2014 Pilot Discussion

[snapthis]

85ER,
Greetings. Hope you are aware of the East pilots age. You should consider it. Lots leaving.
Are your leaders even considering arbitration? If you are, you're crazy. Look what happened to us. It could, be you. And you should get educated on the Nic. It would crush you guys. Consider when it was rendered, 2007. It has been successfully thwarted by the East, as the West was warned. They were informed by ALPA of the fact a change in bargaining reps would kill it. Killed it was. Affirmed by the Ninth.
I for one, want none of your stuff. Most of us want to finish out with what we have.
If you guys do strong arm us, I am sure our group will hardball back. Going to arbitration using the bill you guys have attached to your resume. Right or wrong, you own it. Take your chances. The Wilders have been hired. They authored it.
I have nothing but respect for you guys. Hope we can work it out. Good fences make good neighbors.

To this day, Leonidas has kept you from screwing the West with your USAPA scam, DOH. So when you form your Persian LLC we have plenty of legal spike strips to keep you changing your tires to thwart your escape from arbitration and the APA will squash you like a pesky gnat.

One other thing....
What exactly did the 9th affirm? How about doing a little catching up to keep up.

Adjunct Law Prof Blog
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Rare Cause of Action For Breach of Duty Of Fair Representation Stated
By Adjunct LawProfs
Addington v. U.S. Airlines, 588 F. Supp.2d 1051 (D. Az. 2008)Download 588_F_SUPP_2D_1051_2-11-09_1331.txt is a rare plaintiff DFR win-or at least the successful defeat of a motion to dismiss. This is an RLA case where pilots of a smaller airline that merged with a larger airline stated a claim that after the merger, the union breached its duty of fair representation to the minority. The court reasoned in part:

USAPA vehemently argues that it had every right to renounce its express obligation to the ALPA Merger Policy and the arbitrated seniority award, to which it is bound by the 2004 CBA and the Transition Agreement. It says it may recant a prior bargaining position and adopt a seniority policy based upon date of hire. Seniority rights are creations of the collective bargaining agreement, and so may be revised or abrogated by later negotiated changes in this agreement. Hass v. Darigold Dairy Prods. Co., 751 F.2d 1096, 1099 (9th Cir.1985). As a general proposition, the seniority scheme under the Nicolau Award is not the only permissible way to resolve post-merger seniority issues *1060 within unions. For instance, there is nothing per se unacceptable about a seniority agreement based on the date of hire. Laturner, 501 F.2d at 599; Rakestraw v. United Airlines, Inc., 981 F.2d 1524, 1533 (7th Cir.1992). USAPA refers repeatedly to these principles at their highest level of generality. The problem is, though the benefit of the Nicolau Award is surely what motivates the West Pilots, their legal objection to USAPA's date-of-hire seniority policy is not directly substantive, but rather procedural. The alleged breach of the duty stems from the bad faith manner of USAPA's determined attempts to evade the Award. Irrespective of whether seniority rights vest in a proprietary sense, a union may not arbitrarily abridge those rights after a merger solely for the sake of political expediency. Barton Brands, Ltd. v. NLRB, 529 F.2d 793, 800 (7th Cir.1976); see also Rakestraw, 981 F.2d at 1531.
The Ninth Circuit has not dealt directly with this fact situation, but the union's position flies against the headwind of cases from other circuits. The D.C. Circuit has held that a union breaches its duty of fair representation when it arbitrarily adopt and announce a bargaining policy on seniority merger motivated only by a desire to win the votes of a majority of the employees. Truck Drivers & Helpers, Local Union 568 v. NLRB, 379 F.2d 137, 145 (D.C.Cir.1967). This is so because to adopt such a policy under the circumstances would ... constitute a default by [the union] in its obligation to represent fairly all the employees in the unit for which it becomes the exclusive bargaining representative. Id. Along the same lines, a union may not delegate its decision-making function to a referendum of employees with the understanding that their actions will be motivated solely by their own personal considerations because such a referendum violates the union's duty to consider the views of all those it represents. Branch 6000, Nat'l Ass'n of Letter Carriers v. NLRB, 595 F.2d 808, 812 (D.C.Cir.1979). USAPA was formed and has taken action as a creature of majority will. Though the will of the majority is not inherently discriminatory, see id., in this case the East Pilots are alleged to have targeted the Nicolau Award in a way that gives scant consideration to the West Pilots' interest. By casting off the brokered arrangement after its predecessor agreed to the process by which it was reached, USAPA has renounced any good faith effort to reconcile the interests of both pilot groups. Truck Drivers, 379 F.2d at 142-43.

 

[Phoenix]

....
Adjunct Law Prof Blog
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
..

 
Dec 9th 2013

 

[Phoenix]

 
APA is going our NB pilots at the top of the list so they can watch us leave?
 
Slotting by equipment and status keeps APA pilots at the top of the list now.

 
 

 
What a stupid thing to say.
 
They don't care about the internal order of our seniority list.

 
 
So which is it?  Do they care about equipment and status on our listS, or do they care about our equipment and status that would exist if "our Nic list" were implemented?  
 
Regardless, if it goes to arbitration, no one can control which factors the panel uses or the amount of weight ascribed to each of the factors they choose to use.  

 

[snapthis]

Dec 9th 2013

10 things you need to know today: December 9, 2013
HAROLD MAASS | DECEMBER 9, 2013

1. Coalition of rival tech giants calls for surveillance limits

2. Protesters topple Lenin statue in Kiev

3. Winter storm marches up the East Coast

4. Thai prime minister dissolves Parliament

5. Senators head for confrontation over Obama nominees

6. Hagel discusses Pakistan's complaints about drone strikes

7. More pilot whales die in Florida

8. Pyongyang acknowledges purge of Kim Jong Un's uncle

9. Admirers mourn Paul Walker in California

10. Performing icons receive Kennedy Center honors

 

[flyer63]

Another bought 4 day out East. Basically one 4 day a month being bought. More good things out east for our attrition.

 

[traderjake]

So which is it?  Do they care about equipment and status on our listS, or do they care about our equipment and status that would exist if "our Nic list" were implemented?

 
If I do it for you  you'll never learn it yourself.

 

[Phoenix]

 
If I do it for you  you'll never learn it yourself.

 
 
Cop out.  (No offense meant to the local policeman).  
 
Regardless, if it goes to arbitration, no one can control which factors the panel uses or the amount of weight ascribed to each of the factors they choose to use.  😀

 

[traderjake]

Regardless, if it goes to arbitration, no one can control which factors the panel uses or the amount of weight ascribed to each of the factors they choose to use.   😀

 
Embrace the unknown or convince APA to negotiate.
 
Are we talking about the SLI or the protocal agreement?

 

[Claxon]

 
 
AirCal was a relative merge. AA quit flying it's routes. APA pilots didn't forget the seniority effects.
 
Reno started sometime after 1992, most if not all of their pilots were junior to AA furloughees, and some of their flying was directly replacing AA routes with some BS business relationship with AA. AA also quit flying it's routes.
 
TWA (unfortunately for them ) came after AirCal and Reno. APA had deep concern that AA would do the same thing again. Much of the flying was immediately drawn down. SJU mini hub, Tel Aviv, Cairo, Riyadh, STL 717/S80 regional flying went to Eagle/Trans States. Today, their remaining system is essentially non-existent.
 
I don't pretend to know the legal aspects happening now or expect you to bow and kneel to APA, but try to back down your idiotic, completely ignorant hysterics like the above statements.
 
PS. What exactly would you have done with Reno and TWA?

The East pilots went date of hire with PSA, Piedmont and with the law behind them, america west.
 
Your rationalization of screwing pilots you merged with in previous seniority integrations, does not pass the smell test.

 

[767one]

Replacing a union with USAPA is a silver platter for the APA.

Silver platters look great when you first get them but they tarnish very quickly.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Silver platters look great when you first get them but they tarnish very quickly.

 
Exactly.  That tray is already tarnished.
 
The APA has not had to deal with another union whose sole responsibilty is to one rival airline's pilots.  All their other acquisitions were of ALPA-represented carriers, and ALPA would always throw any particular group of pilots under the bus in order to ensure the money feed to the Herndon trough.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

To this day, Leonidas has kept you from screwing the West with your USAPA scam, DOH. So when you form your Persian LLC we have plenty of legal spike strips to keep you changing your tires to thwart your escape from arbitration and the APA will squash you like a pesky gnat.

One other thing....
What exactly did the 9th affirm? How about doing a little catching up to keep up.

Adjunct Law Prof Blog
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Rare Cause of Action For Breach of Duty Of Fair Representation Stated
By Adjunct LawProfs
Addington v. U.S. Airlines, 588 F. Supp.2d 1051 (D. Az. 2008)Download 588_F_SUPP_2D_1051_2-11-09_1331.txt is a rare plaintiff DFR win-or at least the successful defeat of a motion to dismiss. This is an RLA case where pilots of a smaller airline that merged with a larger airline stated a claim that after the merger, the union breached its duty of fair representation to the minority. The court reasoned in part:

USAPA vehemently argues that it had every right to renounce its express obligation to the ALPA Merger Policy and the arbitrated seniority award, to which it is bound by the 2004 CBA and the Transition Agreement. It says it may recant a prior bargaining position and adopt a seniority policy based upon date of hire. Seniority rights are creations of the collective bargaining agreement, and so may be revised or abrogated by later negotiated changes in this agreement. Hass v. Darigold Dairy Prods. Co., 751 F.2d 1096, 1099 (9th Cir.1985). As a general proposition, the seniority scheme under the Nicolau Award is not the only permissible way to resolve post-merger seniority issues *1060 within unions. For instance, there is nothing per se unacceptable about a seniority agreement based on the date of hire. Laturner, 501 F.2d at 599; Rakestraw v. United Airlines, Inc., 981 F.2d 1524, 1533 (7th Cir.1992). USAPA refers repeatedly to these principles at their highest level of generality. The problem is, though the benefit of the Nicolau Award is surely what motivates the West Pilots, their legal objection to USAPA's date-of-hire seniority policy is not directly substantive, but rather procedural. The alleged breach of the duty stems from the bad faith manner of USAPA's determined attempts to evade the Award. Irrespective of whether seniority rights vest in a proprietary sense, a union may not arbitrarily abridge those rights after a merger solely for the sake of political expediency. Barton Brands, Ltd. v. NLRB, 529 F.2d 793, 800 (7th Cir.1976); see also Rakestraw, 981 F.2d at 1531.
The Ninth Circuit has not dealt directly with this fact situation, but the union's position flies against the headwind of cases from other circuits. The D.C. Circuit has held that a union breaches its duty of fair representation when it arbitrarily adopt and announce a bargaining policy on seniority merger motivated only by a desire to win the votes of a majority of the employees. Truck Drivers & Helpers, Local Union 568 v. NLRB, 379 F.2d 137, 145 (D.C.Cir.1967). This is so because to adopt such a policy under the circumstances would ... constitute a default by [the union] in its obligation to represent fairly all the employees in the unit for which it becomes the exclusive bargaining representative. Id. Along the same lines, a union may not delegate its decision-making function to a referendum of employees with the understanding that their actions will be motivated solely by their own personal considerations because such a referendum violates the union's duty to consider the views of all those it represents. Branch 6000, Nat'l Ass'n of Letter Carriers v. NLRB, 595 F.2d 808, 812 (D.C.Cir.1979). USAPA was formed and has taken action as a creature of majority will. Though the will of the majority is not inherently discriminatory, see id., in this case the East Pilots are alleged to have targeted the Nicolau Award in a way that gives scant consideration to the West Pilots' interest. By casting off the brokered arrangement after its predecessor agreed to the process by which it was reached, USAPA has renounced any good faith effort to reconcile the interests of both pilot groups. Truck Drivers, 379 F.2d at 142-43.

Written in 2009? Pleez, a lot has happened since then!

 

[nycbusdriver]

Written in 2009? Pleez, a lot has happened since then!

 
Yeah.  Did this prof write this about 4 months BEFORE the 9th Circuit actually ruled contrary to his prediction?

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

"To the supporters of the legislation, I want you to know that I understand that long-held norms about marriage and family are being challenged as never before. Our society is undergoing many dramatic changes," she said. "However, I sincerely believe that Senate Bill 1062 has the potential to create more problems than it purports to solve. It could divide Arizona in ways we cannot even imagine and no one would ever want. "JAN BREWER" Speaking of BS out of AZ ok Jan we give, what problems was BILL 1062 going to solve?

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Yeah.  Did this prof write this about 4 months BEFORE the 9th Circuit actually ruled contrary to his prediction?

If you actually find the truth on the blog, RUBENSTEIN I believe wrote it saw it years ago, but blew it off. Partial truths, biased-so called unbiased facts you know!