traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
end_of_alpa said:
I fixed it for you.
Update to the dictionary will be published shortly.
2014 Pilot Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
I fixed it for you.
Update to the dictionary will be published shortly.
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
end_of_alpa said:
You do have more experience than me.
The position you hold is more valuable, that's why they pay you more.
A few keystrokes in Catcrew Option 6 changes the second but not the first.
Phoenix
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2003
- Messages
- 8,584
- Reaction score
- 7,430
traderjake said:
Since you are good at fixing things, why don't you fix Judge Silvers ruling while you are at it?
[SIZE=13pt]IT IS ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that pursuant to the Court’s Order filed March 31, 2014, judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendant US Airline Pilots Association on Count I and Count IV; judgment in favor of US Airways, Inc. on Count II; and a judgment of dismissal without prejudice on Count III. This judgment applies to the certified West Pilot Class as defined in the Court’s September 18, 2013, Order: “All pilots who are on the America West seniority list currently incorporated into the West Pilot’s collective bargaining agreement.” This action is hereby terminated. [/SIZE]
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
Thanks for the vote of confidence.
I'll leave that to APA and AAG to fix.
I'll leave that to APA and AAG to fix.
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
Phoenix said:
You're confusing me with Alex Jones.
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
Is USAPA's Protocol Agreement Approach Playing With Fire?
Before I offer my suggestions on how USAPA can get itself out of this potentially devastating Phyrric problem, let me discuss a few other points. Why? I believe USAPA is once again not being transparent, they’re being dishonest, and they have placed our SLI at risk of being an AA-TWA type of integration many pilots rightfully fear.
Fact #1: According to AAG, “The parties mutually agreed to extend the deadline for negotiation of a Protocol Agreement until February 18, 2014.”
Fact #2: According to AAG, “Despite the exchange of various proposals between the parties, an agreement could not be reached on a Protocol Agreement by the February 18 deadline.”
Fact #3: According to APA, “APA further asserts that, as of the date of Mr. Jones’ email, the parties had reached agreement on “a method for arbitrator selection.”
Fact #4: “On February 20, 2014, USAPA President Captain Gary Hummel sent a letter to NMB Chief of Staff Daniel Rainey, at his office in Washington, D.C., requesting a list of seven arbitrators pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs and the McCaskill-Bond Amendment.”
Chip’s comments: It is very likely from the time line above USAPA had no intent of reaching a Protocol Agreement with APA and AAG because shortly after USAPA pulled out of Protocol Agreement talks the union filed its request with the NMB and then filed its next lawsuit in District Court.
Questions #1: How come USAPA has not provided the pilots the “various proposals” for the Protocol Agreement? Where is the transparency? Why is USAPA not providing the pilots basic information on the M-B ground rules? Why is USAPA not providing us all of the information, again?
Question #2: USAPA was negotiating with APA and AAG on the Protocol Agreement and according to APA “as of the date of (AAG attorney) Mr. Jones’ email, the parties had reached agreement on a method for arbitrator selection.” Why did USAPA renege on a method of arbitrator selection and then submit its request for a single arbitrator arbitration before SCC, which clearly violates USAPA’s contract, the RLA, and contract law, again?
Conclusion: It is highly likely that during Protocol Agreement discussions USAPA had no intention of reaching a Protocol Agreement. And, the union is playing with fire because if the union’s NMB request is denied and USAPA’s complaint filed in the Court for the District of Columbia is denied or USAPA loses the case -- APA will have total control of the ISL process. This All or Nothing approach could produce another AA-TWA type of ISL result.
Furthermore, why has USAPA taken this approach and is not telling the pilots all of the facts? I believe APA and AAG have made it perfectly clear they will not proceed with a 2-way M-B ISL arbitration because of AOL’s DFR and liability threat. USAPA is doing everything it can to prevent the West pilots from having their own seat at the M-B ISL arbitration table. This approach; along with Pat Szymanski’s testimony in Judge Silver’s court, has placed US Airways’ pilots at serious risk of APA deciding the US Airways pilot’s ISL future after SCC where USAPA could be left being a pizza delivery man, if it wants to get close to any ISL activity.
Therefore, I strongly believe it’s in the best interests of all US Airways pilots, East and West, to obtain a seats at the M-B arbitration table, to obtain a F&E arbitration result. To do so USAPA should inform the NMB it agrees to participate in the M-B with the arbitration and dispute arbitrator selection method previously agreed to in the MOU and the union will then withdraw its M-B lawsuit filed in the Court of the District of Columbia.
In exchange for these actions I believe USAPA should propose to both APA and AAG to re-write two sections of APA’s January 17, 2014 Draft Protocol Agreement. My recommended changes are:
Revision 1 - Paragraph 2.A.: “Effective on or after the date the NMB determines the representation of the combined pilot class and craft of the New American, the Organization, if any, designated by the NMB, as the duly designated representative of the combined class and craft (“the Organization”), shall recognize and support three Merger Committees (MC), APA MC, Legacy US Airways East Pilot MC, and US Airways West Pilot MC, as are required to independently with autonomously represent, for seniority integration purposes, the pilots of the pre-merger seniority lists as independently described by each of the three MC’s in the combined class and craft. Consistent with the MOU, this Protocol Agreement, the duty of fair representation, and the Organization’s other legal obligations, the Organization shall delegate to such Merger Committees authority to act for and on the behalf of the pilots on their respective pre-merger seniority lists for purposes of concluding an integrated seniority list. Once designated, each MC shall fill its own vacancies, select their own merger counsel, and maintain all rights and responsibilities as an autonomous committee.”
Revision 2 – Paragraph 18: “One half of the $4 million provided for in paragraph 7 of the MOU shall be allocated for reimbursement of expenses incurred by the Merger Committee of representing the American pilots, and one half incurred by the Merger Committee(s) Representing the US Airways pilots (notice there are multiple merger committees to receive money from AAG). USAPA is further permitted, from its own treasury, to equally fund both the legacy US Airways East and US Airways West Merger Committees as decided by the BPR prior to SCC.
In conclusion, is USAPA’s efforts to prevent the West pilots from having their own seat at the M-B table, which is an “All or Nothing” approach that could produce another AA-TWA type of ISL result, worth the risk of Judge Silver’s “Phyrric victory” coming to fruition? And, for years USAPA’s zealots have cried and demanded a “Nic-Do-Over.” But, what when presented with that opportunity the brilliant minds located at USAPA’s WWHQs have said “no.” Once again, is USAPA playing with fire and opening the door for APA to decide the US Airways pilot’s placement on the New American’s ISL with the start of the staple job the implementation of the Nicolau Award?
Before I offer my suggestions on how USAPA can get itself out of this potentially devastating Phyrric problem, let me discuss a few other points. Why? I believe USAPA is once again not being transparent, they’re being dishonest, and they have placed our SLI at risk of being an AA-TWA type of integration many pilots rightfully fear.
Fact #1: According to AAG, “The parties mutually agreed to extend the deadline for negotiation of a Protocol Agreement until February 18, 2014.”
Fact #2: According to AAG, “Despite the exchange of various proposals between the parties, an agreement could not be reached on a Protocol Agreement by the February 18 deadline.”
Fact #3: According to APA, “APA further asserts that, as of the date of Mr. Jones’ email, the parties had reached agreement on “a method for arbitrator selection.”
Fact #4: “On February 20, 2014, USAPA President Captain Gary Hummel sent a letter to NMB Chief of Staff Daniel Rainey, at his office in Washington, D.C., requesting a list of seven arbitrators pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Allegheny-Mohawk LPPs and the McCaskill-Bond Amendment.”
Chip’s comments: It is very likely from the time line above USAPA had no intent of reaching a Protocol Agreement with APA and AAG because shortly after USAPA pulled out of Protocol Agreement talks the union filed its request with the NMB and then filed its next lawsuit in District Court.
Questions #1: How come USAPA has not provided the pilots the “various proposals” for the Protocol Agreement? Where is the transparency? Why is USAPA not providing the pilots basic information on the M-B ground rules? Why is USAPA not providing us all of the information, again?
Question #2: USAPA was negotiating with APA and AAG on the Protocol Agreement and according to APA “as of the date of (AAG attorney) Mr. Jones’ email, the parties had reached agreement on a method for arbitrator selection.” Why did USAPA renege on a method of arbitrator selection and then submit its request for a single arbitrator arbitration before SCC, which clearly violates USAPA’s contract, the RLA, and contract law, again?
Conclusion: It is highly likely that during Protocol Agreement discussions USAPA had no intention of reaching a Protocol Agreement. And, the union is playing with fire because if the union’s NMB request is denied and USAPA’s complaint filed in the Court for the District of Columbia is denied or USAPA loses the case -- APA will have total control of the ISL process. This All or Nothing approach could produce another AA-TWA type of ISL result.
Furthermore, why has USAPA taken this approach and is not telling the pilots all of the facts? I believe APA and AAG have made it perfectly clear they will not proceed with a 2-way M-B ISL arbitration because of AOL’s DFR and liability threat. USAPA is doing everything it can to prevent the West pilots from having their own seat at the M-B ISL arbitration table. This approach; along with Pat Szymanski’s testimony in Judge Silver’s court, has placed US Airways’ pilots at serious risk of APA deciding the US Airways pilot’s ISL future after SCC where USAPA could be left being a pizza delivery man, if it wants to get close to any ISL activity.
Therefore, I strongly believe it’s in the best interests of all US Airways pilots, East and West, to obtain a seats at the M-B arbitration table, to obtain a F&E arbitration result. To do so USAPA should inform the NMB it agrees to participate in the M-B with the arbitration and dispute arbitrator selection method previously agreed to in the MOU and the union will then withdraw its M-B lawsuit filed in the Court of the District of Columbia.
In exchange for these actions I believe USAPA should propose to both APA and AAG to re-write two sections of APA’s January 17, 2014 Draft Protocol Agreement. My recommended changes are:
Revision 1 - Paragraph 2.A.: “Effective on or after the date the NMB determines the representation of the combined pilot class and craft of the New American, the Organization, if any, designated by the NMB, as the duly designated representative of the combined class and craft (“the Organization”), shall recognize and support three Merger Committees (MC), APA MC, Legacy US Airways East Pilot MC, and US Airways West Pilot MC, as are required to independently with autonomously represent, for seniority integration purposes, the pilots of the pre-merger seniority lists as independently described by each of the three MC’s in the combined class and craft. Consistent with the MOU, this Protocol Agreement, the duty of fair representation, and the Organization’s other legal obligations, the Organization shall delegate to such Merger Committees authority to act for and on the behalf of the pilots on their respective pre-merger seniority lists for purposes of concluding an integrated seniority list. Once designated, each MC shall fill its own vacancies, select their own merger counsel, and maintain all rights and responsibilities as an autonomous committee.”
Revision 2 – Paragraph 18: “One half of the $4 million provided for in paragraph 7 of the MOU shall be allocated for reimbursement of expenses incurred by the Merger Committee of representing the American pilots, and one half incurred by the Merger Committee(s) Representing the US Airways pilots (notice there are multiple merger committees to receive money from AAG). USAPA is further permitted, from its own treasury, to equally fund both the legacy US Airways East and US Airways West Merger Committees as decided by the BPR prior to SCC.
In conclusion, is USAPA’s efforts to prevent the West pilots from having their own seat at the M-B table, which is an “All or Nothing” approach that could produce another AA-TWA type of ISL result, worth the risk of Judge Silver’s “Phyrric victory” coming to fruition? And, for years USAPA’s zealots have cried and demanded a “Nic-Do-Over.” But, what when presented with that opportunity the brilliant minds located at USAPA’s WWHQs have said “no.” Once again, is USAPA playing with fire and opening the door for APA to decide the US Airways pilot’s placement on the New American’s ISL with the start of the staple job the implementation of the Nicolau Award?
USA320Pilot said:
"Lions and Tigers and Bears! Oh My!" Sigh! We know chip, we know: "The sky is falling!!!" ...as always, and without your sage counsel, all will be lost! 🙂 Kindly remind us all of anything that you've ever called correctly before...? No? You can't? What a surprise. Should the APA find any way with which to take unto themselves all power, evade MB legislation entirely, and somehow manage a stapling of the US contingent; they will, whether the west has any seat or not...Period. You needn't help the APA in their efforts. Before you again offer your unsolicited and entirely laughable suggestions; just get over yourself and grow up.
"And, the union is playing with fire..." "Once again, is USAPA playing with fire...?" Can't you even make up your mind and take at least some semblance of a definitive stand, within even your own postings? 😉
Hawkhunter
Veteran
- Joined
- Jul 11, 2005
- Messages
- 577
- Reaction score
- 521
Hey Chippy, what EastUS1 is trying to say is STFU idiot.
Phoenix
Veteran
- Joined
- Apr 16, 2003
- Messages
- 8,584
- Reaction score
- 7,430
EastUS1 said:
I no longer have the interest in reading his predictions or "logic". Years ago it was somewhat intriguing but even then he never stuck around to provide a follow up to obvious misrepresentations and lies.
His most famous axiom that I ever read was "Fake it till ya make it." At least he is good at trying. If he ever makes it we are gonna be wowed.. unless of course he merely runs in front of a mob then declares himself a leader (again). 😀
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
"Mr Nicolau, we're happy with our position".
No dissent allowed.
No dissent allowed.
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
Hawkhunter said:
Thanks for the translation, I lost my EastUS1 to English dictionary.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
