ALPA/USAPA/West thread 3/30-4/5

[Phoenix]

now covering the whole planet's 6 billion or so individually.

Ya gotta hand it to ALPA; they have the "tool box". Them thar Wilson poll people work miracles. I bet that they will never agree to work for USAPA. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

 

[Flyz4food]

No they did not. Typical FUD from an ALPA type. Nice try. Get over it.

You should look into it. It happened. ALPA type or not, I know it happened. So do a lot of your guys. Here's a couple of questions for you though.....
1. If this thing falls apart in a few months....THEN WHAT? Is there a plan?

2. For twenty years or so you said ALPA has bent you over a car hood. What have you guys done EVER in that time to change the ALPA policies that you complain about so so much.

3. How is it that with so many plans, ideas, fixes, that so many of you chose to be rampers, pilots, f/as, gate, res folks, while telling everyone you have the knowledge to be a CEO and run the airline. You have all the answers to everything. Apparently you all got on the wrong line.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You should look into it. It happened. ALPA type or not, I know it happened. So do a lot of your guys. Here's a couple of questions for you though.....
1. If this thing falls apart in a few months....THEN WHAT? Is there a plan?

2. For twenty years or so you said ALPA has bent you over a car hood. What have you guys done EVER in that time to change the ALPA policies that you complain about so so much.

3. How is it that with so many plans, ideas, fixes, that so many of you chose to be rampers, pilots, f/as, gate, res folks, while telling everyone you have the knowledge to be a CEO and run the airline. You have all the answers to everything. Apparently you all got on the wrong line.

What? You think that this would be the FIRST airline that ALPA didn't TRY to get bacK?

You don't give yourself or your compatriots out West enough credit. They ran an independent union for years. Right now, AMR, SW and UPS all have indpendent unions which function well. They also only have to answer to the needs of their pilots, not those of other carriers that prosper when they have difficulties.

Leaving OUR careers in the hands of pilots from UAL,DAL, CAL and NWA to do with as they wish is DUMB!!!

 

[cactusboy53]

nycbusdriver,
Parker and Kirby said in a face-to-face meeting with the Wets pilots regarding the Nicolau ruling - "This is a lottery ticket you cannot cash." ....
What part of "cannot cash" don't the Westies understand? Parker and Kirby get that this Nicolau list was grossly unfair and to be implemented on the property could do harm to the company.

Later,
Eye

Eye;
Apparently it would be the same "part" that my eastern brethern (& sisters ) don't understand about the term FINAL & BINDING.

IF YOU TRY TO TAKE MY JOB, IF YOU TRY TO BUST MY UNION.....

THERE WILL NEVER BE LABOR PEACE!!

USAPA = SCABS[/size]

 

[Flyz4food]

What? You think that this would be the FIRST airline that ALPA didn't TRY to get bacK?

You don't give yourself or your compatriots out West enough credit. They ran an independent union for years. Right now, AMR, SW and UPS all have indpendent unions which function well. They also only have to answer to the needs of their pilots, not those of other carriers that prosper when they have difficulties.

Leaving OUR careers in the hands of pilots from UAL,DAL, CAL and NWA to do with as they wish is DUMB!!!

Maybe you missed it sir, but AMR, SW and UPS aren't now or were bankrupt. They weren't bankrupt once or twice as some of us were. There is a totally different relationship and understanding between pilots, management and money. We are pissing away millions and screwing ourselves out of a future with all this in fighting. The economy is declining and oil is way up. If we had this all figured out years ago as ONE EFFIN union, we would be in a different position. We would have a contract, more money, better lifestyles, but no, we chose to agree to a system, then not like it, then destroy it and have a fight for years to come. Who's going to win out....it surely won't be the pilots from either side.

 

[cactusboy53]

Eye;
While we are quoting our fearless leader, here's a little gem that I found:

From: Corporate Communications
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 7:19 PM
Subject: America West/US Airways Joint Statement of Labor Principles for All Employees
JOINT STATEMENT OF LABOR PRINCIPLES

The management teams at both US Airways and America West Airlines recognize the anxiety and uncertainty created among our valued employees since news of a potential merger surfaced in April, and we sincerely regret that legal constraints prevented us from providing you with more details about our discussions. Now that we have announced our planned merger, we can assure you that we have heard your requests to be kept informed and we will be as open as possible as this transaction progresses.

The leading question is the obvious one: what will happen to my job if America West is ultimately merged into US Airways? We’ll try to give you our best answer, but please keep in mind that it will take a long time to complete an operational integration and, as we’ve already seen, there’s always the potential for unexpected changes in our industry.

Even once we begin the process of integrating our operations, it’s still hard to say what will happen to anyone’s particular job. For employees in work groups not represented by a collective bargaining agent at either airline, our management teams will be fair to employees at both carriers. Every employee is entitled to be evaluated individually, and there is no presumption that employees of one airline will be favored over the other.

For employees in work groups represented by unions, the question of what will happen to your jobs is even harder for us to answer because so much of what will happen is outside management’s control. Our labor contracts contain different provisions governing how seniority lists will be integrated, and depending on your specific contract, provide for integration in accordance with a particular union’s merger policy or certain “Allegheny Mohawk†seniority integration provisions. We will honor those contractual commitments, and the ultimate outcome of seniority integration will be determined by your collective bargaining representatives as dictated by your contracts.

Although the seniority integration process will be handled by your union representatives, we have every expectation that our unions will honor certain obviously fair and equitable protocols as they implement their merger policies or Allegheny Mohawk provisions. Specifically, we would expect that no employee who already had been furloughed prior to the merger would be permitted to bump an active employee out of a job. Likewise, we expect our unions will recognize a solution that simply “staples†all employees of one airline to the bottom of the other’s seniority list as unacceptable and unconscionable. To that end, because of seniority differences in some groups, straight seniority integration could have an effect similar to that of stapling employees to the bottom of a seniority list, an outcome that is inconsistent with a fair and equitable protocol. Therefore, some type of proportional integration would seem reasonable. Given our experience working with your union representatives, we do not anticipate they would advocate an integrated seniority list that violates the basic tenets of fairness and equity, and we encourage them to help ease any uncertainty among their members as soon as possible by confirming their intention to work toward seniority integration using these basic principles.

Lastly, although it is extremely important to go through the proper process of integrating seniority lists, dragging seniority integration out for an unnecessarily long period of time is not in anyone’s best interest. It is distracting to employees, and to customers who contemplate flying with the new US Airways. A thoughtful, deliberate but timely resolution will help everyone move forward with greater certainty, even if expectations are not always met.

We will provide updates about the proposed merger as soon as we can, while continuing to be honest about what we can’t predict. We truly believe this proposed merger is in the best interests of employees at both airlines, and we will work hard to provide you with information as we move towards a combined airline that has a great future ahead.

Sincerely,

Doug Parker Bruce R. Lakefield

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Maybe you missed it sir, but AMR, SW and UPS aren't now or were bankrupt. They weren't bankrupt once or twice as some of us were. There is a totally different relationship and understanding between pilots, management and money. We are pissing away millions and screwing ourselves out of a future with all this in fighting. The economy is declining and oil is way up. If we had this all figured out years ago as ONE EFFIN union, we would be in a different position. We would have a contract, more money, better lifestyles, but no, we chose to agree to a system, then not like it, then destroy it and have a fight for years to come. Who's going to win out....it surely won't be the pilots from either side.

No, MAYBE YOU MISSED IT. Maybe it's the ability to work WITH their labor groups, instead of the adversarial relationship that ALPA and some other unions instigate. WE GET ZERO PROTECTION FROM ALPA! If another merger happens, we are at the mercy of the BIG 4, UAL, DAL, CAL and NWA. The stupid, nonexistent merger policy makes it so.

ALPA's MO is to keep the pilots afraid of management by ALWAYS questioning their motives. This is what has led to the loss of many comapny provided benefits.

The company is NOT ALWAYS the enemy, despite ALPA's protestations. There ARE MANY reasons to get the heck out of ALPA, the Nic award and the animosity it has caused here are only one of them.

 

[nostradamus]

flyz4food, your message board name discribes your start, but you want to finish with flyz4propereimbursement.

Your questions;

You should look into it. It happened. ALPA type or not, I know it happened. So do a lot of your guys. Here's a couple of questions for you though.....
1. If this thing falls apart in a few months....THEN WHAT? Is there a plan?

Yes

2. For twenty years or so you said ALPA has bent you over a car hood. What have you guys done EVER in that time to change the ALPA policies that you complain about so so much.


You wanted fly for yourself and just food, that is why we are in this situation. We are doing something about it now.
.


3. How is it that with so many plans, ideas, fixes, that so many of you chose to be rampers, pilots, f/as, gate, res folks, while telling everyone you have the knowledge to be a CEO and run the airline. You have all the answers to everything. Apparently you all got on the wrong line.

Your ceo doug parker is a proven one song hit wonder. He is a drunk and needs to go. We can not vote him out. But his excuses are like gluteus maximus' we all have them and the aroma they have are not unique to any situation.

 

[Flyz4food]

No, MAYBE YOU MISSED IT. Maybe it's the ability to work WITH their labor groups, instead of the adversarial relationship that ALPA and some other unions instigate. WE GET ZERO PROTECTION FROM ALPA! If another merger happens, we are at the mercy of the BIG 4, UAL, DAL, CAL and NWA. The stupid, nonexistent merger policy makes it so.

ALPA's MO is to keep the pilots afraid of management by ALWAYS questioning their motives. This is what has led to the loss of many comapny provided benefits.

The company is NOT ALWAYS the enemy, despite ALPA's protestations. There ARE MANY reasons to get the heck out of ALPA, the Nic award and the animosity it has caused here are only one of them.

And you don't feel that the building blocks of USURPA aren't doing the same? The alienation of one third of it's members solely due to it's birth isn't adversarial? The premise of overturning something that was mutually agreed upon soley to benefit one group who feel they are OWED something for what they lost at a company that no longer exists? The only thing that you earned during that time was a paycheck. The losses endured during that time will not be carried on the backs of the West. What protections will USURPA GUARANTEE the west? West domiciles? Lifetime fences? Surely you can't be serious? The promises made to the East, what happens when they never materialize? Where do we go as a union when they can't deliver? You wish for a so called union, only if it suits your needs and desires. How are we ever to progess from here? I would agree that ALPA has serious faults, faults that can be fixed with time, patience and a desire of those that wish to make change. I ask again....what has anyone in the east, the west or anywhere else done to change the problems with national before we got to where we are now? If indeed we needed to go independant, it is only when we have a solid joint contract, a solid pilot group and at a time when the change benefits us all and not divides us.

 

[nostradamus]

Skyways Airlines alpa carrier, a regional for Midwest Airlines is discontinuing service tomorrow, April 5th, 2008. The non alpa regional airline that is taking over all their routes is Skyways Airlines (click here for non alpa skywest) Skywest pilots voted out alpa many times, a few months ago recently.

In public statements at the time of the shutdown announcement, Midwest Air
Group management indicated that all employees losing their jobs would receive
severance pay and other assistance. However, in its response to the MEC
regarding the union's proposal, management refused to extend to its pilots the
same severance pay package that it has given all other Skyway employees.

Mr. Reeve replied that the pilots have had the benefit
of a collective bargaining agreement for ten years, while the other employees
have not."

Capt. Prater pledged ALPA's continued assistance to Skyway pilots throughout
this ordeal. (alpa policy in this situation is to have a job fair for the pilots, with 0 results.) "Through jobs and benefits conferences, ALPA will provide every
possible means of assistance for them to move forward with their lives and
careers. We will work to make sure that every Skyway pilot is back in the
cockpit when Skyway shuts down."

Follow this story and see what prater alpa leader can do for them. May I save you the time. Skyways pilots trusted alpa, prater will do nothing. You are part of the problem or you are part of the solution. Voting to save your alpa job will go down in history as a most cowardice act, but hey you got yours that is what is most important. Sleep well tonight.

 

[nostradamus]

Aloha Airlines alpa announcement, click here.

ATA Pilots Blast Management’s Late-Night Decision to Cease Operations alpa announcement, click here.

Skyway Management Denies Pilots Severance Package Given to All Other Employees, click here.

Matt Marsh, chairman of Champion's branch of the Air Line Pilots Association (ALPA), said that pilots have been leaving the carrier steadily as its future became more uncertain.

Give these pilots a line to wait in beside an unemployment line prater. Start a line now.

 

[LSS]

ALPA: COUNCIL 41 TRUSTEESHIP: We'll Give Them a "Fair" Trial, Then Hang Them

April 3, 2008
Fellow Pilots,

I want to thank Dave and Eric for the trust they placed in me. They asked me to represent them at the trusteeship hearing that occurred on Friday, March 28, 2008. Not that they had much choice. In turn, I then solicited the help of both Mike Cleary and Dennis Brennan. The entire experience was a parody on David and Goliath.

Please consider the initial ground rules as they were conveyed to me by Vice President of Administration, Captain Bill Couette, late on Wednesday, less than two days prior to the start of the hearing.

1. Council 41representatives can have an advocate who is an ALPA member in good standing.

2. Council 41representatives can have an attorney present, but he will not be allowed to speak.

3. ALPA First Vice President, Paul Rice will present the case for trusteeship and will have ALPA legal staff available to him.

4. Dave and Eric will receive flight pay loss and reimbursement of expenses for the hearing.

5. ALPA will aid in getting the pilot advocate released from any obligations from the Company. However, no flight pay loss or expenses will be paid.

6. Council 41 representatives can call witnesses in opposition to the trusteeship. However, ALPA will not assist in any release from duty from the company. There will be no flight pay loss or reimbursement of expenses for the witnesses.

7. Hearing is expected to be completed in 1 day.

8. No reimbursement for the production of exhibits. However, if any exhibits are to be produced, 70 copies must be provided to the Board.

9. No reimbursement for a room in order to prepare a defense.

10. No prior sharing of information and exhibits before the hearing. ALPA will provide us with a list of their exhibits and witnesses, at the close of business, the evening before the hearing. If we reciprocate.

11. Oral opening and closing statements will be allowed.

12. The Executive Board will be able to ask questions.

Furthermore, in a discussion I had with Captain Couette at 12:15 on Thursday, March 27, I told him there were several questions that had still not been answered concerning the hearing process. He told me that they (ALPA) were still “finalizing†the process and attorney Mike Abram would explain the procedure to everyone tomorrow (March, 28), just prior to the start of the hearing. Full and fair hearing? You decide.

“WE'LL GIVE THEM A FAIR TRIAL, THEN WE'LL HANG THEMâ€

The ALPA Constitution and Bylaws requires that the elected representatives of Council 41 receive a full and fair hearing prior to deciding if the Executive Councils decision to place Council 41 in Emergency Trusteeship was proper. This provision proved to be nothing more than a farce.

Captain Paul Rice acted as the advocate for ALPA. He was assisted by attorney’s Clay Warner, Jim Johnson and paralegal Louise Fawbush. In addition to their direct assistance, Captain Rice was overtly assisted by Captain Bill Couette, who was charged with running the meeting. Furthermore, the acting parliamentarian, attorney Mike Abram blatantly and repeatedly interjected himself into the hearing, deciding manners which were always beneficial to ALPA’s case. I will have to review the record once it is complete. However, I don’t believe that one objection I raised was sustained.

First, Captain Mike Cleary rose to state an objection to the entire hearing process. He eloquently highlighted the obvious mistakes by ALPA. A full and fair hearing requires that both parties have reasonably equal access to the facts and procedures, and that clearly and simply had NOT been done. Furthermore, the Council 41 representatives were not give adequate time to prepare their defense – a defense to the most serious charge a union can levy against a representative. We considered all the actions of ALPA to be a serious violation of industrial due process and therefore not in compliance with the ALPA C&BL as well as federal law. Objection denied by Captain Couette, of course after consulting with the supposed “parliamentarian†Abram.

There were three charges levied against the PHL representatives.

1. Distributing anti-ALPA communications through ALPA channels

2. Attempting to recruit an ALPA HIMS liaison to work for USAPA

3. Failing to provide necessary support for ALPA in connection with the NMB representation election

Paul Rice began presenting the case for trusteeship. ALPA had the “burden of proof†concerning the EC decision to place Council 41 in emergency trusteeship, therefore they presented their case first. After completing his opening statement, Captain Rice then began to present ALPA’s case for trusteeship. I objected over the format. Advocates are not permitted to “testify†in order to introduce evidence. A hearing requires the party presenting their case to use witnesses in order to prove their allegations. Objection denied, by Captain Couette. Paul Rice was permitted to read the allegations against Dave and Eric. I objected to the format because it denied us the ability to “cross examine†any of the evidence ALPA presented. Clearly, this was just one of many serious defects in the hearing process.

ALPA’s only witness, US Airways First Officer Richard Obermeyer, discussed a meeting that took place on March 14, 2008. I say “discussed†because after I objected to his testimony on two points, both objections were overruled.

1. Relevance – Obermeyer was “discussing†a meeting that occurred after the EC upheld the Trusteeship. Subsequent acts are not proof of a prior offense. This is akin to the Company firing a pilot and then after the pilot behaves poorly because of his termination; they say “see I told you soâ€. Objection, overruled by Captain Couette, after consulting with Abram.

2. The witness was not “sworn†in. I objected to his entire testimony. Again, Captain Couette overruled my objection, after consulting with Abram. He stated that we are bound by the ALPA Code of Ethics and that therefore required First Officer Obermeyer to be truthful. I wonder if this will work if you are called to testify at a divorce hearing?

ALPA rested their case, without meeting their burden of proof. If this issue had been before a truly impartial neutral, I would have moved for a directed verdict. A d irected verdict is usually made because the Trier of Fact concludes the party who bears the burden of proof has failed to offer the minimum amount of evidence to prove their case.

Captain Ciabattoni was the first to testify in opposition to trusteeship, followed by First Officer Dennis Brennan and then Captain Eric Rowe.

In addition to many other pertinent issues, Dave’s testimony was uncontested concerning the advice the AAA MEC received from their outside council Roland Wilder. He stated that the MEC was a dvised to use the USAPA organization effort for leverage against both the AWA MEC and ALPA National. Furthermore, he unequivocally denied all of the charges levied against them by the President. Additionally, Captain Rowe denied all of the allegations.

Although he did not testify during ALPA’s case in chief, I called Captain Prater to question him concerning his actions.

Prater’s testimony yielded the following information and facts:

1. A dinner meeting occurred on February 14, 2008 in which Captain Prater assured both Eric and Dave that not only the MEC but Council 41 was “well within the bounds of merger policy and everything was fine – not in danger of trusteeshipâ€.

· Prater would not answer what specific event occurred and thus triggered his decision to recommend emergency trusteeship between February 14 and February 29.

· Prater did not answer why he made the decision to ask the EC for emergency trusteeship as opposed to trusteeship.

2. The recommendation to place Council 41 in emergency trusteeship was the hardest decision he has had to make during his Presidency. However, please consider the actions that followed this decision:

· The trusteeship notification was sent to Eric and Dave at 21:06 on Friday February 29, 2008, via email and for a hearing scheduled on the following Monday morning.

· No one from ALPA bothered to call Eric or Dave to make them aware of the charges.

· Mike Abram, acting “parliamentarianâ€, clarified that ALPA’s policy on email notification, stating that email was official notification of charges, no receipt is required.

· When questioned, Prater stated that if Eric had been on a trip in Europe, that he “thought they had email in Europeâ€.

· Prater refused to allow the Council 41 representatives an extension of a mere 7 days in order to prepare a defense and answer the allegations concerning these most serious charges.

· The HIMS liaison who had allegedly been recruited to work for USAPA had unequivocally denied this charge, to Chris Beebe, a full two days prior issuance of the February 29 letter. However, the charge remained in the document.

· Prater did not question any incoming representatives, BOS C/O, BOS F/O or PIT F/O representative concerning their support of ALPA over USAPA in the upcoming NMB representative election.

· BOS First Officer Representative, Garland Jones, had written numerous letters to his council using “ALPA channels†advocating for the replacement of ALPA as our bargaining agent, however, he was not held to the same standards of the Council 41 representatives.

3. Although Prater wrote in his letter to ALPA leaders that “many had been encouraging him to take this action for monthsâ€, he refused to answer specifically who had been “encouraging†him to place Council 41 in Trusteeship. After I had asked the question several different ways, because he was so evasive, Prater stated “it wasn’t Jack Stephanâ€. At that point, Attorney Abram declared that he had fully answered the question.

Disparate Treatment

In order to be free of guilt concerning an argument of Disparate Treatment, ALPA National is required to treat all representatives equally. All representatives must be judged by the same standards and the rules that they are held to must be equally applied to all.

Please consider the following letter sent on behalf of the President, John Prater to all ALPA leaders on February 29, 2008.

“ The Local Council 41 officers are being given an opportunity to send written statements to Captain Bill Couette making clear their support for ALPA and opposition to USAPA in the NMB representation election, and their commitment to urge Local Council 41 pilots to vote for ALPA .â€

Were the representatives of PIT, BOS, CLT, LGA and DCA required to make written statements? The answer is a resounding, NO. Only the representatives of Council 41 were being required to make this “pledgeâ€.

Evidence Gathering

When ALPA made the decision to place Council 41 in Trusteeship, they should have had enough information and facts in hand on February 29, to support their decision. Efforts to ESTABLISH THIER CASE after the issuance of the trusteeship would have been declared a waste of time, if the hearing were presided over by an impartial neutral. Allegations of misconduct must stand or fall based on the facts that are gathered up until the time they acted. ALPA cannot place a council trusteeship, and then wait for the representatives to do something wrong and then say “see I told you soâ€. No court, arbitrator or trier of fact allows the admission of a subsequent act as proof of a prior offense. No wonder ALPA would not allow a neutral arbitrator to oversee this hearing; they could not have gotten away with this injustice.

The Principal of JUST CAUSE

Through negotiations and arbitral preceding we demand our employers provide us with at least the minimum standards:

1. Innocent until proven guilty

a. Can our employers remove us from the line?

i. Yes – but they must continue to pay us

ii. ALPA’s actions have left over 1200 pilots completely unrepresented at the MEC level

b. Do they have to perform a full and fair investigation?

i. Yes

c. Does that investigation have to be conducted prior to a finding of guilt?

i. Yes

d. Can they treat us any differently than they do any other employer?

i. No

e. Do we have time to prepare a defense?

i. Absolutely

f. Who gets to ultimately determine the guilt or innocence of the pilot?

i. A neutral arbitrator under the provisions established in the railway labor act guided by years and years of arbitral precedent

ALPA has failed to live by the same standards that they demand of our airline employers. ALPA’s actions are a classic example of do as I say, not as I do.

Between Dennis, Mike and I, we have over 65 years of combined experience working exclusively for the Air Line Pilot Association and over 200 arbitrations under our belt. I can say with 100% certainty that if this issue were between an ALPA represented pilot and any airline employer we would never would have progressed to a hearing. The employer would have become conscious of the massive failures of industrial due process and either settled or dropped the charges completely.

Let me characterize ALPA’s Actions:

1. We make the rules

2. We reserve the right to change, alter and amend the rules at anytime

3. And, lastly we reserve the right to declare that your received a FULL AND FAIR HEARING

No matter what your thoughts and feelings are concerning ALPA’s decision to place Council 41 in emergency trusteeship, and whether you agree or disagree with that decision, I ask you to look at their methods. I ask you to look at the process and how it was openly manipulated it in order to guarantee a predetermined outcome. I ask you to take a long and hard look at ALPA’s eager willingness to abuse their power and interpret their constitution and bylaws in order to make certain that the end justifies the means. Then I ask that you consider one final question; does ALPA deserve to be the trustees of our future?

Please contact me if you have any questions or comments concerning this or other issues.

Fraternally,
Tracy L. Parrella

 

[Leonidas]

One of the most important services that unions provide to their members is representation and due process in the unlikely event of company-initiated disciplinary action. Although most pilots are able to successfully navigate their careers without having to use these benefits, many pilots consider that these benefits alone are worth the price of dues.

These "job defense" benefits are provided to America West pilots in Sections 18 & 19 of our contract. Section 19 details the "due process" that the company is required to follow prior to and after imposing discipline upon a pilot. Section 18 contains provisions for representation and witnesses, including the following language:

"...a Pilot shall have the right to be represented at any Company hearing or investigation by an Association representative (including Association attorneys) or another Pilot on the America West Airlines Pilots' System Seniority List with the approval of the Association, provided the Company has been notified in writing..."

Notice that this provision specifically requires your representative to be an "Association representative" or an "Association-approved representative". Should USAPA become our bargaining agent, this will give them the right to determine who represents you at disciplinary hearings. Meaning, your job will be in the hands of whoever USAPA appoints to represent you.

Considering the escalating emotions out on the line, we should all be particularly concerned about the increased potential for conflict and subsequent company disciplinary action. You may have heard about some of the recent events that have taken place since the election began:

Ø An official USAPA volunteer, who has been sending harassing and threatening emails to many West pilots for the past few months, is being investigated by the company after he allegedly distributed an email that promotes the Ku Klux Klan.

Ø An ALPA (East) volunteer was physically assaulted by several USAPA volunteers and supporters.

Ø USAPA formally announced an intimidation campaign that will run throughout the election. Any pilots not wearing USAPA lanyards will be publicly confronted and belittled by USAPA representatives, in direct violation of the company's "zero-tolerance" policy.

Ø A USAPA supporter shoved a PHX gate agent after he verbally confronter her about wearing an ALPA lanyard. Both the verbal and physical assault was launched by the USAPA supporter in full view of passengers.

Who is going to represent you at a disciplinary hearing?

Allow us to introduce Mr. Elwood "Woody" Menear, Chairman of USAPA's Job Defense Committee:

[Source: Philadelphia Inquirer January 15, 2002]

"A US Airways pilot was released from jail yesterday after being arrested for making what authorities said were 'inappropriate' comments on Sunday at a security checkpoint at Philadelphia International Airport. Police charged the pilot, Elwood Menear, 46, of Annville, Pa., with making terroristic threats and engaging in disorderly conduct."

Perhaps some will argue that this incident is not a fair judgment of Mr. Menear. After all, we were all frustrated by some of the security measures imposed immediately following 9/11. Many of us have made "comments" in the security line as a result of that frustration. Perhaps many will also argue that Mr. Menear's brush with near-unemployment makes him exceptionally qualified to oversee all job defense cases (by the way, we wonder who saved Mr. Menear's job after this incident).

If we take a look at some of Mr. Menear's other activities since 2002, we might begin to notice a pretty well-defined pattern of behavior:

· Allegedly sent an email containing a deliberate racial slur to a member of the America West MEC.

· Composed and widely distributed an email entitled "The Chicken-[expletive] actions of Herndon and the West reps" that maliciously and falsely accused some West pilots of harassment (isn't that the pot calling the kettle black?).

· In response to a letter AWAPPA attorney Jeff Freund wrote that discounted USAPA's legal analysis, Mr. Menear articulated his own legal analysis in a letter that he distributed via email to some pilots. The core of his analysis was, "in much the same way that threatening lawsuits is pointless, (either file it, or shut up), so is this exercise in hollow threat hurling."

Worse yet, Mr. Menear composed the following letter that was, until very recently, posted on the USAPA website. It's one thing if Mr. Menear's uncontrollable hate-filled outbursts occur in front of a limited, private audience, however it's quite another when Mr. Menear is speaking as a duly-appointed representative of USAPA. When you read the following letter, keep in mind that it was posted on the USAPA website as an official communication from the guy who USAPA has appointed to defend your job. We've highlighted one significant comment in the letter, otherwise it is presented unedited:


Fellow US Airways Pilots,

I've allowed a few weeks to pass by, since last writing about ALPA's travails with Mr. Nicolau's infamous "award". I was hoping the dust would settle, that Capt. Prater would search the area just South of his waistband and miraculously rediscover his masculinity.

I hoped too, that the ALPA Lawyers would have been muzzled, (as all lawyers should be), and that policy making would have returned to the stewardship of the Executive Council, with the attorneys offering advice on how to make the E.C.'s policies work.

Alas, I might as well hoped for Doug Parker to sober up; some things are just contrary to the structure of our Universe. Actually, our CEO has the brains and fortitude to overcome his addictions, if he so chooses...... ALPA, I have concluded, is hamstrung from making the Right decision, by its very structure.

For many of you, this part of the letter is a re-hash of previous observations on my part. Still, they bear repeating, since events of the last couple of weeks have reinforced my convictions about ALPA.

ALPA serves too many competing airlines to be effective for any of them. In the never ending quest for dues-money, ALPA have sacrificed Union principles, to instead pander to the cause-de-jour of which ever airline holds the most votes.... usually UAL or Northwest. This is how the merger language (which served the association for decades) was changed in a couple of years to assuage the fears of UAL/NWA - of the possible implications of a merger with "senior-old-USAir". What irony.

All of the above, you probably know. What has become clear during the last couple of weeks, at least to me, is that:

a) ALPA National ain't going to make a decision
B) Your US Airways ALPA Master Executive Council are (slowly.... ever so slowly) sliding in the direction of a negotiated accommodation to the Nicolau Award.

Oh, Jack Stephan and company have not said so, but in his August 01 Chairman's Message Jack stresses (paragraph #4), "separate operations". Jack goes on to assure you that these "separate operations" will be permanent and will include preemptive contract language to assure that they agree they won't be used during any future merger.... etc., etc.

Well, friends, one would have thought (for example) that the "preemptive language" of the previous fifty-years, would have made your pension strictly off limits, too...... funny thing about contract language, isn't it? And the same joker(s) who were more clever than Siegel at the bankruptcy game, have come up with this gambit, to simultaneously accommodate Prater's demand that the two MEC's negotiate, and still maintain our insistence that Nicolau "go away."

Our "clever boys" are at it, again. Ask yourselves, who in the last couple of months has moved toward a position of accommodation? Has ALPA National moved?....that would be, NO. Has the MEC of that perpetual money-loser, America West.... (God, it pisses me off that we had to save their jobs!!) moved? The answer, again, is NO! As usual, in our (recent) history, we at the MEC of US Airways, servants to ALPA National..... and oh, yes... those pilots, too, have started down the slippery slope of accommodation.

My take on this turn of events is simple: "Jack and Company" know that "Prater and Company" are never, never, never going to make a simple, declarative rejection of the Nicolau Award.... period. This, even though Prater knows this is a wrong-headed finding, and based on ALPA's weak-assed, mealy mouthed, says-nothing Merger Policy Language, as dictated, over ten years ago, by shortsighted pilots at UAL/NWA.

So, Jack (and friends) have "cleverly" (in their view) threaded the needle; keeping ALPA National happy (a prime directive, believe me), and still not caving in (yet). Just wait until the next "crisis" of timing..... a merger, sale, threatened downsizing, etc. The pall-mall race to slap on a quick-fix will be on.

Still..... I honestly don't blame Jack and the MEC. The structure of membership in ALPA National mandates these impossibly conflicting loyalties. As officers of ALPA National, the MEC must salute the "Mother Ship", first, last and always, even at the expense (if necessary) of the pilots of US Airways since, in the view of National, we are cogs in a much bigger wheel........ I am totally serious about this..... ask your Local Reps.

These reasons..... and so many more, are why, in the last couple-three months or so, (insert here a very large number, which I am sworn not to share...... but which number makes me giggle with delight!)- of your fellow US Airways pilots have taken the one-minute and thirty- seconds required to fill out and send in the Request for Representative Election Card, that is finding its way to your home or P.O. Box, right now.

Fellows (and Ladies), some of your ALPA Reps are telling you that changing union representation at this time is ill advised. First of all, the card only asks for an election to chose ALPA, or The US Airline Pilots Association..... it does not 'change' unions. Only you, the pilots of this airline can make that decision, and will do so during a future election.

I don't know about you, but I dislike having someone tell me that one choice (ALPA) is somehow preferable to two.... it insults my intelligence. Would any of you set off in your airliners, on a 3,000 mile journey, without an alternate? That is all this card and election are about; an alternate, should (when), ALPA finally lets the cat out of its cellophane bag and declares, "Sorry, US Airways pilots..... screwed again!"

We will have months after the rest of the cards come in and the election is set, to evaluate the two options that we have now given ourselves by filling out and sending in the little card. If in those months, ALPA has come to an epiphany, and actually become a union of principle again..... hey, vote them in. If not, you have an alternative.... if and only if, you've sent in the card. If not..... oh, well, Mother ALPA will take care of you... just like always.......

Giving the constraints of being servants to ALPA National, first, and the pilots of this airline, second, our MEC have done, kinda' okay. Imagine though, how quickly and decisively they could act, if they only had to consider your needs...... fill in your card, I did.

Fraternally,

Woody Menear
[email protected]

 

[Leonidas]

If you remember, it was the AAA Merger Committee under pressure from the MEC to show the MDA pilots as active. This effort to show them as active pilots was patently false and during the certification process was corrected to correctly show them as furloughed.


Regarding the statement of the furlough status of the MDA pilots, in the statement of undisputed facts the Court wrote:


“US Airways purchased, leased, and acquired options to purchase several smaller aircraft and hired approximately 220 furloughed US Airways pilots and 100 pilots from other airlines to commence employment in or about October 2003â€

In the Courts view, they were furloughed. And of course you have the huge problem with how a mainline pilot ended up employed at MDA - the pilot had to be furloughed. They will have big problems getting around this fact. What they want now for some of them, after every count of their original case was dismissed, if for the court to revisit the arbitration to change the date that the Nicolau used to determine pre-merger expectations. Not a chance that will happen. For the remainder, they want the court to conclude they were still mainline and not furloughed. That is not likely to happen either.

With regard to what the court "believes", one must recognize that the court is merely stating the standard position that every court must take in a 12(B)(6) motion to dismiss. The court reveals this standard in its discussion: "In considering a motion to dismiss made pursuant to Rule 12(B)(6), the court must accept the factual allegations in the complaint as true and draw all reasonable inferences in favor of plaintiffs. See Grandon v. Merrill Lynch & Co., 147 F.3d 184, 188 (2d Cir. 1998)." The standard to dismiss is very high in a 12(B)(6) motion because the court must make all reasonable inferences in the plaintiffs' favor and that is all the court is doing in this case. It is quite a leap to claim the judge agrees with the plaintiffs' allegations. That should be clear from the court's standard qualifying statement: "The court’s function is “not to weigh the evidence that might be presented at trial but merely to determine whether the complaint itself is legally sufficient.†and that what is required for a complaint to survive a motion to dismiss is that "...a plaintiff must assert “enough facts to state a claim to relief that is plausible on its face....""

After laying the groundwork for the standards to dismiss, the court breaks out the deficiencies in each of the eight counts of the plaintiffs' complaint and dismisses each and every one. They got creamed! They not only did not have a leg to stand on in court, this ruling tossed their bloodied stumps out on the court house steps with little chance for reattachment. Fortunately for the plaintiffs, they had a motion to amend their complaint. On the plaintiffs' motion to amend and add a ninth cause of action, the court had to use the above standards to determine if their newest assertions were reasonably plausible. They had little choice but to hand their lawyer a needle and thread so that he could reattach one of those legs and allow him to hobble back into court.

What your friend leaves out (his quote is taken so out of context it made me laugh when I read the ruling) is the way the court prefaced its discussion of plaintiffs' newest assertions. "Whether the pilots were correctly designated as furloughed under the terms of the CBA, or whether that designation actually affected the US Airways’ seniority list are issues of fact that cannot be determined on a motion to dismiss." And by making a quote out of context, one misses the fact that the court is quoting the arbitrators' ruling with regard to the plaintiffs' new assertions concerning their claim that AAA ALPA members knowingly submitting a flawed list. It is not the court's opinion at all. Thus using the standard of reviewing a complaint most favorable to the plaintiffs, the court wrote:

"Accepting these allegations as true, and reading the Proposed Supplemental Complaint in the manner most favorable to plaintiffs, plaintiffs have adequately alleged that their injuries were caused by the defendants’ knowing stipulation to introduce an erroneous seniority list that they knew would adversely affect the careers and employment rights of their represented members. Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a supplemental complaint is therefore granted."
The court was most certainly NOT agreeing with the plaintiffs' allegations or statement of facts. It is just that the court was finding that sufficient questions remain that allow plaintiffs to amend. In fact, in footnote 17 that your friend also failed to quote, the court had to make an assumption favorable to the plaintiffs in order to grant relief to amend. The court knows nothing more about the facts of the seniority arbitration other than what the plaintiffs have alleged. To put it simply, the court is still in the dark with regard to much of the facts surrounding the Nicolau arbitration. Thus to reach a conclusion that the court agrees with you based on one very out of context quote is laughable. Read the entire discussion on pages 23-28. I attached the entire ruling incase you do not have it.

Have fun with this guy. This case is about as close to dead as it can get. After a little discovery, I think the court will recognize this amendment for what it really is - grasping at straws.

 

[sharktooth]

Ø An official USAPA volunteer, who has been sending harassing and threatening emails to many West pilots for the past few months, is being investigated by the company after he allegedly distributed an email that promotes the Ku Klux Klan.

As with any false accusation, HR investigated per federal law and apparently found, nothing. I could accuse you of almost anything, say, racism towards goats, and the company must investigate, no exceptions.

The west MEC emailed me the picture, and, I must say that it portrays the Klan in a most effeminate manner, wearing colors of a "certain" rainbow and one, like Alan Alda in MASH, saluting using the wrong hand. I especially liked the pinned on badges, a couple were actually straight, and silk "uniform"s. Those boys (one girl) looked to me like they were ready to roll on the nearest fixer-upper for a complete remodel, paint, drapes and all sorts of swoopy stuff.

Interesting that you talk of ALPA "defense", yet, in the above case, it was the ALPA MEC chairperson who, bypassing all established ALPA procedure, complained about the line pilot directly to the company. Your highly vaulted ALPA did not bother to call the pilot or even engage professional standards, denying him basic union representation by directly involving the company in an investigation. Sounds like DFR time with a sprinkle of individual libel suits. Time to dump ALPA just to avoid the inevitable assessments.

Thank you for providing such a stellar example of ALPA perfidy and yet another item in the long line of why ALPA needs to go. After "proving" ALPA needs to go with your first point, why quit? You go onto make stuff up out of whole cloth about a committee, and continue in that line.

COMMENT DELETED BY MODERATOR