Profile of the American Airlines' Pilot Sickout

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Profile of the American Airlines' Pilot Sickout Profile of the American Pilots' Sickout Airlines’ Pilot Sickout Last February, pilots at American Airlines conducted a 10-day sickout that centered on when American Airlines would integrate the operations of Reno Air, a regional low-fare carrier it purchased in December 1998 to shore up its West Coast presence. After 8 months of negotia- tions the carrier officially integrated Reno Air operations. ast February, American Air- Background MICHAEL H. CIMINI lines and the Allied Pilots As- At the time of the dispute over the in- Lsociation (APA) were involved tegration of Reno Air, there was al- in a labor dispute that spawned a 10- ready discord between American Air- day sickout and led to the cancellation lines and the Allied Pilots because of of some 6,600 flights that cost the car- problems that had been brewing for rier an estimated $200 million.1 The several years. In the mid-1980s, dispute revolved around when Ameri- American Airlines unilaterally im- can would integrate 300 Reno Air pi- posed a two-tiered wage system on pi- lots into its pay and seniority ranks, lots. In addition, following the inte- following the merger of the two carri- gration of AirCal in 1987, some ers. Worried that American Airlines AirCal pilots stayed for several years would transfer its routes to Reno’s at lower wage rates than their coun- lower-paid pilots, the Allied Pilots terparts at American Airlines.2 In the proposed that the integration be ret- early 1990s, the carrier closed hubs in roactive to December 23, 1998, when San Jose and Raleigh-Durham, and American took control of Reno Air. pulled out of West Coast service. As a American Airlines told the union that result, American Airlines made joint it intended to operate Reno Air sepa- marketing agreements with low-cost rately for a transition period—12 to carriers, such as Reno Air, that gave 18 months—to give it time to retrain them access to American’s gates. Reno Air’s pilots, refurbish its air- American pilots saw this as an attempt craft, and consolidate airport facilities. to subcontract their jobs. During this After 9 months of fruitless negotia- time, American furloughed 610 pilots, tions, American Airlines officially in- some for as long as 3 years.3 Michael H. Cimini is an economist in the tegrated Reno Air’s operation on Au- At the same time, Reno Air enjoyed Division of Compensation Data Analysis gust 31, 1999, effectively ending a close business relationship with and Planning, Bureau of Labor Statistics. Telephone: (202) 691-6275 another chapter in the parties’ bar- American Airlines, which even al- E-mail: [email protected] gaining history. lowed Reno Air’s passengers to earn Compensation and Working Conditions Winter 1999 21 American frequent-flier miles. As the Issues in dispute different wage scales for the same work. furlough list grew, so did the Allied The 1999 dispute revolved around the The merger would bring sizable Pilots’ resentment over the close rela- Allied Pilots’ contention that Ameri- wage increases for the Reno pilots and tionship between the two carriers, es- can Airlines was violating their 1997- new advancement opportunities for pecially since Reno Air had taken over 2001 collective bargaining agree- American Airlines’ first officers. The former American Airlines’ routes.4 ment’s scope clause by continuing to APA proposed that American Airlines Coupled with years of mistrust, this operate Reno Air as a separate air car- pay all pilots as if their promotions resentment surfaced in 1997, when the rier, even though it had purchased a were retroactive to December 23, pilots struck America Airlines briefly majority of Reno Air’s stock and had 1998. However, the company was only before being sent back to work under placed four of its senior-level officers willing to phase in the wage boost over an executive order. The subsequent on Reno Air’s board of directors. The a 12- to 18-month integration period. 1997-2001 contract agreement further APA feared that American Airlines The union also requested that the car- angered many pilots, who were already would operate Reno Air as a separate rier compensate the pilots furloughed frustrated by the president’s decision carrier. This would allow American in the early 1990s, whom the union to end the 1997 strike.5 to expand its Reno Air operations; alleged were laid off because of thus, work would be lost to the Reno American’s decision to pull out of vari- Parties to the dispute Air pilots who would not be covered ous West Coast markets and to subsi- American Airlines. American Air- under the terms of the American-APA dize Reno Air through market ar- lines, a unit of ARM Corp., is the collective bargaining agreement. rangements and other support. Nation’s second largest airline, with The union cited its scope clause as Throughout this dispute, APA insisted scheduled service to 161 cities, mostly governing the dispute: “All flying per- that these pilots’ interests be addressed throughout North America, the Car- formed by or on behalf of the company in the negotiations. ibbean, Latin America, Europe, and or an Affiliate shall be performed by American rejected these two pro- the Pacific. Coupled with its regional pilots on the American Airlines Pilots posals, saying that it would cost an affiliate, American Eagle, the carrier Seniority List in accordance with the additional $40-$50 million and wipe serves 233 cities, with a workforce of terms and conditions of the Agree- out significant benefits brought about 8 109,000 and a fleet of 892 aircraft. ment.” According to the union, the by the merger. The carrier claimed American Airlines carries some scope clause meant that the flying per- that its integration proposal was more 225,000 passengers each day, and has formed by the Reno Air pilots for generous than those in past airline 2,200 daily departures. Its major hubs American Airlines since December 23, mergers. It noted that it had made it are located at Dallas-Fort Worth, Chi- 1998, should have been assigned to clear to the union that it would not cago, Miami, New York, and San American Airline pilots, and that all operate Reno Air as a separate carrier, Juan.6 pilots’ work was to be performed ac- and that it would pay Reno Air pilots cording to the American Airline–APA American Airline pilots’ wages as contract. The union said that it noti- soon as the integration was complete. Allied Pilots Association. The APA fied the carrier in October of 1998 that In addition, American Airlines said it is an independent union representing it needed to obtain an exemption (a offered to significantly boost Reno Air American Airlines’ 9,500 pilots, who “bridge agreement”) to temporarily pilots’ wages during the integration fly as captains and first and second operate Reno Air.7 period. officers. The union was founded in The APA wanted to protect its Also at issue was the integration of 1963, and was recognized for collec- members’ job security and pay. Reno the seniority list, which directly or in- tive bargaining purposes by American Air pilots were paid half of the directly affects many aspects of the Airlines in July of that year. The APA $140,000 average salary earned by pilots’ pay and working conditions. is headquartered in Fort Worth, Texas. their American Airlines counterparts. The APA wanted the Reno pilots to be The union feared that American would placed at the bottom of the seniority Reno Air. Reno Air, a scheduled, low- use these lower paid pilots in place of list, instead of placing them accord- fare airline, began operations in July their higher-paid members. The APA ing to their years of service. This 1992. The carrier employed 2,100 insisted that all American pilots, in- would protect the American pilots, but people and had a fleet of 25 aircraft. cluding the former Reno Air pilots, put the Reno pilots, who were not cov- It operated 182 daily flights to 13 cit- should receive the pay rates set under ered under the APA collective bargain- ies from three major hubs—Reno-Lake the Allied Pilots’ contract. The union ing agreement, at a considerable dis- Tahoe, San Jose, and Las Vegas. The had vigorously opposed two-tiered advantage. carrier, which had little overlap in wage systems in the past, and cited its routes flown by American Airlines, current agreement—negotiated after Negotiations and court maintained a marketing agreement the 1997 strike—that had contract lan- proceedings with American from 1993 until 1998. guage calling for the elimination of American Airlines’ and the APA ne- 22 Compensation and Working Conditions Winter 1999 gotiators opened contract talks in mental concerns, there was no reason low the union to use self-help, up to Pilots' Sickout January 1999. After negotiators for the job action to continue. With and including a strike. The union cited reached an impasse in early February that, the union canceled the negotia- a 1969 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that 1999, the APA urged its members to tion sessions that were to be held that it claimed applied to the Reno Air dis- consider whether the emotional or day. pute: physical stress from the dispute would On February 10, U.S. District Judge …it could hardly be expected affect their ability to fly safely. The Joseph Kendall found that the under- that a union would sit idly by as union’s president, Richard LaVoy, told lying labor dispute was a so-called the…(carrier) rushed to accomplish his members shortly after the sickout “minor dispute” and, thus, the job ac- the very result the union was seek- began, “We simply cannot allow any- tion was “inappropriate and has to ing to prohibit by agreement.
Recommended publications
  • Extraterritoriality” -- Useful Guidepost Or Convenient Buzzword Used to Avoid Meaningful Analysis?
    Cv039 Determining What Rules Apply When the Union-Employer Relationship Extends Beyond the United States: “Extraterritoriality” -- Useful Guidepost or Convenient Buzzword Used to Avoid Meaningful Analysis? by Stephen B. Moldof (Cohen, Weiss & Simon LLP, New York, New York) Globalization necessarily impacts the employer-employee relationship. As U.S. and foreign companies forge or deepen their relationships, and as they redistribute their services and work across borders, it no longer is sufficient to look to a single nation’s domestic laws, practices and cultures to determine the rules that will attach to the employment relationship or to the relative rights and obligations of employers and unions. Instead, a host of complex issues are presented in deciding which laws and rules will govern, how disagreements regarding coverage will be resolved, and, more broadly, how interested parties will be able to enforce their alleged rights. In the airline industry, expanded globalization is reflected in, among other things, the following: The forging of relationships or “alliances,” including more deep-routed “joint ventures,” through which U.S.-certificated carriers and foreign carriers have coordinated frequent flyer programs; airport lounges; marketing of flights; pricing; scheduling; revenues and/or maintenance. Code-sharing of international flights that permit a single flight to be marketed as if it was the flight of several different carriers of different nations. Acquisition by carriers of ownership interests in carriers headquartered in other nations.1 As a result of these and other globalization developments, it is increasingly difficult to classify flight operations or activities as “belonging” to individual nations. This blurring of the significance of national boundaries predictably injects a whole host of complex issues that one does not encounter in dealing with domestic disputes.
    [Show full text]
  • Community Outreach
    Truckee Tahoe Airport District COMMUNITY OUTREACH Neighborhood Meetings October 2016 Draft Acknowledgements We wish to thank our supportive community who provided their insight and thoughtful feedback. TRUCKEE TAHOE AIRPORT DISTRICT BOARD AIRPORT COMMUNITY ADVISORY TEAM Lisa Wallace, President Kathryn Rohlf, Community Member/Chair James W. Morrison, Vice President Joe Polverari, Pilot Member/Vice Chair Mary Hetherington Christopher Gage, Pilot Member John B. Jones, Jr. Leigh Golden, Pilot Member J. Thomas Van Berkem Kent Hoopingarner, Community Member/Treasurer Lisa Krueger, Community Member AIRPORT STAFF Kevin Smith, General Manager BRIDGENET INTERNATIONAL Hardy Bullock, Director of Aviation Cindy Gibbs, Airspace Study Project Manager and Community Services Marc R. Lamb, Aviation and FRESHTRACKS COMMUNICATIONS Community Services Manager Seana Doherty, Owner/Founder Michael Cooke, Aviation and Phebe Bell, Facilitator Community Services Manager Amanda Wiebush, Associate Jill McClendon, Aviation and Community Greyson Howard,Mead &Associate Hunt, Inc. M & H Architecture, Inc. Services Program Coordinator 133 Aviation Boulevard, Suite 100 Lauren C. Tapia, District Clerk MEAD & HUNT,Santa INC. Rosa, California 95403 Mitchell Hooper,707-526-5010 West Coast Aviation meadhunt.com Planning Manager Brad Musinski, Aviation Planner Maranda Thompson, Aviation Planner TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION AND PROGRAM DESIGN .............................................. 1 2 NEIGHBORHOOD FEEDBACK ..................................................................... 5 APPENDICES A. Meeting Materials B. Public Comments C. Advertising and Marketing Efforts Introduction and ProgramMead & Hunt, Inc. Design M & H Architecture, Inc. 133 Aviation Boulevard, Suite 100 Santa Rosa, California 95403 707-526-5010 meadhunt.com INTRODUCTION Purpose The Truckee Tahoe Airport District (TTAD) understands that community input is incredibly valuable in developing good policies and making sound decisions about Truckee Tahoe Airport (TRK).
    [Show full text]
  • United States Court of Appeals for the DISTRICT of COLUMBIA CIRCUIT
    USCA Case #11-1018 Document #1351383 Filed: 01/06/2012 Page 1 of 12 United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT Argued November 8, 2011 Decided January 6, 2012 No. 11-1018 REPUBLIC AIRLINE INC., PETITIONER v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, RESPONDENT On Petition for Review of an Order of the Department of Transportation Christopher T. Handman argued the cause for the petitioner. Robert E. Cohn, Patrick R. Rizzi and Dominic F. Perella were on brief. Timothy H. Goodman, Senior Trial Attorney, United States Department of Transportation, argued the cause for the respondent. Robert B. Nicholson and Finnuala K. Tessier, Attorneys, United States Department of Justice, Paul M. Geier, Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, and Peter J. Plocki, Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Litigation, were on brief. Joy Park, Trial Attorney, United States Department of Transportation, entered an appearance. USCA Case #11-1018 Document #1351383 Filed: 01/06/2012 Page 2 of 12 2 Before: HENDERSON, Circuit Judge, and WILLIAMS and RANDOLPH, Senior Circuit Judges. Opinion for the Court filed by Circuit Judge HENDERSON. KAREN LECRAFT HENDERSON, Circuit Judge: Republic Airline Inc. (Republic) challenges an order of the Department of Transportation (DOT) withdrawing two Republic “slot exemptions” at Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport (Reagan National) and reallocating those exemptions to Sun Country Airlines (Sun Country). In both an informal letter to Republic dated November 25, 2009 and its final order, DOT held that Republic’s parent company, Republic Airways Holdings, Inc. (Republic Holdings), engaged in an impermissible slot-exemption transfer with Midwest Airlines, Inc. (Midwest).
    [Show full text]
  • Agreement Between Air Canada and the Air Canada Pilots Association As Follows
    AGREEMENT BETWEEN AIR CANADA AND THE AIR CANADA PILOTS ASSOCIATION Effective September 30, 2017 – September 29, 2020 13230 (06) Amendments Amendment Date Articles Amended ORIGINAL July 30, 2012 - 1 December 5, 2012 Article 20, LOU 74 & LOU 75 2 September 30, 2014 Articles 1-3, 5, 7, 10-14, 16- 21 & 23-32 LOUs 72, 74, 75 & 78-83 LOCs 56, 61-64 Appendix B 3 September 30, 2016 Articles 3, 12 & LOU 74 4 September 30, 2017 Articles 1-3, 5, 7 & 10-33 LOUs 74, 84 and 85 LOCs 60, 65 – 72 Appendix G Amendments i Page intentionally left blank. Amendments ii Table of Contents ARTICLE 1 – Recognition & Scope .................................................................................... 1 1.01 Recognition ......................................................................................................... 1 1.02 Scope .................................................................................................................. 1 1.03 Definitions ........................................................................................................... 1 1.04 Employment Security ........................................................................................... 3 1.05 Merger or Change of Control ............................................................................... 4 1.06 Divestiture and Successorship ............................................................................. 5 1.07 Single Employer Obligations / Separate Entities .................................................. 5 1.08 Codesharing .......................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • July/August 2000 Volume 26, No
    Irfc/I0 vfa£ /1 \ 4* Limited Edition Collectables/Role Model Calendars at home or in the office - these photo montages make a statement about who we are and what we can be... 2000 1999 Cmdr. Patricia L. Beckman Willa Brown Marcia Buckingham Jerrie Cobb Lt. Col. Eileen M. Collins Amelia Earhart Wally Funk julie Mikula Maj. lacquelyn S. Parker Harriet Quimby Bobbi Trout Captain Emily Howell Warner Lt. Col. Betty Jane Williams, Ret. 2000 Barbara McConnell Barrett Colonel Eileen M. Collins Jacqueline "lackie" Cochran Vicky Doering Anne Morrow Lindbergh Elizabeth Matarese Col. Sally D. Woolfolk Murphy Terry London Rinehart Jacqueline L. “lacque" Smith Patty Wagstaff Florene Miller Watson Fay Cillis Wells While They Last! Ship to: QUANTITY Name _ Women in Aviation 1999 ($12.50 each) ___________ Address Women in Aviation 2000 $12.50 each) ___________ Tax (CA Residents add 8.25%) ___________ Shipping/Handling ($4 each) ___________ City ________________________________________________ T O TA L ___________ S ta te ___________________________________________ Zip Make Checks Payable to: Aviation Archives Phone _______________________________Email_______ 2464 El Camino Real, #99, Santa Clara, CA 95051 [email protected] INTERNATIONAL WOMEN PILOTS (ISSN 0273-608X) 99 NEWS INTERNATIONAL Published by THE NINETV-NINES* INC. International Organization of Women Pilots A Delaware Nonprofit Corporation Organized November 2, 1929 WOMEN PILOTS INTERNATIONAL HEADQUARTERS Box 965, 7100 Terminal Drive OFFICIAL PUBLICATION OFTHE NINETY-NINES® INC. Oklahoma City,
    [Show full text]
  • Adaptive Connected.Xlsx
    Sacramento International Airport Passenger Statistics July 2020 CURRENT MONTH FISCAL YEAR TO DATE CALENDAR YEAR TO DATE THIS YEAR LAST YEAR % +/(-) 2020/21 2019/20 % +/(-) 2020 2019 % +/(-) Enplaned Domestic Alaska Airlines 3,593 33,186 (89.2%) 3,593 33,186 (89.2%) 54,432 173,858 (68.7%) Horizon Air 6,120 14,826 (58.7%) 6,120 14,826 (58.7%) 31,298 75,723 (58.7%) American Airlines 28,089 54,512 (48.5%) 28,089 54,512 (48.5%) 162,319 348,689 (53.4%) Boutique 79 95 (16.8%) 79 95 (16.8%) 613 201 205.0% Contour - 721 (100.0%) - 721 (100.0%) 4,461 2,528 76.5% Delta Airlines 14,185 45,962 (69.1%) 14,185 45,962 (69.1%) 111,063 233,946 (52.5%) Frontier 4,768 7,107 (32.9%) 4,768 7,107 (32.9%) 25,423 38,194 (33.4%) Hawaiian Airlines 531 10,660 (95.0%) 531 10,660 (95.0%) 26,393 64,786 (59.3%) Jet Blue - 16,858 (100.0%) - 16,858 (100.0%) 25,168 85,877 (70.7%) Southwest 112,869 300,716 (62.5%) 112,869 300,716 (62.5%) 899,647 1,963,253 (54.2%) Spirit 8,425 11,318 (25.6%) 8,425 11,318 (25.6%) 38,294 15,526 146.6% Sun Country 886 1,650 (46.3%) 886 1,650 (46.3%) 1,945 4,401 (55.8%) United Airlines 7,620 46,405 (83.6%) 7,620 46,405 (83.6%) 98,028 281,911 (65.2%) 187,165 544,016 (65.6%) 187,165 544,016 (65.6%) 1,479,084 3,288,893 (55.0%) Commuters Alaska/Skywest - 4,304 (100.0%) - 4,304 (100.0%) 36,457 50,776 (28.2%) American/Skywest/Compass/Mesa - 8,198 (100.0%) - 8,198 (100.0%) 18,030 45,781 (60.6%) Delta/Skywest/Compass 5,168 23,651 (78.1%) 5,168 23,651 (78.1%) 62,894 146,422 (57.0%) United/Skywest/GoJet/Republic 4,040 16,221 (75.1%) 4,040 16,221 (75.1%)
    [Show full text]
  • Overview and Trends
    9310-01 Chapter 1 10/12/99 14:48 Page 15 1 M Overview and Trends The Transportation Research Board (TRB) study committee that pro- duced Winds of Change held its final meeting in the spring of 1991. The committee had reviewed the general experience of the U.S. airline in- dustry during the more than a dozen years since legislation ended gov- ernment economic regulation of entry, pricing, and ticket distribution in the domestic market.1 The committee examined issues ranging from passenger fares and service in small communities to aviation safety and the federal government’s performance in accommodating the escalating demands on air traffic control. At the time, it was still being debated whether airline deregulation was favorable to consumers. Once viewed as contrary to the public interest,2 the vigorous airline competition 1 The Airline Deregulation Act of 1978 was preceded by market-oriented administra- tive reforms adopted by the Civil Aeronautics Board (CAB) beginning in 1975. 2 Congress adopted the public utility form of regulation for the airline industry when it created CAB, partly out of concern that the small scale of the industry and number of willing entrants would lead to excessive competition and capacity, ultimately having neg- ative effects on service and perhaps leading to monopolies and having adverse effects on consumers in the end (Levine 1965; Meyer et al. 1959). 15 9310-01 Chapter 1 10/12/99 14:48 Page 16 16 ENTRY AND COMPETITION IN THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY spurred by deregulation now is commonly credited with generating large and lasting public benefits.
    [Show full text]
  • Aerospace Industry Characterization Report
    Aerospace Industry Characterization September 30, 2018 Submitted by: ICF Submitted to: Contract #: (EP-C-16-020) Work Assignment: # (1-02) Aerospace Industry Characterization Table of Contents I. Preface .............................................................................................................................................. 4 II. Report Analysis Methodology ....................................................................................................... 5 1. Data Sources ................................................................................................................................ 5 1.1.3 Benchmark databases, industry conferences, and latest industry news & announcements .......................................................................................................................... 6 2. Benchmarks to Comparable Report ............................................................................................. 6 III. Introduction to Aerospace Production Market ............................................................................ 8 1.1 Commercial Air Transport ................................................................................................... 8 1.2 Business and General Aviation ........................................................................................... 8 1.3 Military ................................................................................................................................. 8 1.4 Civil Rotary Wing ...............................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Appendix C Informal Complaints to DOT by New Entrant Airlines About Unfair Exclusionary Practices March 1993 to May 1999
    9310-08 App C 10/12/99 13:40 Page 171 Appendix C Informal Complaints to DOT by New Entrant Airlines About Unfair Exclusionary Practices March 1993 to May 1999 UNFAIR PRICING AND CAPACITY RESPONSES 1. Date Raised: May 1999 Complaining Party: AccessAir Complained Against: Northwest Airlines Description: AccessAir, a new airline headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa, began service in the New York–LaGuardia and Los Angeles to Mo- line/Quad Cities/Peoria, Illinois, markets. Northwest offers connecting service in these markets. AccessAir alleged that Northwest was offering fares in these markets that were substantially below Northwest’s costs. 171 9310-08 App C 10/12/99 13:40 Page 172 172 ENTRY AND COMPETITION IN THE U.S. AIRLINE INDUSTRY 2. Date Raised: March 1999 Complaining Party: AccessAir Complained Against: Delta, Northwest, and TWA Description: AccessAir was a new entrant air carrier, headquartered in Des Moines, Iowa. In February 1999, AccessAir began service to New York–LaGuardia and Los Angeles from Des Moines, Iowa, and Moline/ Quad Cities/Peoria, Illinois. AccessAir offered direct service (nonstop or single-plane) between these points, while competitors generally offered connecting service. In the Des Moines/Moline–Los Angeles market, Ac- cessAir offered an introductory roundtrip fare of $198 during the first month of operation and then planned to raise the fare to $298 after March 5, 1999. AccessAir pointed out that its lowest fare of $298 was substantially below the major airlines’ normal 14- to 21-day advance pur- chase fares of $380 to $480 per roundtrip and was less than half of the major airlines’ normal 7-day advance purchase fare of $680.
    [Show full text]
  • RESOURCE Air Travel 2001
    RESOURCE SYSTEMS GROUP INCORPORATED Air Travel 2001 What do they tell us about the future of US air travel? An Industry Report by Resource Systems Group, Inc. December 2001 331 Olcott Drive, White River Junction, Vermont 05001 802.295.4999 www.rsginc.com www.surveycafe.com TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION..........................................................................................................................................2 THE SURVEY SAMPLE ..............................................................................................................................2 TRIP CHARACTERISTICS..........................................................................................................................2 RESERVATIONS AND TICKETING............................................................................................................3 CHOICE OF TICKETING LOCATIONS ....................................................................................................3 SATISFACTION WITH TICKETING OPTIONS ........................................................................................4 TICKETING SEGMENTS .........................................................................................................................7 AIRPORTS ..................................................................................................................................................7 AIRLINE RANKINGS.................................................................................................................................12
    [Show full text]
  • George W Bush Childhood Home Reconnaissance Survey.Pdf
    Intermountain Region National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior August 2015 GEORGE W. BUSH CHILDHOOD HOME Reconnaissance Survey Midland, Texas Front cover: President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush speak to the media after touring the President’s childhood home at 1421 West Ohio Avenue, Midland, Texas, on October 4, 2008. President Bush traveled to attend a Republican fundraiser in the town where he grew up. Photo: SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images CONTENTS BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE — i SUMMARY OF FINDINGS — iii RECONNAISSANCE SURVEY PROCESS — v NPS CRITERIA FOR EVALUATION OF NATIONAL SIGNIFICANCE — vii National Historic Landmark Criterion 2 – viii NPS Theme Studies on Presidential Sites – ix GEORGE W. BUSH: A CHILDHOOD IN MIDLAND — 1 SUITABILITY — 17 Childhood Homes of George W. Bush – 18 Adult Homes of George W. Bush – 24 Preliminary Determination of Suitability – 27 HISTORY AND DESCRIPTION OF THE GEORGE W. BUSH CHILDHOOD HOME, MIDLAND TEXAS — 29 Architectural Description – 29 Building History – 33 FEASABILITY AND NEED FOR NPS MANAGEMENT — 35 Preliminary Determination of Feasability – 37 Preliminary Determination of Need for NPS Management – 37 CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS — 39 APPENDIX: THE 41ST AND 43RD PRESIDENTS AND FIRST LADIES OF THE UNITED STATES — 43 George H.W. Bush – 43 Barbara Pierce Bush – 44 George W. Bush – 45 Laura Welch Bush – 47 BIBLIOGRAPHY — 49 SURVEY TEAM MEMBERS — 51 George W. Bush Childhood Home Reconnaissance Survey George W. Bush’s childhood bedroom at the George W. Bush Childhood Home museum at 1421 West Ohio Avenue, Midland, Texas, 2012. The knotty-pine-paneled bedroom has been restored to appear as it did during the time that the Bush family lived in the home, from 1951 to 1955.
    [Show full text]
  • The Eastern Provincial Airways-Canadian Airline Pilots
    PROCEEDINGS llventy-fifth Annual Meeting Theme: "Beyond Deregulation: Let Freedom Ring!" October 22-24, 1984 Parker House Boston, MA Volume XXV • Number 1 1984 T R F TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH FORUM in conjunction with CANADIAN TRANSPORTATION 4 RESEARCH FORUM 403 The Eastern Provincial Airways— Canadian Airline Pilots Association Industrial Dispute, 1982-84 by Robert A. Ellison* INTRODUCTION leading to significant efficiencies; considerable im- provements in labor productivity; and substantial On May 10, 1984, the Canadian Minister of stimulation of new demand.' In the past five years Transport, the Hon. Lloyd Axworthy, announced airlines operating in the deregulated U.S. environ- a"New Canadian Air Policy'! This new Canadian ment flew 20.907o more revenue passenger miles while air policy represents the first phase of a long term overall Canadian air traffic declined by 2.7070.9 One plan to liberalize economic regulation of the airline specific objective of the new policy is to counter the industry. The announcement came six years after seepage of passenger traffic via U.S. gateways just the Airline Deregulation Act of 19782 in the United across the border. States. During the past three years various agencies The central thrust of the new policy is to invigorate and groups, mainly governmental, had called for the industry and provide a stimulus to growth the deregulation of the Canadian airline industry through encouraging innovation and improving the Including the Economic Council of Canada,' the airline industry's efficiency and productivity. Airline Ministry of Consumer and Corporate Affairs,4 the managements, no longer hampered to the same ex- House of Commons Standing Committee on tent by regulatory constraints, would be freer to Transport,' and the Director of Investigation and manage.
    [Show full text]