PHL Domicile Update: December 12, 2011
Philadelphia Pilots,
It is with great disappointment that I write to you today. On so many levels, last Thursday's Special BPR Meeting was a waste of time; with very little accomplished, and to top off a day that was little more than a foolish waste of your dues money, we learned that the Association did not prevail on LOA 93. Gentlemen and Ladies, I'm as disappointed as you are, and I believe you have been denied of the restoration in pay that you clearly deserve. This, in return for the continued professionalism and the superior services you provide this company. It's also worth remembering here that the Company has chosen to deny you equal pay for equal work (aka parity), even as we operate on a single certificate. It is probably also worth remembering that the former AWA MEC opposed pay parity. In any event, please take care of yourselves as we all deal with yet another devastating career setback.
Recounting the Special BPR Meeting, here are some digestible pieces that illustrate the waste:
- The meeting was called by DCA Rep Pete Dugstad with only the support of two PHX reps and Eric Jordan, who is resigning his position on 12/15/11.
- Once the meeting began, the first action was to challenge the agenda for the meeting. Rep Dugstad wanted it rearranged in specific order.
- Rep Dugstad also argued for the removal of one item completely, which was: Action regarding alleged EVP breaches of confidentiality, duties, responsibilities and fiduciary obligations to USAPA. He said we could still talk about those issues, but he was adamant that it couldn't be on the agenda. The three PHX reps, Joe Stein (DCA) and Eric Jordan (PHL) agreed, and agenda was modified by a vote of 6-5.
- This exercise took approximately one full hour out of this one day meeting. The Secretary Treasurer has estimated that a BPR meeting costs approximately $13,000 per day. So, 13,000/9 hours in session = $1445/hour. Nearly $1500 just to protect the EVP from reasonable accountability.
- Once underway with the new agenda, after hearing from AFA President Mike Flores about that union's actual efforts to negotiate a contract, we proceeded with discussing allegations made by Lee Seham, that a John or Jane Doe sent him unflattering email.
- We received a preliminary briefing from the Ad Hoc Committee appointed to investigate. Chairman Dave Koseruba informed us that the ominous-looking page that shows a particular IP Address with times and dates, and a name associated with it, proves only one thing: that this IP address was assigned to a specific router at the time. The evidence does not show that any emails were sent from it, never mind the alleged emails in question. Furthermore, the preliminary finding of the Committee is that "None of the information presented to the Ad Hoc Committee offers ANY definitive evidence of wrong doing".
- We then received a legal briefing from attorneys Brian O'Dwyer and Pat Szymanski which informed us that even if someone within or associated with USAPA sent emails posing as someone else, or that if they were unflattering or slanderous that "USAPA cannot be held liable for the email messages because there is no indication that its members ratified, or even had any knowledge of, the alleged tortious conduct."
So, after many hours of discussion, it's concluded that the evidence is inconclusive, and that even if it were to eventually prove conclusive, USAPA cannot be held liable. And I'm here to tell you that we DID NOT need a $13,000 BPR meeting to figure this out. This is a case of Seham successfully motivating certain Board members into attempting to distract USAPA from the very legitimate audit of his legal bills. Seham has, by the way, withdrawn the lawsuit. It is interesting to note that discovery is a two way street. Withdrawal of his suit precludes discovery working in his direction. If the suit was as meritorious as some claim, why withdraw?
We then received legal opinions from O'Dwyer and Szymanski about Executive Vice President Gary Hummel's involvement in this whole affair, which amounted to an oral accounting of what had already been distributed to the BPR. Here are some of EVP Hummel's numerous violations according to the legal analysis:
"Although, some of what is in EVP Hummel's email messages may be in the public domain, much is not. EVP Hummel revealed confidential and privileged information. And even with respect to what is in the public domain, EVP Hummel made public statements (as an Officer whose statements can be used against USAPA) that are damaging to USAPA's interests and discussed litigation strategy outside the attorney-client privilege and which therefore could be used against USAPA in a court of law. These actions violated his fiduciary duty to the organization and the explicit provisions of the USAPA Constitution and UOM."
Continuing,
Without going into detail which would exacerbate the breach already perpetrated by EVP Hummel, it is absolutely clear that he disclosed "sensitive information" to the public in his email messages.
And more from the legal analysis,
There really couldn't be a more obvious breach of an officer's fiduciary duty than to assist an adverse party (Seham) in stonewalling a legitimate audit directed by the BPR, and to assist that same adverse party (again, Mr. Seham) with his purported claims against the very organization the officer is sworn to protect. No one would suggest that a member of Congress or an American diplomat could lawfully disclose confidential information or otherwise assist Al-Qaeda. No one should suggest that EVP Hummel acted properly in cooperating with Lee Seham in his efforts to avoid a legitimate audit of his bills, or to support his potential claims against USAPA.
Indeed, the resolution adopted by the BPR "directs" the "officers, employees and agents" of USAPA "to cooperate in the conduct of the audit" and further that "no officer, employee or agent of USAPA shall interfere with the conduct of the audit."
After establishing for the record that EVP Hummel has placed the Association at risk - the very thing he has accused others of doing - and establishing that he was working in violation of the resolution that authorized the audit of all our legal expenses, working in violation of his fiduciary to the Association, violating the signed confidentiality agreement that all USAPA Officers and Board Members have signed, and acting outside of his duties and responsibilities specified in the USAPA Constitution and Bylaws and the Union Operating Manual, the BPR took the following action: Nothing.
Possible courses of action to prevent EVP Hummel from continuing to act in this detrimental manner failed by a vote of 6-5. It appeared to me that protecting Hummel was the mission of Reps from PHX, and DCA, and Eric Jordan's DDR Jamie Weidner. (In fairness, DDR Weidner said that when Eric left the meeting in the early afternoon he was instructed to vote no for any action against EVP Hummel. For the record, Jordan had not heard all the discussion when he left the building.) And that's about it.
Fellow pilots, we hear from the vast majority of you that you want an end to the infighting. We've identified a focal point of that infighting: EVP Hummel. He made no effort to communicate any of his (read: Lee Seham's) concerns to his fellow Officers. Instead, he distributed them along with confidential information to "anyone who asked for them." When asked if he contacted Lee Seham or if Seham had contacted him, he admitted that he had. He claimed (with a straight face) that he only became aware of the Seham lawsuit against Jane Doe when he and his wife found it by chance on the Internet. Please think about this: Hummel told the BPR, with pilots in the audience, that he and his wife regularly cruise the internet looking for John and Jane Doe lawsuits on a particular website, and that's the only way he happened to know that Seham had filed suit. Armed with this important information, he somehow interpreted it as his responsibility, and the logical course of action, to break out with six emails to serve as his "report" for a BPR conference call.
We came to Charlotte because it's our duty to look after your interests and protect the Association. When presented with irrefutable evidence of wrongdoing and violation, five of us made our best effort to correct the problem and bring some semblance of accountability. I am reporting to you that the representatives from DCA, PHX, and Jordan/Weidner blocked those efforts and made sure that EVP Hummel is still not formally notified that he must cease acts that are contrary to the good of the Association and, in my opinion, performed only for political gain.
If you want to stop the infighting, you need this information to understand who to ask to stop.
Fraternally and with measured disgust,
Chairman Steve "Spike" Szpyrka
[email protected]
704-408-6814
USA320Pilot comments: I find it interesting that two of the three PHL Reps did not sign this update, Eric Jordan's resignation is effective Thursday, and the Friends of Cleary (FOCs) were out voted 6-5. It appears the BPR's new order has the DCA, PHX, and one PHL Rep aligned and the three CLT and two PHL Reps aligned. The two PHL/three CLT Reps are politically aligned with Cleary and Mowery, thus, Cleary has lost control of the BPR.
