Jetcareers - View Single Post - Colgan/Pinnacle Seniority List Merger Question

CAPIP1998 · August 1st, 2008, 15:19

Ok, so I've spent a decent amount of time the past couple days actually looking into the pertinent case history with the NMB. What I've found is quite interesting.

First, IF Pinnacle and Colgan are determined to be a "Single Transportation System", then the PNCL ALPA certificate would be extended to include all CJC pilots. This appears that it would occur regardless whether we have the Teamster's or not. If we are represented by the Teamsters on the date of the official merger, our Teamster certification would be nullified instantly and we would instantly become ALPA represented. If we were ALPA on the date of the merger, then we would follow the ALPA rules for merger.

However, there is a BIG caveat here, and that is PNCL and CJC MUST bet determined to be a "Single Transportation System". Some of the conditions the NMB looks at to determine this are:

-Whether the two systems are held out to be a single operating system
-Whether there is substantial intergration of operations
-Whether there is common marketing, markings, insignia, scheduling, logistics, and reservations
-Whether there is common control, common officers, and centralized labor relations and personnel functions

Clearly the judgement would be up to the NMB, but it appears to me that PNCL and CJC are not a single transportation system since we share almost nothing between our two operations. In fact, the only argument that I can see to be made for a single system is the common control from Pinnacle Holdings, and that our paychecks say Pinnacle on them.

If the NMB were to determine that we are NOT a single system then there would be no reason for a merger of the lists unless Pinnacle decided to do so on their own. If we start to integrate our operations then it would be prudent for us to be represented by ALPA for the list integration. However, while we are seperate operations it seems that our choice of union shouldn't hinge on the issue of seniority list integration.

P.s. I referenced NMB cases R-6701, and R-6515. As well as a few other cases that those cases cited.

August 1st, 2008, 15:19	#19
CAPIP1998 Junior Member Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: New York Posts: 60	Re: Colgan/Pinnacle Seniority List Merger Question Ok, so I've spent a decent amount of time the past couple days actually looking into the pertinent case history with the NMB. What I've found is quite interesting. First, IF Pinnacle and Colgan are determined to be a "Single Transportation System", then the PNCL ALPA certificate would be extended to include all CJC pilots. This appears that it would occur regardless whether we have the Teamster's or not. If we are represented by the Teamsters on the date of the official merger, our Teamster certification would be nullified instantly and we would instantly become ALPA represented. If we were ALPA on the date of the merger, then we would follow the ALPA rules for merger. However, there is a BIG caveat here, and that is PNCL and CJC MUST bet determined to be a "Single Transportation System". Some of the conditions the NMB looks at to determine this are: -Whether the two systems are held out to be a single operating system -Whether there is substantial intergration of operations -Whether there is common marketing, markings, insignia, scheduling, logistics, and reservations -Whether there is common control, common officers, and centralized labor relations and personnel functions Clearly the judgement would be up to the NMB, but it appears to me that PNCL and CJC are not a single transportation system since we share almost nothing between our two operations. In fact, the only argument that I can see to be made for a single system is the common control from Pinnacle Holdings, and that our paychecks say Pinnacle on them. If the NMB were to determine that we are NOT a single system then there would be no reason for a merger of the lists unless Pinnacle decided to do so on their own. If we start to integrate our operations then it would be prudent for us to be represented by ALPA for the list integration. However, while we are seperate operations it seems that our choice of union shouldn't hinge on the issue of seniority list integration. P.s. I referenced NMB cases R-6701, and R-6515. As well as a few other cases that those cases cited.