ALPA Thread 12/30 to 1/6--ALL ALPA/USAPA discussed here

[700UW]

EOA,

This is America, anyone can sue anyone, there are frivilous lawsuits filed everyday.

And for those of you who think if USAPA gets elected the Nic award goes away, how many times do I have to tell you does not.

Any new union is bound by any arbitration decisions and the current CBA.

And we have had Mechanics terminated by US for non-payment of dues.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Just wanted to capture that for posterity. I have a feeling it will come in handy the next time you post some of your "civil discourse."

Still no reply from you regarding my prior posts you ALPA HARPY!

In fact, it would be the best for ALPA if they were to get someone that actually WAS in the ALPA pilot union to come HERE and debate and who knew the union and contracts instead of YOU! In any event, your not helping the AWA side of the equation in my own opinion. But I'll tell you what: why don't you ASK them? I haven't YET seen any pilot...West, East or otherwise come to your aid.

WHAT SAY YOU FORUM?? I'm all for free speech and even free "opinions". But how about "wasted" speech or "hot air"? I, nor anyone else owns this forum other than the "moderator". And it certainly is right to censure profanity. It is certainly not right to censure opinions. But how about censuring those who freely admit to "amusing" themselves by actually pointing to claims and credentials that won't be verified?

DECEIT IS A CENSURABLE OFFENCE, HOWEVER!!!

So "HACK", capture "this" for posterity:

Everytime you post on this forum I'm going to DRILL into you for the old, tired and worn-out piece of outhouse wood you are!!!

In fact, I'm going to make it my mission in life that you ALPA shills need to quit "BACKDOORING" the "legitimate" conversations on this forum. In fact, I hope EVERYONE that participates on this web site sees you for who you are!

CHALLENGE TO THE MODERATOR! The forum posters should have some "resemblence" of at least backing up what THEY say. If YOU wish to have civil converstaions in the forums you should tell this "hag" to back off and find some other place to "play" like maybe the "brothel" she belongs to!

Let me put it another way....either the MODERATOR IS GOING TO BOOT YOU OR HE'S GOING TO BOOT ME FROM THE FORUM. But I GUARANTEE THAT, FROM THIS POINT FORWARD...HE'S GOING TO BOOT ONE OF US! I have a "legitimate" reason for being here which is NOT for amusment purposes. If it is to try to at least look for "ALPA" reps like you that somehow think you know "something" that you can legitimately back up with something of value, so be it!

And as FAR as I'm concerned...I'm exposing YOU for what YOU are...the cowardly and deceitful ALPA HARPY you are!

 

[dariencc]

And for those of you who think if USAPA gets elected the Nic award goes away, how many times do I have to tell you does not.

I've lost count. How many times have you also told us about any number of subjects, from Cuban overflights to Airbus flight control computer logic, to name just two, that you knew nothing about?

I guess we should terminate discussion on this topic, and shut down the USAPA organizing effort, because of what you have told us.

I'll get right on it.

 

[700UW]

How many times are you goint to talk about me and not the topic at hand?

Guess you have a "man crush".

Go find someone else to obsess about.

 

[end_of_alpa]

EOA,

This is America, anyone can sue anyone, there are frivilous lawsuits filed everyday.

And for those of you who think if USAPA gets elected the Nic award goes away, how many times do I have to tell you does not.

Any new union is bound by any arbitration decisions and the current CBA.

And we have had Mechanics terminated by US for non-payment of dues.

We'll sir. I provided the caselaw to YOU in the past but you seem to over look it. It is obvious we have had this "union" discussion before. You're in a union. I'm in a union. You're a mechanic. I'm a pilot. Your opinion is unsubstantiated. From my prior posts, mine ARE. Now, where should we start. Bear96 is getting her "toukass" kicked by me while I'm writing AND researching caselaw for the upcoming election.

So you are an experienced union official. I can provide several cases where opinions like yours have not only been tossed but but have been proven frivolous. Now, if we can keep the debate civil...I'll discuss this with you again.

Tell you what, why don't you page back a few posts and read the Supreme Court case Trailmobile v. Whirls if you want legal education.

If fact, while your at it, I will be GLAD to post for you the elements and rulings regarding Duty of Fair Represntation lawsuits if you like.

We can start...civily...from this point forward and I will GLADLY debate you again.

 

[700UW]

I have posted the cases from the NMB about change of representation.

AMFA take over from the IAM at UA, NW, AMFA takes over from the IBT at WN, PFAA takes over from the IBT at NW, then the AFA takes over.

All new unions were bound by law to uphold the current CBAs, and arbitrations per the RLA and NMB Rules.

Those are facts.

Only case you posted was UAL and the scabs, which is comparing apples to oranges.

Post them

 

[end_of_alpa]

I have posted the cases from the NMB about change of representation.

AMFA take over from the IAM at UA, NW, AMFA takes over from the IBT at WN, PFAA takes over from the IBT at NW, then the AFA takes over.

All new unions were bound by law to uphold the current CBAs, and arbitrations per the RLA and NMB Rules.

Those are facts.

Only case you posted was UAL and the scabs, which is comparing apples to oranges.

Post them

ALPA merger policy is NOT NMB arbitration. You sir, are comparing "apples to oranges"

The "transition agreement" provides a "process" that will ultimate lead to a "tentative agreement". If the "tentative agreement" is not voted in by the majority, what then?

Did you READ the Rakestraw case (7th circuit)?? Did you READ the Supreme Court case I referred you to on this forum?

If you do not have Rakestraw please tell me and I will post it. Until you read them you do not KNOW what you are talking about.

History repeats itself.

 

[700UW]

The T/A does contain language resolve the seniority intergration, correct?

Rakestraw v. United Airlines, 981 F.2d 1524, 142 LRRM 2054 (7th Cir. 1992),
reh’g denied, 989 F.2d 944, 142 LRRM 3006 (7h Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510
U.S. 906, 144 LRRM 2392 (1993)
Duty of Fair Representation is not violated if the Union seeks to serve the
interests of its members as a whole, even if some members of the minority are
adversely affected.
8
CH1 11001397.1
K. Denying members the right to vote on contract ratification does not violate the
Duty of Fair Representation.

Show me how this is the same as a case where BOTH parties agreed to binding arbitration.

 

[end_of_alpa]

The T/A does contain language resolve the seniority intergration, correct?



Show me how this is the same as a case where BOTH parties agreed to binding arbitration.

Yes it does, but before we get to that, lets lay some groundwork...shall we?

Good. It looks like you have the Rakestraw case. What you put down, however, is not the real issue. More about that later in the debate.

However, for our "debate" to occur lets make sure we're reading from the same documents and lay a few ground rules, OK?

First, do you have a copy of the "Transition Agreement" and ALPA merger policy? I would be glad to provide them if you do not.

Second, let's define the term "T/A". Because the "transition agreement" and a "tentative agreement" are entirely separate documents. NO? "T/A" How about "TSA" for the "transition agreement" and "TNA" for the "tentative agreement". OK?

 

[Edward]

I've lost count. How many times have you also told us about any number of subjects, from Cuban overflights to Airbus flight control computer logic, to name just two, that you knew nothing about?

I guess we should terminate discussion on this topic, and shut down the USAPA organizing effort, because of what you have told us.

I'll get right on it.

This is a warning to stay on topic & do NOT make this about another poster.

 

[700UW]

Transition agreement, not tentative.

I dont have the official language.

But the T/A becomes part of your CBA, therefore it will fall under the RLA's rules on arbitration.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Transition agreement, not tentative.

I dont have the official language.

But the T/A becomes part of your CBA, therefore it will fall under the RLA's rules on arbitration.

Rules please...T/A meaning "transition agreement" (TSA) or "tentative agreement" (TNA)?

I have this document and I am trying to enclose but the forum says it doesn't have enough space. If you would like I can email it to you because it IS important.

 

[700UW]

is there an alpa link?

 

[sharktooth]

And for those of you who think if USAPA gets elected the Nic award goes away, how many times do I have to tell you does not.

and many times many of us have said, you are correct, the nic "award" does not go away. It will sit there, humming away, awaiting an approved merger agreement between east and west, and ALPA.

As long as ALPA is off the property, it will continue to hum away, likely in some closet, a cautionary tale for any group willing to put their future in the hands of just any old fool dolt. Had ALPA any intellectual capacity at all, they would have changed the way they use arbitrators yesterday, but, alas, they have way too much practice letting advisors make decisions for ALPA, rather than exhibiting leadership by listening to their constituents as well as advisors (as many as practical) and then making their own decisions.

 

[Freighterguynow]

open a new base within a base at say CLT, PHL, etc. they could be CTL and PLH. Release all the east pilots as west pilots come in and take-over capacity, I would just love the new bases.

A peek into the mind of a scab.