Profit Sharing Grievance
 

Oh Well....

March 6, 2014

Although we are now one MEC and one pilot group, some issues that arose while we were still separate MECs continue to require attention.

One of these issues is a dispute against UCH under Section 4-A of the Transition and Process Agreement (TPA) filed in January 2012.

The dispute arose in response to the Company’s having struck an agreement, outside the confines of Joint Collective Bargaining Agreement (JCBA) negotiations, with the Continental Master Executive Council (MEC) to grant profit sharing to the Continental pilots outside of the provisions of the existing L-CAL CBA and TPA. When the Company entered into an agreement with the L-CAL MEC, ALPA grieved the issue utilizing outside Counsel. The Association’s case, heard by Neutral Richard Bloch, claimed that the Company erred in failing to obtain the national union’s agreement, as reflected by the absence of the ALPA President’s signature. ALPA requested that the grievance be granted and that the matter be remanded to the parties for consideration of an appropriate remedy.

The TPA was designed as a standstill agreement that prevented the Company from dealing solely with one legacy pilot group or the other during negotiations of the new JCBA. All matters were supposed to be handled between the Association, acting as a unitary body, and the Company. The ALPA Joint Negotiating Committee (JNC) at the time was negotiating for the benefit of all 12,000 United pilots and was seeking profit sharing in the JCBA.

The grievance was successful. Neutral Richard Bloch agreed with ALPA, ruling that UCH violated the TPA when UCH paid 2011 profit sharing to the L-CAL pilot group outside the negotiated terms of the TPA and existing L-CAL CBA. The case was then remanded to the parties to agree on a proper remedy.

For several months, the Association attempted to engage the Company on settlement talks which proved fruitless. The Company did not respond positively to our proposals which would have created additional value for United pilots, and the case was referred back to Neutral Bloch for resolution of remedy.

From the first day of the complaint, Company senior management and attorneys insisted that the first step in any remedy should be rescission of Profit Sharing from the L-CAL pilots
Management suggested and argued in arbitration that they would simply take back the disputed profit sharing payments from the L-CAL pilots. Although entirely viable, this solution was unacceptable to the L-UAL MEC, and we refused to entertain such a divisive and inflammatory concept. It was decided that although the L-UAL pilots were certainly harmed by the decision to award profit sharing, they would not allow that harm to be visited on the L-CAL pilots. The L-UAL MEC position was, and is, that our management should compensate the L-UAL pilots with an amount comparable to the amount paid to L-CAL pilots as a remedy for the Company’s violation of the TPA.

Management refused ALPA’s efforts to seek justice, and on March 4, Arbitrator Bloch issued his final decision.

According to the decision, L-UAL had one legal option, to demand rescission or “claw back” of the awarded money.

Neutral Bloch found that,

There is no real question the Company’s actions could be (and were) viewed as a violation of the TPA that could reasonably threaten the vitality of the Union’s representational stance. The sole question presented here is whether, and to what extent, a make-whole monetary remedy is appropriate.

There was a remedy available to the Union, at least from a purely contractual standpoint: It could properly have demanded rescission of the Company’s grant.

Nothing in this opinion should be read as minimizing the potentially devastating impact of a Company’s adjusting contract terms outside the context of collective bargaining. In terms of both statutory and contractual proscriptions, unilateral actions of this nature are prohibited, as has been routinely held in countless administrative and court decisions too numerous to require citing, and which was found in the earlier arbitration case between these parties, cited above.

The requested remedy was denied.

Although we strongly disagree with the Neutral’s decision on the remedy, we stand by our decision not to seek rescission from the L-CAL pilots. This decision was made in the interest of United pilot unity. We are now one pilot group and we must stand together. Further, unlike our management, we are well aware that two wrongs never make a right. We will continue to resist UCH management’s efforts to divide the United pilots.

A second dispute (CBA 3-L), over the dilution of money from L-UAL contractual profit sharing “bucket,” is ongoing.

I'm down 5.8 large.

Who ultimately wins this battle? It's up to us. Enjoy your money cal. Now let's beat the crap out of them in the next contract!

Hear that? That's a big sigh-o-relief from JPierce....all in the name of unionism right guys?

Ok - now we see what happens when you go outside the contract(this case TPA) to work the little deals. Where does the line for unity start. I hate to say it but back when one side thought best to align with management to profit at the expense of others. Sound familiar - boys! The black list of shame begins - would you sign-up please.

I don't think we should drag every LCAL pilot into this. I hold LCAL MEC and JPierce responsible. However, I am proud of the current MEC position to let our brothers have the few bucks and move onto the next battle. We have way too many battles to fight together. If an LCAL pilot is angry about the SLI or a LUAL pilot is angry about the profit sharing then we all lose. I am glad we took this to the highest level of grievance. We won the battle but lost the war. Lets together focus on the next contract. As a LUAL pilot I have seen what management can do to take away a good contract (contract 2000).

Wait till they start telling you they earned it and deserved to take a share of yours to get get it.

Truer words were never spoken. We can let hard feelings over ISL or this grievance divide us or we can move on. If we move forward divided, we all lose.

I am impressed that the MEC moved forward as it did. I think today's actions took a lot of wind out of the sails of the blow hards who preach division and lack of representation in the union house. Today the MEC acted as one and they deserve credit as they will be chastised by a group of unhappy constituents.

Why shouldn't we be surprised you'd be the first to sign-up. It's not about the money, for the most part it's chump change, it's about the integrity of the process. Something that was lacking on one side for many years.

You mean the UAL side right? That's okay they are coming around;)

I generally agree with the sentiment that the CAL side should not be punished for J. Pierce and his MEC's malfeasance. I'm very surprised that nothing came of it though. There were plenty of other options to remediate it. Heck, the CAL side was able to trade a somewhat minor grievance for 40 mil, yet the UAL side got nothing for a gross violation of the TPA. How about LOA 25 for starters. Very disappointed that once again the UAL MEC (combined now) blinked.

On the unity front - it is amazing how quickly that card gets thrown when the battle seems to be over and there is nothing left to take. Yet I still see the vast majority of CAL pilots not wearing an ALPA pin. Add in the lawsuit and the take whatever I can get mentality that I see as pervasive and the calls for unity ring somewhat hollow.

Scott

I agree with most of what you say here, Scott. The only thing I question is if the MEC "blinked". I have no inside info, but the way I read the announcement, the arbitrator left only 1 choice. Take the $$ back from the LCAL Bubbas or not. I'm not sure there was any alternative to "get" anything for the LUAL side. Obviously our MEC (and I) strongly disagree with the arbitration decision. But unlike a certain 6, I will live with the results because the arbitration process was followed, win or lose.

Personally I'm happy that the LCAL's get to keep the $$. I'd rather them have it than management. But JP's true colors are exposed yet again.

Scott, If the MEC could get anything out of the company as far as improvement in the current contract they would have. The company did not offer or were interested in mediation (my own opinion). As far as we my own perspective or yours; we all have decisions to maximize our own interests. I do not care in you go for the money or the time off. Realize though on a macro level we are together.

Perhaps you should read the arbitrators words again. What JP and management did was highly inappropriate and wrong. It worked, and their end run resulted in a nice payout which you didn't deserve. Good for you, and I mean that sincerely. But perhaps a little humility and a "thanks" for not taking the money back from you would be a more appropriate response. If you can't muster that, silence would have been enough.

Please add me to your list as well Staller. At the end of my career, I'm wholly confident I will be in a far better place to speak of integrity then an internet flamer.

Damnit! I would have like to have seen each CAL pilot had about $200 taken from each paycheck until UAL pilots made whole. Now THAT would have been awesome!! :)
The slick tie number would become even larger. It's extremely large now. Very, very young pilots HATE ALPA. That means that you older guys will never, ever see unity. Sorry. Enjoy your retirement.

What might have been a better solution, would have been to deduct the amount of the grievance from any future profit sharing until the debt was paid.

It's obvious one side cares little about unity. Maybe following your young ALPA HATERS would be a good thing for all. Take your ALPA pin off and display your pride and support for what you created. Any hope of unity stopped when you guys stood by and supported JP. Slick ties for all the man said -

Excellent post Scott. The calls for unity and accompanying representative actions would have really meant something in 2010, but they don't now. That opportunity was trashed, beginning with the T&PA. This merger has been all about advancing the LCAL pilots' interests at our expense. Management has played it perfectly, with the able assistance of the LCAL MEC.

I've had good interactions with the individual LCAL pilots I've come across, but as a group I resent them for the actions of their leadership. I reserve my hate for the scabs, Jay "negotiations are going well" Pierce, Jim "we got this" Brucia, and Jason " we're prepared to delay the JCBA forever if you don't agree to our pay banding" Baron.

Where is the arbitrator's ruling located. I haven't been able to find it on the ALPA website nor was it part of the email from the MEC.

How about this. We just let them keep the retro but we can put a 777 ratio fence that comes down with the 787 fence.

I haven't seen the whole thing. Just what was quoted in the ALPA press release

How about you give me a couple grand and then we can move on

I agree with your take on the contract, the profit sharing was not in the contract, it was a side agreement to end an outstanding 767 grievance and the arbitrator ruled correctly. That said, I did not take a penny from any other pilot. If you would feel better at night if we had to give the money back then so be it. I understand you were probably thinking this meant another check for the UAL guys but in the end the only option was to take our away and give it back to Jeff.

Agreed, but unless the suit has grown, how many plaintive are there? 6? Out of how many?

Lies and Deceit
 

All I want is a company whose business plan is not dependent of deceit. Now think about it....the UCH lawyers had this under their sleeve from the beginning. Make the proposed "solution" for their transgressions something so unpalatable to the combined MEC that we would reject it. Then they win when they lose! Time to line up all the GD lawyers, one in front of the other, so we don't waste too many bullets.

Hey, anyone ever think about this solution? Next profit sharing check have the UAL pilots get a higher percentage than the CAL pilots so UAL pilots get back their rightful and contractually mandated share? Let me guess who wouldn't like THAT idea!

So if I were sold a TV stolen from my brother (and I knew it was stolen) and the cops come by and say they caught, prosecuted and convicted the scumbag that who sold it to me....I still get to keep the TV, right? Heck why not invite my brother over to watch his TV? That's fair.....in some twisted book...by the same author who wrote the CAL ISL proposal, right?

I should post my checking account number so those on the southern side of the cockpit can access my account and bypass all this next time they think they deserve my $$.

There will forever be a stench upon the southern boys and girls in the cockpits of UCH and no amount of soap and scrubbing will remove it....and if they are OK with that, then so be it! We can pontificate about unity and one pilot group BUT that stink will never go away. But then where do most of the (s)tinky pilots reside....you know, the (s)tinky pilots from down south who crossed lines in the mid 80's? Can't use the real S word anymore! Remember ALPA's famous Ode to the (S)tinkers?

If UCH is so interested in a split pilot group, for some drug induced reason, thinking that it benefits the airline, then detox will never cure this. I'm looking forward to the Jeff's Gotta Go pins, just as much as the "Employee-friendly" posters. If Glenn was evil, then Jeff's is Satan himself. Where is the Gardener when you need him?

Just Saying!

I would feel better if they didn't just say "Oh Well, we tried" and be done. I never advocated taking from CAL pilots. This stinks like the Bond Allocation. What the hell. It's only money.

That grievance hasn't been settled yet. The charge is that the LUAL profit sharing pool was diluted by the LCAL inclusion. The arbitration on that had not occurred.

However, whatever the arbitrator decides there is good enough for me. The process is the process. The fact that we didn't get any restitution on this grievance is upsetting, but I don't blame ALPA. They fought for it and the arbitrator ruled for the company. So be it. And I'm DAMNED glad we decided not to take the money back from LCAL. That wouldn't have done ANYBODY any good except ole Jeff

The upsetting part is not that we weren't awarded any restitution. The upsetting part is the guilty party has once again been conditioned to believe the contract can be violated at will without any fear of a deterring verdict. Violate the contract and the worse they'll get is a cease and desist.

Welcome to Jeff's world. It's a company of lawyers run by a lawyer. Remember our leader chose to basically sue the CAL pilots the day after we merged to allow United 70 seaters on our company code. We won and got nothing, they just changed how they operated. They still openly flew those aircraft on our routes.

What is a southern pilot? A scab or all cal pilots?

I'd really like to see the arbitrators ruling used to run Jay Pierce (and any other pilot who was involved in that negotiation/decision) out of the union. Pretty damning evidence of anti union activity. I wonder if Article 8 charges would be appropriate?

Pos is just a pawn in a room of sharks. Best thing that could happen to him is to fly the line amongst the unwashed masses. The LUAL side that is.

They can keep the money. I'll just be taking Christmas and New Years off for the rest of my career and I won't be bidding for it either.

Back to Jeff or the shareholders?

I believe what has been lost in this discussion and chest thumping is how JP and the sCAL management ignored the fact they were no longer living in the CAL vacuum any more.

IT is true the CAL pilots had a legit grievance and they were entitled to compensation for it, but both sides forgot the contract now included nearly 7,000 other pilots. It was this failure which the Neutral ruled on, not the legitimacy of the CAL grievance.

The PS would have been satisfactory had there not been sUAL pilots and the TPA involved and that is why it was wrong.

Personally I'm more than Okay with the monetary award. It had nothing to do with me, nor did it effect me directly. What steamed me was either the ignorance of the two parties or the possibility of intentional disregard for a legal and binding contract between parties.

None of us will know what manipulations the two were up too, but what we all know is the neutral decided, after reviewing all the data, that UAL Management had violated its agreement with its pilot employees. Additionally the grievance proceedings, via their willingness to take back the funds, also demonstrated they, UAL Management, is more than willing to encourage division between the two pilot groups represented by ALPA.

If the L-Cal pilots would have given the money back would the company then have to get our 76-200's back? That is what we traded the profit sharing for. I have no problem giving the money back as long as the company does not get something for free!

To our CAL buddies - Enjoy your Profit Sharing gift from Jeff, you earned it. :confused: You may want to stop wearing your ALPA pin so you can be easily identified and receive your proper salute.

Great post

Another bit of wisdom from the angry village idiot.

Don't fret about my ALPA pin. I gave my 25 year pin to the desk clerk at the BFS Holiday Inn as a going away present.