IBT · Republic Airways / Mesa Airlines

Overview

This report explains the joint representation framework governing Republic Airways and Mesa Airlines Flight Attendants during transition. It focuses on representation structure and governance mechanics under the Railway Labor Act (RLA), rather than on contract economics or work rules.

The framework is notable because it preserves dual union representation—IBT at Republic and CWA-AFA at Mesa— while establishing a unified contract architecture anchored in the Republic agreement pending full JCBA implementation.

Baseline Representation Structure

Prior to integration, Republic Airways Flight Attendants were represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (IBT), while Mesa Airlines Flight Attendants were represented by CWA-AFA. Each carrier held its own certification under the RLA.

The transition framework preserves these certifications rather than immediately consolidating representation through a representation election or majority absorption determination.

Majority Absorption vs. Joint Representation

Under the RLA, majority absorption is a doctrine through which one bargaining representative may be deemed to represent employees of an acquired carrier when operational integration and workforce dominance thresholds are met. Such determinations can trigger representation changes without a direct election.

In this case, the parties adopted a joint representation framework instead. This approach preserves existing certifications and avoids triggering an immediate representation election or absorption determination while transition and integration processes are underway.

Structural observation: Joint representation functions as a stabilization mechanism where parties elect to manage integration through negotiated governance rather than NMB intervention.

Role of the Transition / JCBA Framework

The transition and JCBA framework establishes how authority is shared and sequenced during integration. Republic’s IBT agreement serves as the base contract architecture, while Mesa agreements and extension materials function as transitional overlays.

This structure allows pay, scheduling, and enforcement systems to converge without extinguishing Mesa’s existing representation or triggering an immediate representation proceeding.

Implications for Contract Governance

From a governance perspective, this framework clarifies that Republic’s contract controls the combined operation’s architecture, while Mesa documents operate as extension and transition instruments rather than as independent long-term agreements.

This separation explains why Mesa materials are analyzed subordinate to Republic and why extension and transition documents are treated as governance artifacts rather than standalone contracts.

Implication: Representation stability during transition is achieved through negotiated architecture rather than electoral or absorption-based reclassification.

Context Notes

This report is descriptive rather than prescriptive. It distinguishes documented structure from inference and does not attribute strategic intent to any party beyond what is reflected in publicly available transition and JCBA materials.