USALPA Troubles

[Ignition Override]

Despite the many interesting comments on this complex topic, it can not be described in a short paragraph, even in three-four solid pages. Just some observations and questions here which require a bit of space, hopefully detached and objective, despite this "Pandora's Box" topic.

I was with three regionals for a short while in the mid-80s (flew Bandits and Shorts: the first airline survived for a year), and later began to understand and heard about how much more difficult it was to get a certain company's pay up to the standard, i.e. veterans of non-union Mesa Airlines said that Beech 1900 Captains/FOs were paid about 30% LESS than average. Working while a GOP President is in the White House or with a GOP-controlled Congress, despite their better qualities, puts you in an environment where such leaders love any employer which can figure out how to cheat YOU, the worker, out of standard working conditions and pay. If still in denial, one can read about US airline deregulation history-many souces are available for cross-checking.

Two guys I know worked at Mesa for a while, one had flown multi'turbine Navy helicopters 20 years and the other, a friend, flew complex Marine helos for several; both needed immediate fixed wing multi-engine experience while hiring at majors was forecast to either begin or continue. If a pilot avoids the first valuable stepping stone which offers a seat in a new-hire class, other than scabbing, can mean no more options for a while, or no paycheck for a flying job, and non-currency (this has seriously handicapped so many applicants: Microsoft Flight Sim can't be logged). If this was their first opportunity to further their career, then anyone who actually claims that both guys should have quickly gone to work at Walmart or become insurance salesmen after reacting with disgust at the crappy regional salaries, is not really sincere with such a view. This implies that a quality-experience and maybe above-standard pay regional flying job could land in their laps, all by chance-does it not?

Maybe someone can explain to me whether national ALPA can legally help support a strike at a codeshare regional, in a physical sense. As far as I know, under the Railway Labor Act etc, it is not possible, using reduction/suspension of service at the major partner. Maybe I was not aware of such methods, and wish we could all have used such legal support, in order to put standard speed/grossweight formulas into regional pay contracts, as COMAIR tried to. They were up against extreme (possibly some illegal...) pressure from the entire industry, which was leaning very hard on Delta not to cave in and help create an earthshaking watershed event. The advantage of operating regional jets might have begun to disappear, with a tremendous new industry contract precedent.

Are not regional pilots easier to replace during a strike, from a financial perspective, than their brethren at the major partner? If so, how can they win a strike with the entire industry subsidizing (while threatening via Congressmen/Senators? Guess how Close-In Noise Abatement procedures were forced upon the FAA? ) the owners to resist to the bitter end?

Will somebody also explain to me (via this site or e-mail) how a regional airline's pilots can refuse to fly a CRJ, Embraer jet etc if these are the only replacements for many turboprops at the same carrier? By the way, one of our FOs ( a former military fighter and Instructor Pilot, a Northrop Wonder) was ignorant enough to refer to our regional partners as scabs, implying that they had somehow crossed an invisible picket line, because they are flying Canadair CRJs. The guy obviously has a very bone-headed, purely personal perspective, so I realized how futile it would be to expose him to the reality of our industry, with his total lack of airline experience as a true "airline working grunt" before he came here, having been a major contributor to his blinded viewpoint. Luckily he does not work for the union. But he is not alone. Some of our pilots are arrogant enough to consider their 757 or widebody flying to be the only real airline flying on the property, although I don't like saying this in public.

Are these questions difficult to answer, without distorting/changing the wording or contex of the questions? I see so many contradictions in this topic and "Catch 22s", what simple solutions are there, other than subjective policies or abstract academics and value judgements-assuming that national ALPA continues to be far too protective of past/future promotions to even consider supporting, with freezes and fleet/seat protections, a national seniority/codeshare-based seniority list, as used at American, Continental? I'm not suggesting that our regional affiliates should have been prevented from ordering at least a "competitive" batch of RJs, but if seen from the perspectives of both regional and major carrier pilots, IF unlimited numbers of RJs were allowed (200-300+ etc), would not the affliate major airline(s) have far fewer job slots in the future available for many of these codeshare regional pilots or pilots from other codeshare operations (USAirways Express, United Express...)? Is there not some general, numerical relationship in this situation if it applied in the same overall percentages to every US major regional airline codeshare combination? On the one hand, it is not fair for ALPA to limit the careers of those at a regional who will stay there, but on the other hand how about those young enough to move on, who don't mind giving up the Captain's seat in order to be much more able to help the wife stay home with young kids or even pay for chldrens' college educations etc? Most kids don't qualify for scholarships...Is it possible that turboprop PIC hours are just as valuable as turbofan PIC on a major airline resume? It would be tragic, if many pilots felt that they absolutely must have generic turbofan PIC at any cost in order to escape a career with a regional; if the opposite result took place, too many RJs could mean much less hiring in the future when they have about 5,000-7,000 total hours: is any one jet the only reward, on a clearly discriminatory pay scale? One major airline prefers pilots to have flown more than one high-performance aircraft.

According to second hand info which I only recently heard from "my" FO , one's having flown many hours in two or three different regional turboprops (an "aggressive career") is preferred to having flown the line in 'only' a C-141 for eight years, not to mention pilots who believe seriously in CRM. Don't ask me why it prefers combinations of types-in my opinion, they all have value, including helos. That hiring-in-a-nutshell philosophy came from someone in our Flight Personnel Dept. The backgrounds of my FOs in the last three years all reflect this hiring philosophy. The two who had finished flying C-141s as IPs/Check Airmen (Stan Eval) had both also flown Air Force Learjets at detachments etc in Ramstein or Stuttgart. Many FOs here were all civilian with at least two or three type-ratings such as Beech-1900, Jetstream, ATR-42...and pertinent line experience on those aircraft which made their resumes/CVs attractive. Just a thought or two. Those CRJs do not appear to have given any of "my" FOs an advantage when they applied to work here. So many were hired as civilians with no jet experience-plenty of folks with chunks of jet hours and a college degree might have been available anyway.

Don't get me wrong here: I'm not picking on anybody's views and normal, natural career goals to fly newer or bigger planes which pay more and go faster+higher. The same pay formula would apply if some court ruling would have the balls to admit and finally rule that at least two different pay formulas are used when contrasting US majors and regionals (clear discrimination, considering the calculations used by ALPA for mainline jet pay, used for many years in our industry's "contract pattern bargaining"), which ironically, in many case have the same name (or it is implied), logo and paint job on the planes. I could not believe that a US court ruled that American Eagles' various components could finally bargain as a single entity. With that as a precedent, why can't this legal concept be extended, whether the major owns a regional component or not? Just because Eagle consisted mostly of turboprops should not be a legal reason to separate negotiations from mainline American, or did Eagle leave APA because mainline American had no sympathy for its brethren who often work harder for a living (I was a 757 FO, which gave me some exposure to the easier world of many days with just two legs while punching on the FMC/LNAV/VNAV: a long day on a Bandit or Shorts [DC-9...] could be much more work and tiring: none of you guys/gals can "preach to the choir" and fool many of us).

By the way, some majors are selling their regional affiliates-could the significance of a future strike like COMAIR be a strategic reason, among others, which became apparent to managements after the bitter COMAIR struggle? By the way, how much solidarity do our companies have with their ATA/RAA union (a powerful lobby group), ...er..ahem.. excuse my frankness, they would much prefer the phrase "industry trade association" or such.

Ok, end of this Spanish Inquisition: no offense meant towards the Monty Python version. As an IP said after an 0600-1000 steam-gauge, high bladder psi sim period, "hasta la pasta".

If you folks keep throwing lances and axes at each other's personalities (with the raised computer monitor as your Saxon shields), which few would ever consider while on somebody's jumpseat, few combatants will have allowed even valid information to penetrate their brains. But I'm certainly above such tactics, let there be no doubt, King Aelfred.

[AA717driver]

We have met the enemy...

Good post I/O. As I have been trying to tell the AA pilots on our message board--ALPA will not solve our problems. Each pilot group has to negotiate its own contracts.

Now, until ALPA National can find a way to keep regionals from flying mainline routes during a job action AND keep mainline or other 'wholly-owned subsidiary' pilots from covering for a striking regional, it will be tough to get better conditions for the regionals.

Hell, it will be tough to get better conditions for mainline. I just talked to a friend who is getting furloughed at DAL while RJ flying continues to explode. Force Majeure my ass!

This leads me to another point. An "impartial", "independent" arbitrator ruled that Force Majeure allows DAL to continue to violate the contract/SCOPE clause--9 months(and counting) after the event causing the F/M. Don Carty wants to expedite the process of getting contract negotiations to an arbitrator. Would that be the same "impartial" arbitrator used in the DAL case?

We need to find a way to unite ALL professional pilots and thwart the assault underway by the ATA/RAA Union.TC

[steamchicken]

Isn't it a better idea for a trade union to try to get better pay for its underpaid members than to attack them? I always thought unions exist to represent their members against the power of the boss.....

[DownIn3Green]

Well Hell you say, Mr. AA717, (That's not a real Boeing, by the way)

Regarding your post and all of the "let's get a better contract for mainline, etc..."

How about this:

During the Comair strike, I had several occasions to fly Delta to/from Ft Myers (RSW).

One flight I took last summer (July 4th to be precise) was from RSW to JFK via ATL.

Anyway, I sat next to a woman who had been tossed about in the system because she was supposed to go from RSW to Orlando (MCO) on Comair, then onto her final destination on Delta. (mainline)

Because of ALPO's strike at Comair, DAL rerouted this passenger (Comair regional passenger, whose ticket was on the "struck" airline),to her final destination on mainline.

In other words, the pilots on that flight from RSW were flying struck revenue because they hauled this woman out of Fla to ATL to get her to her final destination.

The nerve of those mainline pilots. I'll gladly provide the details of this flight, if ALPO will declare those "brother" pilots scabs.

If you guys don't get it yet, drink some more cool aid and keep trying.

ALPO does nothing for the "have-nots" except take their hard earned money...

[AA717driver]

That's the whole point, for ALPA to be anything other than an 'association', it has to include ALL airline pilots in this country.

In fact, to have any teeth at all, ALPA needs to develop a single seniority list, single contract for all airline pilots. That way, no one has to fly struck work.

The DAL pilots who were forced to fly CA's routes are getting paid back in spades.TC

P.S.--I never called it a Boeing, anyway. Give me Douglas 'Fly-By-Wire' any day!

[Ignition Override]

Down In 3 Green: My company won't let us stay at the gate for passengers who we can see just now run up to the gate, as the agent quickly leaves the podium and rudely locks the jetway door in their face and is required in most situations to slam the main cabin door shut five minutes before sched departure. Supposedly those marketing focus groups prefer the silly DOT "on-time" stats which pressures each company (and very often compromises safety-and I can prove it) more than the abililty to step on to the aircraft

In this corporate, so-called "People First" atmosphere, how can the flight attendants or anyone else determine how many passengers are on us instead of on a codeshare carrier which is on strike? Even if we knew, who believes that we can plan in advance to notify certain crews not to go to work? Who is willing to seriously jeopardize their only flying career on this side of the blue planet, without a new court ruling to allow a suspension of service etc?

[surplus1]

Originally posted by dc8skippy
Surplus 1:
Very well said. and I agree with you 100%. I was at Emery and we had to fight with ALPA national on different fronts. It was not only money. The main idea was to get Emery to operate safely. That cost money and in the end they shut the airline down. The management of Emery is the kind of which ALPA never delt with (at least in the last 70 years) before. We were always treated like lose cannons and told to be patient we know what we are doing.

Greetings,
I've read a lot of your story and know some of it first hand. I think TR is a good person and did his best on your behalf. He just didn't understand the inner politics of the organization and believed too much of the sales pitch. All that glitters is not gold.

I tried to warn him but don't blame him for not heeding the warnings (at the time I was as much a stranger to him as anyone else). When the canary hit the fan he unfortunately came to realize that the support he expected was never there. BTW, if you are still in contact with him send me a private message with how I might get in touch (if you can).

Thanks for your understanding.
Surplus1

[surplus1]

Originally posted by peepsmover

Talk to me
Take that post about new hire fairness regarding company owned and codeshared regionals elsewhere. It is off topic and while simplistic, it certainly would be unfair to those pilots who earned the same skill set outside the respective regionals, so while the current scheme is not perfect it certainly offers all competitive pilots a shot at the majors.

Sorry for being slow but I don't quite follow you on that. What are you talking about? What is "off topic" and why? What skill sets earned outside the regionals are you referring to? Please clarify your statements.

As for ALPA bashing, I see a lot of fingerpointing, but lets read the facts. First, do you have an elected union group, and the commensurate union leadership? Does your respective MEC negotiate your pilot group's contract? Am I to believe that your respective pilot group does not then vote on the negotiated contract? Certainly ALPA advises and assists, but is the national office negotiating and voting your respective contracts?

I'll respond as applicable to my own airline and with the perspective of a "regional pilot" member. The answer to your first questions is YES. To the second question the answer is also YES, but it's not quite that simple. Small airlines like mine negotiate contracts in the same way that large ALPA airlines do but with one important difference. The large ALPA carrier (like UAL or DAL or NWA) is not subject to interference from ALPA national during negotiations. The small carrier like mine (CMR) definitely is. That interference takes many forms, sometimes subtle other times over and still others extreme pressure. The interference is not beneficial to the contractual objectives of the small carrier, particularly when they might conflict with the ALPA agenda (controlled by mainline pilots) or the objectives of a particular mainline carrier. Yes, the pilot group does vote on the negotiated contract (at my airline, but not at all airlines). That vote (Comair being a typical example) often goes against the "wishes" of the ALPA national initially but sooner or later, winds up coming out pretty much like ALPA wants it. The political pressure wielded by the national union varies from mild to threateningly intense. ALPA national controls the money and uses it to coerce whenever deemed appropriate. These tactics are not known generally to mainliners who are not exposed to them.

As a diverse pilot group certainly there is common ground on a variety of issues, yet the differences simply reflect the diversity, therefore regionals will of course not have the 777 pay of UAL. Tell me specifically what the claims are, don't give me generics, tell me numbers and tell me how ALPA is robbing Peter to pay Paul.

It is not the "natural" differences and diversity to which regional pilots object. The issues go far beyond that. No one expects 777 wages to fly a 50-seat airplane. What IS expected is the same methodology generally used to determine mainline compensation and vigorous support of the effort to obtain it. Regional pilots also don't expect substantially inferior work rules (supported by the national union) and substandard benefit packages (also supported by the union) simply because they don't have 40-year old contracts. To be told that your aspirations for long established contractual "standards" are "unrealistic" solely because you fly for a "regional" reflect the two tier system created and fostered by ALPA national. The regional carriers don't have the leverage available to the majors but they do expect their union to support their efforts. It does so rhetorically but when the chips are down, they are pretty much on their own. Fighting the Company is one problem. Fighting the Company and your very own Union at the same time is another matter all together.

Scope is a major issue. Regional pilots support the need for Scope. Yet amazingly, there isn't a single regional carrier with any scope that realistically protects its own flying from anything. National attorneys find it impossible to navigate the corporate webs and devise effective language (or so they allege). Yet, those same lawyers work overtime at finding ways for mainline pilot groups not only to protect their own flying, but also to create predatory contractual provisions, control the flying of regional subsidiaries (with the same parent corporation) and reduce or restrict it to the point that would stagnate growth, force furloughs and unreasonably restrict aircraft types. Importantly they don't seek to do this before the fact but after the Genie is (thanks to them) already out of the bottle. Regional scope that might come at the expense of mainline pilots is taboo. Mainline scope that can devastate the careers of regional pilots, in regional jets, is de rigeur. The double standard is unacceptable to regional pilots and a major cause of friction. When the regional flying is a subcontracted arrangement, that's not a problem. When the regional is an Alter Ego owned and operated by the same Company as the mainline, the conflict becomes irreconcilable.

ALPA prohibits the application of merger policy when the parties are mainline/regional, but demands the policy when they are mainline/mainline. Another double standard. ALPA attempts to push flow-through concepts on carriers that don't want it. For those that do want it, the same ALPA aids mainline pilot groups attempting to prevent it. For the most part, regional pilots don't expect to be "equal" but they do expect to be treated equally by their union. Discrimination against a select group of ALPA members is not acceptable. That is precisely what is happening.

ALPA decries the creation of a quasi Alter Ego airline whose pilots will be non-union on one of its regional carrier properties and refers to the founder as "another Lorenzo". Yet a couple of weeks later, the same ALPA supports the creation of an Alter Ego on a mainline property (where there are already 3 other Alter Egos, all represented by ALPA) because the mainline pilot group wants it (to find jobs for its furloughed pilots). ALPA ignores the fact that the newly created Alter Ego may result in pilots at 3 airlines (all ALPA represented) losing their jobs. ALPA supports a scenario, created at the same a major airline (ALPA represented), that together with the created and accepted Alter Ego, will force regional pilot members to abrogate their contracts and seniority in favor of furloughed mainline pilots or see themselves phased out as the affected flying is awarded to subcontractors. Still another demonstration of a double standard.

The union's Constitution and policies must be applied equally to all union members. It can't favor one assumed superior "class" of pilot over another assumed inferior class. We are all airline pilots. The fact that you and I may fly different equipment does not change that. ALPA policy seems to think that it does. That thinking must change. A member, is a member, is a member.

As for Emery, I have seen the posts, but still I have not seen enough to make an assessment on ALPA's shortcoming, so tell us. I certainly am willing to listen, because unions themselves are certainly not a panacea, but a bad union can make things even worse, if ALPA needs to take corrective action, well then it has to be done, because our collective strength rests on our collective unity. Maybe the bigger issue is that ALPA cannot be all things to all pilot groups and perhaps the birth of two major pilot groups would be the best solution.

I won't attempt to speak directly to the details of the Emery scenario since I'm not an Emery pilot. Basically however, it is simply a question of Emery being a small airline. In ALPA today, the size of the airline, measured in terms of its contributions to the exchequer, is apparently directly related to the quality of representation that the union provides. That's a bad union in my book. If the national union is unwilling or unable to represent with equal vigor the interests of pilots in airlines large or small, then it should restrict its membership to the large airlines it prefers. You are correct, the union can't be all things to all people at all times. However, when the union seeks the membership of a pilot group and sells itself as being "THE pilot's union", it has assumed the responsibility of defending those members. It must either carry out that responsibility or be forced legally to do so.

A conflict of interest exists between large and small. Since ALPA chose to recruit and represent both, it must do so fairly in accordance with the law. The litigation alleges it did not. If the courts determine the litigants to be justified in their claim, ALPA National will be forced to change its way of doing business.

[surplus1]

Originally posted by AA717

We have met the enemy...
Good post I/O. As I have been trying to tell the AA pilots on our message board--ALPA will not solve our problems. Each pilot group has to negotiate its own contracts.

Interestingly, ALPA was "solving the AA pilots problems" before you left ALPA in a manner quite similar to how it is now "solving" the problems of regional pilots.

Now, until ALPA National can find a way to keep regionals from flying mainline routes during a job action AND keep mainline or other 'wholly-owned subsidiary' pilots from covering for a striking regional, it will be tough to get better conditions for the regionals.

I do hope you're not implying that regional pilots would fly your struck work? They are far more likely to be willing to strike in sympathy with you where legally possible. Now, would you be willing to strike in sympathy with the Eagle pilots? Answer honestly please. The Delta pilots were not willing to do that for the Comair pilots, but they did not fly struck work either.

Hell, it will be tough to get better conditions for mainline. I just talked to a friend who is getting furloughed at DAL while RJ flying continues to explode. Force Majeure my ass!

I have a question for you. If DAL were to stop all RJ flying tomorrow, how many DAL pilots do you think would be recalled as a result? Do you think DAL would replace the RJs with a fleet of 737s carrying 50 pax each?

This leads me to another point. An "impartial", "independent" arbitrator ruled that Force Majeure allows DAL to continue to violate the contract/SCOPE clause--9 months(and counting) after the event causing the F/M. Don Carty wants to expedite the process of getting contract negotiations to an arbitrator. Would that be the same "impartial" arbitrator used in the DAL case?

Again an honest answer please. If the arbitrator had ruled against the Company, would you be putting the words impartial and independent in quotes? I'm against Carty's proposal because it would remove the right to strike. However, I wonder again if that procedure was in place and the arbitrator chose the pilot's proposal, would you think he was "impartial"?

We need to find a way to unite ALL professional pilots and thwart the assault underway by the ATA/RAA Union.TC

Yes we do. Start by recognizing that all airline pilots are professional pilots (that includes the regionals), then next move to create one seniority list by merging the current separate lists where ever a company owns more than one airline. Finally, stop all further subcontracting and phase out current subcontractors when their contracts expire. Are you prepared to do those things?

If you choose to reply, please don't tell me that the APA has already proposed a merged list because you haven't. What you have proposed is the confiscation of all Eagle jets to be then place at AA to be flown by AA pilots. If the DAL pilots proposed anything like that, the dispute we have now would go nuclear in a heartbeat.

[BenThere]

Well done, SURPLUS 1!

While I am a mainline major carrier pilot, I see the business model of the majors evolving toward ever greater reliance on their regional partners to carry ever greater proportions of the domestic load. I would much rather be bumped to an RJ in bad times than furloughed to the street. I also want to see us serve Fargo, as the RJs make feasible. This makes the industry grow to provide more jobs for more of us. Most importantly, I want pilots, who have paid their dues in life regardless of where they work just to get any airline job, to earn a decent, family supporting living. We in the majors will continue to be threatened by increasing efficiency and utilization of the RJs unless their success is made to become our success.

[Ignition Override]

AA717 Driver and Gang: knowing that impartiality is required of judges in our local, district, state, federal courts etc, including Georgia (Delta/COMAIR jurisdiction) and Texas (AA), and knowing the integrity required of those with such crucial legal responsibilies, is it possible that such wise individuals could have a strong anti-labor prejudice? I read something months ago about such allegations and was most shocked after considering the implications.

How could such well-respected decision makers be accused of having a strong personal bias? It was my impression that such people take an oath. Could the "word" of certain individuals mean nothing when personal prejudice takes over? If so, this is most disturbing.

In the early 90's "Aviation Week" reported that certain Department of Transportation Admin. judges ruled very favorably for Frank Lorenzo's 'Texas Air Corporation' or 'Jet Capital', and soon thereafter went to work for said private employers. Wasn't this just a coincidence? That is, the fact that the rulings were in favor of the corporation which was the airline 'golden child' in the honest eyes our government's Executive Branch, which felt that deregulation is always best?

Is it remotely possible that the (US) Air Transport Association and the Regional Airline Association, which have powerful lobbys and influence in our federal government, maneuvered with politicians to break the COMAIR strike by a combination of back-room dealing? Could Delta Airlines have "allegedly" received some sort of financial incentives form other parties? Did much extra money suddenly flow into anyone's Political Action Committee(s) because of this strike?

If any of these allegations could be proven, then just how could US regional pilots ever find an impartial jurisdiction for any future legal decisions?

[Ignition Override]

US regional pilots (workhorses of the airlines)-I wish everyone lots of luck, when considering that our entire industry has enormous financial resources set aside with no possible claim of impartiality, in order to shaft you all any way that they can. There must be tons of legal assistance standing by (in somebody's back pocket?), gavel in hand, with only a presumption of impartiality.

[AA717driver]

They're only human...

I/O--Need I say more? TC

[surplus1]

Originally posted by BenThere

Well done, SURPLUS 1!

While I am a mainline major carrier pilot, I see the business model of the majors evolving toward ever greater reliance on their regional partners to carry ever greater proportions of the domestic load. I would much rather be bumped to an RJ in bad times than furloughed to the street. I also want to see us serve Fargo, as the RJs make feasible. This makes the industry grow to provide more jobs for more of us. Most importantly, I want pilots, who have paid their dues in life regardless of where they work just to get any airline job, to earn a decent, family supporting living. We in the majors will continue to be threatened by increasing efficiency and utilization of the RJs unless their success is made to become our success.

BenThere,

Thanks and congrats to you. Apparently you've seen the "big picture". Unless we join hands and work together to make things better for all, management will make us the victims of our own folly.

The RJs are here and like it or not they aren't going to disappear. No union can really prevent management from operating a particular aircraft type. No pilot group that I can think of will ever allow another pilot group to simply put them out of work via a scope clause.

The only way we can avoid competitive wars between pilots for the same flying and not become victims of the "lowest bidder" plague is to join forces. Too many major airline pilots don't appear to see that and USALPA certainly doesn't.

[Roadtrip]

APA is trying to fix the problem that was created when regionals were scoped in to begin with. Acquiesing to the creation of regional companies was a huge mistake. Hindsight is 20/20.

Guess what AMR management's reaction is? That's right. "Forget it. We like hiring guys with 200 multi and are willing to sign contracts to fly for crap wages." Stop whinning about ALPA not coming to your rescue and start your own union.