2014 Pilot Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
CallawayGolf
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 1,961
Not surprising; DFR II was destined to futility from the get go. I haven't read the order but I would think any new legal strategy would depend on what she actually said and also how long USAPA survives to defend its actions. An appeal or a DFR III might start after USAPA is liquidated, which would also be futile IMO.Pi brat said:
Let the new SLI process proceed and then evaluate the results against federal law from there. Going to another federally-mandated arbitration might work out great for the west, or it could give east pilots all they dreamed of for eight years, or all LCC pilots could get put way behind AMR pilots as a nice gift for not being unified going into the process.
luvthe9
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 9,464
- Reaction score
- 14,119
Now that this election is behind us, I would like to take time to educate our pilots on the some of the unbelievable behavior that transpired during this process. This is not to inflame but to attempt to prevent this behavior from otherwise 'professional people' through recognition that there are consequences to our actions. I intend to use specific names and related actions where possible as I want our pilots to relate to these individuals directly if they agree that their actions were intolerable and unprofessional. Words and actions have consequences and everyone should be held accountable for those words and actions. These are the consequences.
Note also that these are my 'opinions' based on personal observation. Further, I have always lived by a tenet that if you use certain words to describe an individual, you best be prepared to say those words to their face and to defend yourself physically on the field of battle as necessary. I intend to use those words.
The most obvious to all of us should be JoeVotesNo. This method of campaigning was by far the most cowardly act from an individual(s) most of us have ever witnessed. We were literally inundated with messages from this unnamed source that many believe to be none other than Mark King due to the addresses on some of the mailings. Now, I have no issue with individuals attempting to publicly support their candidate. What I take issue with is not having the courage to sign your name. The fact that they did not have the intestinal fortitude to sign demeans their candidate and reinforces their cowardly behavior. If any of you were influenced by these unsigned mailings then shame on you, and, to those that did pay attention and fell for their FUD, I know a Nigerian General that needs your help with laundering money. Further, for those of us that have paid attention over the years, it should be clear that Joe Blow is not an individual but a group of pilots and based on the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt that was their theme, it should be obvious to most of us just who was involved in this group. Everyone here knows the greatest FUD-Munnster of them all and his band of miscreants. His reputation is unprecedented and he and his group have proclaimed the Nicalou award as the way forward ever since its inception. Also, recognize that as omission of the truth or statements with the intent to deceive are lies, then I proclaim that these people are outright and shameful liars. However, if the ends justify the means then I guess they are justified in their own sick and limited minds.
Next in my order of despicable pilots is John DuBarry. You may remember John as he is noted for his past outrageous behavior. In fact he is the pilot that could not control himself in a public forum and verbally abused you, Bill, in the PHL food court to the point of creating a scene that was on the verge of turning violent. If I remember correctly, you indicated he was so out of control that he was on the verge of foaming at the mouth. To say that he was a public embarrassment to our profession would be an understatement. He is also the one that misinformed all of our PHL pilots that I sent fictitious emails during the previous PHL BPR elections, where he was soundly defeated. When I asked for copies of those mailing he said I didn't actually write them but I was guilty 'by association'. Now John has again outdone himself by filing formal charges against the 9 members of the BPR that voted for the recall even though it is constitutionally permitted. I guess if you don't subscribe to Johns personal point of view, you are guilty of a DFR. Maybe if he would show up at a domicile meeting he would discover that his is not the only point of view, but again, consider the source. I can personally attest that I have never had the pleasure of meeting a more ignorant pilot.
As I indicated earlier, I have no issues with 'individuals' supporting their candidate. I do however have issue with Committee members taking public political stance. This becomes even more important when those individuals are required and expected to maintain absolute neutrality due to the nature of their position. This provisional trust was broken when Appeal Board members Roger Henrickson and Doug Burke wrote a politically motivated letter to support their candidate. This coming soon after Henrickson made a very controversial decision regarding the Presidents medical status. I cannot think of a greater conflict of interest and I can tell you that these actions have now created an environment where nothing either of them can ever say again through the Appeal Board can be accepted as without bias. I can tell you that should they ever speak at a BPR meeting, I will leave the room and abstain from any vote where their decision was involved unless it would adversely affect our pilots. Their credibility as members of the Appeal Board is now irrevocably destroyed. To make this even clearer you need to recall the prior actions of former PHL Rep Doug Burke. You may remember Doug as the pilot that did not defend his fellow pilot in our fight for our international crew rest seat. When the company unilaterally broke our contract by selling our crew rest seat, some of our pilots had the balls to stand up and say no. When one of our pilots was escorted off the aircraft and threatened with disciplinary action for defending our contract, Doug decided he would fly the aircraft. The result of this lack of supporting our fellow pilots led to the loss of this seat and grievance. To do this as a sitting Rep is unconscionable but consistent with his pussy approach. To make matters worse, immediately following the election Burke publicly chastised and humiliated our PHL Chairman, Paul DiOrio. He was loud, boisterous, obnoxious, and unprofessional. He verbally attacked Paul in the hotel lobby by screaming at him in full view and earshot of hotel guests, calling him a disgrace and indicating that he would never allow Paul to represent him in the Chief Pilots Office. The next time you see Doug, make sure you thank him for this unprofessional but consistent lack of respect towards his fellow pilot. The only thing that surprises me through all of this is that Jamie Weidner did not sign their letter.
The next Apolitical Committee to enter into the fray was the Balloting Committee. While publicly stating that they had no political motivation, they all left office simultaneously and just prior to the election. I indicated to them that this is a statement and a statement is political. Now we are being asked to reinstate them and to this I say, go home. You will not have my support.
Then we had an individual that took it upon himself to personally threaten us as reps and threaten me personally. Again, I have no problem with this and would prefer this as a method of settling differences. The caveat however is that you are willing to take off the epaulets, put on the gloves and go at it. In this case I will not mention his name as this became quite heated and eventually involved Professional Standards and was headed to HR.
Then we had Kirk Atkinson who wrote so many letters and took such a personal as opposed to factual approach that I could not keep up with them. In his case however, he did have the courage to sign his name. My only response to Kirk is to say thank you for the passion in your opinion but you owe me a delete key as you have worn mine out.
In summary I think it's important to know that while I agree with the passion of supporting your candidate; this election was particularly ugly. While it is often times difficult not to become emotional especially when you are constantly bombarded with lies, innuendo and personal attacks; I believe the BPR members did an unusually good job of attempting to stick to the facts. The opposition however relied on Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt and outright lies to accomplish their goals. I have found them to be insulting, unprofessional and childish and could not have less respect for these named individuals. I would hope that you would agree that they demean our profession and make a mockery of our democratic process.
Everyone here must understand that a vote is the only real barometer we have to actually know the will of the pilots. When an issue is this significant, it must be called to vote. My only issue is that we maintain a level playing field. I was recently asked by one of our Officers if I believe that we now know the true view of the pilots and I am sorry to say that I had to respond that this election was so dirty that I just don't know but I have to accept the results.
There is also the lingering issue of publishing the base breakdown of the election results. We have had numerous requests to release that information as the breakdown could be significant as it would show a clear view of East vs. West attitudes. We have asked for that information but have been informed that the manner in which this information has been released is consistent with 'past practice'. We were also informed that until Judge Silver rules on Addington II, to deviate from past practice could potentially have adverse affects on our case. If this is so, then I see no reason to believe that information could not become available after the ruling if the pilots insist on having it released.
For now however, we have all agreed to work in a spirit of cooperation and feel it may not be in our best interest to open up a potential hornets’ nest at this time. Should however that spirit of cooperation be short lived, we may have to reconsider our options. I also think that in that spirit of cooperation and the obvious conflicts of interest that both Roger Henrickson and Mark King should either step down or be asked by the administration to leave. If you agree, I encourage you to inform both your reps and the administration of your views. Further, I encourage you to reinforce to the named individuals how you view their actions. Everyone needs to be held accountable for their behavior and again, actions have consequences.
Sincerely,
Paul Music
Note also that these are my 'opinions' based on personal observation. Further, I have always lived by a tenet that if you use certain words to describe an individual, you best be prepared to say those words to their face and to defend yourself physically on the field of battle as necessary. I intend to use those words.
The most obvious to all of us should be JoeVotesNo. This method of campaigning was by far the most cowardly act from an individual(s) most of us have ever witnessed. We were literally inundated with messages from this unnamed source that many believe to be none other than Mark King due to the addresses on some of the mailings. Now, I have no issue with individuals attempting to publicly support their candidate. What I take issue with is not having the courage to sign your name. The fact that they did not have the intestinal fortitude to sign demeans their candidate and reinforces their cowardly behavior. If any of you were influenced by these unsigned mailings then shame on you, and, to those that did pay attention and fell for their FUD, I know a Nigerian General that needs your help with laundering money. Further, for those of us that have paid attention over the years, it should be clear that Joe Blow is not an individual but a group of pilots and based on the Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt that was their theme, it should be obvious to most of us just who was involved in this group. Everyone here knows the greatest FUD-Munnster of them all and his band of miscreants. His reputation is unprecedented and he and his group have proclaimed the Nicalou award as the way forward ever since its inception. Also, recognize that as omission of the truth or statements with the intent to deceive are lies, then I proclaim that these people are outright and shameful liars. However, if the ends justify the means then I guess they are justified in their own sick and limited minds.
Next in my order of despicable pilots is John DuBarry. You may remember John as he is noted for his past outrageous behavior. In fact he is the pilot that could not control himself in a public forum and verbally abused you, Bill, in the PHL food court to the point of creating a scene that was on the verge of turning violent. If I remember correctly, you indicated he was so out of control that he was on the verge of foaming at the mouth. To say that he was a public embarrassment to our profession would be an understatement. He is also the one that misinformed all of our PHL pilots that I sent fictitious emails during the previous PHL BPR elections, where he was soundly defeated. When I asked for copies of those mailing he said I didn't actually write them but I was guilty 'by association'. Now John has again outdone himself by filing formal charges against the 9 members of the BPR that voted for the recall even though it is constitutionally permitted. I guess if you don't subscribe to Johns personal point of view, you are guilty of a DFR. Maybe if he would show up at a domicile meeting he would discover that his is not the only point of view, but again, consider the source. I can personally attest that I have never had the pleasure of meeting a more ignorant pilot.
As I indicated earlier, I have no issues with 'individuals' supporting their candidate. I do however have issue with Committee members taking public political stance. This becomes even more important when those individuals are required and expected to maintain absolute neutrality due to the nature of their position. This provisional trust was broken when Appeal Board members Roger Henrickson and Doug Burke wrote a politically motivated letter to support their candidate. This coming soon after Henrickson made a very controversial decision regarding the Presidents medical status. I cannot think of a greater conflict of interest and I can tell you that these actions have now created an environment where nothing either of them can ever say again through the Appeal Board can be accepted as without bias. I can tell you that should they ever speak at a BPR meeting, I will leave the room and abstain from any vote where their decision was involved unless it would adversely affect our pilots. Their credibility as members of the Appeal Board is now irrevocably destroyed. To make this even clearer you need to recall the prior actions of former PHL Rep Doug Burke. You may remember Doug as the pilot that did not defend his fellow pilot in our fight for our international crew rest seat. When the company unilaterally broke our contract by selling our crew rest seat, some of our pilots had the balls to stand up and say no. When one of our pilots was escorted off the aircraft and threatened with disciplinary action for defending our contract, Doug decided he would fly the aircraft. The result of this lack of supporting our fellow pilots led to the loss of this seat and grievance. To do this as a sitting Rep is unconscionable but consistent with his pussy approach. To make matters worse, immediately following the election Burke publicly chastised and humiliated our PHL Chairman, Paul DiOrio. He was loud, boisterous, obnoxious, and unprofessional. He verbally attacked Paul in the hotel lobby by screaming at him in full view and earshot of hotel guests, calling him a disgrace and indicating that he would never allow Paul to represent him in the Chief Pilots Office. The next time you see Doug, make sure you thank him for this unprofessional but consistent lack of respect towards his fellow pilot. The only thing that surprises me through all of this is that Jamie Weidner did not sign their letter.
The next Apolitical Committee to enter into the fray was the Balloting Committee. While publicly stating that they had no political motivation, they all left office simultaneously and just prior to the election. I indicated to them that this is a statement and a statement is political. Now we are being asked to reinstate them and to this I say, go home. You will not have my support.
Then we had an individual that took it upon himself to personally threaten us as reps and threaten me personally. Again, I have no problem with this and would prefer this as a method of settling differences. The caveat however is that you are willing to take off the epaulets, put on the gloves and go at it. In this case I will not mention his name as this became quite heated and eventually involved Professional Standards and was headed to HR.
Then we had Kirk Atkinson who wrote so many letters and took such a personal as opposed to factual approach that I could not keep up with them. In his case however, he did have the courage to sign his name. My only response to Kirk is to say thank you for the passion in your opinion but you owe me a delete key as you have worn mine out.
In summary I think it's important to know that while I agree with the passion of supporting your candidate; this election was particularly ugly. While it is often times difficult not to become emotional especially when you are constantly bombarded with lies, innuendo and personal attacks; I believe the BPR members did an unusually good job of attempting to stick to the facts. The opposition however relied on Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt and outright lies to accomplish their goals. I have found them to be insulting, unprofessional and childish and could not have less respect for these named individuals. I would hope that you would agree that they demean our profession and make a mockery of our democratic process.
Everyone here must understand that a vote is the only real barometer we have to actually know the will of the pilots. When an issue is this significant, it must be called to vote. My only issue is that we maintain a level playing field. I was recently asked by one of our Officers if I believe that we now know the true view of the pilots and I am sorry to say that I had to respond that this election was so dirty that I just don't know but I have to accept the results.
There is also the lingering issue of publishing the base breakdown of the election results. We have had numerous requests to release that information as the breakdown could be significant as it would show a clear view of East vs. West attitudes. We have asked for that information but have been informed that the manner in which this information has been released is consistent with 'past practice'. We were also informed that until Judge Silver rules on Addington II, to deviate from past practice could potentially have adverse affects on our case. If this is so, then I see no reason to believe that information could not become available after the ruling if the pilots insist on having it released.
For now however, we have all agreed to work in a spirit of cooperation and feel it may not be in our best interest to open up a potential hornets’ nest at this time. Should however that spirit of cooperation be short lived, we may have to reconsider our options. I also think that in that spirit of cooperation and the obvious conflicts of interest that both Roger Henrickson and Mark King should either step down or be asked by the administration to leave. If you agree, I encourage you to inform both your reps and the administration of your views. Further, I encourage you to reinforce to the named individuals how you view their actions. Everyone needs to be held accountable for their behavior and again, actions have consequences.
Sincerely,
Paul Music
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,146
- Reaction score
- 3,236
Again, for the record:
FACT: Nicolau was NOT FEDERAL ARBITRATION
FACT: If this MERGER of the APA and USAPA (and only those TWO) does go to McCaskill/Bond, which IS federal law the THREE arbitrators CANNOT punish either APA or USAPA for their respective arguments because as admonished in the United/Continental Arbitration under ALPA (new) merger policy the Arbitrators there realize that how they arbitrate in the future could very well put their own profession at risk in the court system.
FACT: Nicolau was NOT FEDERAL ARBITRATION
FACT: If this MERGER of the APA and USAPA (and only those TWO) does go to McCaskill/Bond, which IS federal law the THREE arbitrators CANNOT punish either APA or USAPA for their respective arguments because as admonished in the United/Continental Arbitration under ALPA (new) merger policy the Arbitrators there realize that how they arbitrate in the future could very well put their own profession at risk in the court system.
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,146
- Reaction score
- 3,236
I remember that he "predicted" the law favored the Westicles. This was when we were having more "civil" discourse in those days and before the likes of Res Judicata, Nic4US, Metroyet and their ILK put a damper on reasonable dissertation. But no matter, let the record SHOW that I was %100 correct in MY legal analysis and Calloway was WRONG. I have the record from the past to prove it.
- Joined
- May 8, 2007
- Messages
- 3,146
- Reaction score
- 3,236
Let's GLOAT some more.
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
But all the Court can do at this stage is implore USAPA to, in the words of
CAB, “make every effort to see that [the West Pilots’] are given extensive consideration, and
that their interests are fairly and fully represented” during seniority integration. National
Airlines, Acquisition, 84 C.A.B. 408, 477 (1979). And when USAPA is no longer the
certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration.
15
CAB, “make every effort to see that [the West Pilots’] are given extensive consideration, and
that their interests are fairly and fully represented” during seniority integration. National
Airlines, Acquisition, 84 C.A.B. 408, 477 (1979). And when USAPA is no longer the
certified representative, it must immediately stop participating in the seniority integration.
15
CallawayGolf
Veteran
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 1,920
- Reaction score
- 1,961
Seemed like an easy one to make after her last ruling on the DJ. She clearly doesn't like USAPA and it's legal counsel, but calling this a DFR after she failed to resolve on the much easier legal standard of a DJ that she said was ripe was not a big stretch. No one knows what ultimately would have happened if LCC was standalone until the next CBA, but for now the east has won the victory they desired here. What that does in the final product with an APA list is still a really big question. At least that's a question that simply cannot drag on for eight more years this time around.Pi brat said:
Phoenix
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2003
- Messages
- 8,584
- Reaction score
- 7,430
CallawayGolf said:
Silver has a better grasp of politically sympathetic word smithing than she does of the rule of law. IMHO it would have cost a lot less if the courts had been able to divorce themselves from personal feelings and political crafting from the very beginning.
The APA and USAPA can now come up with a list, put it out for ratification for all of us to deem it fair, and we move on. The folks in charge appear to be moderate enough and political enough that it might just work out to piss off everyone, in a good sort of way. 😀
Piedmont1984
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2004
- Messages
- 1,737
- Reaction score
- 897
In the event that APA becomes our bargaining agent before the M/B process is complete, can someone post a link or reference the specific language which allows USAPA to continue to represent our interests during seniority arbitration. IOW, once the NMB certifies APA as the bargaining agent for all pilots, USAPA can no longer act as the legal representative for the former LCC pilots unless there exists MTA or MOU language to the contrary, which I am having trouble finding.
Depending on what happens with AFA/APFA, single carrier status could happen sooner rather than later. I don't see how this would be in our interests.
Silver's interpretation of the timeline and it's significance has me concerned.
Depending on what happens with AFA/APFA, single carrier status could happen sooner rather than later. I don't see how this would be in our interests.
Silver's interpretation of the timeline and it's significance has me concerned.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
