Judge Blocks NW f/as right to strike
- Thread starter PITbull
- Start date
Its obvious this Judge is on the take. The RLA is clear, workers have the right to strike when the staus quo is changed, so either he cant read or he is on the take.
The AFA should give him a day or two to read the law and go ahead with their actions anyway. If the courts come down on them we all should walk off the job. When our rights are taken away by corrupt Judges we need to resist.
If you look at the history of labor you can see that injunctive abuse by Federal Judges has always plauged working people, thats why Unions pushed hard to have laws put in place. How did unions get to have these laws put in place-by disobeying such injunctions and causing massive economic disruptions. When imprisonment, force, executions and massacres didnt work the govt and their corporate masters decided that a little compromise was in order. Unions got laws that, even though the language was not nearly clear and precise enough, in practice provided them what they needed. However that compromise has backfired on labor as over time the law has been eroded if not completely reversed by a corrupt judicial system and weak corrupt union leadership that was unwilling to mount a challenge.
What we are seeing now is the death of the rights of labor. In fact we should all wear black armbands to signify this. The owner of a gallon of oil has more rights as to what he does with this stuff that he digs out of the ground than a working person does with his labor. As the oil companies tripled the price they charge for their product the courts do nothing, but when workers who have already taken paycuts refuse to take even more paycuts(so the airline can pay for the oil and bonuses for the executives) a judge forces them to continue to provide labor.
Clearly this is yet another example of a corrupt Judge, who like many before him will likely be paid off some time in the future with some well paid no show job in the corporate world after leaving the bench in return for his "faverable" actions now. He is subverting the law and abusing his priviledges to screw over working people by engaging in the delay tactic. The idea is to delay, delay, delay workers from taking action in order to break their determination.
His issuance of a TRO is basically an admission that he is unfit to be a judge in that he is claiming that he does not not understand the law. The RLA is clear, we can strike if the status quo is changed.Its not as if the law is new, its been around for 80 years.
Because we live in a fascist controlled society and we are willing to tolerate it, thats why.
While a Judge may issue a TRO against a union, temporarily preventing them from leading self help actions as provided by law, until he clarifies himself and actually reads the law and its intent, how can he force individual workers to work under conditions they did not agree to? Basically thats slavery.
Chaos away people!Let them prove you werent in a state where you were unfit to work.
A sidenote. In NY a workers comp case recently went in favor of a mechanic who went out IOD due to stress induced by management.Since then there have been reportedly several incidences where mechanics have left work due to stress.
You're correct. The Judge is a obvious crook. On the one hand he prevents the workers from engaging in self help while allowing the company to do it. Nowhere is this right given in the RLA, in fact the RLA explicitly grants either party the right to exercise self help once the other party engages in it.
We are all under attack, and our "leaders" do nothing.
Our failure to respond to such actions by the courts are nothing less than an invitation for more abuse.
Don Smith
Veteran
My understanding is this...a judge acted outside of rules of the RLA.
The company imposed an agreement that was previously voted down.
That leaves the AFA the right to self help.
If I missed something here then pppllllleeeaaasssseeee by all means, lets hear it.
????
To which you responded
Ford was a Republican as was Reagan and Bush1. So the seven that you yourself cite were appointed by Republicans not two. I think you got your parties mixed up there.
To which you responded
Ford was a Republican as was Reagan and Bush1. So the seven that you yourself cite were appointed by Republicans not two. I think you got your parties mixed up there.
Exactly!! The judge is allowing the company to exercise self help and impose their terms but denying the flight attendants their lawful right to exercise self help. Its like the judge is an accomplice to a rape, he is like a cop holding them down, preventing them from defending themselves, while the rapist, the company, is doing as it pleases. His excuse, he doesnt know if rape is illegal, is BS. The RLA is clear, they can strike the moment the company changes the terms that were previosly agreed to. Its been law for over 80 years!! If the Judge was going to issue a TRO against the AFA in order for it to be legal under the RLA it should have required that the company also adhere to the conditions that they previosly agreed to.
And they never paid any of it.
Another example of our crooked Judicial system. The company violates the contract and the Judge fines the union.
Made for good press for the weak do nothing unions but the APA did the right thing.
Besides even if they had paid the fines what are the dues for anyway? May as well put that money to use defending the profession.
http://www.nwaafa.org/default.asp?id=365
NO! NO! NO! NO! NO! QUIT MAKING STUFF UP!
THAT IS NOT WHAT THE JUDGE DID.
I more than anyone support the NWA flight attendants, but what the Judge did was absolutely correct, as much as I wanted to see an implementation of CHAOS over the holiday weekend. The judge did not rule for or against any party. He simply said there is a chance that the strike would be illegal and he gave each side an opportunity to present their arguments for or against CHAOS. This is not an indication of how he will rule, just that he needs to hear the arguments, study the law, including precedent handed down my higher courts if any relate to the issues at hand. That all takes time.
This is why AFA was absolutely incorrect in delaying CHAOS (and yet another reason why the NWA flight attendants are beginning to regret their decision to bring AFA in). AFA should have begun the action the second the rejected contract was shoved down the throats of its constituency. They could have gotten several days in before the temporary injunction was issued.
You need to realize the difference between a temporary injunction and a permanent one. Temporary injunctions are pretty easy to get. The company still had the burden of showing how CHAOS would be illegal.
MCI transplant
Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2003
- Messages
- 5,311
- Reaction score
- 584
<_< ---- So has anyone have any idea as to when this judge is going to rule? After the holiday week-end, that's a given! But when? 😉 In other words, how "temporary' is "temporary", as in "Temporary injunction?" And does the F/A's have a plan "B", if things don't go as expected?
:down:
For once someone that is factual in a stamanet rather than opionionated and living on another planet. The judge was withing the law, for those of you who think you are lawyers. He was within the BK law in imposing the TRO to establish a ruling based on the material facts that were presented.
Holy geez are you ppl in another dimension. If two laws are in conflict with each other, as the RLA and BK laws are, one should think before reacting. You think the Judge isn't asking for case law or opinion from peers for guidance, well he is.
AFA screwed it's labor group again. Should have started when you had the chance. Plus CHAOS doesn't work. AS had the only disruption for 7 flights. Whoopy do!!! WOW I am amazed, OMG it worked. Think you dolts, carriers cancel 10% of the flight A DAY!!!
you think 7 more is something to talk about? Get real. CHAOS didn't work at AWA, no matter what the AFA says. Franke threatened back to the AFA and said simply, you strike, I close the doors, nothing flies. Doesnt matter UA was courting HP at the time, so no loss because they were going to shut PHX down and ship the Airbus's east. The union was the one who caved in with AWA, have you seen that contract, cannon fodder is what it is.
DO THE THING YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE TO BEGIN WITH, EVERYONE WALK AT ONCE, START THE PICKET LINE AND PUT ON A GOOD O' STIKE LIKE THEY SHOULD BE DONE.
CHAOS is for wimps, cowards and immature babies. Then again doesn't that describe a good majority of the ppl here?? LOL
DC,
For once someone that is factual in a stamanet rather than opionionated and living on another planet. The judge was withing the law, for those of you who think you are lawyers. He was within the BK law in imposing the TRO to establish a ruling based on the material facts that were presented.
Holy geez are you ppl in another dimension. If two laws are in conflict with each other, as the RLA and BK laws are, one should think before reacting. You think the Judge isn't asking for case law or opinion from peers for guidance, well he is.
AFA screwed it's labor group again. Should have started when you had the chance. Plus CHAOS doesn't work. AS had the only disruption for 7 flights. Whoopy do!!! WOW I am amazed, OMG it worked. Think you dolts, carriers cancel 10% of the flight A DAY!!!
you think 7 more is something to talk about? Get real. CHAOS didn't work at AWA, no matter what the AFA says. Franke threatened back to the AFA and said simply, you strike, I close the doors, nothing flies. Doesnt matter UA was courting HP at the time, so no loss because they were going to shut PHX down and ship the Airbus's east. The union was the one who caved in with AWA, have you seen that contract, cannon fodder is what it is.DO THE THING YOU SHOULD HAVE DONE TO BEGIN WITH, EVERYONE WALK AT ONCE, START THE PICKET LINE AND PUT ON A GOOD O' STIKE LIKE THEY SHOULD BE DONE.
CHAOS is for wimps, cowards and immature babies. Then again doesn't that describe a good majority of the ppl here?? LOL
OSU... thanks for the moral support. I do want to point out to you, however, that just the threat of CHAOS worked for the USAirways flight attendants. During round three of concessions, the company kept raising its demand on the flight attendant group and negotiations went nowhere. As soon as the group voted to authorize CHAOS, the company finally began negotiating in reasonably good faith (well, as good as good faith got with our former management group). Somehow, I think AFA will completely screw things up, but they need to start off with a bang and make sure there is national media coverage (the former union was amazing when it came to keeping people infomed and media coverage... the current AFA folks suck at it). If they start off big, people will start booking away from the airline, especially business fares. The trick is to keep changing course... something like, for example:
Day 1 - all AM flights into MSP and all pm flights into California and Hawaii.
Day 2 - nothing until international last flights of the day.
Day 3 - do nothing (again, just the threat that something can happen!)
Day 4 - all final bank incoming flights into DTW.
... and so on.
Good luck to the NW flight attendants. You have a lot of support out there. Don't let AFA get away with wimping out... you have to hold their feet to the fire and make sure they you you expect ACTION.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norris-LaGuardia_Act
You can spin this thing any way you want, but, NWA being given relief from the actual or threatened job action by AFA is a win for business and a huge loss for labor.
Under Norris-Laguardia, the Judge has no authority to prevent a job action under the circumstances presented. If the Judge were actually honest, he would have insisted on status quo conditions being maintained until he had enough information to make a ruling then required the maintenance of the status quo through the appelant process.
The issuance of a TRO, with the conditions present, gives NWA the funding to continue the fight.
You can spin this thing any way you want, but, NWA being given relief from the actual or threatened job action by AFA is a win for business and a huge loss for labor.
Under Norris-Laguardia, the Judge has no authority to prevent a job action under the circumstances presented. If the Judge were actually honest, he would have insisted on status quo conditions being maintained until he had enough information to make a ruling then required the maintenance of the status quo through the appelant process.
The issuance of a TRO, with the conditions present, gives NWA the funding to continue the fight.
ThirdSeatHero
Veteran
While his characterization concerning the judge may be questionable, his observation on the self-help provisions of the RLA are accurate.
You don't need a law degree to read/understand the RLA.
