2015 Pilot Discussion.

[Pi brat]

Implicit assumptions. Your go to tag line. There is absolutely, positively nothing implicit about the Nicolau award. It was mutually agreed upon. Fact. It took months of work and millions of dollars to craft. Fact. It was final and binding. Fact. It was accepted by the company. Fact. If anyone is implicitly assuming facts it's you. Why do you implicitly assume the illegal behavior of yourselves to thwart implementation has a greater bearing on the outcome than actual facts the West brings to the table. Why do you implicitly assume that lack of implementation means a complete do over to your sole advantage? Wasn't DOH the "Gold Standard "? No? Not anymore? Is that just another implicit assumption that didn't work out?
You're the only ones who think the Nic was t fair. Even the Senile Judge Tashmia said that the East pilots were the only ones who cared about this and that "it was your problem ". Keep begging though. It's great to see Wilder wheel out illegal activity to justify your proposal (aka revisionist fantasy).

To this day it has never been used. FACT. It is not the status quo under the PA. FACT.

 

[nic4us]

Your use of the Nic, and your previous arguments, will haunt us all. I hope LAA does mention that you guys wanted to staple over 900 active pilots, or that Nic didn't use the snapshot fleet.

 
FU
 
It is not the use of the Nic, but rather the willingness of the scab union to remain on bankruptcy wages for over a decade that will haunt us all.
 
Also, that Wilder is still arguing the Nic is not fair BS, and to this day the east is still just trying to jump the West, while adding the twist of trying to also steal AA pilots positions within AAL.

 

[nic4us]

To this day it has never been used. FACT. It is not the status quo under the PA. FACT.

 
West was/is not a party to PA.
 
And, the status qou at LCC is the Nic is the list upon JCBA.

 

[Phoenix]

Implicit assumptions. Your go to tag line. There is absolutely, positively nothing implicit about the Nicolau award. It was mutually agreed upon. Fact. It took months of work and millions of dollars to craft. Fact. It was final and binding. Fact. It was accepted by the company. Fact. If anyone is implicitly assuming facts it's you. Why do you implicitly assume the illegal behavior of yourselves to thwart implementation has a greater bearing on the outcome than actual facts the West brings to the table. Why do you implicitly assume that lack of implementation means a complete do over to your sole advantage? Wasn't DOH the "Gold Standard "? No? Not anymore? Is that just another implicit assumption that didn't work out?
You're the only ones who think the Nic was t fair. Even the Senile Judge Tashmia said that the East pilots were the only ones who cared about this and that "it was your problem ". Keep begging though. It's great to see Wilder wheel out illegal activity to justify your proposal (aka revisionist fantasy).

Focus.

You can argue it was (still is) "final and binding" or you can argue it was (still is the only way to be) "fair and equitable".

Be persuasive. Show your work.

FRUEND: "I'll make it simple. I'll just let George Nicolau speak." <---------- not too persuasive, but abundantly assumptive

 

[Pi brat]

West was/is not a party to PA.
 
And, the status qou at LCC is the Nic is the list upon JCBA.

Yes, you were. Just like I was a party to ALPA's final and binding-by agreement of my CBA.

 

[Pi brat]

FU
 
It is not the use of the Nic, but rather the willingness of the scab union to remain on bankruptcy wages for over a decade that will haunt us all.
 
Also, that Wilder is still arguing the Nic is not fair BS, and to this day the east is still just trying to jump the West, while adding the twist of trying to also steal AA pilots positions within AAL.

Did I hit a nerve with the facts nicless?

Freund gets paid to be a hypocrite, not you. Your proposal tries to use the longevity of others.

 

[snapthis]

Tuesday's transcripts are an interesting read and Russ does a pretty good job with derailing Wilder:
 
 
 
 
So despite what you had testified you had
hoped would happen in JCBA bargaining, you voted for
the MOU that did not by its terms adopt the Nicolau
Award?
 
 
A. Okay. Maybe I'm confused. Maybe I'm
thinking you were talking about the single contract
between the East and West pilots.
 
Q. Yes.
 
 
A. Is that what you were asking me?
 
 
Q. That is what I'm referring to.
 
 
A. Okay. And restate your question then,
please.
 
 
Q. All right. Well, my question is a simple
 one. In terms of what you could reasonably
expect, you didn't reasonably expect that a single
JCBA among premerger US Airways pilots adopting the
Nicolau Award would be ratified.
Again, not what could happen, or might, or
possible, but what you could reasonably expect.
 
 
A. And by JCBA, do you mean a JCBA between
the East and the West pilots?

 

[Metroyet]

Focus.
You can argue it was (still is) "final and binding" or you can argue it was (still is the only way to be) "fair and equitable".
Be persuasive. Show your work.
FRUEND: "I'll make it simple. I'll just let George Nicolau speak." <---------- not too persuasive, but abundantly assumptive

The Nic award is both at the same time. Final AND binding. Fair AND Equitable. Those concepts are inextricably linked to each other. You can't argue one without the other. So in your mind this new arbitration, in the eyes of the law, can only be EITHER final and binding or fair and equitable, but not both. That's absurd. Your particular OPINION might separate the two but your OPINION is utterly irrelevant. Silver spelled it out for you with her "powerful " evidence comment and I believe the 9th circuit was abundantly clear as well. The Nic is FB&FE.

Also, Freund is right to let Nic speak for itself. It cost millions of dollars and both sides had teams of lawyers to argue their cases and the Nic award is the result. It's common sense to rely on it...or you could go the Wilder route, sniffle and cry about how many days someone worked where. Without America West you be counting your days since liquidation in the several thousand. A point not lost upon Nic or anyone else.

 

[Phoenix]

 
FU
 
It is not the use of the Nic, but rather the willingness of the scab union to remain on bankruptcy wages for over a decade that will haunt us all.
 
Also, that Wilder is still arguing the Nic is not fair BS, and to this day the east is still just trying to jump the West, while adding the twist of trying to also steal AA pilots positions within AAL.

  
 
I don't think Wilder has described the Nicolau as either  "fair" or "un-fair", but certainly he has exposed evidence (for the BOA's benefit) that can be used by them to evaluate the Nic's conformity with the "fair and equitable" standard, in the matter before the BOA.  
 
If you will notice, Wilder has made an educated guess that the BOA just might not assume that Nicolau was binding, so in the alternative the BOA might need to consider what indeed is fair and equitable... and Wilder doesn't let others (from 10 years ago) speak for him (like Freund does)... Wilder actually mans up, picks a premise, and argues for it....  No implicit assumptions that the BOA will be complicit with  implicit assumptions.    
 
Freund and his witnesses should pick an argument and support it, rather than just let George Nicolau speak... 
 
MR. FREUND: I'm going to make it easier. I'm going to just rely on George's award. 
 
MR DE VICQ:  I didn't do that. Arbitrator Nicolau did that. 
 
Is the BOA going to call George Nicolau as a witness?  And include direct, cross, re-direct, etc testimony, or is it unnecessary since Nicolau's word was/still is final and binding (written by his finger in stone 😀)? 

 

[Phoenix]

The Nic award is both at the same time. Final AND binding. Fair AND Equitable. Those concepts are inextricably linked to each other. You can't argue one without the other. So in your mind this new arbitration, in the eyes of the law, can only be EITHER final and binding or fair and equitable, but not both. That's absurd. Your particular OPINION might separate the two but your OPINION is utterly irrelevant. Silver spelled it out for you with her "powerful " evidence comment and I believe the 9th circuit was abundantly clear as well. The Nic is FB&FE.

Also, Freund is right to let Nic speak for itself. It cost millions of dollars and both sides had teams of lawyers to argue their cases and the Nic award is the result. It's common sense to rely on it...or you could go the Wilder route, sniffle and cry about how many days someone worked where. Without America West you be counting your days since liquidation in the several thousand. A point not lost upon Nic or anyone else.

 
The West is the one always relying on the premise of "final and binding".  You might want to tell your lawyer to make an argument supporting that premise, especially since the courts have repeatedly said Nic is not binding on the BOA.   Help the BOA understand why the courts are wrong.  Relying on what "George said" (ten years before the courts even ruled the BOA is not bound) is "dangerous ground" (for you Judge Silver fans).
 
If the West is also readily and implicitly accepting the Nicolau as "fair and equitable" (by just letting "George speak") then they need to consider the real possibility that the BOA may not share that implicit acceptance, since they are evaluating a different merger in a different decade.  
 
Freund should make and argument supporting your premise!  He is getting paid far too well to simply close his mouth, toss his hands in the air, and let "George speak".  

 

[snapthis]

Admirable testimony, Mr. Freund. This is how it's done, Mr Wilder.
 
Q. Okay. Let me ask a somewhat different
question.
 
Before you met USAPA, did you have a
reasonable expectation that a labor union would
breach its duty of fair representation for year
after year in order to keep an award from coming
into place?
 
MR. WILDER: Objection.
 
MR. FREUND: On what ground?
 
ARBITRATOR VAUGHN: Allowed. Respond.
 
THE WITNESS: No. I did not.
 
 
 
BY MR. FREUND:
Q. And Wes and Russ -- not Wes and Russ.
 
Wes and Bill both asked you questions
about the choice of using the Nicolau Award for
purposes of doing both standalone career expectation
analysis and the comparative career expectation
analysis.
 
Do you recall that?
 
A. I do.
 
Q. If you didn't use the Nicolau Award,
wouldn't that simply have the effect of baking in
USAPA's breach of duty of fair representation
forever?
 
A. Absolutely.
 
MR. FREUND: That's all I have got.
 
ARBITRATOR VAUGHN: Admirable testimony,
Mr. Freund.
 
Thank you
 
 

 

[luvthe9]

FU
 
.

Foul mouth little Spartan.

 

[Metroyet]

I don't think Wilder has described the Nicolau as either  "fair" or "un-fair", but certainly he has exposed evidence (for the BOA's benefit) that can be used by them to evaluate the Nic's conformity with the "fair and equitable" standard, in the matter before the BOA.  
 
If you will notice, Wilder has made an educated guess that the BOA just might not assume that Nicolau was binding, so in the alternative the BOA might need to consider what indeed is fair and equitable... and Wilder doesn't let others (from 10 years ago) speak for him (like Freund does)... Wilder actually mans up, picks a premise, and argues for it....  No implicit assumptions that the BOA will be complicit with  implicit assumptions.    
 
Freund and his witnesses should pick an argument and support it, rather than just let George Nicolau speak... 
 
MR. FREUND: I'm going to make it easier. I'm going to just rely on George's award. 
 
MR DE VICQ:  I didn't do that. Arbitrator Nicolau did that. 
 
Is the BOA going to call George Nicolau as a witness?  And include direct, cross, re-direct, etc testimony, or is it unnecessary since Nicolau's word was/still is final and binding (written by his finger in stone 😀)? 

Your arguments only make sense if you take the USAPA route and...as Judge Wake and Orwell put it, "separate words from their meaning ".

Final and binding means what? What court said you could ignore it without penalty? Where is USAPA now? Where is Leonidas? See a pattern developing?

 

[Phoenix]

ALPA agreed with final and binding. Is ALPA a party? Does ALPA present their case tomorrow?

The PA doesn't mention ALPA, does it?

 

[CactusPilot1]

 
FU
 
It is not the use of the Nic, but rather the willingness of the scab union to remain on bankruptcy wages for over a decade that will haunt us all.
 
Also, that Wilder is still arguing the Nic is not fair BS, and to this day the east is still just trying to jump the West, while adding the twist of trying to also steal AA pilots positions within AAL.

 
 

 
West was/is not a party to PA.
 
And, the status qou at LCC is the Nic is the list upon JCBA.

 
Trank is like Hillary, shifty as they come. He's did not vote for USAPA yet is the biggest crybaby on the C&R's pushing their agenda. Just wait, when the arbitration is settled and it doesn't go their way, he will back-pedal and retreat like the weasel he is.