Did Lombardo ok this?

WeAAsles said:
I didn't know that the curriculum at Aviation High School also included interpretation and presentation of law?

I have noticed that they do provide Special Education classes though and I think you even get a yellow helmet for the bus ride? :wacko:

http://www.aviationhs.net/group_profile_view.aspx?id=782eb7c4-21d4-468c-ab13-18ca5a9e30be
For you non-A&P folks, below you will find the curriculum for the A&P licensing requirements at my former Alumni, a standard. The writing and communication courses prepared us, and now with an average of 20yrs of practicing experience, to be quite proficient at interpreting the written language. But, maybe you'll feel that's an elitist statement.... too damn bad.
 
http://lewisu.smartcatalogiq.com/Undergrad-2014-2015/undergraduate-catalog/College-of-Arts-and-Sciences/Aviation-Maintenance-Technology/Aviation-Maintenance-Technology-Associate-Degree

Degree Requirements

I. Core Courses (68-69)

46-101

Aviation Mathematics

4


 

OR

 

13-119

Intermediate Algebra

3


46-102

Introduction to Aviation

1


46-105

Aviation Technical Writing

3


 

OR

 

06-xxx

English writing course

3


46-106

Aviation Fundamentals

4


46-110

Aircraft Structures I

4


46-120

Aircraft Electricity I

4


46-130

Introduction to A/C Structures and Engine NDT NDE

3


46-135

Drafting and Blueprint Reading

3


46-200

Aircraft Instruments

4


46-201

Aviation Physics I

4


46-210

Aircraft Structures II

4


46-220

Aircraft Electricity II

4


46-310

Aircraft Reciprocating Engines

4


46-320

Aircraft Systems

4


46-330

Aircraft Engine Accessories

4


46-410

Gas Turbine Powerplants

4


46-420

Aircraft Propellers

4


46-430

Aircraft Inspection and Engine Testing

4


46/47-xxx

Aviation Elective

3


(Regarding the writing requirement, any 100-level, 3-credit hour writing course offered by the English Department is acceptable; an English Placement Examination is required.)
 


II. General Education Courses (9)

04-xxx

Economics option

3


10-112

Introduction to Human Communication

3


19-100

The Search for Faith

3


 

OR

 

19-106

Introduction to Christian Theology

3
 
toroshark said:
If YOU were a amt on the line being confronted with these issues daily then YOu would appreciate your local attempting to do something about management trying to dutch- uncle YOU into unsafe maint practices. But if YOU are a TWU Intl. Apologist, not a amt, or a management type then who really cares about your IGM comments.It is nice to have someone in our corner!
 
OK. Here is the lawsuit wording. You tell me where the issues faced on the line by AMT's is being addressed. Deal?
 
SUMMARY OF ACTION:​
 
1--"Plaintiffs, through their undersigned counsel, bring this action under the Railway Labor Act for declaratory, injunctive relief, and other appropriate relief to halt the interference of American Airlines, Inc. (AA) with the plaintiffs’ efforts to represent their members with respect to critical issues related to aviation maintenance safety."
 
2--"AA management representatives have responded to the plaintiffs’ efforts to represent their members regarding these matters with: 1) threats of discipline, including termination, 2) threats of arrest, 3) threats of station closure and/or reduction of staff, 4) unlawful surveillance of the plaintiffs’ efforts, and 5) a refusal on the part of AA to make every reasonable effort to settle all disputes with respect to these issues."
 
3--"Defendant AA's actions constitute violations of the Railway Labor Act, 45 U.S.C. § 152, First, Third, Fourth, and Ninth. Because AA’s actions constitute a fundamental blow to the plaintiffs’ statutory rights and compromise public safety, the plaintiffs are entitled to declaratory and injunctive relief enjoining AA from continuing such actions."
 
COUNT ONE: VIOLATION OF RLA, SECTION 2, FIRST: "“t shall be the duty of all carriers, their officers, agents, and employees to exert every reasonable effort to make and maintain agreements concerning rates of pay, rules, and working conditions, and to settle all disputes, whether arising out of the application of such agreements or otherwise, in order to avoid any interruption to commerce or to the operation of any carrier growing out of any dispute between the carrier and the employees thereof,”
 
COUNT TWO: VIOLATION OF RLA, SECTION 2, THIRD: “neither party shall in any way interfere with, influence, or coerce the other in its choice of representatives,”
 
COUNT THREE: VIOLATION OF RLA, SECTION 2, FOURTH: “it shall be unlawful for any carrier to interfere in any way with organization of its employees, or to use the funds of the carrier in maintaining or assisting or contributing to any labor organization, labor representative, or other agency of collective bargaining, or in performing any work therefor, or to influence or coerce employees in an effort to induce them to join or remain or not to join or remain members of any labor organization...,”
 
COUNT FOUR: VIOLATION OF RLA, SECTION 2, NINTH: “the carrier shall treat with the representative so certified as the representative of the craft or class for the purposes of this chapter
 
then in order to address those issues, these are the injunction sought by the suit:
 
A.."Restraining and enjoining AA, its officers, agents, employees and all persons acting on its behalf from engaging in any discipline, threats of discipline, staff reductions or threats thereof, or other forms of harassment designed to influence or interfere with its Mechanics and Related Employees' selection of a collective bargaining representative."
 
B.."Restraining and enjoining AA, its officers, agents, employees and all persons acting on its behalf from disciplining, threatening with discipline, arresting, threatening with arrest, surveilling, or otherwise threatening or harassing Local 591 union representatives engaged in union representation activities."
 
C.."Ordering AA, its officers, agents, employees and all persons acting on its behalf to treat with Local 591 and its representatives with respect to complaints of harassment and coercion complaints related to AMT adherence to FAA/IAW maintenance standards."
 
Take a pill to induce objectivity and then read again. Its all over the place. Granted it doesn't go into as much detail as you might prefer but if you were a AMT working the line you might understand. AA committed to the " In accordance with" program in order to lessen FAA fines due to management's maintenance program. Now that we have all been to IAW class, and there is more maintenance to perform and more timely I might add, AA isn't pleased with the outcome. Threats of discipline, layoffs, and other punitive measures are being employed against the average joe line mech to circumvent the program AA committed to. Therefore leaving said mechanics in the undesirable position of violating FARS or being subjected to punitive actions then trying strong arm the union officers from aiding the membership from the assault. Mr. W robles wants to break the local so they can run roughshot over the mechanics and leave them holding the bag with the FAA. The lawsuit reads clear to me.
 
JABORD said:
For you non-A&P folks, below you will find the curriculum for the A&P licensing requirements at my former Alumni, a standard. The writing and communication courses prepared us, and now with an average of 20yrs of practicing experience, to be quite proficient at interpreting the written language. But, maybe you'll feel that's an elitist statement.... too damn bad.
 
http://lewisu.smartcatalogiq.com/Undergrad-2014-2015/undergraduate-catalog/College-of-Arts-and-Sciences/Aviation-Maintenance-Technology/Aviation-Maintenance-Technology-Associate-Degree
Degree Requirements I. Core Courses (68-69) 46-101 Aviation Mathematics
4
  OR   13-119 Intermediate Algebra
3
46-102 Introduction to Aviation
1
46-105 Aviation Technical Writing
3
  OR   06-xxx English writing course
3
46-106 Aviation Fundamentals
4
46-110 Aircraft Structures I
4
46-120 Aircraft Electricity I
4
46-130 Introduction to A/C Structures and Engine NDT NDE
3
46-135 Drafting and Blueprint Reading
3
46-200 Aircraft Instruments
4
46-201 Aviation Physics I
4
46-210 Aircraft Structures II
4
46-220 Aircraft Electricity II
4
46-310 Aircraft Reciprocating Engines
4
46-320 Aircraft Systems
4
46-330 Aircraft Engine Accessories
4
46-410 Gas Turbine Powerplants
4
46-420 Aircraft Propellers
4
46-430 Aircraft Inspection and Engine Testing
4
46/47-xxx Aviation Elective
3

(Regarding the writing requirement, any 100-level, 3-credit hour writing course offered by the English Department is acceptable; an English Placement Examination is required.)
 

II. General Education Courses (9) 04-xxx Economics option
3
10-112 Introduction to Human Communication
3
19-100 The Search for Faith
3
  OR   19-106 Introduction to Christian Theology
3
Aviation High School is a good school. Not Gold level like Bronx Science but a good solid High School nonetheless. But I didn't criticize in any way your Math or Maintenance skills. What I did point out is again that Legal expertise is not a part of the High School's curriculum.

Did you perhaps go to NYU after you graduated?

A good solid Bronze ranking here indeed.
http://www.usnews.com/education/best-high-schools/new-york/districts/new-york-city-public-schools/aviation-career-and-technical-high-school-13339
 
If you can't comprehend that, then I'd like to quote my favorite line from the movie the big Lebowski. " Donny. You're out of your element! "
 
toroshark said:
Take a pill to induce objectivity and then read again. Its all over the place. Granted it doesn't go into as much detail as you might prefer but if you were a AMT working the line you might understand. AA committed to the " In accordance with" program in order to lessen FAA fines due to management's maintenance program. Now that we have all been to IAW class, and there is more maintenance to perform and more timely I might add, AA isn't pleased with the outcome. Threats of discipline, layoffs, and other punitive measures are being employed against the average joe line mech to circumvent the program AA committed to. Therefore leaving said mechanics in the undesirable position of violating FARS or being subjected to punitive actions then trying strong arm the union officers from aiding the membership from the assault. Mr. W robles wants to break the local so they can run roughshot over the mechanics and leave them holding the bag with the FAA. The lawsuit reads clear to me.
 
I don't dispute any of that. If the lawsuit mentioned relief in the form of an injunction towards the treatment of the Members, then I'd agree the lawsuit is something positive for those Members. As it stands, the relief sought by the lawsuit is for the treatment of the 591 Representatives and to not interfere in the choice of a representative body in the form of an election.
 
All the stuff you mentioned can continue even if they win the suit since it is not specifically mentioned as a point for an injunction.
 
WeAAsles said:
The lawsuit was filed by "strong, intelligent and skilled men who are afraid to come to work," said Lee Seham, who filed the lawsuit on behalf of the union.
 
"They felt they had to make a choice between keeping their jobs and performing illegal maintenance," said Seham, an attorney with Seham, Seham, Meltz & Peterson LLP in New York. "Safety ought to be an issue of mutual interest. We all should want a safe airline."

http://www.bizjournals.com/dallas/news/2015/01/23/mechanics-union-files-suit-against-american-saying.html?ana=yahoo

I doubt very much that the TWU international has anything to do with this since Local 591 is Using AMFA's lead council.
So why is local 591 using Seham to represent the case?  Why isn't 591 using the TWU?  The only time Seham has represented AA/TWU mechanics in the past was to get their jobs back after being fired.  Now they are using Seham again to represent the AA mechanics.  What is going on?  Is the TWU refusing to act accordingly against AA management?  Is the TWU refusing to take such an action towards the company because the company and union work so well together?  Did the TWU refuse to take the case saying not enough evidence?  What gives?  Why did 591 hire a firm outside the TWU?  Maybe 591 does not trust the current firm that the TWU uses...
 
I would be willing to bet the International will put TWU 591 in trusteeship and take over the local.  They might look upon this move as something against the TWU...
 
swamt said:
So why is local 591 using Seham to represent the case?  Why isn't 591 using the TWU?  The only time Seham has represented AA/TWU mechanics in the past was to get their jobs back after being fired.  Now they are using Seham again to represent the AA mechanics.  What is going on?  Is the TWU refusing to act accordingly against AA management?  Is the TWU refusing to take such an action towards the company because the company and union work so well together?  Did the TWU refuse to take the case saying not enough evidence?  What gives?  Why did 591 hire a firm outside the TWU?  Maybe 591 does not trust the current firm that the TWU uses...
Don't know BUT all good questions. I'll pay attention and see how this plays out. Lombardo and team did say they were going to give more autonomy to the Locals though so it could be something as simple as that?

Many people have said that the Int'l over the years has gotten too much into their Local business. Maybe they're just butting out?
 
In the injunctions sought to adress the issues, articles B and C seem to address the concerns for someone with skin in the game just fine.
 
Seham is a very capable and accomplished lawyer, and I'd trust his judgment on whether the prayer for relief in his complaint is adequate to achieve the desired results.

I am a lawyer and I agree with toroshark. Seham (and I) are completely unqualifed to question the work of a licensed AMT in fixing an aircraft, and my guess is that very few people here are qualified to question Seham's work in this case (I'm certainly not qualified to question it).
 
Just like Seeham and USAPA got slapped with an injunction against them claiming PMUS was doing the same.

Seeham is just in it to make a buck.
 
700UW said:
Just like Seeham and USAPA got slapped with an injunction against them claiming PMUS was doing the same.

Seeham is just in it to make a buck.
We know what you think of Lee Seham:
 
700UW said:
Actually it was the APA and Seeham at AA, not the TWU who were first with the B-Scale.
 
And no labor union should pay or use an attorney or any kind of specialists if they have worked against unions in their past or present.
http://www.airlineforums.com/topic/58071-more-groups-wanting-to-fire-the-twu/page-4#entry1142447

IMO, that's a short-sighted and ignorant view. The best lawyers are those who can argue effectively on either side, and if management and labor have both hired him in the past, that's a pretty good endorsement.

Should criminal defendants always refuse to hire defense attorneys who have previously served as prosecutors? Good luck with that, as many successful defense attorneys began as assistant DAs. Trial experience and thorough preparation are what matters, not whether you previously sent someone to the electric chair as a prosecutor.

Effective lawyers don't choose sides and then refuse to ever work for the other side. With the exception of mob lawyers, that's not how the world works. Very few people share the view that there's a perpetual conflict of interest that would force lawyers to pick sides and then never represent the other side for the rest of their careers.
 
700UW said:
Just like Seeham and USAPA got slapped with an injunction against them claiming PMUS was doing the same.
Seeham is just in it to make a buck.
  
700UW said:
So why isn't the same happening at PMUS?
Change of subject=diversionary tactic. How do you know it isn't happening at Plus? Could be either condoned by IAM locals or ingrained at Pmus as a cultural work environment. Or possibly it is a tactic being employed against pmaa mechanics and the TWU for some unknown agenda. Can't say for certain as I'm not a Pmus mechanic. I'm quite sure that you have those answers though.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top