The largest thing when it comes to contract/policy violations is that with a certified union under the NLRB there is a legally defined path to settle disputes and provide restitution.

When a genuine dispute arises between a union and the company it is arbitrated/mediated by a neutral 3rd party. These decisions are legally binding (not always in favor of the union) and are often codified into the contract via MOUs.

The pilot's of SkyWest and SAPA do not participate in this process, because we are not a certified collective bargaining unit. SkyWest pilots are AT WILL employees.

This is the current "grievance" process via SAPA:

1) Pilots fill out a policy grievance on SAPA's broken down, heavily censored, often-hacked, half functioning website, that many pilots can't even access because it isn't updated and been left to decay.

2) After some indeterminate time frame that can be up to several months. The SAPA "president" sits down with management to discuss the policy disputes, and the conversation goes something like this:

SAPA: The policy clearly says XYZ. We interprit the policy on face value to mean XYZ as written.

Management: We don't interpret it that way. We interpret XYZ to actually mean ABC, besides that's what we have done in the past, so that's the way it is.

SAPA: That's not what the policy says, and this is a clear violation.

Management: Well, that's not the way we see it. Sorry. End of discussion. Thanks for coming see you in 6 months. TFAYD.

The results of these policy dispute meetings are occasionally communicated to the pilot group via the broken down, hacked website. However, the vast majority of time the results are never communicated at all. Like all things SAPA related, it's completely on a whim.

When was the last time we had a CSC update? PIC update? Hotel committee update? over a year?
The only updates we've received have been from the "president" blowing smoke up people's buts.

SAPA is a toothless joke, and a sham of an organization funded by the company to give pilots the "illusion" of representation.

 

Clearly we don't know each other. But in short, yes indeed.

 

Take it easy Il Duce
You only been at Skywest a few years and think you speak for all?

Calm down, the union will not take your gun away and you can keep your degrading women view and you will still be able to hold your meetings in white and not show your face.....

Capisce?

 

I don't see anyone playing both sides. Things change and people may rethink their position based on recent events.

You may be a big Ford guy but after you get burned on a couple lemons you might decide you aren't such a big fan.

I've never felt the need for a union. I'm starting to come around to the idea. Not playing both sides..simply maybe making a change in position.

 

I think this is happening to more people everyday.

 

These types of issues say more about the different managements. You admit that pinnacle management eventually paid. So it's not a matter of them disputing what you should be paid. It's just that they had lousy processes for administering pay. And at Skywest, they are very good at paying you correctly. But what if there is a disagreement in pay? Do you have a legally binding grievance process with a neutral arbitrator to decide?


I'm politically very conservative yet support unions in most cases.

By voting in a union or joining one, you are simply choosing to give yourself more rights. These rights come from acts of congress (NLRB and RLA) that give members a collective voice in their working conditions and compensation. There are also responsibilities that come with those rights. It requires management to bargain in good faith and requires workers to abide by the contract. And if gives each the right to a dispute resolution process.

And then if that is not satisfactory, either side, if they have a valid complaint, can file a lawsuit in the court of jurisdiction. That constitutional right does not go away because you are union. Again, you are simply giving yourself more rights (and responsibilities) when you do join one.


At expressjet, I've refused to accept a rolled day off. I've seen it happen many many times, even flight attendants despite there being nothing in the contract that allows us to do that. I've never heard of anyone having to explain themselves, much less getting fired.

Now, if you lie about something you did wrong, or steal, or decide not to show up to work, good luck.


At Skywest, you are an at-will employee. You can only sue on the grounds of any existing federal or state labor law, which any union member also can on top of their grievance process afforded them under their NMB recognized contract.

You mean like DD did when he paid tens of thousands out of pocket in order to have a judge force management to hire him back? As a member of a union, there is a multi-step grievance process which may ultimately be decided by a neutral arbitrator. And the pilot still maintains the right to file a lawsuit afterward (i.e. NFLPA, Tom Brady), although I've never heard it coming to that. The union pays for this as part of their duty to its members. These proceedings set precedents and apply to future instances. Many times, these outcomes are codified into an MOU so that all pilots benefit. This way, management can't just chalk this one up as a loss and try it a year later to another pilot who may not be able to afford to pay for his legal defense out of pocket while he is out of work.




Being a member of a union gives you more leverage which can be used to negotiate a better TA.

 

Funny. Everyone bring up 1 case... the DD one. Thats it in the 20+ years ive been here. And that realy was a fight between two peoples personalities.... SAPA is most definitely involved in terminations..

 

The importance of that can't be overshadowed though. DD was a tenured captain who could afford his own legal defense. Many can not and thus wouldn't be able to mount a challenge.

 

It's one case because not many people can afford $100,000 and no job for a year in order to force management to hire him back. How many other people have just given up their grievance because it's not worth it to them (in time, money, making a name for yourself) or simply couldn't afford to hire an attorney? If you have a union, you don't have to worry about ANY of that. You have representation already paid for you. That alone is a huge deterrent. Because it costs management money to fight every single grievance. They'll end up settling more of them in the pilots favor instead of holding out knowing that eventually the pilot doesn't have the resources to fight it in court, if he wanted to take it to that point. And what pilot would? You'd make a bad name for yourself.

 

How many? I'd like to know. And some names too, you'd think after a decade I'd know some of them...

Actually I know of a few who maybe shouldn't even still be flying 121... but they didn't lie. That's the big thing, don't lie...

File an asap and plead the fifth, or come clean and confess but don't lie.

Not saying it wouldn't be nice to have a union for disciplinary proceedings, but I never saw a huge problem with honest mistakes.

IMO these are not honest mistakes...
- Sitting ORD reserve at Incline Village.
- Departing the pavement and then trying to power-back out of the dirt (in an airplane not approved for power-back).
- Going off the end because you fudged the LDG numbers... after the correct LDG numbers said you didn't have enough RWY.