OCT/NOV 2012 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Eric Auxier, pilot for america west video link below. Auxier is defending the theft of pilot personal information from US Airways computers, eric was just trying to save you when he stole your personal information, why are you East pilots coping him an attitude.

You remember eric auxier, rico defendant, he is just trying to save you from your self.

"Upon information and belief, defendant Auxier made 45 telephone calls,
for a total of 160 minutes, to the USAPA toll-free telephone number from telephone
number (505) 710-4970. Auxier made 33 of the 45 calls between May 1 and May 7,
2008."

"Defendant Auxier’s postings on the AWAPPA Web Board end with the
message, “Have you called 877-678-7272 25 times today???”

"Upon information and belief, on April 28, 2008, defendant Auxier posted
the following message on the AWAPPA Web Board:
Hey, the UAL guys have the balls to deny the Eastholes, the least we can
do is follow suit. They are the pariahs of the industry, and frankly I think
it IS unsafe to have them on our jumps. They’ve made their bed, now they
get to lie in it. Plus – damn good point – they would be quicker than a
hard up Fed to bust us for the slightest infraction. Nuff said. I’m on board
– just itching to deny one to his face!"

Hey East pilots, eric knows better than you and he is just trying to save you.

Watch eric in the following video.

And they wonder! AMES your neighbors in SC are on to you! Remember their EASTHOLES!

 

[end_of_alpa]

Mr. Nicolau lost his leg on his last mission. What does it take to be a hero in your eyes?

My brother got blown out of an amtrac in Vietnam twice with severe back injuries to this day. Again, he served and I repect that. Hero to me is one who goes BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY. I'm not saying he wasn't a hero but it is a separate issue from this debate.

 

[Claxon]

May I indulge myself just once. When dealing with auxier, it reminds me of how I have had to deal with my own kids. He thinks he knows everything, steps over the line many times and you have to put a boot in his ass to straighten him out in order to assure he is able to handle the real world in the future.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Really! You think she put this statement in her order to support usapa?

there is no obvious impediment to USAPA and US Airways negotiating and agreeing upon any seniority regime they wish.

That was put in telling the company they have no excuse not to negotiate with usapa. It is just usapa has to have a LUP. So far usapa has not found an LUP that the company agrees with.

Absolutely! The company has duty to honor a contract, one that is not based in bad contract law. The union has a DFR. Both are mutually exclusive. You cannot have one without the other. That's why they call it a hybrid 301/ DFR. Two cases, one trial. Too bad the company negotiated an UNENFORCEABLE CONTRACT PROVISION.

I am looking forward to the appeal, only if the union lawyers argue right, which I have my doubts Symanski is up to the task.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

OUR BOY AMES, is bulding a house CHS shoreline anticipating his jump in seniority of 15 years of other US pilots!

 

[EastUS1]

"Upon information and belief, on April 28, 2008, defendant Auxier posted
the following message on the AWAPPA Web Board:
Hey, the UAL guys have the balls to deny the Eastholes, the least we can
do is follow suit.......... Nuff said. I’m on board
– just itching to deny one to his face!"

Wow! "...have the balls..."...? Why, just the immense amount of raw, personal courage it would take to deny someone a jump seat is staggering to even try to imagine! = Nicster "heroics" at their finest! That pathetic little punk is truly a perfect poster child for the "integrity" and "maturity" of the most rabid nicsters.....

Little princess eric..so eager to "deny one to his face"?...You'll never be denied a jumpseat by me, purely due to your wearing at least the costume and outer trappings of a "professional pilot".

 

[cleardirect]

Why ask me; I didn't sign anything? What do I have to do with it? Ask the court, if they will hear you.

When usapa the union that you wanted became the bargaining agent you gave usapa that right to sign for you. It has everything to to with you.

Can the west pilots deny that usapa has any authority to negotiate for the was because I didn't sign anything?


This is what the court had to say.

The primary focus of the parties’ summary judgment filings is whether the Transition Agreement is “binding” on USAPA. According to USAPA, it is “not ‘contractually’ bound by any of ALPA’s agreements,” including the Transition Agreement. (Doc. 160 at 10). But the West Pilots, as well as US Airways, cite a variety of authority supporting the position that the “decertification of ALPA and the certification of USAPA did not change the binding nature of the Transition Agreement.” (Doc. 164 at 7). The West Pilots and US Airways are correct.

As there does not appear to be any dispute that the Transition Agreement was part of the contract between the pilots and US Airways, the Transition Agreement applies to USAPA. Even the case which USAPA relies upon states there is a “general principle that collective bargaining agreements survive a change in representative.” Ass’n of Flight Attendants, AFL-CIO v. USAir, Inc., 24 F.3d 1432, 1439 (D.C. Cir. 1994). Thus, just as ALPA would have been bound by the Transition Agreement had it remained the pilots’ representative, USAPA is bound by the Transition Agreement.2

2 USAPA believes the Transition Agreement is not binding and it “cannot in any way limit the authority of USAPA . . . with respect to negotiating a new agreement.” (Doc. 152 at 16). It is unclear why USAPA is so adamant on this point as there is no claim that the Transition Agreement itself is limiting USAPA’s authority during the negotiation of a new collective bargaining agreement. Regardless of the binding nature of the Transition Agreement, USAPA’s duty in negotiating a collective bargaining agreement remains the same: to act in conformity with its duty of fair representation.

 

[cleardirect]

Eric Auxier, pilot for america west video link below. Auxier is defending the theft of pilot personal information from US Airways computers, eric was just trying to save you when he stole your personal information, why are you East pilots coping him an attitude.

You remember eric auxier, rico defendant, he is just trying to save you from your self.

"Upon information and belief, defendant Auxier made 45 telephone calls,
for a total of 160 minutes, to the USAPA toll-free telephone number from telephone
number (505) 710-4970. Auxier made 33 of the 45 calls between May 1 and May 7,
2008."

"Defendant Auxier’s postings on the AWAPPA Web Board end with the
message, “Have you called 877-678-7272 25 times today???”

"Upon information and belief, on April 28, 2008, defendant Auxier posted
the following message on the AWAPPA Web Board:
Hey, the UAL guys have the balls to deny the Eastholes, the least we can
do is follow suit. They are the pariahs of the industry, and frankly I think
it IS unsafe to have them on our jumps. They’ve made their bed, now they
get to lie in it. Plus – damn good point – they would be quicker than a
hard up Fed to bust us for the slightest infraction. Nuff said. I’m on board
– just itching to deny one to his face!"

Hey East pilots, eric knows better than you and he is just trying to save you.

Watch eric in the following video.

Just another false accusation.

Now for the rest of the story.

VII. CONCLUSION
The Plaintiff’s allegation that the Defendants’ purpose is to “destroy
USAPA” undermines the Plaintiff’s RICO claims in two respects. By
asserting that the Defendants’ goal is the destruction of the Plaintiff itself,
the Plaintiff fails to meet the continuity requirement of RICO and also fails
to allege adequately an essential element of extortion, namely, that the
Case 3:08-cv-00246-MR-CH Document 97 Filed 07/11/2008 Page 45 of 48
46
Defendants seek to “obtain” the Plaintiff’s “property.” For these reasons,
the Court concludes that Counts One and Two of the Plaintiff’s Amended
Complaint fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, and
accordingly, these claims are dismissed. Because the federal claims
asserted by the Plaintiff have been dismissed, the Court declines to
exercise supplemental jurisdiction over the Plaintiff’s state-law claims
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1367(c)(3), and these claims are therefore
dismissed without prejudice. The Plaintiff’s request for leave to file its
proposed Second Amended Complaint is futile and therefore is denied.
Finally, the Plaintiff’s requests for a temporary restraining order and a
preliminary injunction are rendered moot by the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s
state-law claims, and for that reason are denied.
Accordingly, IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Motion to
Dismiss of Defendants AWAPPA, [Doc. 42] and the Motion to Dismiss by Individual
Defendants Eric Auxier,, and Joinder in
Motion to Dismiss Filed by AWAPPA Defendants [Doc. 77] are GRANTED
to the extent that Counts One and Two of the Amended Complaint are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rules 12(B)(1) and 12(B)(6) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

Because the federal claims asserted by the Plaintiff have been
dismissed, the Court declines to exercise supplemental jurisdiction over
the Plaintiff’s state-law claims (Counts Three through Eleven) pursuant to
28 U.S.C. §1367(c)(3), and accordingly, IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that
these claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to
Amend First Amended Verified Complaint [Doc. 80] is DENIED as futile.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that to the extent that the Motion to
Dismiss by the Individual Defendants [Doc. 77] seeks dismissal of these
Defendants for lack of personal jurisdiction and improper venue, such
Motion is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion for Temporary
Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction [Doc. 63] is DENIED AS
MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed: July 11, 2008

Continuing to make false accusation after the case is closed can set you up for harassment and liable.

The false charges were DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. you need to let that case alone.

 

[cleardirect]

OUR BOY AMES, is bulding a house CHS shoreline anticipating his jump in seniority of 15 years of other US pilots!

If you are going to make an argument at least get the facts correct. It is a 15 year jump in longevity. The seniority was the same.'

BTW the 15 years was just at the bottom of the list. You junior guys all ignore the top of the list.

 

[mrbreeze]

Sometimes harsh is the only way to get through.

I didn't consider it harsh. It was just more BS from you narrow perspective.

breeze

 

[mrbreeze]

Indeed. I've much respect for Mr. Nic's service and sacrifice, but I'd also believe he'd agree that those that have fallen are the true Heros.

Just for the record, I never called NIC a terriorist....that was, once again, clear's spin on what was said.
breeze

 

[Move2CLT]

... from your narrow perspective.

breeze

Said the east guy.

 

[Move2CLT]

"Do you have any spokesmen that can rise above the level of pathetic little drama queens?."



I rest my case.

Rest your typing hands too.

 

[cleardirect]

I didn't consider it harsh. It was just more BS from you narrow perspective.

breeze

Like only looking at or considering DOH to be the only factor when merger a SENIORITY list.

 

[cleardirect]

Just for the record, I never called NIC a terriorist....that was, once again, clear's spin on what was said.
breeze

What you said was.

Now, for you to claim that you deserve a higher position than pilots who have invested more time on the job is BS. You are no better than the terriorists who have tried to take advantage of the events of 9/11.

George Nicolau created the list not the west like you try and imply.

It was George Nicolau that thinks the west deserves to be more senior and has nothing to do with time invested. It is the east pilots that are trying to take advantage of your majority numbers. The west is simply living up to our deal and what a neutral arbitrator decided. the guy you compared to a terrorist.