snapthis
Veteran
- Joined
- Dec 23, 2009
- Messages
- 4,236
- Reaction score
- 6,907
Here are your wins....Claxon said:
1) USAPA Loses DFR Case!/US pilot thread
Started by Richard, May 05 2009 02:08 PM
2) On September 28th, 2011, Judge Conrad granted US Airways' request for a preliminary injunction. You can read the 45 page order here. Our initial comments are:
USAPA has been sued in two different federal district courts by two different plaintiffs the West pilots and now the company. Both plaintiffs sued to enjoin (stop) USAPA from consciously harming the respective interests of the plaintiffs. In both suits, the plaintiffs prevailed against USAPA.
Recall that Lee Seham boasted early in our suit that "DFRs are notoriously difficult to win." Judge Conrad writes, "[p]reliminary injunctions are an extraordinary remedy whose primary function is to protect the status quo and to prevent irreparable harm during the pendency of a lawsuit".
Twice now USAPA has lost on claims which should have been easy for a union to prevail on had they followed the law. It is astounding that a union could face two different claims and lose on both, all within three and a half years of its creation.
In addition to losing a DFR and an injunction, in its short lifetime, USAPA has also sued its own members under a civil RICO theory, lost, appealed and lost again on the appeal. In addition, USAPA has allowed grievances to become backlogged to levels unheard of under ALPA; spent over three years in Section 6 negotiations with virtually no progress; virtually eliminated West representation on committees; burned through millions of dollars of pilots' dues money in other frivolous investigations; and now faces the prospect of dozens of pilots being terminated as a result of USAPA's illegal job action. USAPA rabidly uses its Section 29 powers against its membership, unlike anything seen before under East or West ALPA.
The common denominator in all of USAPA's experiences since its inception is the habit of doing the wrong thing, even when the right thing to do is glaringly obvious. The mentality appears to be, "[w]e will get what we want, right or wrong, no matter what it takes!" This fact becomes abundantly clear when one reads Judge Conrad's order. We are stunned by how similar the injunction order against USAPA is when compared to Judge Wake's "Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law," (Doc 593). Both are from very different claims, with very different facts, but when we were finished reading Judge Conrad's order for the first time, it was as if we had seen all of this before. We have. Once again, it comes down to USAPA's consistent inability to do the right thing.
We have printed the headers below from Judge Conrad's order with selected text from each section. We also referenced headers and text from Judge Wake's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law for you to compare to Judge Conrad's order. The gist is clear that the union is wrong. Judge Conrad makes it obvious that USAPA is wrong in its intent, wrong in its actions, and wrong in its direction.
