2015 Pilot Discussion.

[luvthe9]

Which agreement was that? Final & Binding Arbitration?

Wye River..............we offered you refused, and you won't get it back.

 

[CAVOK]

AntiPolygraph.org Home Page > Personal Statements
Note: this statement originally appeared on StopPolygraph.com.

Polygraph Statement of Mr. Mark C. Doyal

I had always wanted to be an FBI agent. With that singular goal in mind, I enrolled in Southwest Texas State University in the fall of 1988. My major was Law Enforcement with a minor in Economics. I graduated in December 1990 and I took the written FBI exam that next January. I passed and was scheduled for an interview in March of 1991. The interview went great and I achieved a perfect score. However, the FBI determined that I needed more experience and informed me to re-apply in two years. I immediately took the Law School Admissions Test and applied to South Texas College of Law in Houston, Texas. I was excepted for the class beginning in January 1991. I was fortunate in that I was able to obtain employment on a full time basis with the Harris County District Attorney's Office - Economic Crime Division. I remember my new boss asking me after he interviewed me what I planned on achieving with a law career. I immediately responded that I wanted a career with the FBI. Everyone who I met knew that that was my goal.

Working full time for the District Attorney while attending law school at night was tough, but I knew I had to get the right kind of experience and education to make myself the best possible candidate for the FBI. Upon graduation from law school (Dec. 1994), I re-applied with the FBI. I was scheduled to take the written exam on a Monday following the Bar exam. I again passed the written exam and had to wait to be selected for the interview. I wrote letters nearly every month to the applicant coordinator asking to be interviewed and explaining what I was doing each month. Finally, I was selected to be interviewed in Kansas City in July of 1996. Seven of us in our region were selected to go, but only two of us passed the interview process. Myself and another girl. I was on top of the world, knowing that I was about to realize my dream.

The polygraph exam was next, August 7, 1996, in San Antonio, Texas. I knew I had nothing to worry about, since I had never violated the FBI's drug policy and I had not lied on my application. The agent administering the polygraph noted during the pre- polygraph interview that I had attended a university that he believed was a "party school" and that I needed to tell him what drugs I used when I went there. I stated that I had taken none, that I didn't live on campus, I lived in another city, and that I was an older student and wasn't influenced to do such things. He repeated that that couldnít be the case and told me again to tell him what illegal drugs I had done. I countered again that that just wasn't the case and that I was telling the truth. This went back and forth for about 10 minutes and he seemed to be getting upset that I wouldnít admit to taking drugs. Finally he stated that if I was lying he was about to find out. I was upset at the unbelievable accusations he was making. Up until that point I had been treated with the utmost professionalism by the FBI staff, now I was being treated like an accused criminal. After the polygraph was over, he told me I had failed. I almost passed out in disbelief

I wrote several letters to FBI Director Freeh, and in October of 1996 I was polygraphed again, by another agent with the first agent who polygraphed me present. The results were the same, he told me I had failed. I just could not believe it. I had not lied on the polygraph. Even the first agent that had polygraphed me told me as I was leaving that he now believed me, that I was telling the truth. I wrote the Director several more times to no avail, my application was terminated in November of that year. My dreams were shattered.

Finally, as a side note, I later applied with the Secret Service. I did just as well in the testing and interview stages as I had with the FBI. When it came time for the polygraph, the agent administering it asked me if I had been polygraphed before. I told him yes, and under what circumstances and the results. He thanked me for my honesty, unhooked me from the polygraph without testing me and told me that he would have to contact his superiors for their advice. I could not believe it. Two months later I received a form letter stating that I was no longer competitive with the other agent applicants. I am a licensed attorney, professional pilot, have law enforcement experience and with top scores but I was not competitive? Obviously I had been "black balled" by the erroneous polygraph results from the FBI.

I will probably always be effected by the injustice of what happened. I wrote a final letter to Director Freeh this summer asking for another polygraph. I even offered to pay all expenses associated with retaking it if I were to fail. I guess I still haven't accepted that you can fail a polygraph while telling the truth. Or the fact that the FBI could make this kind of mistake. I had always looked up to that agency as the pinnacle of professionalism. I received the same form letter back that I had received almost two years earlier. It is a shame, since all I wanted to do was to have a chance to serve my country and make my family proud.



Sincerely,



Mark C. Doyal



AntiPolygraph.org Home Page > Personal Statements

So, Clax, this guy was having a failed interview for the FBI at the end of '96, was hired by America West at the end of '03 and now he is angry because he is not senior to a US Airways pilot, not furloughed, hired in '87 (almost 17 years before Doyal's own airline hire date) and 10 years older and 10 years closer to retirement? Is that about right? Why didn't Doyal just hire on with the airlines earlier? 

 

[EastUS1]

So, Clax, this guy was having a failed interview for the FBI at the end of '96, was hired by America West at the end of '03 and now he is angry because he is not senior to a US Airways pilot, not furloughed, hired in '87 (almost 17 years before Doyal's own airline hire date) and 10 years older and 10 years closer to retirement? Is that about right? Why didn't Doyal just hire on with the airlines earlier? 

 
To that last; Well, I personally know of at least one airline that required a polygraph as part of the pilot screening process, although that certainly wasn't at all common industry-wide...but perhaps even without the machine some interesting character traits shown through.

 

[cactusboy53]

No, the one that kept it from implementation. Have you not read it?

Speaking of reading comprehension: DFR - Fees & ? $? to boot. I say again: DFR.

 

[Phoenix]

Speaking of reading comprehension: DFR - Fees & ? $? to boot. I say again: DFR.

When are you going to sue Silver for stealing your injunction?

 

[luvthe9]

Speaking of reading comprehension: DFR - Fees & ? $? to boot. I say again: DFR.

Blah, blah..............such enormous desperation.

 

[nevergiveup]

Speaking of reading comprehension: DFR - Fees & ? $? to boot. I say again: DFR.

How much have you collected?

 

[cactusboy53]

How much have you collected?

I'm really not too worried about that, Dorothy.  The FACT is that USAPA is BANNED from further spending (generally speaking).  It's just a matter of time.  In the meantime, your stellar team is instructing the BOA on the nuances of your proposal.  In other words, they are being heard by the BOA. 
 
The BOA will hear the other two proposals & witnesses.  They will then deliver a FINAL & BINDING seniority list (just like the last time). 

 

[nevergiveup]

I'm really not too worried about that, Dorothy.  The FACT is that USAPA is BANNED from further spending (generally speaking).  It's just a matter of time.  In the meantime, your stellar team is instructing the BOA on the nuances of your proposal.  In other words, they are being heard by the BOA. 
 
The BOA will hear the other two proposals & witnesses.  They will then deliver a FINAL & BINDING seniority list (just like the last time). 

Yes...more time...more bids...more upgrades...better lines...loving it! 

 

[im back..!!]

I'm really not too worried about that, Dorothy.  The FACT is that USAPA is BANNED from further spending (generally speaking).  It's just a matter of time.  In the meantime, your stellar team is instructing the BOA on the nuances of your proposal.  In other words, they are being heard by the BOA. 
 
The BOA will hear the other two proposals & witnesses.  They will then deliver a FINAL & BINDING seniority list (just like the last time).

Actually you were correct up to the (just like the last time) comment....

What part of "Federal" do you not understand?

 

[nic4us]

Sorry we made you hold to the agreement?

 
You keep bringing this up to justify the east's actions...and you are flat out wrong.
 
The east violated the agreements made via the TA.  The ability to force separate ops was in ALPA policy, not the TA, and the way the east went about forcing separate ops took us out of ALPA, so the policy no longer applied.
 
The TA called for negotiations of a JCBA, the east walked from the talks....violation of agreement!!
The TA called for the product of arbitration to be the used seniority list....scabs walked...violation of TA!!!
usapa never produced a tentative JCBA even for consideration because of their fear it may pass and implement Nic...violation of agreements in TA!!!
 
 
The "agreement" was a contract to merge the two companies.  When things did not go the way you would have liked, you scabbed and violated the agreement...hence still not a merged company after 10 years.
 
So, you can save the implications that the West is somehow not honoring our part of the bargain...you scabbed, the company favored you for doing it, the West gets it...now so does the SLI board.
 
 
Oh, and BTW, the Nic is still the only company accepted combined system seniority list covering all LCC pilots.

 

[nic4us]

Actually you were correct up to the (just like the last time) comment....

What part of "Federal" do you not understand?

 
Actually, I think it is you who does not understand that this "final and binding" arbitration carries no more weight than any other arbitration.
 
It can be challenged once complete, and will be subject to the same criteria as any arbitration entered into by mutual agreement between two or more parties.
 
The difference between this time and "the last time" is not found in the binding nature of the decision, just the path for reaching the arbitration phase.

 

[Claxon]

 
Q = Freund, west attorney  A = Kelley Ison, witness for the East pilots.
 
 
"Q. Okay. Are you familiar with the decision
3 that Arbitrator Nicolau issued in connection with
4 the list that he created?
5 A. Somewhat.
6 Q. Right. You would agree with me, would you
7 not, that he took into account in that decision and
8 he articulated in the decision that he was taking
9 into account the different attrition rates, the
10 different equipment -- and the different equipment
11 that folks brought to the merger of US Airways and
12 America West, and constructed the list taking that
13 into account?
14 A. Yeah. I heard that said, but I don't know
15 how he did it.
16 Q. But you don't quarrel with the proposition
17 that he says he -- that he said that he heard that
18 evidence and took it into account; correct?
19 A. Sure.
20 MR. WILDER: Arbitrator Jaffe, if I may,
21 this is really getting into the realm of legal
22 argument.
Page 947
1 And respectfully, I'm not a potted plant.
2 I mean, counsel gets to argue what awards mean or
3 don't mean. If he wants to elicit the question
4 that -- I would leave that to the Panel and to you.
5 I just don't want to be prejudiced in
6 making my legal arguments by trying to elicit a
7 legal opinion from a lay witness.
8 That's my only point.
9 MR. FREUND: I don't think I was asking
10 for a legal opinion.
11 I was simply asking whether he read the
12 opinion and whether the opinion recites that he took
13 it into account.
14 MR. WILDER: Well, and, again, my point is
15 interpreting the opinion, arguing from the opinion
16 is what lawyers do, not witnesses.
17 MR. FREUND: That was my last question on
18 that subject, so I don't think we need to really
19 spend much time on it."

 

[Claxon]

 
Actually, I think it is you who does not understand that this "final and binding" arbitration carries no more weight than any other arbitration.
 
It can be challenged once complete, and will be subject to the same criteria as any arbitration entered into by mutual agreement between two or more parties.
 
The difference between this time and "the last time" is not found in the binding nature of the decision, just the path for reaching the arbitration phase.

Naive poster. 

 

[nic4us]

Wye River..............we offered you refused, and you won't get it back.

 
You should have taken the Nic at Wye....and all the guys who retired $1/2 million poorer won't get that money back, but you will get the Nic from this BOA.