2015 Pilot Discussion.

[luvthe9]

Keep sayin' it...it might come true.

Do tell us how that s a lie...........Wye and STL.........You know the facts flounder, you can lie all you want to your membership, and you have, but we know the truth.



Geez, most every semi intelligent west pilot knows the NIC can never happen .........come back to reality son.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

I'm not saying it's going to be the Nic, but how does McCaskill-Bond prohibit the Nic?

. McCaskill-Bond dictates that all “covered employees” in this proceeding, however, have Section 3 rights as of December 9, 2013 to a fair and equitable seniority list integration. Its adoption in 2007 superseded the dispute before Arbitrator Nicolau in a covered transaction involving US Airways. The MOU Paragraph 10 provides pilot seniority list integration would occur only in this proceeding consistent with McCaskill-Bond. The Section 13(b) seniority protocol agreement in paragraph 2(b) recognizes, as it must, that the “seniority lists” within the meaning of Section 3 are the three seniority lists described in Paragraph 10 of the MOU. The pilots’ Section 3 rights in this covered transaction cannot be eliminated by an assertion that their seniority rights were actually fixed by an unimplemented arbitration award occurring years earlier. This Board
cannot create or eliminate employee rights under McCaskill-Bond;

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

What YOU think is "fair & equitable" does not matter. There is nothing that prevents the BOA from delivering a list that utilizes the Nicolau Seniority List as the beginning point for the LUS pilots. In fact, 2 of the 3 parties insisted on it.

. The court of appeals had earlier noted that ALPA failed in its efforts to resolve the dispute over the Nicolau Award and so “it is, at best, speculative that a single CBA incorporating the Nicolau Award would be ratified if presented to the union’s membership.” 606 F.3d at 1180.19/ If courts found they lacked authority to order implementation of the Nicolau Award ISL because it was speculative whether the condition precedent to its implementation -- that is, a ratified joint collective bargaining agreement -- would have occurred, then plainly this Arbitration Board cannot assert such authority in its own right. Again, arbitrators lack jurisdiction to determine or establish the status quo under the RLA.

 

[luvthe9]

. The court of appeals had earlier noted that ALPA failed in its efforts to resolve the dispute over the Nicolau Award and so it is, at best, speculative that a single CBA incorporating the Nicolau Award would be ratified if presented to the unions membership. 606 F.3d at 1180.19/ If courts found they lacked authority to order implementation of the Nicolau Award ISL because it was speculative whether the condition precedent to its implementation -- that is, a ratified joint collective bargaining agreement -- would have occurred, then plainly this Arbitration Board cannot assert such authority in its own right. Again, arbitrators lack jurisdiction to determine or establish the status quo under the RLA.

Seriously, Dorothy does not undestand any of that............have not read all his dicta......




Fair and equitable ..........we are so glad they did not listen to Mr. Blomgren and Mr. Freund.......

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Dude....you REALLY have to stop quoting Blomgren.  It shows exactly how desperate you are.  Dave's not one of my favorite union volunteers for a variety of reasons.  The same Jeff Freund argued BRILLIANTLY in front of the BOA as to why the Nicolau list should be the starting point AND the LAA guys opined THE SAME WAY.
 
Stuck on the island?  Sure.  Nic is DEAD??  Who knows?  I don't.  I guess we'll see, and then see who's right & wrong.
 
Hang in there buttercup, it's just a little while longer.

. reasons why the Nicolau Award was an improper basis for integrating the pilots groups, none of which had anything to do with the West pilots’ DFR claim against USAPA. As already noted, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the plaintiffs’ claim under McCaskill-Bond, so the decision cannot be used for interpretation of McCaskill- Bond’s requirements. Consistent with the position asserted by AAPSIC on June 19, 2015, it remains true that “the Nicolau Award has never been implemented or governed seniority” and the Ninth Circuit did not order that remedy. Indeed, it is illogical for the AAPSIC to assert that it is using the Nicolau Award ISL to integrate East and West pilots because of the Ninth Circuit decision when the East Pilot Committee has not been required either by the USDC for the District of Arizona, on remand from the Ninth Circuit, or this Arbitration Board to use the Nicolau Award as part of its proposa

 

[luvthe9]

Keep sayin' it...it might come true.[/quo


Try to keep up, it's already true.........it's over for you and your little scab buddies....Wye River


And STL...........what ashame........ The NIC was in your hands....darn....

 

[cactusboy53]

"Jeff Freund is a top-notch lawyer. We have no doubt that he told our MEC the truth about how negotiable the NIC really was. The question is: why didnt CJ, Bendett, et al, listen? We figure that they either didnt believe him or after all their hairy-chested resolutions and hotlines, they were afraid to back down. What good are attorneys if you dont take their advice?"

Yes, WYE did they not listen?
 

 
[SIZE=12pt][[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt]sub-note 40: Not only does the Wye River meeting confirm that the East pilots understood the force of the Nicolau Award, it confirms that they were willing to live under it.  By the terms of their proposal, the list would be operative immediately upon execution of a JCBA but with restrictions for seven additional years.  (The East pilots’ Wye River proposal contemplated that a JCBA[/SIZE] [SIZE=12pt]would be ratified by June 2008, which was a reasonable assumption given the state of negotiations, including the Kirby proposal.  See West R. Ex. C (East Wye River Proposal) 22.)  Had the East’s Wye River Proposal been in effect, the Nicolau list would have been the list to be used in this proceeding without question and the carryover restrictions of the East pilots’ Wye River Proposal would have dropped within months of the effective date of the Award in this case…][/SIZE]

 

[cactusboy53]

Keep clicking those heels Dorothy......this time don't quite think it's going to happen......Wye River.....the BOA laughed at the NIC .........so sorry.

 
[SIZE=12pt]The Ninth Circuit’s holding, that the denial of the Nicolau Award in Paragraph 10.h. of the[/SIZE]
[SIZE=12pt]MOU breached USAPA’s duty of fair representation, is effectively the tie-breaker on this question.  With the Ninth Circuit’s affirmation of the West Pilots’ reasonable expectation of the Nicolau Award, the AASPIC acknowledges it as the starting point for ranking the East and West Pilots on the ISL. As part of the ISL, the US Airways Pilots (East and West) should be ordered based on the Nicola Award……the job allocations as between the West and East Pilots must be rationalized according to the Nicolau Award as those pilots compete for jobs with each other for the first time, so that West Pilots achieve their expectations vis a vis the East Pilots.[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]AAPSIC Pre-Hearing Statement                                                               19 Sept 2015[/SIZE]

 

[cactusboy53]

Do tell us how that s a lie...........Wye and STL.........You know the facts flounder, you can lie all you want to your membership, and you have, but we know the truth.

Geez, most every semi intelligent west pilot knows the NIC can never happen .........come back to reality son.

 
[SIZE=12pt]US Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit                                                                       26 June 2015[/SIZE]
 

[SIZE=12pt]“…USAPA has served as the stalking horse for the East Pilots’ exclusive interests and left the West Pilots bereft of representation.  USAPA’s manifest disregard for the interests of the West Pilots and its discriminatory conduct towards them constitutes a clear breach of duty.  Accordingly, we reverse the district court’s conclusion that USAPA did not breach its duty of fair representation, and remand with instructions to enjoin USAPA from participating in the McCaskill-Bond proceedings except to the extent that USAPA will advocate the Nicolau Award..”[/SIZE]

 

[cactusboy53]

[SIZE=12pt]The Board shall retain jurisdiction[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] in accordance with Section H. 5 .b. of the ALPA Merger Policy to resolve any disputes over the meaning or interpretation of this Award. This retention of jurisdiction shall terminate when all provisions of the Award have been satisfied. In the event the Chairman becomes unavailable or unwilling to serve to resolve such disputes, the Merger Committees will agree on a replacement Chairman or will select one by the alternate strike method from the most recent ALPA list of seniority integrations arbitrators.  In the event one of the Pilot Neutrals becomes unable or unwilling to serve on the Arbitration Board to resolve such disputes, the Chairman, after consultation with the Parties, shall decide how to proceed.  In any such arbitration, if there is a dispute between the methodology contained in the Award and the accompanying Integrated Seniority List or any other list purportedly using such methodology, the Seniority List prevails.[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=12pt]George Nicolau, Mediator[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]AWA/AAA Opinion & Award; May 07, 2007[/SIZE]

 

[Phoenix]

Somebody is off their meds.

 

[jcw]

how will folks manage through the new uniforms and the new ties - will folks be able to handle using a common tie

 

[nevergiveup]

 
[SIZE=12pt]The Board shall retain jurisdiction[/SIZE][SIZE=12pt] in accordance with Section H. 5 .b. of the ALPA Merger Policy to resolve any disputes over the meaning or interpretation of this Award. This retention of jurisdiction shall terminate when all provisions of the Award have been satisfied. In the event the Chairman becomes unavailable or unwilling to serve to resolve such disputes, the Merger Committees will agree on a replacement Chairman or will select one by the alternate strike method from the most recent ALPA list of seniority integrations arbitrators.  In the event one of the Pilot Neutrals becomes unable or unwilling to serve on the Arbitration Board to resolve such disputes, the Chairman, after consultation with the Parties, shall decide how to proceed.  In any such arbitration, if there is a dispute between the methodology contained in the Award and the accompanying Integrated Seniority List or any other list purportedly using such methodology, the Seniority List prevails.[/SIZE]
 
[SIZE=12pt]George Nicolau, Mediator[/SIZE]

[SIZE=12pt]AWA/AAA Opinion & Award; May 07, 2007[/SIZE]

 

 
Look around. Where are you at present? If you are in PHX and loving it, you win!

 

[luvthe9]

Desperate Dorothy is going off the deep end..............AGAIN.




Somebody change the water in the fishbowl.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

The Ninth Circuit’s holding, that the denial of the Nicolau Award in Paragraph 10.h. of the
MOU breached USAPA’s duty of fair representation, is effectively the tie-breaker on this question.  With the Ninth Circuit’s affirmation of the West Pilots’ reasonable expectation of the Nicolau Award, the AASPIC acknowledges it as the starting point for ranking the East and West Pilots on the ISL. As part of the ISL, the US Airways Pilots (East and West) should be ordered based on the Nicola Award……the job allocations as between the West and East Pilots must be rationalized according to the Nicolau Award as those pilots compete for jobs with each other for the first time, so that West Pilots achieve their expectations vis a vis the East Pilots.

AAPSIC Pre-Hearing Statement               The AAPSIC asserts it is now using the Nicolau Award ISL as the basis for integrating East and West pilots because the Ninth Circuit decision in Addington III was the “tiebreaker.” (Tr. 100, AAPSIC opening statement). As this recitation reflects, however, there was no “tie” to break; the AAPSIC listed reasons why the Nicolau Award was an improper basis for integrating the pilots groups, none of which had anything to do with the West pilots’ DFR claim against USAPA. As already noted, the Ninth Circuit dismissed the plaintiffs’ claim under McCaskill-Bond, so the decision cannot be used for interpretation of McCaskill- Bond’s requirements. Consistent with the position asserted by AAPSIC on June 19, 2015, it remains true that “the Nicolau Award has never been implemented or governed seniority” and the Ninth Circuit did not order that remedy. Indeed, it is illogical for the AAPSIC to assert that it is using the Nicolau Award ISL to integrate East and West pilots because of the Ninth Circuit decision when the East Pilot Committee has not been required either by the USDC for the District of Arizona, on remand from the Ninth Circuit, or this Arbitration Board to use the Nicolau Award as part of its proposal.                                           19 Sept 2015

.