SKYW ALPA OC and SAPA

[DV8Pilot]

As far as I am concerned the ALPA OC at SKYW has shot them selves in the foot. With the latest lawsuit and temporary injunction put in place by the court, many SKYW pilots are upset with how they are playing the game.

It would seem to make more sense, if they truly are interested in representing the pilots, to leave the current system of representation well enough alone until they are named as the representative body for our pilot group. It doesn't seem smart from that standpoint to try and dissolve SAPA (even if it is just the student government) with out ensuring that ALPA will represent the pilots. Kinda like if I can't play, then no one can play. Just a bit .


DV8

[DV8Pilot]

More than a handful of pilots have made the comment that they "want their card back" after what has happened (I know where I stand), but the outcome that concerns me is this: SAPA is dissolved, the ALPA vote happens, less than 51% of the pilots vote yes (or even vote at all), and we are left with????

DV8

[aloft]

"Current system of representation"? SAPA? You're joking, right?

Having seen the OC's lawsuit, nowhere in it do they seek dissolution of SAPA; rather, they seek the same access to the pilot group that SAPA has enjoyed over the past year--access that so far, SKYW management has actively denied them, which is illegal. The lawsuit simply asks that SKYW's management be required to obey the law.

[DV8Pilot]

fine... how about the line of communication, instead of representation.

it still provides us a venue to get some things corrected (PIC's)

DV8

[Doug Taylor]

Of course this is third hand information, but didn't the head cheese at SAPA just testify on behalf of ALPA against the company?

Labor laws are labor laws bro, no matter how sacred the lamb.

[aloft]

Sure, things that the company is willing to correct out of the goodness of their hearts....but don't confuse that with any sort of negotiating muscle, because SAPA is a toothless 98-lb weakling in that regard.

[DV8Pilot]

For the sake of civil conversation... how would you see that changing if SAPA was certified?

What would be the difference between an independent representation group, and a national representation group?

These are the questions that I'm mulling over when I contemplate my choices. I do feel that true representation is needed for our pilot group, but the hostility of ALPA sure isn't winning over the "hearts and minds" of many of the pilots that I fly with.

DV8

[Velocipede]

Remember in representation elections, one of the options is "no representation." I've seen one Union get decertified while trying to change to another one. Better count those votes!

[bike21]

The lawsuit's purpose is not to disband SAPA. The 'spin team' of three very outspoken members on the Executive Board (EB) have done a good job at 'educating' the pilot group to this 'fact'. Their easy going 105 hours of credit a month are at risk - and they don't want to lose that!

The true fact is this: management has the EB of SAPA right where they want them. At the end of their puppet strings! The past few years of getting us next to nothing and winning a few very small 'battles' mean next to nothing. 1.2% and nothing for the Brasilia folk? Sad. No new QOL improvements and a small proposal to reimburse for cell phone usage? Sad.

The injunction merely states that SAPA needs to be funded properly [legally] and not be in under so much management control. Anyone line pilot who believes the 'big three' are not virtually under control by management is drinking too much kool-aid.

The EB recall will move forward, and we will hopefully get some new blood in these positions who will really fight for the average line pilot. ALPA or not, us line pilots need to fund our own representation and ensure objectivity of those who are supposedly representing our best interests.

[GaTechKid]

Technically ALPA is seeking to cut off funding for SAPA, not their dissolution. The end result is the same. Besides, SAPA as it stands today is illegal.

[Doug Taylor]

Having been thru a union drive at another carrier, this is what I can't understand.

If the individual pilots do not want representation, don't vote in a union. But what the company is doing, sadly with the help of people who really don't understand labor law, is illegal.

It's a democratic process.

If you really hate Barack Obama, don't "figuratively" flatten his tires, fire his campaign director whose moonlighting at your sandwich shop and hack his computer -- don't vote for him.

It's that simple.

But threatening organizers, firings and other intimidation tactics aren't legal. And I'm sorry to say but it's a huge slap in the face to a lot of professional pilots.

Can't really talk crap about the evils of unions while riding on an OAL jumpseat or trustingly adjusting the prop controls on a Brasilia or after a night of compensatory rest.

[Ophir]

Originally Posted by GaTechKid

Technically ALPA is seeking to cut off funding for SAPA, not their dissolution. The end result is the same. Besides, SAPA as it stands today is illegal.

This is technically correct. The facts are this though: SAPA is a pilot representation group funded by the company. This is illegal under the RLA. I am surprised this wasn't brought to light earlier. The injunction seeks to end the current form of SAPA because of its illegal nature. It, in no way, seeks to ban any group from representing the pilots at SKYW, not SAPA nor ALPA. It purely seeks to end the illegal structure that is based on a conflict of interests (SAPA paid by the company) and wants access to the pilots. The current SAPA agreements gives is soley access. This too is illegal.

The fact is that we can elect another SAPA whose bylaws seperate it from the company. If the company wants to continue to fund SAPA it cannot be the sole representing voice for the pilots. So, if we want an unbiased opinion and representation we need to pay for it, as a pilot group.

[mrivc211]

I'd love to talk right now, but being a member of the organizing committee, I'm bound to a confidentiality agreement. There's A LOT of stuff the company did wrong in court, and has been called to the carpet for it. They finally being held accountable. You can't play student council in court.

One thing that is public knowledge is the fact that the secretary of SAPA texted the president that there was to be a meeting in SGU with flight ops. It just so happend that the meeting was to take place the same day as the court hearing. It just happend that mgmt asked the secretary and other exec members who were mgmt supporters, to testify in court for them.

Now ask yourself this, why would the secretary, text the president, and ask him to go to Utah, the same day he was supposed to testify in court on behalf of mgmt, in SFO? And at that, tell a federal judge that He, the secretary is the head of SAPA. Under oath I might ad. It's because the president is pro alpa and the rest are not.

You guys wanna read some court transcripts? You wanna see these SAPA chumps trembling at their knees?

[mrivc211]

do ya? do ya? do yah?

[mrivc211]

ok fine.

[mrivc211]

How do you sit at home and be payed for a job your not even eligible for







104 hours is average pay:


2 Q. And in 1999 you determined that 104 hours was a reasonable



3 amount of pay because that, you believed, was what you had been



4 paid at that time?



5 A. Yeah. We had checked the records for the past six months.



6 Q. The average now is more in the neighborhood of 87 hours a



7 month, isn't it?



8 A. That varies. I don't know what the average is. It varies



9 from domicile to domicile.



10 Q. But it's safe to say that 104 hours is significantly more



11 than most line pilots earn in a month, isn't it?



12 A. Not for a senior pilot, no.



Are you considered management?

12 Airlines. Are you considered to be a member of management?


13 A. I'm not.



14 Q. Are you aware that you are shown as a member of management



15 in some documents that SkyWest Airlines provides?



16 A. I believe I am aware of that, yes.



And the bombshell:







1 CROSS EXAMINATION



2 BY MS. GINSBURG:



3 Q. Mr. Eisenstat, I'm Elizabeth Ginsburg, Counsel for



4 plaintiff.



5 Mr. Eisenstat, you were elected to this position



6 eight years ago at SAPA; is that correct?



7 A. The current position of secretary, yes.



8 Q. Position of secretary. Before that did you hold other



9 positions at SAPA?



10 A. I didn't. I was a representative.



11 Q. And you became a full-time representative when you were



12 elected secretary?



13 A. Shortly thereafter.



14 Q. You haven't flown the line for some time; is that correct?



15 A. Not as a -- no, I haven't.



16 Q. When is the last time you flew the line?



17 A. When is the last time I flew an airplane?



18 Q. No, my question is, when did you last fly -- fly the line



19 for the company on a regular flight?



20 A. A full paying line, about eight years ago.



21 Q. So you have not maintained currency?



22 A. I did to a point.



23 Q. To what point?



24 A. That would be hard to determine. I think in the last four



25 years is when I stopped maintaining currency.



EISENSTAT - CROSS EXAMINATION / GINSBURG 70





1 Q. So you haven't flown the line for four years at all; is



2 that correct?



3 A. No, I haven't flown an aircraft for about two years now.



4 The line flying is -- I flew passengers, that would be



5 considered line flying.



6 Q. That's what I'm asking you.



7 A. It was about a year and a half, two years ago.



8 Q. Two years ago you flew passengers?



9 A. Yes.



10 Q. And were you current at that time?



11 A. I was, uh-huh.



12 Q. I believe your testimony a moment ago was that you had not



13 maintained currency for the last four years?



14 A. There are periods of types of currency that you can go out



15 of currency and get recurrent with a simulator ride or



16 something of that nature.



17 Q. So you have been taking the simulator rides to maintain



18 your takeoffs and landings?



19 A. Yes, up until about a year ago.



20 Q. What happened a year ago?



21 A. I just got too busy. We have to have -- we just got too



22 busy. We couldn't keep up with it.



23 Q. So at this time you are not qualified to fly the line; is



24 that correct?



25 A. I am not.





EISENSTAT - CROSS EXAMINATION / GINSBURG 71





1 Q. Do you hold a medical certificate?



2 A. Not currently.



3 Q. How long have you been without a medical certificate?



4 A. Three -- two months.



5 Q. A medical certificate is required to do any flying in



6 revenue flight; isn't that correct?



7 A. Absolutely.



8 Q. So you are not medically qualified -- you are not



9 qualified to serve as a pilot for SkyWest Airlines, correct?



10 A. Not currently.



11 Q. You're familiar with the bylaws of this -- of SAPA?



12 A. I am.



13 Q. And you're familiar with the membership requirements for



14 membership at SAPA?



15 A. Yes.



16 Q. I'd ask you not to look at the exhibit for a moment until



17 I am done with my questions.



18 Membership requires that you are currently employed



19 as a line pilot but not full-time management; isn't that right?



20 A. I believe that's correct.



21 Q. And the officers must meet those requirements as well as



22 the members?



23 A. I would think so, yes.



24 Q. Okay. In order to be a line pilot, you have to be



25 qualified to fly the line, don't you?



EISENSTAT - CROSS EXAMINATION / GINSBURG 72





1 A. Yes.



2 Q. What happens to a line pilot at SkyWest Airlines when he



3 is not medically qualified to fly?



4 A. He goes offline.



5 Q. When you say "offline," is he on a pay status?



6 A. No, unless the company puts him in a different position.



7 Q. So he could be paid in a position such as SAPA



8 representative or customer service representative but not as an



9 airline pilot?



10 A. No, he can't be a SAPA representative because he would



11 have to be elected to that position. He could audit flights,



12 for instance. He could do work down at St. George or a hangar,



13 something of that nature.



14 Q. So that would be a nonpilot position?



15 A. Yeah.



16 Q. He would could be a SAPA representative if, in fact, he



17 were elected to that position?



18 A. Yes.



19 Q. And your testimony is that you are qualified to serve as



20 an officer because you are an elected -- because you were



21 elected to that position, correct?



22 A. Yes.





23 Q. Could you be elected to that position today, assuming that



24 you had the votes, of course?



25 A. Yes.



EISENSTAT - CROSS EXAMINATION / GINSBURG 73





1 Q. Do you consider yourself eligible under the bylaws to



2 serve as an officer of SAPA?



3 A. I do.



4 Q. And yet you're not qualified to fly the line?



5 A. Yes.



6 Q. So you are not -- you do not meet the membership



7 requirements specified in the bylaws, correct?



8 A. Apparently not.

Top

[KLB]

Eeeek!

[Doug Taylor]

Originally Posted by mrivc211

do ya? do ya? do yah?

Yeah maing! Such a tease...

[surreal1221]

Owned anyone?



OWNED!!!!1111

[mrivc211]

Originally Posted by surreal1221

Owned anyone?



OWNED!!!!1111

I think it's time the propaganda machine that mgmt puts out to the general public come to an end. Historically, the pilots had no way of formal communication with the public, thus what mgmt said is what they heard. Our names have been slung in the mud enough. It's time the truth came out for all pilots.

Thankfully, jetcareers has been a form of communication from the skywest pilot group to the rest of the aviation community.

[Bumblebee]

Thanks Omar for posting the transcript. I'm curious as to the rest of the contents.
I for one appreciate all of your work and efforts.