2015 Pilot Discussion.

[Phoenix]

Dicta is the 1st-amendment-protected-free-speech zone where a judge is roped off and allowed to be a cheerleader, before they climb into the bench and perform their judicial duty of ruling justly (in the actual order).  
 
The MB arbs are proceeding pursuant to the PA and the MB statute, and don't really have any fear of cheerleaders roped off in the 1st-amendment-protected-free-speech zone.  If everyone stays in their assigned box, this will be done by mid summer next year and we will all wait for the IT department to catch up.  
 
If...

 

[cactusboy53]

August 2015 9th Circuit Court finding quote, page 54 below;
 
"Because a good faith attempt to
implement the Nicolau Award would have ultimately required a ratification vote
by all the pilots, and we cannot know what the results of such a vote would have
been, we can never be certain whether efforts to implement the Nicolau Award
through a collective bargaining agreement with US Airways would have
succeeded. See Addington I, 606 F.3d at 1179.
We conclude that injunctive relief is necessary and appropriate in this case
to prevent the East Pilots from continuing to enjoy the benefits of USAPA’s breach
at the expense of the West Pilots. Although there remains some ambiguity over
whether the Nicolau Award would have been adopted in, to conclude, as does
the dissent, that the West Pilots may not obtain any relief at all is to grant USAPA
the benefit of doubt that USAPA itself created. We thus remand this case with
instructions to the district court to enter an order enjoining USAPA from
participating in the McCaskill-Bond seniority integration proceedings, including
any seniority-related discussions leading up to those proceedings, except to the
extent that USAPA advocates the Nicolau Award.12 See Bernard, 873 F.2d at
 
12 We decline to order the issuance of the West Pilots’ requested injunction
“that an unmodified Nicolau Award must be used to order the seniority of the East
and West pilots in the pending McCaskill-Bond process.” Although we have
approved injunctions against nonparties, see SEC v. Wencke, 622 F.2d 1363, 1370"
(continued...)
PAGE 54
9th Circuit Court
 
http://leonidas.cactuspilots.us/West_Pilot_DFR_DJ/9th_Circuit_Ruling.pdf
 
West pilots before you unveil the cursed west celebration tent and chairs, forget the dicta and go to the remedy and injunctive part of Judge Silvers future order, the Arbitration panel was wise enough to do so. 
 
Do not trust the rose colored glasses cactusboy and AOL will use.

Oh look!! A piece of straw!!!!!!!

 

[cactusboy53]

Dicta is the 1st-amendment-protected-free-speech zone where a judge is roped off and allowed to be a cheerleader, before they climb into the bench and perform their judicial duty of ruling justly (in the actual order).  
 
The MB arbs are proceeding pursuant to the PA and the MB statute, and don't really have any fear of cheerleaders roped off in the 1st-amendment-protected-free-speech zone.  If everyone stays in their assigned box, this will be done by mid summer next year and we will all wait for the IT department to catch up.  
 
If...

It ain't gonna be "dicta" this time Scotty. It's gonna be REAL. Gee, I wonder if Judge Silver will have softened here sentiments regarding USAPA / East / Former AAA pilots (names interchangeable for the integrity impaired)?

 

[EastUS1]

It ain't gonna be "dicta" this time Scotty. It's gonna be REAL.......

 
Umm...right..."REAL" along the lines of "This is Sparta!" one must assume? Thanks for the laughs son. 😉
 
"You'se" are a numerically insignificant tiny tribe of what?....Perhaps 1200-1300 or so?....And yet you're arrogantly imagining, as being but the tiniest tip of the tail, to somehow be some mighty force/farce that will wag the entire "dog" of ten times your size? Good luck with all your childish fantasies.

 

[snapthis]

Dear Arbitrators Eischen, Jaffe, and Vaughn,
Since the day that the Nicolau Award was issued in May 2007, the East pilots (whether wearing an ALPA, USAPA or APA-appointed Committee coat) have used every tool at their disposalboth lawful and, as the Ninth Circuit conclusively held in Addington, unlawfulto avoid the implementation of the Award. After eight years of conduct designed to disadvantage the West pilots at every turn (and that has cost the West Pilots literally tens of millions of dollars collectively), the Ninth Circuit on June 26, 2015 issued a decision directing the Arizona district court to enter an injunction to to prevent the East pilots from continuing to enjoy the benefits of USAPAs [duty of fair representation] breach at the expense of the West Pilots, and to alleviat[e] the West Pilots hardship of fighting on two fronts and ensuring that the East Pilots cannot exploit the benefits of USAPAs breach any longer. Addington Slip Op. 54-55 (emphasis added).1
Despite the Ninth Circuits directive to put an end to the East pilots campaign against the West pilots (whether carried out under the auspices of USAPA or otherwise), the East pilots persist in their efforts to avoid, by any means at their disposal, the implementation of the Nicolau Award. It is hardly surprising, then, that the East pilots now ask the Panel to (again) delay the commencement of the SLI hearings, citing uncertainty and the potential for disruption.2 The East pilots request must be recognized for what it surely is: simply the latest anti-Nicolau tactic on their part. Their request should be rejected and the hearings in this matter should proceed on the schedule set by the Board in its July 5 Decision.

Indeed, in its July 5 Decision, this Board anticipated the very possibility that
the East pilots would seek further delay and made clear that strict compliance
with the new schedule would be required. In that Decision, the Board stated that,
while it desired the participation of an East Merger Committee in the SLI
proceedings, there was no right of such a committee to participate since the East
pilots had already been afforded that right to participate through USAPA and
after receipt of the decision of the Court of Appeals in Addington, the USAPA
Merger Committee opted to withdraw permanently from this proceeding. July 5
Decision pp. 12-13 (emphasis added). The Board held in no uncertain terms that:
[t]o the extent that USAPA and its Merger Committee have exited the
process and have decided not to return, that is not the responsibility of
the Board or the remaining Parties and should not materially prejudice
their legitimate rights and expectations with respect to the timing of the
seniority list integration arbitration proceeding in this case.
Id. at 16.3 Accordingly, the Board concluded that, although not desirable, the
hearings could take place without the participation of an East Merger Committee:
If necessary to avoid undue delay in finalizing the ISL, the Board is
prepared to proceed in the event that a new Merger Committee to
represent the East pilots is not created in sufficient time to participate
in the arbitration process pursuant to the revised schedule set forth in
connection with our answer to question 3.
Id. at 13. And, in so holding, the Board also recognized that there was a realistic
possibility that an East Merger would be bound by an injunction in Addington:
Even if any newly appointed East Merger Committee is limited by the
Addington Court in terms of the position that it can advocate with
respect to the Nicolau Award and its application, there remain other
areas in the position of an East Merger Committee that may vary from
advocacy by the West Merger Committee, the AAPSIC or the Company.
To the extent that the restrictions on advocacy contained in Addington
may be found inapplicable to any such newly created East Merger
Committee, their participation is even more important to ensure that
advocacy and evidence in support of the interests of the East pilots are
presented to the Board in the record upon which we will make our decision.
Id. at 13-14. Thus, held the Board, strict compliance [with the revised schedule] will be required by the Board, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties and approved by the Board; or unless, in the sole judgment of the Board, compelling good cause is shown to justify any further modification. Id. at 21.
* * *
The Board should reject the request of the East pilots to delay the commencement of the SLI hearings. The East pilots have identified nothing that could constitute compelling good cause for delaying the hearings any further. We consider each of their contentions in turn.
The first reason for the proposed further delay proffered by the East Merger Committee is that there is uncertainty surrounding the reach of the injunction that will be entered in the Addington case, and as a result, the East pilots request that the panel recess the September and October hearing dates and reset the hearing to begin on the January 2016 hearing dates. Wilder Letter p. 2. This reason cannot be compelling good cause for a delay in the proceedings since nothing has materially changed with respect to the injunction in Addington since July 5 when the Board issued the Decision described above.
The only new fact is that the Ninth Circuit has rejected the East pilots petition to have the Addington decision reheard en banc, so it is now likely that the district court will issue an injunction sometime in the next several months.4 But this was the anticipated outcome when the Board issued its July 5 order and accordingly cannot provide compelling good cause for more delay.
As for continuing uncertainty about the reach of the injunction that the district court will issue, whatever uncertainty existed as of July 5 when the Board held that strict compliance [with the revised schedule] will be required by the Board is the same as exists now. As of July 5 there was no reasonable expectation that the district court would issue its injunction by now.
Furthermore, a delay nowto allow for the issuing of the injunctionwould simply open the door to further arguments for delay. Even assuming that the issue of the breadth of the injunction is fully litigated and decided by the Addington district court by January (an assumption based only on speculation), some party may well wish to appeal whatever injunction is entered. At that point, the uncertainty of exactly who will be bound by the injunction could take additional years to resolve. Rather than wait until some indefinite point in time, the parties should proceed as the Board contemplated that they would proceed in Julythat is, the parties should commence the arbitration in this matter, with each party taking whatever position it deems prudent in light of the circumstances, while the Addington litigation continues to work itself out.
5
The second proffered reason for delaying the scheduled hearings is that the East pilots surmise that the West pilots may seek to have the East Pilots counsel, Mr. Wilder, bound by the injunction in Addington6a consequence which apparently is equal in their minds with being disqualif[ied] from representation of the East pilots. It is audacious, to use a polite word, for the East pilots to have chosen as their counsel the same firm that represented the USAPA Merger Committee. But it was a deliberate choice that the East Pilots have made with full knowledge of the breadth of the Ninth Circuits directive to the district court and the text of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d)(2), which provides that, in addition to binding the party against whom it is entered, a federal court injunction binds officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys of the party and other persons who are in active concert with the party or its agents. Having made this choice, the East Merger Committee should be prepared to live with whatever consequences may come from it. And, needless to say, Mr. Wilders firm would not be disqualified from representing the East pilots even if the firm is held to be subject to the Addington injunction. Instead, Mr. Wilder (and, presumably, the East pilots
7) would simply be bound to advocate a position in compliance with the Ninth Circuits directive.
Finally, the East pilots suggest that the funding of the East Merger Committee is in jeopardy and that the hearing should be postponed for that reason as well. The East Pilots are flat wrong on this point. First, as they acknowledge, the East Merger Committee is currently being funded by APA in the same manner as the other Committees. Wilder Letter p. 3. There is therefore no compelling good cause for postponing the hearing based on any funding concerns.
Nor is there any compelling good cause on the horizon related to funding matters stemming from the Bollmeier litigation, which the East pilots seriously mischaracterize in their letter. While is correct that the plaintiffs in that case have alleged that USAPA and its Merger Committee should have first spent the $1.3 million that would have been advanced by the APA prior to the withdrawal of the USAPA Merger Committee from these proceedings, rather than spending funds that consist, in part, of compelled dues paid by West Pilots to benefit the pilot group as a whole, the remedy for that claim, if the plaintiffs prevail, will be against the individual defendants personally, who will be required to make up any USAPA funds that were spent in violation of those officers fiduciary duties. The claim does not call into question the availability of any funds to the East Merger Committee from APA or the Company.
* * *
The Board recognized in July that the West pilots, as well as other parties, have legitimate rights and expectations with respect to the timing of the seniority list integration arbitration proceeding in this case. Supra at 2. Delay advances only the interests of the East pilots and the pre-merger American pilots and substantially disadvantages the West pilots, who have been victimized by delay for eight years. The Board has been presented with no compelling reasons for postponing the commencement of the SLI proceedings, and the East pilots should not be afforded another opportunity to delay these proceedings any further.
Sincerely,
/s/Jeffrey Freund

 

[snapthis]

Dear Arbitrators Eischen, Jaffe, and Vaughn:
When the parties last appeared before this ISL Panel, the Company argued,
unsuccessfully, that the Panel should not direct the APA to use best efforts to designate a new
East pilots merger committee to replace the USAPA Merger Committee that had walked away
from these proceedings, and expressed its concern that doing so could create a black hole that
we cannot control. Transcript of June 29-30, 2015 Prehearing Meeting (Tr.) at 116:22-117:1.
See also id. at 116:2-7 ([T]hen what happens next week if Jeff [Freund, counsel for the West
Pilots Merger Committee] doesnt like your ruling and he says hes not going to attend, or if you
-- theres a second committee that -- for the East that announces that it doesnt want to
participate once it learns what the parameters are for its advocacy). The request of the
US Airways (East) Pilot Seniority Integration Committee (East Pilot SIC) to delay the
commencement of the evidentiary hearings in this matter raises the specter of just such a black
hole, fraught with endless delay to accommodate the idiosyncratic desires of each of the
participants. The East Pilot SIC has offered no valid reason for its proposed disruption to the
schedule for these proceedings, and its request should therefore be denied.
As its primary justification for delaying the hearing, the East Pilot SIC cites the
substantial uncertainty regarding the scope of the injunction to be issued by the District Court
in Arizona after the Addington case has been remanded by the Ninth Circuit. See August 28,
2015 Letter from William R. Wilder to ISL Panel (Motion for Delay), at p. 2. That argument
is baseless. The final ruling from the Ninth Circuit actually reduces the uncertainty which the
parties might have had prior to the originally-scheduled June 29 start date for the evidentiary
hearings in this matter. Although no one could have known how the Ninth Circuit was going to
rule until its decision was actually issued on June 26, no participant even so much as hinted prior
to June 26 that uncertainty should be cause for delay.
September 2, 2015 - Page 2
In any event, the possibility that District Judge Silvers injunction on remand in
Addington might apply to the East pilots new merger representative was discussed at length
during counsels oral arguments before the Panel on June 30. See e.g. Tr. 39:11-40:8; 65:20-
68:7; 99:19-100:10. Yet, when the Panel ordered the delay in the hearing schedule to account for
USAPAs and the USAPA Merger Committees abdication of the East pilots, it did not condition
the September 29 start of the hearings on the elimination of all uncertainty surrounding the scope
of Judge Silvers injunction. And nothing has changed since the Panel issued its decision. The
East Pilot SIC has been, and still is, free to formulate whatever seniority-integration proposal it
deems appropriate, including one that is contrary to obvious import of the Ninth Circuits
decision, unless an injunction restricting its activities is issued at some point in the future.
Moreover, the Panel anticipated the possibility that any newly-created merger
representative for the East pilots might need additional time to prepare for the September 29
hearings. Cf. Motion for Delay, at p. 3. In its July 5 decision, the Panel explained: Thus, we
conclude that it is appropriate and necessary for the Board to modify the hearing timetable and
order of appearances set forth in the Ground Rules to allow reasonable time: . . . 2) For such
representative [of the East pilots], if appointed, to obtain legal counsel and perform the functions
of a Merger Committee under the terms of the Procedural Ground Rules. Panel Opinion on
Procedural Questions, July 5, 2015 (Op.), at 21 (emphasis added); see also id. (The resulting
schedule should afford more than sufficient opportunity for the full and informed participation of
any newly appointed East Pilot Merger Committee in the proceedings, especially if its direct
presentation is scheduled to occur after those of the other Pilot Merger Committees.)
(emphasis added). There is no reason to delay the start of the evidentiary hearings if as the
Panel has already ruled the East Pilot SIC will not present its direct case until after the other
two merger committees. And, contrary to Mr. Wilders assertion (see Motion for Delay, at p, 2),
no one has suggested that he or his firm should be disqualified from representation of the East
Pilot SIC, either by virtue of his previous representation of USAPA or the USAPA Merger
Committee, or for any other reason.
The alleged uncertainty regarding funding for the East Pilot SIC is an equally specious
justification for the requested delay in these proceedings. (See Motion for Delay, at p. 3.)
Pursuant to Paragraph 7 of the Memorandum Of Understanding Regarding Contingent Collective
Bargaining Agreement (MOU), the Company has an obligation to reimburse the merger
representatives for their seniority integration-related expenses in a total amount not to exceed $4
million, but the Companys reimbursement obligation is expressly contingent on the satisfaction
of certain conditions conditions which are specifically linked to the delivery of a final
integrated seniority list and thus cannot be satisfied (if at all) for quite some time. See Joint
Ex. 9, at ¶ 7. Thus, the suggestion in the Motion for Delay (at page 3) that there is currently a
dispute whether those MOU monies are available to finance an East Pilot SIC is misleading and
groundless.
September 2, 2015 - Page 3
Moreover, as noted in the Motion for Delay itself (at page 3), although not required to do
so by the MOU or the Seniority Integration Protocol Agreement (Protocol Agreement), the
APA is currently advancing funds to the East Pilot SIC.1 The suggestion that the APA might
discontinue its advancement of those funds to the East Pilot SIC, depending on the outcome of
the upcoming arbitration before Richard Bloch, is sheer speculation especially given that the
issue before Arbitrator Bloch in mid-September is not whether the APA should continue its
advancement of funds to the East Pilot SIC, but, rather, is whether USAPA and/or the USAPA
Merger Committee is entitled to MOU Paragraph 7 expense reimbursement from the Company.
See Attachment A at p. 2. And even if it were true that the East Pilot SIC may not be able to
receive funding from APA if Arbitrator Bloch adopts USAPAs current position under MOU
Paragraph 7 and rejects the position of the APA (see Attachment ), the Company (see
Attachment A), and the original position of USAPA (see Motion for Delay, at page 3 footnote 1)
that would not be a reason to delay the hearings. It would be a reason for the East pilots to
start raising funds on their own, with a reservation of any and all rights to future funding sources
they might have.
The East Pilot SIC concludes its request for delay with an unfounded assertion that We
do not believe such a rescheduling will delay implementation of the SLI award since the
Company has notified the pilots that it will not have in place a single preferential bidding system
permitting implementation of an SLI award until at the earliest September 2016 and more likely
not until February 2017. (Motion for Delay, at pp. 3-4.) While the Company has advised pilots
that, depending on when the final integrated seniority list is presented and what its terms and any
fences are, September 2016 is a realistic estimate of when the list could be implemented by the
Companys IT Department, it has never mentioned a delay until February of 2017. Such a delay
is only likely to occur if the East Pilot SIC is successful in its gambit to prevent this Panel from
reaching a final decision for as long as it possibly can.
In any event, the East Pilot SICs assertion does not justify the requested delay in the start
of the hearings. As this Panel has previously ruled:
That said, the Board is acutely aware that the other Merger Committees and the
pilots they represent, American Airlines and APA also have rights to adherence,
as much as possible and practicable, to the negotiated timelines laid down in the
Protocol Agreement and the Ground Rules. Accordingly, we intrude upon those
rights only to the extent we deem absolutely necessary to fulfill our obligations to
properly preserve and protect the fairness of this arbitration proceeding and the
finality of the awarded ISL.
* * *
1 The Company, in turn, has agreed to reimburse the APA for the APAs advancement of funds (up
to $4 million), provided that certain conditions are satisfied.
September 2, 2015 - Page 4
All concerned are well advised to note that strict compliance will be required by
the Board, unless otherwise agreed by the Parties and approved by the Board; or
unless, in the sole judgment of the Board, compelling good cause is shown to
justify any further modification.
Op. at 20-21.
Here, at least some of the parties do not agree to the schedule modifications
requested in the Motion for Delay, and the East Pilot SIC has failed to demonstrate
compelling good cause for its requested delay. Its request to delay the commencement
of the hearings in this matter should accordingly be denied.
Respectfully Submitted,
_______/s/_________________
Robert A. Siegel
Chris A. Hollinger
of OMELVENY & MYERS LLP
Counsel for New American Airlines

 

[Phoenix]

It ain't gonna be "dicta" this time Scotty. It's gonna be REAL. Gee, I wonder if Judge Silver will have softened here sentiments regarding USAPA / East / Former AAA pilots (names interchangeable for the integrity impaired)?

 
Promises. Promises.  (P.S. I feel bad for Scotty. He is missing out on some real humor.  You should mail him a carbon copy.) 
 
If you are lucky the judges you are pleading to will stay in their box and shake their pompoms from the free speech zone.   The Arbs have ruled twice about three committees, now have to rule again in mid September about your East Committee funding dispute, and frankly would probably rather quit having to address your attempted impositions on their authority.  Its their job, but there may be a limit to their humor.  

 

[EastUS1]

Do not trust the rose colored glasses cactusboy and AOL will use.

 
Merely rose colored glasses? I'm thinking a whole lot of at least peyote/mushrooms/LSD/exctasy/whatever must needs be involved. Hmm...of course some clinical study to properly determine if the hallucinogentic affects from licking the skins of some poisonous toads might be here replicated by licking the shoe soles of lawyers would seem appropriate as well.
 
No matter, I suppose, since after all; "This is Sparta!" and their tiny 1200 will doubtless soon conquer "the rest of the world".....One would have to laugh, were it not so sad.

 

[Claxon]

It ain't gonna be "dicta" this time Scotty. It's gonna be REAL. Gee, I wonder if Judge Silver will have softened here sentiments regarding USAPA / East / Former AAA pilots (names interchangeable for the integrity impaired)?

I agree Judge Silver did not soften her sentiments or her injunctive judgments.
 
Enjoy the dicta, but you must  honor the judgments.

 

[Claxon]

Give them credit, they know it's throwing good money after bad.

west pilots, how many years since the merger was announced? 10
west pilots, how many years, YEARS, since the Nicolau came out. Almost 9.
west pilots, how many jobs and upgrades have you squandered, yes SQUANDERED whilst you follow so called attorneys such as Koontz and Vasin? Hundreds and hundreds.
Another delay coming. The Fishbowl is a very angry and squalid hovel.

 

[EastUS1]

west pilots, how many years since the merger was announced? 10
west pilots, how many years, YEARS, since the Nicolau came out. Almost 9.
west pilots, how many jobs and upgrades have you squandered, yes SQUANDERED whilst you follow so called attorneys such as Koontz and Vasin? Hundreds and hundreds.
Another delay coming. The Fishbowl is a very angry and squalid hovel.

 
Some suggested caution there brother, since ever interfacing with actual reality's never been much at all any notable virtue among PHX/"spartans"..umm..."Integrity" and "valor"-saturated "knights"/"dire wolves"/"soldiers"/whatever.

 

[Claxon]

west pilots prescient in their futuristic recognition of the coming fishbowl. Eric Auxier prepares to load fish symbolizing angry west f/o s into the bowl. Auxier is a true visionary.....

http://youtu.be/D0WxIsu3eOw

 

[EastUS1]

.... Eric Auxier....

 
I've some sadness for that poor baby's perpetual and obvious sufferings, but no more compelling entries for the Joke of the Day could ever be made. The poor creature could have, at least somewhere along the way, opted to at least attempt the onerous task of becoming an actual adult, after all. What will "he"/"cap'n aux" do whenever the time comes when no "teenaged blog buddies" will indulgently attend? What "heroically" attired, leather-jacketed "pilots"/"knights"/"dire wolves" will then "care"?...Over the age of at best 16, that is?
 
Oh well. Where the whole PHX/"sparta"/Fantasyland-"Army"/"knights"/"dire wolves"/whatever infantile nonsense is concerned: "Not my circus. Not my monkees"....
 
P.S. Unlike "you'se" pathetic little "spartans"; I'll cheerfully afford your very best "soldiers"/"pilots" the chance to personally prove just how AWAsomely great they truly are and what a pitiful old fool I must be for all the world to see aloft. Think of both the money and glory that could so easily be yours. Step right up and show us all just who's who and what's what....? After all; "This is Sparta!"....Right?....And of course "you'se" are "Righteous" and both "Integrity" saturated and even "Valor"-soaked and "battle"-tested pwecious widdle "knights"...not to mention the whole world's best-ever "pilots"....arent you? 😉

 

[Phoenix]

.. 

 

[Phoenix]

...