AAA ALPA Thread 9-7 to 9-13

[Junebug172]

The USAPA Officers are going to meet tomorrow and there could be a press release and a big annoucement shortly.

As of September 10 USAPA says they have received 2,344 cards.

Ted Reed's USAPA article, titled "US Airways Pilots Veer Away From ALPA" is accurate and can be viewed by clicking here.
Regards,

USA320Pilot

From USAPA's president:

"ALPA has too many constituencies to faithfully represent east pilots, says Stephen Bradford, interim president of USAPA. "We will not put our futures in the hands of others whose interests may not be aligned with ours," he says.

The arbitrator's ruling falls short, he says, because it is not based on the date of hire."

Nice.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Can anyone please help me figure out what this guy is saying?!?!

No I can't. Warned you about that. But, hey, what do I know? Maybe next time you will heed my advice.

 

[USA320Pilot]

Junebug,

People have been telling you and the AWA MEC over-and-over that there needs to be a compromise to the Nicolau Award and the AWA MEC has not changed their postion. In my opinion, the AWA MEC has under estimated the resolve of the East pilots to never let the Nicolau Award proceed.

Dependent on the result of tomorrow's meeting, the strategic decisions made, and the advice of Lee Seham there could be a NMB Form 1 filing as soon as this week. If that happens the EC, US Airways MEC, and AWA MEC will lose control of the process and union "imposition" could occur.

There is still time to reach a "realistic solution" to the Nicolau Award problem, but unless the AWA MEC is willing to negotiate a compromise then I believe USAPA will start the formal process to kick ALPA off of both the East and West property very soon. If USAPA is successful in thier effort to replace ALPA nobody truly knows how the courts will rule on the Nicolau Award because it is a private contract versus a corporate contract. Therefore, is Lee Seham's or Pete Janhunen's opinion accurate and which one will be viewed as accurate by the Court's?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[BoeingBoy]

nobody truly knows how the courts will rule on the Nicolau Award because it is a private contract versus a corporate contract

Wonder which LOA's fall under.......

Jim

 

[SkyRat]

Junebug,

People have been telling you and the AWA MEC over-and-over that there needs to be a compromise to the Nicolau Award and the AWA MEC has not changed their postion. In my opinion, the AWA MEC has under estimated the resolve of the East pilots to never let the Nicolau Award proceed.

Dependent on the result of tomorrow's meeting, the strategic decisions made, and the advice of Lee Seham there could be a NMB Form 1 filing as soon as this week. If that happens the EC, US Airways MEC, and AWA MEC will lose control of the process and union "imposition" could occur.

There is still time to reach a "realistic solution" to the Nicolau Award problem, but unless the AWA MEC is willing to negotiate a compromise then I believe USAPA will start the formal process to kick ALPA off of both the East and West property very soon. If USAPA is successful in thier effort to replace ALPA nobody truly knows how the courts will rule on the Nicolau Award because it is a private contract versus a corporate contract. Therefore, is Lee Seham's or Pete Janhunen's opinion accurate and which one will be viewed as accurate by the Court's?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Wow DEL BY MOD, I can't believe that you write non-sense like this. For 18 months the MC's could not find "compromise" ala DOH or LOS. That's why BOTH groups agreed to go to arbitration!

Where have you been all this time? The "compromise" process ended a while back. It's amazing how a few EAST pitols will BEHAVE in thi manner. Shame on YOU. UNREAL!

Go UZAPA!!!

But the AWARD still stays... 😱

Regards,
GL

 

[USA320Pilot]

SkyRat,

According to Ted Reed, "USAPA leaders say that because the seniority ruling was a step toward implementing ALPA's policy on merged unions, leaving ALPA would invalidate it. "A successor union would be free to negotiate with US Airways concerning the terms of any seniority integration," says an opinion by a law firm retained by USAPA. ALPA disputes this opinion," Reed wrote.

Reed continued, "Although leaving ALPA would appear to enable east pilots to avoid the ruling's impact, the reality may not be so simple. Among the many variables, ALPA attorneys contend that 'any successor union would inherit all contracts and agreements,' says ALPA spokesman Pete Janhunen. Those attorneys 'have practiced railway labor law for 70 years,' he adds."

USA320Pilot comments: According to Lee Seham the difference is a private agreement within a union and a corporate agreement between a union and the company.

Regardless, it appears we are about to find out when the USAPA effort to formally replace ALPA begins...very, very soon, unless the AWA MEC takes Doug Parker's advice and seeks a compromise or Paul Rice's advice to seek a "realistic solution".

Regards,

USA320Pilot

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

"According to Ted Reed....." Ha ha ha ha, and I'm an authority on brain surgery.

 

[SkyRat]

SkyRat,

Regardless, it appears we are about to find out when the USAPA effort to formally replace ALPA begins...very, very soon, unless the AWA MEC takes Doug Parker's advice and seeks a compromise or Paul Rice's advice to seek a "realistic solution".

Regards,

USA320Pilot

Have you taken your... latelly? Oooops sorry! To the point.

Irrelevant coments DEL BY MOD. Binding is binding. The time to negotiate was... WHEN?

UZAPA or Hampsters... Nic STAYS! Dress it up as you wish, still the same. Please STOP making a FOOL out of YOURSELF! It's funny, it's amuzing, but to think that you are "driving" people around? Sound Judgement? Rings a bell? A requirement for an ATP Cert.

Will you PLEASE behave like one coherent "driver"? It's a scary thought Chippy! Your family or mine could be back there. Please get ahold of yourself, or get some help!!!

Regards


MOD NOTE: DO NOT USE THE REAL NAME OF A POSTER.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

So, according to Ted Reed, what would be a realistic solution?

 

[BottomFeeder]

Have you taken your... latelly? Oooops sorry! To the point.

Irrelevant coments *****. Binding is binding. The time to negotiate was... WHEN?

UZAPA or Hampsters... Nic STAYS! Dress it up as you wish, still the same. Please STOP making a FOOL out of YOURSELF! It's funny, it's amuzing, but to think that you are "driving" people around? Sound Judgement? Rings a bell? A requirement for an ATP Cert.

Will you PLEASE behave like one coherent "driver"? It's a scary thought Chippy! Your family or mine could be back there. Please get ahold of yourself, or get some help!!!

Regards

Rat,

In the end it does not matter since the East has the trump "No" vote to a joint contract.
Your MEC has spread misinformation about the vocal minority at the East.
Is 2400 a minority of East? The number grows every day.

USAPA

 

[Richard]

Just a reminder to refrain from personal attacks and name calling.

 

[Bear96]

[N]obody truly knows how the courts will rule on the Nicolau Award because it is a private contract versus a corporate contract. Therefore, is Lee Seham's or Pete Janhunen's opinion accurate and which one will be viewed as accurate by the Court's?

Regards,

USA320Pilot

???

Could you explain the legal distinction you are trying to make between "private" and "corporate" contracts:

1. Please define the terms, "private" contract and "corporate" contract.

2. You seem to be saying that no one knows how courts decide "private" contracts, because "private" are somehow less enforceable, or at least are treated differently in some ways, than corporate contracts. Did I get that right? (If not, please clarify what you are saying.) Please give some examples of what you are talking about. This is a new concept for me and I am anxious to learn.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

???

Could you explain the legal distinction you are trying to make between "private" and "corporate" contracts:

1. Please define the terms, "private" contract and "corporate" contract.

2. You seem to be saying that no one knows how courts decide "private" contracts, because "private" are somehow less enforceable, or at least are treated differently in some ways, than corporate contracts. Did I get that right? (If not, please clarify what you are saying.) Please give some examples of what you are talking about. This is a new concept for me and I am anxious to learn.

I would like to know that one myself. But if he's smart he won't take the bait. IMO. Then again we might learn what side he's really on.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

"My viewpoint is always accurate but my previous viewpoint conflicts with my current argument, therefore you obviously misinterpreted my previous viewpoint."

Does that help?

Jim

That just about sums it up. Sometimes I wonder what he is really trying to accomplish though. Mass confusion, hysteria or a really good laugh from the reactions?

 

[Bear96]

I would like to know that one myself. But if he's smart he won't take the bait. IMO. Then again we might learn what side he's really on.

After I posted, I see he kinda sorta answered question # 1 post # 126.

So USA320pilot, are you saying a court is less likely to enforce contract where both parties are unions, and because of the simple fact that both parties are unions, as opposed to contracts between a union and an employer?

Again, got something to back that up? Examples? Case law?