Airline Pilot Central Forums - JCBA at a stand still!

As of December 17 our contract is now in arbitration, correct? I have heard that US Airways/America West went to arbitration, and 5 years later they still do not have a contract. I was told that their contract was arbitrated expeditiously but they decertified the union when the seniority lists were not merged to the satisfaction of the pilots. Did Delta/Northwest have to go to arbitration for either a contract or seniority lists? What length of time would be considered typical to have a contract in arbitration? Is our contract arbitration being expedited? After the mediator reaches his conclusion, are the pilots given an opportunity to vote on it, or is our only recourse to strike? When would we be released to go on a strike?

Answer: Our contract negotiations are not in arbitration. On December 17 we requested the services of the National Mediation Board (NMB) per the Railway Labor Act (RLA). A mediator has been assigned to our negotiations, but his role is that of a mediator, not an arbitrator.

From the NMB web site:

As provided for in the RLA, the National Mediation Board (NMB) is responsible for providing mediation services to help the parties reach a settlement should the parties fail to reach an agreement during direct negotiations. If the parties are unable to reach a voluntary agreement to establish or modify a collective bargaining agreement, either party may apply for the mediation services of the NMB. Once mediation is invoked, the NMB conducts mediation meetings until an agreement is reached or until the NMB concludes no agreement can be reached despite its best mediatory efforts. If the NMB reaches this conclusion, it urges both sides to resolve their dispute through binding arbitration. Upon rejection of the proffer of arbitration by either party, the NMB releases the parties into a 30-day cooling off period. During the cooling off period, neither side can alter the status quo. At the end of 30 days, the parties either reach an agreement or engage in self help.

In reality, binding arbitration is almost never accepted by the parties to airline contract negotiations.

In the past, the length of time that airlines have remained in negotiations has depended on a host of complicated factors. To understand and appreciate the complexity of the process, some knowledge of the history of the RLA is required. It was enacted by the Congress in 1926 in an effort to end the constant labor strife in the railway industry, and the RLA's primary purpose is to minimize disruptions to the nation's commerce by making it very difficult for transportation unions to go on strike. But, recognizing that some method of dispute resolution is necessary, the RLA set up a framework for negotiating disputes (e.g. contract negotiations). That is the framework that we must follow, but it is the reason that, so often, contract negotiations drag on for years. In contrast, countries that are more labor-union-friendly than the United States do permit legal strikes to occur much more easily, and union members in those countries generally have relatively more lucrative contracts as a result.

In our specific case, however, it doesn't necessarily mean that our negotiations will drag out for years. There is a lot of incentive on both sides to expeditiously negotiate a new contract. Our management has the positive example of the success of Delta Airlines and the negative example of the mess at US Airways as signposts. We will continue to negotiate per the procedures specified above, but we don't know how long the process will take, and our intent is to move the process along as expeditiously as possible.

It's the NMB that has the legal authority to release the parties into a 30-day cooling off period. Their decision to do so is done in accordance with the RLA, of which its primary purpose is to minimize disruptions to commerce.

The NMB's web site has a lot of very good information:
Mediation -- Frequently Asked Questions

Also, in 2009 our Negotiating Committee put out a video explaining the process that is well worth the ten minutes spent to watch it:
The Negotiation Process

As far as US Airways is concerned: Under the ALPA merger policy in effect at the time, the seniority list integration (SLI) process, which does call for binding arbitration if necessary, took place prior to negotiating a new contract. The SLI went to arbitration, but many of the former US Airways pilots were unhappy with the arbitrator's integrated seniority list award, so they successfully decertified ALPA, replacing it with an in-house union, USAPA, with a new union constitution that mandated merger of the seniority lists based on date of hire. The new union re-merged the seniority lists, but before the new consolidated seniority list was presented to US Airways, the America West pilots sued the new union in federal court, alleging breach of the duty of fair representation (DFR) under federal labor law. A jury trial was held in Arizona Federal District Court. The jury held for the America West pilots and against the new union. Notwithstanding the jury trial and verdict, the Ninth Circuit dismissed for "lack of ripeness", holding, in effect, that the case was premature because the former America West pilots had yet to be harmed by the imposition of the new "date-of-hire" seniority list. And so it continues to drag on. Till all this has been resolved in the courts, the US Airways pilots have not been able to negotiate a new contract, and the former America West pilots and the former US Airways pilots continue to operate as separate groups with separate contracts.

As a result of the US Airways SLI, ALPA merger policy was changed to include longevity as one of the factors to be taken into consideration, and SLIs now do not take place till AFTER a new contract has been negotiated to preclude giving up contractual improvements, including pay, for years.

As far as Delta is concerned: Prior to the merger with Northwest, DAL-ALPA negotiated a contract that went into effect once the merger was consummated, so no, they did not go to arbitration over their contract. They did, however, go to arbitration for their seniority list integration.

Regarding the SLI timeline, it is stated that the “140-day negotiations clock” starts after a TA is reached. Does that mean after it has been ratified by the membership or as stated?

Answer: The 140 day process starts when a T/A is reached. If both MECs don't ratify it or the pilots don't ratify the contract then the SLI process stops again at 140 days and arbitration does not begin.

Is a single pilot seniority list required for the company to be able to obtain a single operating certificate?

Answer: No, a single pilot seniority list is not required in order for the company to obtain a single operating certificate. While some of the merger's synergies can be obtained without an integrated seniority list (ISL), the company needs all of the synergies in this very competitive business which can only be realized with an integrated seniority list. They will only get this list AFTER we get a joint contract, per the new ALPA merger policy.

Can you please fill me in on the equity distribution that took place at Delta, specifically how long they waited for it and the approximate value that was given to the pilots union to distribute?

Answer: The Delta equity distribution took place on issuance of the new stock of the combined Northwest/Delta. The pilot group received 49.5 million shares, approximately 5% of the total, and each Delta pilot received about 4,000 shares of common stock, on average, with a valuation of about $4.26 per share on the date that the shares were transferred to each pilot’s 401k. The actual ratio of the number of shares was 7:5 for the most senior pilot to the most junior pilot, with a straight line in between. The $4.26 per share value was used to fill the 2009 IRS 415(c) limit, with the excess as income.

Several Captains have mentioned the negotiation for seniority integration will focus on the top half of the seniority list to ensure the wide-body captains get the best possible deal (example-pay banding discussion). All negotiating capital will be expended before the bottom 25% will be discussed. United 11 year pilots should expect to be on par with 2 year Continental pilots and furloughed United pilots will be stapled to the bottom of the list unless they accept positions at the bottom of Continentals list.

Answer: No methodology has been determined. By design, the Merger Committee is autonomous. The MEC does not direct the Merger Committee. The Merger Committee, which is composed of members that are representative of the pilot group, is charged with representing the group, and will advocate for all pilots during the integration process. Please ignore any idle speculation that you may hear out on the line.

When can we expect a Tentative Agreement?

Answer: There is a lot of incentive to expeditiously negotiate a new contract. Our management has the positive example of the success of Delta Airlines and the negative example of the mess at US Airways as signposts. We will continue to negotiate per the procedures specified above, but we don't know how long the process will take, and our intent is to move the process along as expeditiously as possible.

Will there be an equity stake distribution of some sort, and, if so, does it hinge upon a ratified JCBA or will it be distributed by some certain point in time regardless of whether or not a JCBA has been achieved?

Is the Negotiating Committee -holding fast for the CAL-type Scope and at least the restoration of C2000 Pay rates? If not, why not?

Answer: It has always been UAL-ALPA policy to not negotiate in public. We know that the absence of answers in this area is frustrating to the membership, but it’s the MEC’s opinion that this long-standing policy serves the pilots best in terms of getting to an agreement that the pilot group will have a desire to ratify. We have believed all along that the fight over this contract will be largely be over Scope and Compensation.
My local LEC says we are not comparing ourselves to the following: We are currently more than 50% below Southwest, FedEx and UPS (except only 29% below UPS with our 777/400 pay)! WHY NOT compare to them?

Answer: It has always been UAL-ALPA policy to not negotiate in public. We know that the absence of answers in this area is frustrating to the membership, but it’s the MEC’s opinion that this long-standing policy serves the pilots best in terms of getting to an agreement that the pilot group will have a desire to ratify.

What is the real story or amount the average pilot can expect with any equity stake and retro pay respectively, and are the payouts set for inside the pension or outside?

Since the negotiation is ongoing on all but the closed sections of the contract, the negotiation over equity has not yet concluded. Whether sheltered or as direct W2 compensation is yet to be determined as well.

From the Transition and Process Agreement:

13-A. Partial Termination. Unless the Parties agree otherwise, the Airline Parties may jointly terminate the provisions of Sections 4-D (Domiciles), 7-A (Furlough with regard to United Pilots only), 7-C (Flying Ratios), 7-D (Domicile and Base Protection), and 9 (ALPA Travel), individually or collectively, at any time on or after December 31, 2011, if the parties have not reached a tentative agreement on a JCBA by that date.

It looks as if all the company has to do is stall until 12/31/2011. With it already stated that a contract will take a year, it is very possible the above protective provisions will be lost, at which point the company will have the ability to close domiciles, to furlough UNITED pilots and to change flying ratios (move current UAL flying to CAL) or shift flying.

Why is this obviously one-sided provision, favoring the company, in the T & PA? What benefit is it to the pilots? What did we get in return for allowing this provision to be included?

Answer: Absent this provision, there was no furlough protection for United pilots. As you point out, the T&PA gave us furlough protection through the end of 2011, but not beyond. Yes, the company could delay beyond 2011, but there is a lot of incentive to expeditiously negotiate a new contract. Our management has the positive example of the success of Delta Airlines and the negative example of the mess at US Airways as signposts.

Hasn’t American been working with a government appointed mediator for the last three years? If so, what good is the mediation process if the company can stall even longer once we enter mediation?

Answer: The mediation process is required under the Railway Labor Act. Parties are not allowed to engage in self-help till the National Mediation Board has declared an impasse, and the thirty-day cooling-off period has ended. Please refer to the video produced by the Negotiating Committee in which ALPA Director of Representation Bruce York explains the RLA and NMB process in greater depth. It’s ten minutes well spent