AOL update
03-01-2013, 08:25 AM
#251
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
[QUOTE=R57 relay;1362720]
I can answer that as it is no secret. If the merger fails it becomes "unripe", if the merger is completed then the contract is retroactive to feb 8th. So the merger should close by September and we need to file by August to "hold" the lawsuit. Usapa will be gone by January (4 months after por). I know you want very badly to believe we "jumped the gun" but those demand letters are a set up for litigation I.e. the apa will be keeping transcript of any sli negotiations for use by leonidas etc.
That is an accurate summary, VFC.[/QUOTE
I agree.
If you are the same aquagreen from elsewhere, I have a question for you. If you choose to not answer for strategic reasons, I understand, no problem,
AOL claims the MOU makes the Addington ripe. I don't see how since it is a path to a CBA, not a CBA. Today the US pilots are still on two different contracts and will indeed stay there if the merger should fall through (I doubt it will, but you never know. It took about a year for the UA/US merger to fall through). If it is ripe, and the merger fails through, doesn't be come unripe again?
I agree.
If you are the same aquagreen from elsewhere, I have a question for you. If you choose to not answer for strategic reasons, I understand, no problem,
AOL claims the MOU makes the Addington ripe. I don't see how since it is a path to a CBA, not a CBA. Today the US pilots are still on two different contracts and will indeed stay there if the merger should fall through (I doubt it will, but you never know. It took about a year for the UA/US merger to fall through). If it is ripe, and the merger fails through, doesn't be come unripe again?
03-01-2013, 08:27 AM
#252
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
I am a third-lister, so I am theoretically neutral on this. (A third-lister being a pilot hired at US after the US/HP merge who is junior to all pre-merger East and West pilots regardless of list in use.) So here's my best attempt to explain the situation as neutrally as I can.
The US/HP integration attempted to integrate two of the most demographially dissimilar pilot groups ever to merge in our industry's history. HP started in 1983 and had a RELATIVELY uniform pattern of hiring throughout its history (not many massive gluts of hiring or long gaps with no new hires). US - itself the product of many prior mergers - had a dramatically older pilot group with some enormous gaps in hiring (nobody from 1990-1998 for example) and some huge gluts (1986-1989 for example) in the list, due to both hiring "binges" and the placement of pilots on the list from prior integrations (PSA, Piedmont, Trump, etc.).
At the time of the merger, HP was hiring and US had hundreds of pilots on furlough, dating back to 1989 hires.
Nicolau's arbitration award attempted to balance the enormous differences in the two groups (quite possibly an impossible task). The award granted the first 500-ish spots on the list to the East (US), accounting for their widebody (767 and 330) aircraft which the West (HP) did not have at merger time. Next all remaining active pilots on both lists were ratioed in, first on a ratio for 757s (common to both airlines) then for 737/320 (also common to both). Thereafter, the furloughed East pilots were placed on the bottom. Seems reasonable enough, until you look at the demographics.
The bottom active East pilot at the time of the merger had about 17 years in at US, whereas the bottom West pilot was a new hire fresh from the schoolhouse. This LOS disparity meant that West pilots on the lower half of their list were placed among East pilots with over a decade more LOS than they had. This obviously caused heartburn to many on the East.
The East had advocated for a DOH list before Arbitrator Nicolau. The problem with this is that some 80% of the West list, in this scenario, would have been slotted below East pilots furloughed at the time of the merger. While not technically a staple, it would have been an effective staple for many West pilots (since, save for several hundred hired from 1998-2000, the entire East list at the merger was hired in or before 1989). Obviously, the West had a real problem with this concept.
After the Nicolau Award was released, the West obviously fared better than the East AS A WHOLE under it. The East was desperate to get out of it. Attempts to vacate the award were made through ALPA and through the courts. Eventually, the idea was struck to elect a new union whose presence might invalidate the award. So, a card drive was started, and (thanks to the East's 2:1 size advantage versus the West) USAPA was elected. USAPA has been attempting to dispose of the Nicolau Award ever since, and a number of court cases have come along since which have thoroughly muddied the legal waters.
The West (through a self-funded LLC, the Army of Leonidas [AOL]), has vigorously defended the Nicolau Award and insists that its list be part of the AA merger. The East (through USAPA, the union representing all US Airways pilots) has insisted the Nicolau Award is dead and that it is free to negotiate a seniority regime of its choosing with the Company.
Lawsuits: The Addington case. Some West pilots (Addington being the lead plaintiff) sued USAPA for breach of DFR for failing to implement the Nicolau Award. The Addington plaintiffs won this case, in Federal court in Phoenix, several years ago. USAPA appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which ruled that the the DFR in Addington would not be "ripe" until a JCBA incorporating a non-Nicolau list was signed. (The Ninth did NOT, however, comment on the merits of the underlying DFR case.)
The situation being unresolved, US Airways filed a Declaratory Judgment Action in Federal court in Phoenix in 2011 to resolve its liability, if any, in the seniority dispute. In the case, US Airways states that it is neutral on the seniority dispute, but wishes to ensure that it cannot be held liable to either side depending on the outcome. The Judge in that case rules that USAPA CAN pursue a non-Nicolau seniority regime, provided it is supported by a LEGITIMATE UNION PURPOSE. She also does NOT offer US Airways any protection from liability. Therefore, US Airways has appealed this ruling to the Ninth Circuit, where the matter pends today.
Enter the AA merger. AOL's attorney suggests the MOU is a ratified contract (or at least a path to one), making the dispute in the Addington case - as set aside by the Ninth - "ripe". AOL's position is that any non-Nicolau list damages the West pilots and therefore insists that the Nicolau list be the list used to integrate with the AA pilots. If USAPA, APA, and the Company don't use it, AOL intends to seek a restraining order enjoining the integration process (but not the merger, they say) until the courts rule. USAPA says this is nonsense and intends to pursue a DOH solution to the East/West scenario (and with APA, per its Constitution). The Company just wants to avoid being sued by anyone, no matter how the list comes down.
If you're not confused yet, you haven't been paying enough attention!
The US/HP integration attempted to integrate two of the most demographially dissimilar pilot groups ever to merge in our industry's history. HP started in 1983 and had a RELATIVELY uniform pattern of hiring throughout its history (not many massive gluts of hiring or long gaps with no new hires). US - itself the product of many prior mergers - had a dramatically older pilot group with some enormous gaps in hiring (nobody from 1990-1998 for example) and some huge gluts (1986-1989 for example) in the list, due to both hiring "binges" and the placement of pilots on the list from prior integrations (PSA, Piedmont, Trump, etc.).
At the time of the merger, HP was hiring and US had hundreds of pilots on furlough, dating back to 1989 hires.
Nicolau's arbitration award attempted to balance the enormous differences in the two groups (quite possibly an impossible task). The award granted the first 500-ish spots on the list to the East (US), accounting for their widebody (767 and 330) aircraft which the West (HP) did not have at merger time. Next all remaining active pilots on both lists were ratioed in, first on a ratio for 757s (common to both airlines) then for 737/320 (also common to both). Thereafter, the furloughed East pilots were placed on the bottom. Seems reasonable enough, until you look at the demographics.
The bottom active East pilot at the time of the merger had about 17 years in at US, whereas the bottom West pilot was a new hire fresh from the schoolhouse. This LOS disparity meant that West pilots on the lower half of their list were placed among East pilots with over a decade more LOS than they had. This obviously caused heartburn to many on the East.
The East had advocated for a DOH list before Arbitrator Nicolau. The problem with this is that some 80% of the West list, in this scenario, would have been slotted below East pilots furloughed at the time of the merger. While not technically a staple, it would have been an effective staple for many West pilots (since, save for several hundred hired from 1998-2000, the entire East list at the merger was hired in or before 1989). Obviously, the West had a real problem with this concept.
After the Nicolau Award was released, the West obviously fared better than the East AS A WHOLE under it. The East was desperate to get out of it. Attempts to vacate the award were made through ALPA and through the courts. Eventually, the idea was struck to elect a new union whose presence might invalidate the award. So, a card drive was started, and (thanks to the East's 2:1 size advantage versus the West) USAPA was elected. USAPA has been attempting to dispose of the Nicolau Award ever since, and a number of court cases have come along since which have thoroughly muddied the legal waters.
The West (through a self-funded LLC, the Army of Leonidas [AOL]), has vigorously defended the Nicolau Award and insists that its list be part of the AA merger. The East (through USAPA, the union representing all US Airways pilots) has insisted the Nicolau Award is dead and that it is free to negotiate a seniority regime of its choosing with the Company.
Lawsuits: The Addington case. Some West pilots (Addington being the lead plaintiff) sued USAPA for breach of DFR for failing to implement the Nicolau Award. The Addington plaintiffs won this case, in Federal court in Phoenix, several years ago. USAPA appealed to the Ninth Circuit, which ruled that the the DFR in Addington would not be "ripe" until a JCBA incorporating a non-Nicolau list was signed. (The Ninth did NOT, however, comment on the merits of the underlying DFR case.)
The situation being unresolved, US Airways filed a Declaratory Judgment Action in Federal court in Phoenix in 2011 to resolve its liability, if any, in the seniority dispute. In the case, US Airways states that it is neutral on the seniority dispute, but wishes to ensure that it cannot be held liable to either side depending on the outcome. The Judge in that case rules that USAPA CAN pursue a non-Nicolau seniority regime, provided it is supported by a LEGITIMATE UNION PURPOSE. She also does NOT offer US Airways any protection from liability. Therefore, US Airways has appealed this ruling to the Ninth Circuit, where the matter pends today.
Enter the AA merger. AOL's attorney suggests the MOU is a ratified contract (or at least a path to one), making the dispute in the Addington case - as set aside by the Ninth - "ripe". AOL's position is that any non-Nicolau list damages the West pilots and therefore insists that the Nicolau list be the list used to integrate with the AA pilots. If USAPA, APA, and the Company don't use it, AOL intends to seek a restraining order enjoining the integration process (but not the merger, they say) until the courts rule. USAPA says this is nonsense and intends to pursue a DOH solution to the East/West scenario (and with APA, per its Constitution). The Company just wants to avoid being sued by anyone, no matter how the list comes down.
If you're not confused yet, you haven't been paying enough attention!
03-01-2013, 08:47 AM
#253
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,299
[QUOTE=cactiboss;1362739]
NO IT IS NOT! Will they go back and recalculate my rigs for your long rate or the MOUs new trip rigs. Will a van show up with my crew meals I've been accruing? Will you be bidding CLT on the next bid? Can I get some more vacation? NO. It is not a contract, only the pay rates are retroactive to Feb 8th.
Besides, I didn't ask you. I don't take your word for anything. If aquagreen is who I think he is, I have some respect for him
Now pardon me, I need to go unripen some bananas.
Besides, I didn't ask you. I don't take your word for anything. If aquagreen is who I think he is, I have some respect for him
Now pardon me, I need to go unripen some bananas.
03-01-2013, 08:51 AM
#254
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,299
The same goes for east guys that say the west "stole" their seniority. That's BS. The west simply played the game as the rules called for and, at least for the bottom 60% or so, got a very favorable outcome.
03-01-2013, 09:03 AM
#256
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
I can answer that as it is no secret. If the merger fails it becomes "unripe", if the merger is completed then the contract is retroactive to feb 8th. So the merger should close by September and we need to file by August to "hold" the lawsuit. Usapa will be gone by January (4 months after por). I know you want very badly to believe we "jumped the gun" but those demand letters are a set up for litigation I.e. the apa will be keeping transcript of any sli negotiations for use by leonidas etc.
Where's the proposed seniority list in this "contract"? Are seniority negotiations complete? Has the airline responded to the proposed seniority list and accepted it? When was this single CBA ratified? Specifically, what does the final result of this process look like; and, without speculating, how does it affect the West class?
From the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals:
At this point, neither the West Pilots nor USAPA can be certain what seniority proposal ultimately will be acceptable to both USAPA and the airline as part of a final CBA. Likewise, it is not certain whether that proposal will be ratified by the USAPA membership as part of a new, single CBA. Not until the airline responds to the proposal, the parties complete negotiations, and the membership ratifies the CBA will the West Pilots actually be affected by USAPA’s seniority proposal --whatever USAPA’s final proposal ultimately is. Because these contingencies make the claim speculative, the issues are not yet fit for judicial decision.
03-01-2013, 09:09 AM
#257
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Nov 2011
Position: A320 Capt
Posts: 5,299
03-01-2013, 09:42 AM
#258
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
03-01-2013, 09:44 AM
#259
Banned
Thread Starter
Joined APC: Apr 2008
Posts: 3,240
Has AMR and LCC management signed on to this "contract"? I thought a contract, by definition, required everyone to sign not just the labor side. Right now it's just a handshake deal.
Where's the proposed seniority list in this "contract"? Are seniority negotiations complete? Has the airline responded to the proposed seniority list and accepted it? When was this single CBA ratified? Specifically, what does the final result of this process look like; and, without speculating, how does it affect the West class?
From the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals:
Where's the proposed seniority list in this "contract"? Are seniority negotiations complete? Has the airline responded to the proposed seniority list and accepted it? When was this single CBA ratified? Specifically, what does the final result of this process look like; and, without speculating, how does it affect the West class?
From the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals:
03-01-2013, 09:47 AM
#260
Gets Weekends Off
Joined APC: Jan 2013
Position: Pitot heat, what's to eat?
Posts: 392
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
