Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Airline Pilot Forums > Major > United
Release formally requested >

Release formally requested

Search

Notices

Release formally requested

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 05-01-2012, 08:20 AM
  #51  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default

Originally Posted by Ottolillienthal
CAL MEC currently does have a seperate and legally binding section 6 position with the NMB and has since 2008.
Legal question: Does this mean that if the UAL pilots are released to self-help, the CAL pilots would be legally prohibited from honoring their picket line because of the "status quo" rule? That unpleasant scenario could be avoided if the two MECs put their differences behind them and unite now.
tomgoodman is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 08:39 AM
  #52  
Banned
 
Joined APC: Sep 2009
Posts: 173
Default

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
Legal question: Does this mean that if the UAL pilots are released to self-help, the CAL pilots would be legally prohibited from honoring their picket line because of the "status quo" rule? That unpleasant scenario could be avoided if the two MECs put their differences behind them and unite now.
No Status quo would only last 30 days the UniCal do have the right to follow and need to follow the UAL pilots.
teedog is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 09:23 AM
  #53  
Gets Weekends Off
 
tomgoodman's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: 767A (Ret)
Posts: 6,248
Default

Originally Posted by teedog
No Status quo would only last 30 days the UniCal do have the right to follow and need to follow the UAL pilots.
Thanks. I knew that the UAL pilots' "status quo" rule would expire after 30 days, but I wondered if the CAL pilots might be blocked from action by their own "status quo" requirement, since they are currently working under a different contract. If both groups get a simultaneous release, of course, it's not an issue.
tomgoodman is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 10:33 AM
  #54  
Gets Rolled on the Reg.
 
Joined APC: Oct 2010
Posts: 274
Default

Ready to go
1257 is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 11:10 AM
  #55  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Mar 2012
Position: 767 F/O
Posts: 303
Default

Originally Posted by larryiah
Where's the statement from Jay Pierce? This is like 9-11 when Bush ran around hiding until Dick told him it was okay to come home. We need to hear from our leader and get prepared to be released as one 10,000 strong pilot group.

Classic Movie Line #51 - YouTube

He's trying to figure the right spin so he still get's his office adjoining co-worker Jefff's.
Pilotbiffster is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 11:43 AM
  #56  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2010
Posts: 3,071
Default

Originally Posted by larryiah
Where's the statement from Jay Pierce? This is like 9-11 when Bush ran around hiding until Dick told him it was okay to come home. We need to hear from our leader and get prepared to be released as one 10,000 strong pilot group.

Classic Movie Line #51 - YouTube
I fear this time he is hiding behind Lee Moak. This does not bode well for ALPA.
SpecialTracking is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 11:52 AM
  #57  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 32
Default

If L-UAL pilots left ALPA, would the injunction still be enforceable?
dogfood is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 05:20 PM
  #58  
Gets Weekends Off
 
LeeFXDWG's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2006
Position: B737 CAPT IAH
Posts: 1,130
Default RLA and Norris-LaGuardia Act

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
Thanks. I knew that the UAL pilots' "status quo" rule would expire after 30 days, but I wondered if the CAL pilots might be blocked from action by their own "status quo" requirement, since they are currently working under a different contract. If both groups get a simultaneous release, of course, it's not an issue.
Tom,

Therein lies the potential "rub" in such a circumstance.

Without getting too deep into either of the Acts, there is nothing in the RLA or Norris-LaGuardia Act that prohibits "honoring" a picket line. So, while this is all currently a hypothetical scenario, yes, CAL pilots could go on a "sympathy" strike and honor the UAL pilot's picket line legally.

Such sympathy strikes are not forbidden in anyway; however, that does not mean that the company would not file to enjoin the CAL pilots if they elected to do so.

The precedent is there (Eastern vs ALPA) from when the pilots elected to honor the IAM picket lines in early 1989. Unfortunately, even though the case went to appeal to get the ruling, Eastern prevailed because they were able to prove ALPA's pretext through its formal statements made to the membership. In other words, able to get the court to consider ALPA's sympathy strike (legal) as merely a pretext for its own agenda (getting released) and using the opportunity to engage in self help before all provisions of the RLA had been exhausted with regards to ALPA.

Clear as mud?

Frats,
Lee
LeeFXDWG is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 05:44 PM
  #59  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Nov 2008
Position: B-777 left
Posts: 1,415
Default

Originally Posted by tomgoodman
Thanks. I knew that the UAL pilots' "status quo" rule would expire after 30 days, but I wondered if the CAL pilots might be blocked from action by their own "status quo" requirement, since they are currently working under a different contract. If both groups get a simultaneous release, of course, it's not an issue.
Do you really see ual going on strike without cal going also, sorry I just don't see that happening.
syd111 is offline  
Old 05-01-2012, 06:28 PM
  #60  
Line Holder
 
Joined APC: Mar 2010
Posts: 28
Default

Originally Posted by SpecialTracking
I fear this time he is hiding behind Lee Moak. This does not bode well for ALPA.
Does anyone else find it interesting that ALPA national (Moak) has been silent regarding Heppner's direction to submit the paperwork for release? I have to believe that if ALPA national was in favor of doing so, they would be making a big deal about this. To me, their silence is telling.
2wright is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
APC225
United
70
04-26-2012 01:43 PM
trigg41
Cargo
7
10-07-2011 03:20 AM
SilkySmooth
Regional
18
09-17-2009 04:44 AM
caddis
Mergers and Acquisitions
85
12-08-2008 07:26 PM
JayDee
Major
2
04-11-2008 02:27 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



Your Privacy Choices