PHX F/A & Pilot Crew News Sessions: August 11, 2011

[mrbreeze]

Sparrow,

I do not know why Robert and Doug made their comments. However, maybe they know because the Award has been released and USAPA is not informing the pilots because the union is about to get slapped with a Preliminary Injunction.

As far as the Preliminary Injunction, one US Airways pilot said, "the injunction goes away if either the company tells the judge they don't need it anymore (fat chance that will ever happen) or the court determines that the harm has dissipated and will not recur obviating the need for the injunction. Likely scenario is that the injunction gets traded by the company for contract concessions at the negotiating table. Any of the USAPA true believers out there should consider for a moment the effect AMR's injunction had on the APA's bargaining power. Then consider that you started out on your USAPA campaign trying to offer the company a cost neutral contract in return for them buying off on a contract term that has already once been found to be a DFR."

Another US Airways pilot said, "USAPA (Cleary) is leaning way too hard on The Norris-LaGuardia Act (NLGA) for safe harbor...so much so that it kind of reminds me of a quote from a well respected Federal Judge. USAPA places another "Elephantine proposition on such a slender reed." The company was well prepared for this as it is a common strategy to quote the NLGA as "cover" for illegal work actions. USAPA PHX Rep David Braid researched and found these references in DOC 11 filed 7/29/11 on pages 49-50, pages 62-65.

C. The NLGA Does Not Prohibit Injunctive Relief in This Case

In response to efforts to enjoin job actions under the RLA, unions frequently seek to divert attention from the requirements of the RLA to the requirements of the Norris LaGuardia Act (the “NLGA”). The NLGA, however, does not bar an injunction.

1. The Federal Courts Have Jurisdiction to Enjoin a Violation of the RLA, Notwithstanding the NLGA

It is well-established that in labor disputes governed by the RLA, the more specific provisions of the RLA take precedence over the general provisions of the NLGA. See, e.g., Chi. & N.W. Ry., 402 U.S. at 581-82 n.18.“It is clear that the substantive legal duty of 45 U.S.C. § 152, First, is a ‘specific provision’ of the RLA and, moreover, is central to the purpose and functioning of the RLA. Therefore, the provision takes precedence over the more general provisions of the NLGA.” Delta Air Lines, 238 F.3d at 1307; Bhd. of R.R. Trainmen v. Chi. River & Ind. R.R. Co., 353 U.S. 30, 41-42 (1957); Bhd. of R.R. Trainmen v. Howard, 343 U.S. 768, 774 (1952). The Supreme Court has expressly held that the federal courts have subject matter jurisdiction to enjoin a violation of the status quo obligations under the RLA, not withstanding the NLGA. See Chi. & N.W. Ry., 402 U.S. at 582. Thus, the anti-injunction provisions of the NLGA do not apply.

Yeah, yeah...that's the ticket! and the original United/USAir merger is a done deal!

 

[nic4us]

Well... perhaps Dougie may be telling the truth (however rare an occurance that may be)... As has been stated ad nauseum on this forum, in LOA 93 there was no "snap back", but a beginning and end date of the reduction in pay using the rates set forth in the 1998 Contract, i.e. the reduced pay was frozen until 12/31/09.

FROM LOA 93:
"The rates of pay specified in Section 3 of the Agreement, as
modified by the Restructuring Agreement, will be revised as
follows:
1. Freeze current rates effective 5/01/04 through 12/31/09.
2. Reduce rates as frozen by 18%.
3. Reduce International pay override, as stated in Section
3(F) and Section 18(C), by 18% for transoceanic trips;
eliminate international override for non-transoceanic trips.
4. Pay all flying at day rate."

Nice job bolding the important part that states quite specifically that you have nothing coming back on 12-31-09.

That second sentence pretty much sums it up. All by itself and alone, "reduce rates as frozen by 18%". Sentence one says how long you are stuck until you can negotiate a new rate. Sentence 2 says what the rate you are stuck with equals.

BTW, had the east any integrity, you could have had a new rate back in maybe 2007 timeframe. Four years ago. We would be negotiating the second contract right now.

 

[VAflyGal]

Nice job bolding the important part that states quite specifically that you have nothing coming back on 12-31-09.

That second sentence pretty much sums it up. All by itself and alone, "reduce rates as frozen by 18%". Sentence one says how long you are stuck until you can negotiate a new rate. Sentence 2 says what the rate you are stuck with equals.

BTW, had the east any integrity, you could have had a new rate back in maybe 2007 timeframe. Four years ago. We would be negotiating the second contract right now.

INTEGRITY INTEGRITY INTEGRITY, go join the priesthood.

SSDD SSDD SSDD

How's it working out for you with your lawsuits and injunctions and mire and strife and insults and put downs and holier-than-thou attitudes and harassment and working in a place that has turned into a plain hell?

Why can't you guys work something out among yourselves, seriously? SO MANY of the East pilots will be retirement age within a few years.

 

[Monkee]

INTEGRITY INTEGRITY INTEGRITY, go join the priesthood.

SSDD SSDD SSDD

How's it working out for you with your lawsuits and injunctions and mire and strife and insults and put downs and holier-than-thou attitudes and harassment and working in a place that has turned into a plain hell?

Why can't you guys work something out among yourselves, seriously? SO MANY of the East pilots will be retirement age within a few years.

They did work something out, it was called Binding Arbitration. Everyone agreed to live by the decision.

But guess who is trying to back out of what they legally agreed to?

 

[UtterlyUdder]

INTEGRITY INTEGRITY INTEGRITY, go join the priesthood.

SSDD SSDD SSDD

How's it working out for you with your lawsuits and injunctions and mire and strife and insults and put downs and holier-than-thou attitudes and harassment and working in a place that has turned into a plain hell?

Why can't you guys work something out among yourselves, seriously? SO MANY of the East pilots will be retirement age within a few years.

B) Thing is, this board is a microcosm of how low our culture has gone. You're right VAflyGal. This is one of the nastiest places online and it is a public forum. Now there are people morphing into different screen names so who knows who they are. Frankly, I don't give a d@mn but really, this is what life is like these days, on and off a computer forum. That's sad but it is true.

 

[VAflyGal]

They did work something out, it was called Binding Arbitration. Everyone agreed to live by the decision.

But guess who is trying to back out of what they legally agreed to?

Yeah, I know the story. The rest of us have had our ears bleeding when grown men and women can't act civil on a hotel van becuase someone wants to get into a pissing match about it when the rest of us are trying to decompress from all the BS we deal with on this side of the cockpit door.

I'm sorry for your war. I really am. And I'm also sorry that neither side will get everything they want, and that both sides keep singing the same old song, doing the same old dance, insisiting that they are on the right side, the righteous side, the side that will prevail.

How's that working out for you, the lawsuits and repeating yourselves about binding arbitration? I am not taking sides here but we ALL wish you guys would f*n work it out so we could go back to making this job fun and not a civil war when we pass in every airport.

Badge backers, lanyards, angry stickers on planes and in airports, s*** talking at hotel bars and THIS forum, which is nothing if it's not the most embarrassing example of our profession.

You guys keep doing the same thing wanting a different outcome. Might it be possible that you call a truce and put together a plan that would work for everyone? Maybe a fence until enough people retire where neither side will be screwed out of what they have worked for? There HAS to be a better way. You're all going to have heart attacks with this battle and you are giving the rest of us indigestion every day.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Might it be possible that you call a truce and put together a plan that would work for everyone?

There is one little problem with that - USAPA made sure that there would be no one on the west side authorized to negotiate on behalf of only the west pilots. USAPA could undo that and give the west separate merger reps, elected by the west pilots only and fund them equally but I've seen no evidence that USAPA is inclined to do that. Thus the only two possible outcomes are the Nic or USAPA's DOH proposal.

Jim

 

[cleardirect]

Quote from Kasher "If you owe them you WILL pay them".

Untrue! Urban legend created and repeated by people that hear what they want to hear.

Post the transcript in context when he said that. You did use quotation marks.

 

[nic4us]

INTEGRITY INTEGRITY INTEGRITY, go join the priesthood.

SSDD SSDD SSDD

How's it working out for you with your lawsuits and injunctions and mire and strife and insults and put downs and holier-than-thou attitudes and harassment and working in a place that has turned into a plain hell?

Why can't you guys work something out among yourselves, seriously? SO MANY of the East pilots will be retirement age within a few years.

Priesthood.

Nope, couldn't commit to that vow of celibacy.

How is what working out for me? My integrity? Works great for me. I don't break my commitments, and people trust that when I say something, they can rely on it being truthful.

We did work something out. The many east pilots who will be retirement age, along with the ones who are not as close, reneged. So many of the West pilots, particularly the many who are closing in on retirement, are not in the mood to listen to any offers from proven liars, out to steal from us. Get it?

Not only is there no West representative capable of brokering a compromise, there is no usapa supporter who is not labled a lying POS, who would have anybody make a deal with them. Get it?


Sorry you have to hear talk of this on vans etc.... I would never discuss our situation with an east pilot in person, especially while at work, and definitely not in front of witnesses. The next time you are in a position tha makes you feel uncomfortable with the discussion, just tell them to shut up. Seriously. Maybe that is the solution. You call them both out. Tell the east pilot they lack integrity, and that the West pilot is not listening to them. Then tell the West pilot, they are the most stubborn a-hole you have ever encoutered. Then stay out of the hotel Bar.

 

[A320 Driver]

There is one little problem with that - USAPA made sure that there would be no one on the west side authorized to negotiate on behalf of only the west pilots. USAPA could undo that and give the west separate merger reps, elected by the west pilots only and fund them equally but I've seen no evidence that USAPA is inclined to do that. Thus the only two possible outcomes are the Nic or USAPA's DOH proposal.

Jim

You are right about USAPA. But I think it is worth saying that there seems to be no interest on the West side either to find middle ground. This duel is to the death I am afraid.

Driver B)

 

[A320 Driver]

Priesthood.

Nope, couldn't commit to that vow of celibacy.

How is what working out for me? My integrity? Works great for me. I don't break my commitments, and people trust that when I say something, they can rely on it being truthful.

We did work something out. The many east pilots who will be retirement age, along with the ones who are not as close, reneged. So many of the West pilots, particularly the many who are closing in on retirement, are not in the mood to listen to any offers from proven liars, out to steal from us. Get it?

Not only is there no West representative capable of brokering a compromise, there is no usapa supporter who is not labled a lying POS, who would have anybody make a deal with them. Get it?


Sorry you have to hear talk of this on vans etc.... I would never discuss our situation with an east pilot in person, especially while at work, and definitely not in front of witnesses. The next time you are in a position tha makes you feel uncomfortable with the discussion, just tell them to shut up. Seriously. Maybe that is the solution. You call them both out. Tell the east pilot they lack integrity, and that the West pilot is not listening to them. Then tell the West pilot, they are the most stubborn a-hole you have ever encoutered. Then stay out of the hotel Bar.

Thanks for proving my point...

Driver <_<

 

[luvn737s]

Take the legal action out of the picture for a moment and let's look at two groups of men. What can the west do to reconcile with the east? Can they say they were wrong? Can they apologize for what they did? Seriously, what do you accuse the west of doing to instigate this battle? Why is the west paying the price for the east's disagreement with Nicolau?

The responsibility for reconciliation begins and ends at the east's doorstep. They dragged an unwilling group into a dysfunctional union which has cost them (west) real dollars to fund a legal defense. The east chose to break it's word to abide by the arbitrator's decision regardless of whether or not they agreed with it. .

So the stony silence of the crew van can't be broken by a west pilot saying, "I'm sorry for what we've done". That can only come when the east agrees that the strategy of alienation and disenfranchisement has failed and that unity must again be rebuilt one relationship at a time.

 

[BoeingBoy]

This duel is to the death I am afraid.

Driver B)

I don't know about the "death" part, at least literally, but I agree it's a duel till the last bullet is fired and one side or the other has to concede. While I by no means think the majority of posters here are representative of every pilot on either side, there are enough hard-core on the East to hold USAPA's feet to the DOH fire and AOL seems to be funded well enough to wage the fight to the end.

Jim

 

[Iclubbabyseals]

They did work something out, it was called Binding Arbitration.

Okay, we can go back to the conditions that would enable your statement to be true. To do that, however, you must also go to the two votes, either party having veto authority over any merged contract. Which puts any kind of merged contract further away than it is now. At least under USAPA, you now have to have a majority whereas before either group could nix any proposal.

Amazing that the west has no idea what they have.

 

[luvn737s]

Okay, we can go back to the conditions that would enable your statement to be true. To do that, however, you must also go to the two votes, either party having veto authority over any merged contract. Which puts any kind of merged contract further away than it is now. At least under USAPA, you now have to have a majority whereas before either group could nix any proposal.

Amazing that the west has no idea what they have.

Quote that in the TA please.