PBS Arbitration Decision
Allegiant Pilots:
Last week, we received a decision in the PBS II Arbitration. The System Board ruled in the company’s favor, with the union’s board member dissenting. The decision is attached: “Decision (PBS II)” along with the referenced district court decision (District Ct.), 9th Circuit decision (9th Circuit), and the original award (Bloch).
We want to review the history to ensure you have the proper context of this decision and its effect on the next CBA.
Introduction
The words “Must Work Days” (“MWD”) are not in the collective bargaining agreement (“CBA”) with Allegiant Air, LLC (“Allegiant” or “Company”). MWDs have been described by the Company as when the number of Pilots available to cover assignments at a base on a particular day or days, is equal to or less than, the number of assignments to be covered. This was not a negotiated or defined term and currently is not in the collective bargaining agreement.
Once the CBA was finalized in 2016 and efforts to negotiate a new scheduling system had been unsuccessful, the Union began filing Preferential Bidding System (“PBS”) grievances alleging that the way the Company was using MWDs in the CBI software scheduling system violated the terms of the CBA by not creating initial Bid Award Lines in accordance with Seniority and preferences as required by Section 15 of the CBA.
PBS I Arbitration
In 2019, over five (5) days of arbitration, the initial ninety (90) PBS grievances filed by the Union were presented to a System Board of Adjustment (“Board”) for decision. In June 2020, the Board issued its Decision and Award (“PBS I Decision”), and stated as follows:
“The Union’s burden, in this case, is to prove (1) that the labor agreement requires preferences to be awarded in seniority order and (2) that the Company’s practice of solving first for MWDs, in the assignment of those preferences, violates the bargained terms of the agreement. We find that burden to have been sustained. The premise here proposed by management – that bidding will be based on seniority, with listed preferences considered sequentially in all cases except MWDs – has not been supported by the evidence.” (PBS I Decision p. 25)
“Seniority must be observed in solving for Must Work Days. In that process, expressed bid preferences must be awarded, seniority permitting, in sequential order. The Company is ordered to cease and desist from practices that interfere with those requirements.” (PBS I Decision. 31)
Effect of PBS Board Ruling
It is critical to understand that the PBS I Decision did not require the Company to stop issuing MWDs in its scheduling system. The Decision requires that if the Company uses MWDs, it must do so honoring Seniority and preferences as stated in the Decision. Additionally, although the award memorialized MWDs on behalf of the Company, it did not specifically define the meaning of the term or any parameters associated with it for the Pilots.
Company Actions after the PBS I Decision and PBS II
In July 2020, the Company unilaterally modified the CBI software scheduling system to not consider Composite Lines in determining when an MWD exists and to automatically reject all Pilot Day Off requests on any of the MWDs. The Company acknowledged this created more MWDs and had a more negative impact on the more senior Pilots. Notwithstanding these facts and the changes to the system, the Company argued at arbitration that these changes complied with the PBS I Decision because they were done in sequential order.
Download View PBS I
Download View PBS II
High/Low Bid Lines
In November 2021, the company again modified the CBI scheduling system for the December bid period without notifying the Union. The company stopped setting low, high, and medium Bid Lines and instead set a specific number of required High Bid Lines. This change caused senior pilots to be involuntarily bumped to Reserve or Composite Lines, resulting in less pay.
This new group of PBS (High/Low) grievances have also been arbitrated before a System Board of Adjustment for decision. The System Board ruled that since the Company has always set the monthly bid range, line credit window, and number of high, medium, and low Bid lines, the November 2021 changes by the Company are not in violation of the CBA and are allowed under the CBA Management Rights clause (Section 1.J).
Impact of PBS II Decision and Negotiations
It is important that none of the PBS cases, including the original PBS I Decision, require the Company to get rid of or stop using MWDs in their scheduling system. However, as the PBS I Decision holds, they must do so in compliance with the CBA and honor Pilot Seniority and preferences.
The overall impact of these decisions will not change how we will approach scheduling negotiations. It’s essential to understand that the promised win by the past Executive Board would have put us in no different position than we are today; the extensive rhetoric and weight they placed on this arbitration’s outcome were unfounded.
We are planning to hold a Zoom Webinar this coming Tuesday, June 4, to answer any questions and field any comments you have. Look for that invite in your email tomorrow.
Download/View Decision (PBS II)
Download/View District Ct.
Download/View 9th Circuit
Download/View Bloch
Fraternally,
Greg Unterseher
Temporary Trustee