2014 Pilot Discussion

[nycbusdriver]

What does the MOU say about disagreements over it's implementation? Perhaps you should read it instead of getting your info from the AWAPPA board.

Good point, Pi Brat....I had forgotten about that "fail safe."
 
Without reading it again, I believe it says that at a certain point in time if an combined seniority list is not completed, it goes to arbitration by a panel of three arbitrators.   The clock to reach that point in time is still ticking, and there will be no extension (because the company would have to approve, and they want this done.)
 
Looks like, if the story is true, the APA and USAPA will simply run out that clock and skip the SLI negotiations altogether.  Why not?  Who caress?  

 

[Res Judicata]

Good.  I can live with the status quo of the MOU for quite a while.  Separate ops FOREVER!
 
If APA and/or the company try a run around M-B, it will only end up in the federal courts again and take years to resolve.  USAPA might just become a well-funded LCC to maintain the fight.  We will miss the westhole dues, but we won't miss a beat.  
 
Parker can then go down in history as the guy who could not consummate two mergers of major carriers.  What a legacy for him as an airline leader!   Even David Siegle will be jealous!

HA!!! Best of luck avoiding prison sentences for those in charge of that theft. USAPA, once decertified, is absolutely nothing. You don't have a C&BL to even refer to. Nothing survives. Nothing. The funds are either returned to the rightful owners or the perpetrators of the fraud risk jail, felony convictions, and the loss of their ATP.

In your idiotic world, that probably sounds like a good plan.

 

[snapthis]

Good.  I can live with the status quo of the MOU for quite a while.  Separate ops FOREVER!
 
If APA and/or the company try a run around M-B, it will only end up in the federal courts again and take years to resolve.  USAPA might just become a well-funded LCC to maintain the fight.  We will miss the westhole dues, but we won't miss a beat.  
 
Parker can then go down in history as the guy who could not consummate two mergers of major carriers.  What a legacy for him as an airline leader!   Even David Siegle will be jealous!

Step one...get trademark from Cleary. Then what do we do?


USAPA
By: Cleary, Captain Michael J. T
labor unions
This is a brand page for the USAPA trademark by Cleary, Captain Michael J. in Durham, NH, 03824. Write a review about a product or service associated with this USAPA trademark. Or, contact the owner Cleary, Captain Michael J. of the USAPA trademark by filing a request to communicate with the Legal Correspondent for licensing, use, and/or questions related to the USAPA trademark.
On Thursday, November 08, 2012, a U.S. federal trademark registration was filed for USAPA by Cleary, Captain Michael J., Durham, NH 03824. The USPTO has given the USAPA trademark serial number of 85774309. The current federal status of this trademark filing is CANCELLATION PENDING. The correspondent listed for USAPA is CAPTAIN MICHAEL J CLEARY of 26 CEDAR POINT RD, DURHAM, NH 03824, . The USAPA trademark is filed in the category of Advertising, Business & Retail Services . The description provided to the USPTO for USAPA is Labor unions.
Word Mark: USAPA
Status/
Status Date:
CANCELLATION PENDING
1/14/2014
Serial Number: 85774309
Filing Date: 11/8/2012
Registration Number: 4364282
Registration Date: 7/9/2013
Goods and Services: Labor unions
Mark Description: NOT AVAILABLE
Type Of Mark: Service Mark
Published For Opposition Date: 4/23/2013
Last Applicant/Owner: Cleary, Captain Michael J.
Durham, NH 03824
Why is this contact information displayed?
Mark Drawing Code: Standard Character Mark
Design Search: (NO DATA)
Register Type: Principal
Disclaimer: (NOT AVAILABLE)
Correspondent:
CAPTAIN MICHAEL J CLEARY
26 CEDAR POINT RD
DURHAM, NH 03824


Status: 630 - New Application - Record Initialized Not Assigned To Examiner

Serial Number86164942
Word MarkUSAPA
Status630 - New Application - Record Initialized Not Assigned To Examiner
Status Date2014-01-27
Filing Date2014-01-14
Mark Drawing4000 - Standard character mark Typeset
Attorney NameBarry I. Friedman
Statements
Goods and ServicesLabor unions
Pseudo MarkUS AIRLINE PILOTS ASSOCIATION

 

[Res Judicata]

What does the MOU say about disagreements over it's implementation? Perhaps you should read it instead of getting your info from the AWAPPA board.

Best of luck with that. By June 1st if not much sooner: "What's USAPA?"

 

[snapthis]

Merger Committee Protocol Agreement Update

For several weeks, your Merger Committee has been collaboratively working towards a protocol agreement with APA to guide negotiations for the Seniority List Integration (SLI) going forward. Unfortunately at the last minute, APA insisted on a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU. Regrettably, because of this change, we now find ourselves at an impasse.

A protocol agreement is intended to establish basic ground rules for the SLI process. We had come to consensus on almost everything contained within the various drafts that had been exchanged between the parties over the past several weeks. With little notice, APA’s Merger Committee demanded USAPA allow APA and the Company the option to modify the Protocol Agreement should APA be certified as the sole bargaining representative by the NMB. In effect, APA wants the ability to negate agreements made in the past, after it has been certified as the single bargaining representative. Changing rules like this would create an unfair situation and subvert the McCaskill-Bond process which was enacted to prevent unfair merger practices that have occurred in the past.

Your USAPA Merger Committee has refused to agree to this demand. With Legal Counsel, we are reviewing all available options to protect you in this process. We will keep you updated on further developments.

USAPA Merger Committee
 
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
View attachment 10025
 
View attachment 10026
 
 
 

 

[nevergiveup]

Good point, Pi Brat....I had forgotten about that "fail safe."
 
Without reading it again, I believe it says that at a certain point in time if an combined seniority list is not completed, it goes to arbitration by a panel of three arbitrators.   The clock to reach that point in time is still ticking, and there will be no extension (because the company would have to approve, and they want this done.)
 
Looks like, if the story is true, the APA and USAPA will simply run out that clock and skip the SLI negotiations altogether.  Why not?  Who caress?  

I recall we must get a JCBA before the arbitration even begins! 

 

[Res Judicata]

West won't be at the table, except as represented by the former pilots of US Airways.  Judge Silver said so.  Doesn't matter whether USAPA exists or not.

You're a fking delusional idiot. The New and improved nic award is getting into the hands of an arbitration panel via our legal team. Nothing. You. Can. Do. To. Stop. It.

 

[dca319]

 
Good.  I can live with the status quo of the MOU for quite a while.  Separate ops FOREVER!
 
If APA and/or the company try a run around M-B, it will only end up in the federal courts again and take years to resolve.  USAPA might just become a well-funded LCC to maintain the fight.  We will miss the westhole dues, but we won't miss a beat.  
 
Parker can then go down in history as the guy who could not consummate two mergers of major carriers.  What a legacy for him as an airline leader!   Even David Siegle will be jealous!

Status quo? You moron, the only thing now is NMB giving APA the green light and poof, ISAPA is a fart in the wind. You think a lawsuit is going to stop anything?!? Again, idiot, it won't. We've been check mated. There are no options to review. All that's left is to wait for APA.

Status quo - makes me laugh. Friggin' idiot.

 

[Res Judicata]

Merger Committee Protocol Agreement Update
For several weeks, your Merger Committee has been collaboratively working towards a protocol agreement with APA to guide negotiations for the Seniority List Integration (SLI) going forward. Unfortunately at the last minute, APA insisted on a significant change that would radically change the process you accepted a year ago through ratification of the MOU. Regrettably, because of this change, we now find ourselves at an impasse.
A protocol agreement is intended to establish basic ground rules for the SLI process. We had come to consensus on almost everything contained within the various drafts that had been exchanged between the parties over the past several weeks. With little notice, APA’s Merger Committee demanded USAPA allow APA and the Company the option to modify the Protocol Agreement should APA be certified as the sole bargaining representative by the NMB. In effect, APA wants the ability to negate agreements made in the past, after it has been certified as the single bargaining representative. Changing rules like this would create an unfair situation and subvert the McCaskill-Bond process which was enacted to prevent unfair merger practices that have occurred in the past.
Your USAPA Merger Committee has refused to agree to this demand. With Legal Counsel, we are reviewing all available options to protect you in this process. We will keep you updated on further developments.
USAPA Merger Committee

So now you scabs don't believe in the "sanctity" of your certified Union and their omnipotent right to control SLI? Man did Silver kick your asses.

HHHHHAAAAAA!!!!!!!! Told you pricks you were too stupid to not royally FK this up. Go ahead and sue, you'll be a decertified, bad memory before any Judge even looks at your little complaint.

 

[dca319]

 
I'm sure Parker's shaking in his boots, he's played USAPA perfectly (LOA 93) for 5 years.

That he has. I remember the bluster coming from the likes of Jamie and his band of box-carrying idiots on how they were going to show the commuter CEO how it's done.

We sure showed him. And saved him a few million in the process.

 

[dca319]

You still need it spelled out?

 

[dca319]

Parker can then go down in history as the guy who could not consummate two mergers of major carriers.  What a legacy for him as an airline leader!   Even David Siegle will be jealous!

Are you truly this moronic?

 

[Piedmont1984]

The MOU timeline says arbitration to begin 90 days after POR. That would be Mar 10 timeframe. Another MOU timeline says single carrier status expected 6-8 months after filing. That would be July (APA filed on Jan 14). Does the west expect the SCS timeline to be reduced by almost 4 months - and if so based on what? If March arrives without a SCS determination then USAPA and APA begin the arbitration process. It's a battle of timelines.

 

[Res Judicata]

The MOU timeline says arbitration to begin 90 days after POR. That would be Mar 10 timeframe. Another MOU timeline says single carrier status expected 6-8 months after filing. That would be July (APA filed on Jan 14). Does the west expect the SCS timeline to be reduced by almost 4 months - and if so based on what? If March arrives without a SCS determination then USAPA and APA begin the arbitration process. It's a battle of timelines.

Gee, I hope there aren't any delays...like an appeal. Whose under greater time pressure...USTUPID, The APA, or The Company?

 

[Beancounter]

It appears that in USAPA's quest to dictate seniority to the west, it may have given the APA the chance to dictate it to us all, both east and west. Time will tell I guess. For those of you on the east that told us, "don't worry we'll decide what's fair," are you comfortable with the APA saying the same to you? I'm not jumping up and down with glee, because I know the APA's first interest is it's pilot's and I have yet to see what they'd do if in control. If indeed they do gain control of the process, may they have mercy on our souls (seniority), or at least make an attempt at being fair.

Bean