example, if the arbitrators were to slot a 2005 East "third-lister" ahead of a 2001 AA flow ostensibly because they didn't activate their training (time-in-seat longevity) until 2013, it hoses any legacy AA non-flow junior to him (remember he has a 2001 OCC date) as the separate lists will not be reordered and will maintain present relativity. So in that example, do they hose the legacy AA F/O (in fact, ALL legacy AA pilots junior to Eagle flow X by applying Eagle flow longevity to the factors in the integration or protect legacy AA pilot pre-merger career expectations by minimizing or even eliminating it. Same could be argued for furloughees on all sides.
These underlined statements may be misleading—I'm afraid they may unnecessarily stress some of the less than 500 AA natives whom these statements apply. Everyone pre 12/9/13 would have a pre-merger career expectation based on their separate carriers as opposed to the combined entity. That expectation would include the aircraft they would have the opportunity to fly, the routes they would have the opportunity to fly, the timeline (if any) they'd have those opportunities based on their seniority and known retirements and their expected pay based on their then CBA, etc.......among other things. It would be the pre-merger pilots that will require the arbitrators to fairly dovetail together (some in blocks, others individually), but again, the complication is to benefit one group, you'll hurt another. For example, if the arbitrators were to slot a 2005 East "third-lister" ahead of a 2001 AA flow ostensibly because they didn't activate their training (time-in-seat longevity) until 2013, it hoses any legacy AA non-flow junior to him (remember he has a 2001 OCC date) as the separate lists will not be reordered and will maintain present relativity. So in that example, do they hose the legacy AA F/O (in fact, ALL legacy AA pilots junior to Eagle flow X by applying Eagle flow longevity to the factors in the integration or protect legacy AA pilot pre-merger career expectations by minimizing or even eliminating it. Same could be argued for furloughees on all sides.
I believe you suppose that AE flows with relatively less sweat equity, and who did not hold a recall right may devalue the SLI value of legacy AA non-flow thru pilots who did/do hold a recall right. Is this correct?
AE flows, and any relatively junior AA native recalls will surely be credited their sweat equity, but at this most bottom portion of the seniority list what value did either group's longevity represent? Regardless of longevity, both demographics have the same net bidding power, and I believe arbitrators will take note of this.
How much percentage based movement was there between February 14th, 2013, and December 9th, 2013? Given this question, I am confident that the arbitrators won't devalue AAnatives relative seniority to their more senior AE flows. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the last AA native recall class prior to December 9th, 2013 was November 20th, 2013? This illustrates the net value of these group's seniority value.
I also must point out, as I have in the past, that the Merger Announcement Date is the typical litmus test for delineating Conditional Notice pilots. If this applies to this merger, than the majority of the people you're writing about need not worry about these things.
Furthermore, if West Pilots (against all odds) gain representation they will assuredly demand a Merger Announcement Date Conditional Notice Snapshot for delineating pre/post merger pilots. This method was used in the UAL, DAL, and Nic SLI awards. So for all the arguments AA pilots may have made advocating west pilot representation...you may have devalued a MOU effective date method for inflating system-wide AA pilot relative seniority.
It's ironic, but it's out of our hands, and as a third list pilot I don't really care which snapshot is used as I personally feel that it makes no difference for junior AA/East pilots. The net value of bidding seniority is equally inflated on both sides during the February 14th, 2014 to December 9th, 2013 time frame. Assuming relative seniority inflation between the AA & East groups is constant between MAD, and MOU Effective days than what are we worried about?
I hope my late night thoughts prove constructive.
Respectfully,
FBW