ALPA Thread 1/18-1/25 ALL ALPA Discussed Here

[aquagreen73s]

ALPA is not admitting publicly of the ramifications of USAPA and the list but they DO admit that if a contract with the nic award cannot be voted in by the East then the only way to get ANY joint contract is to reopen Section 22 seniority, confirming what Kirby already knows. In short, if you don't vote for it, you don't get it.

Where is this printed? All we have is your hearsay which relies on your credibility. We know from your earlier posts that your reasoning skills leave a lot to be desired and that usaps have a strong tendency to disregard reality when it conflicts with your desires.

Second, you need to look up "Specific Performance" in Blacks Law Dictionary. You (plural) are obligated to perform. There will be no renogitiating and not you, the company, or ALPA can force the West to renogotiate. Think about it for a minute...if we could be forced to cave, don't you think it would have already happened? You are obligated to perform and you will perform, whether through the JNC or via a court order. It's your choice, and from the looks of it, you seem to be choosing option two. That's fine with us.

And finally, how do you know what Kirby "already knows?" What are you now, a mind reader? You really need to get a grip. The company won't even give you pay parity yet you entertain the fancy belief that they will subject the company to a breach of contract suit just to suit you? Come on. Nobody is that....well...maybe they are.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Interesting comment. I take it from your above post that you think merging of two pilot groups is about declaring a winner, or gaining the spoils of war. In reality, the merger process requires understanding and a commitment to principles to foster and ensure a working relationship between two diverse pilot groups afterward. The imporance of cooperation following the integration marks the success or failure for all pilots in a combined pilot group. It is evident you (plural) are not interested in the effects of your actions and have little understanding of the consequences to your airline career. Forgive me, I just cannot share your happiness in declaring fellow pilots as enemy #1.

It's about a VOTE! If that defines a "winner or loser" than I'll accept that. Again, you are right about the principles and understanding of the merger "process". You think we're immoral. SO WHAT? We're voting. What the MEC agreed to do and what the negotiating committee agreed to do are one thing....but THEIR NOT VOTING for the RANK AND FILE now, are they?

You and Aquagreen talk about a "vested" right in seniority when this continues to be explained to you time and time again. No matter. I can't prove anything to you unless and until we have a vote, we go to court, the judge throws it out on summary judgment, you appeal as far up as to the Supreme Court and we find out then.

Seniority is NOT a vested right. Contracts come and go. NO MATTER!

What you're saying is if the vote doesn't go YOUR way EAST pilots are the enemy!! I have never said I was your enemy. What I HAVE said is that if I vote and you vote and the majority won't accept a contract with the award, West stagnates, East captures growth, attrition and international. New hires capture our growth until a new combined contract is put in place or until USAPA gets in.

We're going to get a vote, so again we'll see what the lawsuit brings....OK? Every pilot out there KNOWS USAPA and the company are going to get sued. SO....WHAT? Welcome to AMERICA! You can't reap the spoils unless and until you win the appeals. So again, we wait for the VOTE!

 

[end_of_alpa]

Where is this printed? All we have is your hearsay which relies on your credibility. We know from your earlier posts that your reasoning skills leave a lot to be desired and that usaps have a strong tendency to disregard reality when it conflicts with your desires.

Second, you need to look up "Specific Performance" in Blacks Law Dictionary. You (plural) are obligated to perform. There will be no renogitiating and not you, the company, or ALPA can force the West to renogotiate. Think about it for a minute...if we could be forced to cave, don't you think it would have already happened? You are obligated to perform and you will perform, whether through the JNC or via a court order. It's your choice, and from the looks of it, you seem to be choosing option two. That's fine with us.

And finally, how do you know what Kirby "already knows?" What are you now, a mind reader? You really need to get a grip. The company won't even give you pay parity yet you entertain the fancy belief that they will subject the company to a breach of contract suit just to suit you? Come on. Nobody is that....well...maybe they are.

So tell me....when do you think the vote will be? Specific performance doesn't apply to a "vote"! I'm not "obligated" to perform ANYTHING because I don't sign the contract! We're not forcing you to negotiate....we're forcing you to VOTE!

You just don't get it. They did at the ALPA meeting. You should have been there to defend your "legal" position.

 

[aquagreen73s]

So tell me....when do you think the vote will be? Specific performance doesn't apply to a "vote"! I'm not "obligated" to perform ANYTHING because I don't sign the contract! We're not forcing you to negotiate....we're forcing you to VOTE!

Not the vote silly, but your obligation to negotiate in good faith and to adhere to your previous agreement to arbitrate. Once again, your new child inherits the obligations that your previous agent entered into. To say otherwise would function to turn all of contract law onto its head; an action which I seriously doubt any rational person would think is possible. To date not a single usap has proffered a viable legal argument which supports the idea that there is legal authority for the seniority arbitration to be ignored. You tried with O'Neill and Rakestraw, but that was obviously erroneous reasoning on the part of usap. Since then, nothing else has come to light. But now you're suggesting some sort of forced acceptance by Kirby to work against the West pilots and open up Section 22. Clearly, now you're grasping for straws because you can't even get pay parity!

You just don't get it. They did at the ALPA meeting. You should have been there to defend your "legal" position.

What did they get at the ALPA meeting? Was it similar to the antics at Herndon? Sounds like it was. As to the legal position, you yourself said that ALPA EMPHATICALLY stated that Nic cannot be overturned. It's difficult to ascertain from your context whether that was a past remark by ALPA or whether it was stated yesterday. In any case, point to where ALPA, the company, or any case in the history of labor law suggests that the law is something other than the fact that Nic stands and that it stands with the force of law. Please, provide some evidence other than hearsay.

And btw, I don't work for free. You could have paid me the going rate of $200 an hour and I would have been there to explain why there is virtually zero chances of usapa ever accomplishing that which they say is possible. And a lot of us are also waiting for Seaham's response to the Abram's letter; you know, the one that totally deconstructed the wishful case interpretations which usaps clilnged to. And I'm still waiting for Seaham to discuss how he will be the first attorney in the history of the ABA to get a binding arbitration overturned using these circumstances.

Keep believing the fantasy. It'll save the West from that inane steering committee.

 

[AAA73Pilot]

Where is this printed? All we have is your hearsay which relies on your credibility. We know from your earlier posts that your reasoning skills leave a lot to be desired and that usaps have a strong tendency to disregard reality when it conflicts with your desires.

To my knowledge there is not a "transcript". Try going back and look at old crew news videos involving Kirby. Particularly the west briefings. Not sure which month. That is where you can find the information. To me your questioning this fact just goes back to your credibility and you say you're an attorney?

And finally, how do you know what Kirby "already knows?" What are you now, a mind reader? You really need to get a grip.

No we're not mind readers. We do pay attention to what is out there in public however. Some more than others it would seem. Maybe a reality check on your part would also be in order.

 

[aquagreen73s]

To my knowledge there is not a "transcript". Try going back and look at old crew news videos involving Kirby. Particularly the west briefings. Not sure which month. That is where you can find the information. To me your questioning this fact just goes back to your credibility and you say you're an attorney?


No we're not mind readers. We do pay attention to what is out there in public however. Some more than others it would seem. Maybe a reality check on your part would also be in order.

Point to where Kirby said he can and would force the West to accept a renogtiated seniority list, because that is what you are implying. Show me. I'm not even asking for a direct statement; I'll settle for a contextual argument. I guarantee you won't find any such thing because we would have already known about it had Kirby said anything remotely close to that.

Jesus HC...this isn't hard people! And you call yourselves "professionals?" Your beatings will continue until you guys get a grip.

Oh and one more thing...now it looks like Kirby is the new path to achieving usaps' goals, right? Where's the response to Abrams? Surely someone from usap would have offered SOMETHING. If Seaham knew his position and knew his argument, he would have anticipated the Abram response and replying would have been quick. O'Neill and Rakestraw suddenly don't work so now you're on to Kirby. You guys are too much.

 

[prechilill]

And I'm still waiting for Seaham to discuss how he will be the first attorney in the history of the ABA to get a binding arbitration overturned using these circumstances.

I think you can label most of the USAPs as "true believers"- they follow their hopes and not reason or logic.

 

[prechilill]

O'Neill and Rakestraw suddenly don't work so now you're on to Kirby. You guys are too much.

Their floating strategy is simply because they don't really have one. As you eloquently stated above, the USAPA movement is fueled by anger and emotion- logic and reason can't be found anywhere.

 

[aquagreen73s]

Their floating strategy is simply because they don't really have one. As you eloquently stated above, the USAPA movement is fueled by anger and emotion- logic and reason can't be found anywhere.

They've triggered a mechanical process, that's it. That process looks solely to numbers. They have the majority so usap is certainly a possibility. But the law judges actions and it judges those actions for their substantive effects - not numbers. This is not idealism, but a fact of modern jurisprudence. If numbers and only numbers mattered, Jim Crow laws would still apply south of the Mason Dixon line. We're way past the time where "majority" rules meant unchecked trouncing upon a minority.

If usasps get in and IF they try to undermine Nicolau in any way, they're toast. Legally, they're toast and if what's-his-face the frustrated F/O brainchild of usapa had an ounce of credibility, he'd outline how usap will accomplish what it desires and he'll do it without relying on a vastly outdated game plan of brute force by a majority. Today we're hearing from two of the preeminent usap cheerleaders who are suggesting that Kirby will succumb to the overwhelming resolve of the East. Oh God [roll eyes]. That just doesn't fly in this day and age.

 

[nostradamus]

Point to where Kirby said he can and would force the West to accept a renogtiated seniority list, because that is what you are implying. Show me. I'm not even asking for a direct statement; I'll settle for a contextual argument. I guarantee you won't find any such thing because we would have already known about it had Kirby said anything remotely close to that.

Jesus HC...this isn't hard people! And you call yourselves "professionals?" Your beatings will continue until you guys get a grip.

so now you're on to Kirby. You guys are too much.

AWA ALPA website, try reading your own union news, counsel.

"May 2007: The “Kirby Proposalâ€￾ emerges, which offers America West pilots a three percent pay raise paid for by concessions in other areas of the America West contract. During presentation of the Kirby Proposal, US Airways President Scott Kirby mentions that pilot expectations are too high, despite the fact that it is he and other senior managers who set the expectation for all employees with their lavish post-merger compensation packages.

· Summer 2007: Kirby begins to insist that America West pilots mitigate the seniority award so that he can try to cram another sub-standard contract down our throats."



Kirby to AWA ajust your expectations

 

[end_of_alpa]

Point to where Kirby said he can and would force the West to accept a renogtiated seniority list, because that is what you are implying. Show me. I'm not even asking for a direct statement; I'll settle for a contextual argument. I guarantee you won't find any such thing because we would have already known about it had Kirby said anything remotely close to that.

Jesus HC...this isn't hard people! And you call yourselves "professionals?" Your beatings will continue until you guys get a grip.

Oh and one more thing...now it looks like Kirby is the new path to achieving usaps' goals, right? Where's the response to Abrams? Surely someone from usap would have offered SOMETHING. If Seaham knew his position and knew his argument, he would have anticipated the Abram response and replying would have been quick. O'Neill and Rakestraw suddenly don't work so now you're on to Kirby. You guys are too much.

"The process was we have binding arbitration but it has to get ratified through the joint negotiation process. So what I would say to you is you say binding arbitration that was the first half of the agreement...the second half was it has to get ratified through joint negotiations. So what. Had the opposite happened had it been date of hire, I don't know what would have happened over here. But there's a much higher probability that it would have gotten rejected on the west side is my guess. And if it was, some kind of negotiation would have had to happen. So there is binding arbitration, that is out there, yes, but it has to be something that gets approved. If it doesn't get voted in, if it doesn't get ratified, it doesn't get implemented. Just because it's binding it still has to get ratified. That's the key point.

I don't think it can with the Nicolau award, I don't think it can but again; I don't even have a seat at that table. My opinion frankly doesn't matter. What matters is what you guys are willing to VOTE IN!" Scott Kirby Transcript 07 Oct 2007.


We'll wait for the VOTE, then.

 

[aquagreen73s]

· Summer 2007: Kirby begins to insist that America West pilots mitigate the seniority award so that he can try to cram another sub-standard contract down our throats."

I'm talking intent to act...big difference from asking. A lot of people have been asking us to throw you guys a bone and we probably would have had you been slightly reasonable. But Kirby sure as hell can't demand and he knows it. Just like ALPA can't demand or anyone else. Finally, this was from our own MEC and not Kirby's words. Try again. Surely if Kirby is as onboard with this as your esteemed usap cheerleaders seem to imply, then there's got to be plenty of evidence to proffer. Again, the request is that: "Kirby can force the West pilots to negotiate." It's really a simple request and a very reasonable one in light of the fact that your entire game plan rests on it.

 

[luvn737s]

E-O-A

So you've proved what? That Kirby understands the inherent stalemate built into the TA? That he recognizes his opinion doesn't matter (but his money does)?

Is this the best U-SAPs can come up with? And they want to be the labor leaders??????

 

[nostradamus]

E-O-A

So you've proved what?

Auquagreen, should stick to aviation.

 

[aquagreen73s]

I don't think it can with the Nicolau award, I don't think it can but again; I don't even have a seat at that table. My opinion frankly doesn't matter. What matters is what you guys are willing to VOTE IN!" Scott Kirby Transcript 07 Oct 2007.
We'll wait for the VOTE, then.

Kirby, you're right. Nothing can touch Nic. The ONLY avenue would be through a knowing and voluntary waiver by the West to shift some of the West benefits to the East. It's the doctrine of waiver. THAT's IT! And the very fact that a lot of pressure has been put on the West from the East MEC, ALPA National, the company, illustrates that nobody can "force" a renegotiation. The only way Nic gets mitigated is through a West relinquishment. That's the fact.