ALPA’s deliberate abandonment of the TWA pilots

---

This page is to educate pilots regarding ALPA’s abandonment of its own pilots at TWA and the ensuing loss of a law suit brought by the TWA pilots against ALPA. It further covers ALPA’s failure to pay the pilots what they were awarded through the court.

Brady V. ALPA, public record. Civil Case #02-2917 was filed in NJ District Court in 2002 by the roughly 2,000 pilots formerly employed by TWA at the time. Plaintiffs alleged the Air Line Pilots Association had breached its Duty of Fair Representationunder the Railway Labor Act to those pilots during the TWA, Inc.-American Airlines merger that was finalized on 10APR 2001.

ALPA, as the representative of the TWA pilots and TWA, Inc.were bound by a 1998 collective bargaining agreement which among other provisions required “the fair and equitable seniority integration of employees in the event of a merger or acquisition of TWA.” ALPA was the exclusive collective bargaining agent for all TWA pilots until 03APR, 2002. 

In OCT 2000, six months before TWA and American began negotiating their merger, ALPA had adopted a national policy to recruit independent pilot unions to come into its fold, including, but not limited to the American Airlines pilots represented by the Allied Pilots Association. 

In JAN 2001, the TWA Merger Committee expressed concern with ALPA’s conflict of interest regarding actively recruiting the American pilots. ALPA officials assured the TWA Merger Committee that its’ efforts had ceased. However, this assurance was belied by the undisputed evidence that ALPA’s general manager had wrote to APA’s president, on 25JAN 2001, to offer ALPA’s assistance in financing a push in support of the campaign to re-unify the two unions. Duane Woerth, then the ALPA President, gave a speech to the APA BOD literally three days after TWA-MEC waived its scope provisions without informing the TWA-MEC of this appearance.

In MAY 2001, a month after the merger was official and before seniority integration was complete, two American Airlines pilotsorganized a campaign to reunite APA and ALPA. They sent authorization cards to American pilots to request a vote on re-unification with ALPA. They also were in contact with the New Members Liaison for ALPA, on a regular basis throughout the winter of 2001, and well into the next year of 2002.

The correspondence between the two American pilots and those at ALPA covered a range of topics: the TWA-American  

Airlines merger, the authorization cards sent to APA members, and reimbursement for the two American pilots’ costs. Plaintiffs alleged  ALPA misrepresented its position to them and misled theTWA Merger Committee by concealing these relationships with APA members.

The gravamen of the former TWA Pilots’ complaint was that ALPA’s underlying conflict of interest in trying to merge unions with the American pilots led to not informing the TWA-MEC of material facts including its involvement in an organizing campaign to bring American pilots into ALPA’s representation.Finally, Plaintiffs contended ALPA intentionally sabotaged the efforts of the TWA pilots to protect and preserve their seniority integration rights so that ALPA could obtain representation rights to American’s over 11, 000 pilots at the time and the millions of dollars in dues they paid, so much so that ALPA breached its duty of fair representation under the RLA.

The proceedings in the Court were bifurcated into liability and damages phases in May 2005. Following extensive discovery, motion practice, and a six-week trial on liability in July 2011which included the ALPA President Testifying, a unanimous jury found that ALPA “violate[d] its duty of fair representation to the TWA Pilots” and that this breach “directly caused injury to some of the TWA Pilots.” ALPA subsequently filed a series of post-trial motions seeking to set aside the liability jury’s verdict and to decertify the class. The Court denied these motions. 

But it gets worse! ALPA recognized that Plaintiffs prevailed in the liability trial and might prevail in a damages trial. When the Plaintiff’s, the former TWA pilots, tried to collect rightfuldamages, they were prevented from doing so, because ALPA had established “Kitty Hawk” in 1991, a Bermuda‐based captive insurance company that is a wholly owned subsidiary of ALPA. Beginning in 1999, Kitty Hawk expanded to duty of fair representation (DFR) insurance. Because of this the former TWA pilots faced a protracted and expensive legal battle against the union they founded, but now after 75 years of paying dues as the second and third oldest ALPA LEC’s in the world—thedamages money they were owed was found to be offshored by ALPA and therefore inaccessible. 

Recognizing the risks if the Action went forward, the parties decided to enter into a Settlement Agreement to avoid the expense and uncertainties of protracted litigation. A Settlement Fund of Fifty-Three Million United Dollars was paid by ALPA, Kitty Hawk, and Reinsurers, a fraction of the damages owed.The TWA pilots still on our list were never made whole. 

To add insult to a career-long injury, in the event of a future re-unification with ALPA, the wronged former TWA pilots would likely have to pay back-dues to regain good standing with the union that a court of law found violated their duty as a union to those same pilots.

In case you are thinking this is ancient history, and why is it relevant now-- 

There are approximately 750 Former TWA pilotscurrently on the AA seniority list still suffering the irreparable damages of ALPA’s Duty of Fair Representation breach. That’s more pilots than some domiciles.