Nobody held anybody hostage, there were many attempts at negotiations, all failed, BTW USAPA did negotiate the MOU correct?, They are your NMB legal bargaining agent correct?, USAPA is your legal rep according to a signed contract correct?Beancounter said:
2014 Pilot Discussion
- Thread starter Falcon
- Start date
- Status
Beancounter
Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,378
- Reaction score
- 1,817
C'mon USA, how do you expect the east to run roughshod over the west if they have representation and there is possibly a neutral arbitrator? What are you wanting, a fair and equitable seniority integration??? You and i both know the best way to do this is to take a separate never integrated group from a prior merger and throw them and an arbitrated list in the closet. That way the east can decide what's in their best interests.....oops, i mean what is in everyone's best interest.USA320Pilot said:
Bean with sarcasm
algflyr said:
Pretty much sir. Ya' gotta' just love all the attempted "heroics" within all standard "army" of whatever presentations. Case in point: "The past six years have been incredibly challenging and trying," What tha' hecks so "incredibly challenging and trying" about hiring some frikkin' lawyers?
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
[SIZE=10pt]I do not like the Nicolau Award and I believe it's unfair, but that is my opinion and not a fact. I believe those who voted for USAPA created this problem because they did not listen to Mike Abram. I believe the creation of USAPA shifted the dispute from a moral argument, which could ahve been dealt with under ALPA, to a DFR argument and subsequent complaint(s). Do like this? No, of course not. But, I believe "final and binding" is "final and binding," otherwise; the entire dispute resolution process would become a mockery.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Separately, in my opinion, it's wrong for a voting majority to try to impose their will on a minority group to virtually staple a pre-merger pilot group to the bottom of the joint SL and for unemployed furloughed pilots to become senior to active Captains under the guise of C&Rs. I know many East pilots can accommodate their thoughts to justify their staple desires because of career disappointment, but from a moral perspective I believe that is wrong.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Far too many people are looking at the East vs. West pilot dispute from an emotional SLI perspective when the issue is all about DFR.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]And, USAPA has hurt hundreds of thousands of pilots, their families, and US Airways' customers by their illegal actions and inability to reach a JCBA with the company, even if that JCBA had only been the Kirby Proposal.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Meanwhile, according to court filings the Company and APA are seeking West Pilot Class certification and the West pilot's having a seat at the M-B BOA table and for APA to appoint MCs, which is an interesting development. Why? DFR and liability.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]I saw two interesting posts on another board, They are:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"Remember that ever since the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the Addington I jury verdict and Judge Wake's injunction, the courts have deemed USAPA's DOH scheme to be an "unquestionably ripe DFR". Do you think that has fallen on deaf ears within the APA? Even Judge Silver's recent ruling said that the DFR violation was avoided on the slimmest of margins solely based on the fact that USAPA did not include an alternative list (DOH based because that's needed to comply with the USAPA C&BLs) for comparison to the Nicolau Award. What's different now is that the MOU spells out a definitive timeline to an SLI. The APA will be the CBA and the new list will be used for bidding purposes shortly after its release because it is preceded by a JCBA. Thus no "ripeness" issue is likely to delay any DFR violation claim as has been the case with USAPA's inability to secure a contract and implement a list."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"To date, the East pilots have used their statistical majority to keep the question if the Nic is final & binding in abeyance. With this advantage (majority) soon to be lost, I expect the APA parsing through the subject rather quickly. If, under any circumstances, the APA inherits the same DFR liability for using a non-Nic list, I suspect that the APA will insure themselves. How? By allowing what USAPA refuses; a West voice from within the CBA to advocate for the Nic's inclusion moving forward. By allowing the West independent counsel and committee, the APA can do as ALPA does and remain neutral in SLI arbitrations. Once finalized, all the APA is responsible is to implement the award properly."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Separately, in my opinion, it's wrong for a voting majority to try to impose their will on a minority group to virtually staple a pre-merger pilot group to the bottom of the joint SL and for unemployed furloughed pilots to become senior to active Captains under the guise of C&Rs. I know many East pilots can accommodate their thoughts to justify their staple desires because of career disappointment, but from a moral perspective I believe that is wrong.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Far too many people are looking at the East vs. West pilot dispute from an emotional SLI perspective when the issue is all about DFR.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]And, USAPA has hurt hundreds of thousands of pilots, their families, and US Airways' customers by their illegal actions and inability to reach a JCBA with the company, even if that JCBA had only been the Kirby Proposal.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Meanwhile, according to court filings the Company and APA are seeking West Pilot Class certification and the West pilot's having a seat at the M-B BOA table and for APA to appoint MCs, which is an interesting development. Why? DFR and liability.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]I saw two interesting posts on another board, They are:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"Remember that ever since the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the Addington I jury verdict and Judge Wake's injunction, the courts have deemed USAPA's DOH scheme to be an "unquestionably ripe DFR". Do you think that has fallen on deaf ears within the APA? Even Judge Silver's recent ruling said that the DFR violation was avoided on the slimmest of margins solely based on the fact that USAPA did not include an alternative list (DOH based because that's needed to comply with the USAPA C&BLs) for comparison to the Nicolau Award. What's different now is that the MOU spells out a definitive timeline to an SLI. The APA will be the CBA and the new list will be used for bidding purposes shortly after its release because it is preceded by a JCBA. Thus no "ripeness" issue is likely to delay any DFR violation claim as has been the case with USAPA's inability to secure a contract and implement a list."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"To date, the East pilots have used their statistical majority to keep the question if the Nic is final & binding in abeyance. With this advantage (majority) soon to be lost, I expect the APA parsing through the subject rather quickly. If, under any circumstances, the APA inherits the same DFR liability for using a non-Nic list, I suspect that the APA will insure themselves. How? By allowing what USAPA refuses; a West voice from within the CBA to advocate for the Nic's inclusion moving forward. By allowing the West independent counsel and committee, the APA can do as ALPA does and remain neutral in SLI arbitrations. Once finalized, all the APA is responsible is to implement the award properly."[/SIZE]
Beancounter
Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,378
- Reaction score
- 1,817
Well, i do apologize. That was unintentionaly insensitive of me. Just because i as of yet have not needed to join that group, does not justify me ignoring their pre merger folicle expectations. So, i do apologize.EastUS1 said:
Bean
USA320Pilot
Veteran
- Joined
- May 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,175
- Reaction score
- 1,539
[SIZE=10pt]I do not like the Nicolau Award and I believe it's unfair, but that is my opinion and not a fact. I believe those who voted for USAPA created this problem because they did not listen to Mike Abram. I believe the creation of USAPA shifted the dispute from a moral argument, which could have been dealt with under ALPA, to a DFR argument and subsequent complaint(s). Do like this? No, of course not. But, I believe "final and binding" is "final and binding," otherwise; the entire dispute resolution process would become a mockery.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Separately, in my opinion, it's wrong for a voting majority to try to impose their will on a minority group to virtually staple a pre-merger pilot group to the bottom of the joint SL and for unemployed furloughed pilots to become senior to active Captains under the guise of C&Rs. I know many East pilots can accommodate their thoughts to justify their staple desires because of career disappointment, but from a moral perspective I believe that is wrong.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Far too many people are looking at the East vs. West pilot dispute from an emotional SLI perspective when the issue is all about DFR.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]And, USAPA has hurt hundreds of thousands of pilots, their families, and US Airways' customers by their illegal actions and inability to reach a JCBA with the company, even if that JCBA had only been the Kirby Proposal. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Meanwhile, according to court filings the Company and APA are seeking West Pilot Class certification and the West pilot's having a seat at the M-B BOA table and for APA to appoint multiple MCs (presumably three), which is an interesting development. Why? DFR and liability.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]I saw two interesting posts on another board. They are:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"Remember that ever since the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the Addington I jury verdict and Judge Wake's injunction, the courts have deemed USAPA's DOH scheme to be an "unquestionably ripe DFR". Do you think that has fallen on deaf ears within the APA? Even Judge Silver's recent ruling said that the DFR violation was avoided on the slimmest of margins solely based on the fact that USAPA did not include an alternative list (DOH based because that's needed to comply with the USAPA C&BLs) for comparison to the Nicolau Award. What's different now is that the MOU spells out a definitive timeline to an SLI. The APA will be the CBA and the new list will be used for bidding purposes shortly after its release because it is preceded by a JCBA. Thus no "ripeness" issue is likely to delay any DFR violation claim as has been the case with USAPA's inability to secure a contract and implement a list."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"To date, the East pilots have used their statistical majority to keep the question if the Nic is final & binding in abeyance. With this advantage (majority) soon to be lost, I expect the APA parsing through the subject rather quickly. If, under any circumstances, the APA inherits the same DFR liability for using a non-Nic list, I suspect that the APA will insure themselves. How? By allowing what USAPA refuses; a West voice from within the CBA to advocate for the Nic's inclusion moving forward. By allowing the West independent counsel and committee, the APA can do as ALPA does and remain neutral in SLI arbitrations. Once finalized, all the APA is responsible is to implement the award properly."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Separately, in my opinion, it's wrong for a voting majority to try to impose their will on a minority group to virtually staple a pre-merger pilot group to the bottom of the joint SL and for unemployed furloughed pilots to become senior to active Captains under the guise of C&Rs. I know many East pilots can accommodate their thoughts to justify their staple desires because of career disappointment, but from a moral perspective I believe that is wrong.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Far too many people are looking at the East vs. West pilot dispute from an emotional SLI perspective when the issue is all about DFR.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]And, USAPA has hurt hundreds of thousands of pilots, their families, and US Airways' customers by their illegal actions and inability to reach a JCBA with the company, even if that JCBA had only been the Kirby Proposal. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]Meanwhile, according to court filings the Company and APA are seeking West Pilot Class certification and the West pilot's having a seat at the M-B BOA table and for APA to appoint multiple MCs (presumably three), which is an interesting development. Why? DFR and liability.[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]I saw two interesting posts on another board. They are:[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"Remember that ever since the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned the Addington I jury verdict and Judge Wake's injunction, the courts have deemed USAPA's DOH scheme to be an "unquestionably ripe DFR". Do you think that has fallen on deaf ears within the APA? Even Judge Silver's recent ruling said that the DFR violation was avoided on the slimmest of margins solely based on the fact that USAPA did not include an alternative list (DOH based because that's needed to comply with the USAPA C&BLs) for comparison to the Nicolau Award. What's different now is that the MOU spells out a definitive timeline to an SLI. The APA will be the CBA and the new list will be used for bidding purposes shortly after its release because it is preceded by a JCBA. Thus no "ripeness" issue is likely to delay any DFR violation claim as has been the case with USAPA's inability to secure a contract and implement a list."[/SIZE]
[SIZE=10pt]"To date, the East pilots have used their statistical majority to keep the question if the Nic is final & binding in abeyance. With this advantage (majority) soon to be lost, I expect the APA parsing through the subject rather quickly. If, under any circumstances, the APA inherits the same DFR liability for using a non-Nic list, I suspect that the APA will insure themselves. How? By allowing what USAPA refuses; a West voice from within the CBA to advocate for the Nic's inclusion moving forward. By allowing the West independent counsel and committee, the APA can do as ALPA does and remain neutral in SLI arbitrations. Once finalized, all the APA is responsible is to implement the award properly."[/SIZE]
Beancounter
Veteran
- Joined
- Jun 28, 2009
- Messages
- 1,378
- Reaction score
- 1,817
That is absolutely correct..........., well at least for a little while longer. I'm sure USAPA will fairly represent both the east and west pilots and if for some, as of yet unknown reason, they choose not to use the Nic arbitration, I am sure they will have a logical and LEGAL reason for doing so.MUTATIS MUTANDIS said:
Bean with you guessed it, more sarcasm
This whole thing reminds me of the old saying "Keep your friends close and your enemies closer". I think the APA is smiling that the West thinks they are friends. Having the West perceived as "friends" is only a means to an end... It's only about how the APA can benefit from that perception. I think in the end, the APA will do exactly as judge Silver did: They will voice an opinion contrary to what is actually going to happen, but they will tell how they would have wanted it to go, but ultimately, they will follow the law. Silver may have wished it to go another way, but she finally realized that the law must be followed... So just as USA320 stated "why can't the West pilots have a merger committee represent them at a MB negotiation? Because the law doesn't support that happening...
I suspect a integration protocol agreement will surface soon that is agreed to by all parties. The SLI will be agreed upon and this whole mess will be settled... finally. The West will pitch a fit, and the APA will agree wholeheartedly with the West... but say their hands were tied by the law, and they will enjoy all the APA attrition and widebody protections in place... which was their primary goal from day one...
I suspect a integration protocol agreement will surface soon that is agreed to by all parties. The SLI will be agreed upon and this whole mess will be settled... finally. The West will pitch a fit, and the APA will agree wholeheartedly with the West... but say their hands were tied by the law, and they will enjoy all the APA attrition and widebody protections in place... which was their primary goal from day one...
traderjake
Veteran
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2002
- Messages
- 5,669
- Reaction score
- 9,308
algflyr said:
It reminds me of the old saying "The enemy of my enemy is my friend".
You forgot to add nullified by the 9th, discarded by ALPA in the NAUGHLER and voted away in the MOU, now demanding representation of it in a SLI, you can't make this S$&$ up!Beancounter said:
They have a huge legal reason!Beancounter said:
the west side story for seven years, airmail updates from USAPA. Staring goat video producer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Xx-FXjdC4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h2Xx-FXjdC4
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
