Dare we dream?

 

Okay, from what I can gather about the case of Republic's negotiations and mediation beginning in June 2007, a couple of things stand out. First, it sounds like the Teamsters, who represented the pilots of Republic Airways Holdings (RAH), waited four years from the opening of negotiations to file for mediation with the NMB in June 2011:

Maybe there was a reason at the time (like the economic collapse) that made sense to wait that long. In general, though, delaying the filing for mediation is a major mistake in the RLA game. Filing for mediation is, in the eyes of the NMB and the courts, when the clock starts ticking. Therefore, in that context, the process did not last seven years. It lasted a little over four years.

From a 1989 RLA case:

Notice the courts do not consider "time in negotiation and in mediation". They consider only "time in mediation". When it comes to this important legal test, time spent negotiating prior to entering mediation is essentially worthless.

Notice that RAH's "time in mediation", not "time in negotiation and mediation", was roughly about the same amount of time as it seems many other airlines spend in mediation. That's when the Teamsters got an agreement for its pilots.

Both the NMB and airline management groups with their paid assassins like FordHarrison know this. They realize that when "time in mediation" begins to approach that threshold identified by the courts ("time in mediation in all other RLA disputes"), that the potential for a release from mediation begins to become more and more likely. That creates pressure on them. I would contend that it's no coincidence that RAH got their new CBA at the point in time that they did (about four years in mediation).

Most pilot groups do not seem to realize this and instead prefer to believe that the RLA favors management. Self-defeating. Again, the RLA favors the more informed side.

Since the parties are required to negotiate in good faith ("exert every reasonable effort to make and maintain agreements"), we cannot simply file for mediation immediately upon commencing negotiations. We have to give it the "good ol' college try" before filing for mediation. This will obviously vary depending on the circumstances, but in my opinion, time spent in direct negotiations shouldn't last less than a couple of months and, under no circumstances, should it go on for more than a year.

This idea motivated the NMB to make the following statement in their 2010 "Dunlop II" report:

Furthermore, RAH management appears to have known how to play the game against the pilots. In March 2012, RAH filed a lawsuit against the Teamsters for an illegal job action that was ultimately dismissed. From the sounds of it, the lawsuit was bogus (the union had put up a web site attempting to discourage aspirants from applying to RAH airlines citing the poor work conditions). But that's not the point.

The point is the lawsuit was evidence that RAH management knew how to play the RLA game better than the pilots. When a lawsuit is filed during mediation in a RLA dispute, it effectively stops the clock on the mediation timer. From the same 1989 RLA case above:

The above is why it's extremely important not to engage in anything that resembles or could be construed as an illegal work action. It gives management an excuse to file a suit which, in turn, draws out the clock. As a 1970 RLA case explained, "resort to the courts may only prolong the duration of the statutory procedures."

This is why all of the talk about op's slow-downs, sick campaigns, increasing maintenance write-ups, etc are evidence of not knowing how to play the game. The only thing they accomplish is shooting ourselves in the foot by giving management an excuse to file a suit and draw out the clock.

Finally, the other thing I would say about the timing of RAH's negotiations and mediation is that they began right as the second greatest economic collapse in US history began. Most of the period of the combined negotiations and mediation were conducted under the specter of that enormous economic cloud. That certainly had an impact.

 

I can’t remember the exact dates but around the 2008-10 timeframe Frontier declared Ch. 11 and voided our contract. In a effort to recoup lost revenue during a recession, RAH bought Frontier. And then bought Midwest Express. Per the CBA, a seniority integration had to occur because all flying by the Holding Company must be performed by pilots on the master seniority list.

So in the midst of CBA negotiations there was 2 airline aquisition/mergers. Also the head of our local was caught embezzling dues money and was arrested so we had to join/create a new local. Yay Trucker Unions.

Prob wouldn’t have gone on so long were it not for all that....but you’re right in that Ford/Harrison did a vastly better job than a bunch of 20-40 yr old RJ pilots.

Anyone around for the length of the last SWA cycle know how long negotiations went on before mediation was requested? I didn’t get hired until after TA1 was voted down so was only here for the Jon Weaks era.

 

Didn't you pay attention to what happened to Spirit? The restraining order against the pilot group was based on 500 pages of internet postings by about 10 people saying "fly the contract". Federal law has plenty of "features" implemented since 9/11 to permit them to pull your IP address from the forums, and therefore get your actual identity to be discovered during legal procedings.

If they can go after one person, they'll go after everyone, personally.

Don't be stupid, but then again it's probably too late, an archive of your post is probably already in the pile ready to go before a judge to prove a concerted and coordinated effort for illegal job action. That's exactly how it went down with Spirit, and the stack of forum posts that led to the TRO is public record so everyone can see how stupid "innocent" forum posts by just a handful of people can get used against everyone.

 

SWAPA filed for mediation November 2014. It began Strike Preparedness in November 2015. Our previous CBA had become amendable in Aug 2012.

During the last round of CBA negotiations, SWAPA made a major mistake by waiting more than two years to file for mediation. They made another large mistake by beginning "Strike Preparedness" a year after filing for mediation. Strike Preparedness at SWAPA did not feature any RLA education beyond publishing a flow chart and very basic kindergarten-level explanations of the flow chart. A strike authorization vote was never taken.

What SWAPA did right was never giving the Company an excuse to file an illegal job action lawsuit and conducting the pickets (though the pickets would have been orders of magnitude more powerful with a RLA-informed group and a successful strike authorization vote).

On the first page of the "Platform" published in March 2016, in a cover letter signed by the entire BOD, SWAPA pledged that "the goals of this document will be achieved and we will be recognized as professionals at a Big Four airline". That letter has since been deleted from the copy of the Platform that is now available on the SWAPA site.

The BOD's letter was likely deleted from the Platform because, in the fall of 2016, SWAPA and the pilots of SWA ratified TA2, which fell more than $1 billion dollars short of the Platform and the BOD's pledge. The SWAPA President personally all but recommended a yes vote to the pilot group despite his previous bluster, couching his words in terms of letting everyone know that he was personally voting yes for TA2 despite the large distance between it and the Platform.

In the fall of 2016, the US was experiencing what was already, at that point, one of the strongest economic expansions in history with no reliable indication that the expansion was in danger of stalling any time in the foreseeable future. Furthermore, in 2016, SWA was (and still is) the most financially successful airline in industry history. We also had language in the previous CBA that made a strong case that the Company would need SWAPA's permission to fly the MAX.

Highlights of TA2 consisted of an industry-lagging and Big Four-bottom B-Fund (initially set at 12.4%), a signing bonus, and pay raises that brought rates up to what is now slightly below narrow body industry average. Low-lights included concessions on code share (airline partnerships), minimal changes to work rules and benefits, sub-industry standard hotel language, and no paid parking.

According to analysis by United Airlines' MEC, in terms of company contribution to retirement alone, during the course of a 30-year career, a SWA pilot falls more than $400,000 short of pilots at UA and DL who spend their entire careers in narrow bodies, upgrading to captain after 10 years, and never move over to wide bodies. If we compare a 30-year career at SWA vs pilots who opt for the wide body track at UA or DL, SWA pilots end up with over $1.2 million less. These figures do not consider the disparity in pay rates between SWA and the other Big Four airlines.

Many within the SWA pilot group believe TA2 represented a home run. If they understood the RLA, I don't think they'd see it that way. Given the economic, airline industry, and legal environment in which it was ratified, I'd contend that TA2 represented a home run for SWA management, not the SWA pilot group. It made sense for the Company to put forward what amounted to two low-ball agreements between 2015 and 2016 in order to lock in an industry-lagging CBA before we got near the time threshold where we could start to pose a danger of getting released and before the pilot group got mad enough to get a clue about the RLA.

While all of that is water under the bridge, it still provides a valuable object lesson for 2020 so that we can avoid making some of the same missteps. Why would SWAPA agree to a less-than-industry leading narrowbody contract (ignoring wide body comparisons) with everything it had going for it?

I would argue that a primary reason is that the SWA pilot group lacks a basic understanding of RLA dynamics. If we had an understanding of the RLA, we would have spent much less time in direct negotiations. We would have filed for mediation much, much sooner. Had we done that, we would have been posing a danger of getting released by 2016 and the Company would have felt much more pressure to propose an industry-leading agreement.

We also would have taken a successful strike authorization vote very early in mediation. This idea scares the daylights out of people that do not understand the RLA. A strike authorization vote at the beginning of mediation essentially has very little to do with actually going on strike. From the time mediation begins until a strike MIGHT possibly occur is about three to four years. On top of that, for a variety of reasons, the likelihood that we'd end up on strike is very low and, if we understood the RLA, we'd also understand why that doesn't really matter that much.

A successful strike authorization vote requires that 95%-plus of the pilot group have a good understanding of the RLA (so that they will vote yes for the authorization). That means RLA education needs to start early because there is an enormous lack of awareness and education within our group. We're already late in the game for that education to begin for 2020.

The purpose of a strike authorization vote early in mediation is about communicating a message to the Company and the NMB that the pilot group is united and has a basic understanding of how the RLA game is played. That is powerful. A strike authorization vote at this stage makes it LESS, not more, likely that we would ever end up on strike. It also makes it MORE, not less, likely that we will end up with an industry-leading contract sooner, rather than later.

The last thing I'll say is that the RLA does not mean we need to get angry. This is just business. That's it.

The Company has tools available to it, including the RLA, and uses them. I respect that.

We also have tools available to us. The RLA is the most powerful tool we have available. It's a completely legal tool that Congress provided to both industry and labor. We do nut use it. It's mind-boggling.

We can use the RLA without being angry in a completely calm, business-like, cordial fashion. Things don't need to get nasty.

 

Yup.

From the "Complaint for Injunctive Relief" filed by Spirit managment against the Spirit MEC May 8, 2017:

The complaint goes on for more than two pages quoting Spirit pilots posts from APC as evidence.

In response to the complaint, the court issued a Temporary Restraining Order enjoining Spirit pilots from engaging in any kind of concerted work action. Worse, it stopped the mediation clock and significantly reduced the danger to Spirit that their pilots could possibly get released in the foreseeable future. That dramatically decreased their leverage. It also put Spirit ALPA in danger of paying out substantial fines if their pilots continued to engage in illegal job actions.

 

I won’t quote you here PolishFlyerDude, but thanks for the education. Sincerely. I hope you are spreading the word whenever you can.

 

This quote needs to be addressed. It is held by a large number of pilots within our pilot group.

To begin with, as I believe Proximity already pointed out, the RLA does not prohibit a strike. The Supreme Court said this about that idea:

The RLA attempts to strike a balance between the right of labor to to its own economic agency, the right of industry to the same, and the national interest in a transportation infrastructure on which the economy and flow of commerce depends.

One court put it like this:

To balance those three interests, the RLA lays out a multi-step process that compels labor and industry to engage each other in the hope that an interruption of commerce can be avoided.

In other words, one of the big ideas behind the RLA is to wear one or both sides out so that they will capitulate thereby avoiding an interruption of commerce. Court opinions on RLA cases are full of similar statements. Notice that those statements do not say anything like, "...based on the hope that labor will get tired of mediation and concede to industry". It doesn't say that because that is not the objective.

Instead, the Supreme Court has made statements like this:

Here is what the US federal appeals court had to say about the right to self help:

Notice a key word in these statements: "right". Engaging in self help is a right recognized by the highest court in the land. If the NMB attempted to strip labor - or industry - of that right, it would be illegal and subject to challenge. Most pilots seem to not understand that when mediation drags on for several years that what is occurring is exactly what is supposed to be occurring. It's all part of the RLA game.

The NMB draws out mediation because that's what the RLA is designed to do. It's not because they want to see labor fail. If pilots understood this, they'd exhibit the patience that is required to win the RLA game.

None of us are required to like that the RLA forces drawn-out mediations. But it's the way it is. The RLA comprises the rules of the game.

Complaining about the RLA, refusing to learn the RLA beyond the level of a first-grader, and declining to accept it as reality would be like a professional football team complaining that they don't like the NFL's rules, not reading the NFL rule book beyond the one-page introduction, and walking off the field after 30 minutes of play because, in their opinion, games should only last 30 minutes instead of the 60 minutes defined by the league.

What would happen if your favorite NFL team didn't come back to play after half-time? They would lose, right? Even if they were ahead by 60 points at half-time, if they refused to come back out, the other team would score touchdown after touchdown unopposed. Welcome to airline pilot negotiations at many airlines in the early 21st century.

We could make more analogies between playing football and why pilot groups don't file for mediation and why they're terrified of a strike authorization vote and so on, but you get the idea.

******************************************

On a separate, related note, most pilots also seem to not be aware that NMB mediators can, do, and are encouraged to lie and tell half-truths to one or both parties in an effort to obtain a settlement.

Here is what the courts have had to say about that:

So, when the mediator threatens to, for example, put us "on ice forever" or at least, nearly "forever", they are lying. Threats like that are lies. They are merely tactics to spur negotiations. Plain and simple. NMB mediators do not have the legal authority to actually follow through on threats like that. They absolutely have the legal authority, upheld by multiple court rulings, to claim that they will do that or any number of other things. The bottom line is that mediators can say almost anything, as long as it "does not independently offend other laws" to try to compel one side or the other to cave.

The mediator, like the President with a PEB, does have a limited ability to control the clock. While the President gets only 60 days, the NMB via the mediator gets several years. But the mediator's power over the clock is not unlimited. It eventually runs out no matter how much the mediator threatens. The same goes for other lies the mediator might tell like a claimed ability to limit discussions to only certain sections of the CBA. The mediator doesn't have the authority to actually enforce something like that.

Unfortunately, in almost all cases, the party with the better ability to withstand the pressure is NOT labor (pilots) because we mind-bogglingly refuse to learn or play the game that the RLA has created for both labor and management. Because of our stubborn refusal to accept reality and insistence on believing myths like big ol' government is colluding with industry to get us, we lose bargaining strength advantage and engage in self-defeating behaviors like refusing to take the field again after half-time because we're tired or ideologically opposed to the idea that the NFL can make the rules or simply don't like to take the time to read the rule book.

The truth is that the more educated and informed side wins. Management may not like that the game lasts 60 minutes any more than we do, but they accept that fact and the play the game according to that reality.

 

Unfortunately, it is forums like this, and social media in general that doom us to failure.

Industry leaders do not post online their wishes, tactics, and complain about the greedy pilots. They keep quiet and play the game. We should let our union leaders speak for us.

When we speak individually, we are not a union, and it is used against us.

then we lose.

 

REALLY? People communicating with each other and educating each other is what dooms us to failure?

REALLY?

OR is it maybe a union and union leadership who don't believe in the RLA or the tools it provides?

Is it maybe a union and the union leadership who refuse, either out of laziness, stupidity, arrogance, or obstinance, to educate themselves and educate the membership on the RLA and the tools available to us?

Is it maybe a union and union leadership who don't acknowledge, and outright DISMISS, the aspects of a law that have been touted legally by airlines themselves and members of the National Mediation Board? .....either out of laziness, stupidity, arrogance, or obstinance.

Are we really doomed to failure because pilots openly and freely communicate with one another, help one another, and educate each other on the law under which we work?

Or are you really afraid that the sheep will stand up to the ignorance that exists at our union level and demand appropriate representation from our elected officials?

Do we maybe have a larger danger from our elected officials, those same union leaders, who collude with the company to waive our contract, hide it from the membership, and the lie about it once they're caught red handed?

People who refuse to communicate, refuse to educate themselves, and naively let the "union leadership speak for them" are simply happy in their warm blanket of ignorance, which is perpetuated by this union "leadership," and then vote "yes" simply because "Jon told them to."

Union leadership NEVER speaks for me! The union asks questions of the company. Then, I speak for me with my vote!

People like you are what dooms us to failure!