April/May 2013 Pilot Discussion

[Claxon]

Oh, btw, you can bet your ASS I will be in Silvers court room on the 14th. I'll be the guy in the suit.

I hope you have a very large hanky in the breast pocket of your suit, you will need it.

 

[Claxon]

PHX will become just another domicile that you will have the opportunity to bid into with your Nic seniority. And that's how it's going to end my friend.

It will end with the PHX base closed and you commuting and working in CLT, watching the Airbus 330 planes taxi and takeoff from your right seat in the E190.

APA pilots will have a fence in LAX for 10 years.

 

[Res Judicata]

I hope you have a very large hanky in the breast pocket of your suit, you will need it.

So you're not going to post any of your crazy polygraph BS? Thought so. Scabs like you are now only cowards but liars as well.

 

[Metroyet]

........

 

[Claxon]

Um...obviously you have not heard....the APA gave away 330 pay in the MOU, for the east pilots 330 pays LOA93 wages.

I really don't know and have to ask...which pays more the 757 MOU pay retro, or the LOA93 330?

Which pays more flying for america west, the Airbus or your 757's?

The following is your america west pilot pay scale vs the rest of the industry for years, do the math.

http://web.mit.edu/airlinedata/www/2010%2012%20Month%20Documents/Employees%20and%20Compensation/Pilots/Average%20Annual%20Wages%20and%20Salaries%20-%20PILOT%20AND%20CO-PILOT%20PERSONNEL.htm

 

[Claxon]

So you're not going to post any of your crazy polygraph BS? Thought so. Scabs like you are now only cowards but liars as well.

And why sir do you consider US Airways pilots scabs? Be specific.

Your response will make my day.

 

[traderjake]

Bid is published. 104 new hires. 84 net new pilots. 70 Capt vacancies.

13-03 PRIMARY LINES OF TIME SUMMARY

CLT

A330 C/O DECREASE -1

A330 F/O DECREASE -2

B767I C/O DECREASE -8LT

B767I F/O DECREASE -8

A319 C/O DECREASE -10CLT

A319 F/O DECREASE -10CLT

B737 C/O DECREASE -12CLT

B737 F/O DECREASE -12

DCA

A319 C/O DECREASE -5DCA

A319 F/O DECREASE -5

PHL A330 C/O INCREASE 2PHL

A330 F/O INCREASE 4PHL

B767I C/O DECREASE -20PHL

B767I F/O DECREASE -20PHL

A319 C/O DECREASE -7PHL

A319 F/O DECREASE -7PHL

B737 C/O DECREASE -6PHL

B737 F/O DECREASE -6PHL

E190 C/O DECREASE -2PHL

E190 F/O DECREASE -2

Minus 68 Primary Lines

 

[Claxon]

Be fore caddie. The birth of this forums cadence from the west.

http://leonidas.cact...nstructions.pdf

 

[Claxon]

Legitimate Union Objective, purpose, where have we heard that before?


FORE !

http://leonidas.cactuspilots.us/attachments/category/34/Final%20Jury%20Instructions.pdf

 

[prechilill]

Contents of the company's filing, Document 49:


***********************************************************************


US Airways sets . forth its position that plaintiffs’ DFR claim against USAPA is indisputably ripe for

. 2 prompt and final adjudication by this Court.​

******************************************************************************

. The MOU expressly provides that “US Airways . . . shall remain​

. 6 neutral regarding the order in which pilots are placed on the integrated seniority list.”​

*****************************************************************************

. Contrary to USAPA’s suggestion (see USAPA’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 44)​

. 24 at p. 10 (p. 15 of the ECF filing)), the Ninth Circuit in Addington I did not rule that the​

. 25 West Pilots would never have a justiciable DFR claim prior to the finalization of an . integrated US Airways/America West seniority list. Rather, the court reasoned that​

. 2 plaintiffs’ DFR claim against USAPA in that lawsuit was not yet ripe because it remained​

. 3 uncertain “what seniority proposal ultimately will be acceptable to both USAPA and [US​

. 4 Airways] as part of a final CBA” and “whether that proposal will be ratified by the​

. 5 USAPA membership as part of a new, single CBA.” Addington v. US Airline Pilots​

. 6 Ass’n, 606 F.3d 1174, 1179-1180 (9th Cir. 2010). But the court made clear that its​

. 7 conclusion did not mean “that a DFR claim based on a unions’ promotion of a policy is​

. 8 never ripe until that policy is effectuated.” Id. at 1181.​

. 9 In light of the US Airways/American merger, the facts are entirely different and ​

. 10 none of the contingencies at issue in Addington I are present here. ​

• 
  
  ***************************************************************************
  
  
  
  . 23 While USAPA notes that a JCBA must still be negotiated following the merger,​
  
  
  . 24 and asserts that the MOU is therefore not a “final product” and “does not affect [the​
  
  
  . 1 ripeness] analysis at all” (USAPA’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 44) at pp. 9-10 (pp. 14-​
  
  
  . 2 15 of the ECF filing)), it fails to mention that the MOU itself has already determined and​
  
  
  . 3 sharply circumscribed the parameters of the JCBA.​
  
  ******************************************************************************
  
  
  
  
  . Contrary to USAPA’s​
  
  
  
  . 11 argument, the material terms and conditions of employment for both the East and West​
  
  
  
  . 12 pilots following the merger are now known and fixed by the MOU.​
  
  ******************************************************************************
  
  
  
  . What is not settled by the MOU, however, is the seniority list(s) for US Airways​
  
  
  . 14 (East and West) pilots that will be used in the overall seniority integration with​
  
  
  . 15 American’s pilots. Any suggestion that the parties to the MOU (including US Airways)​
  
  
  . 16 have agreed that the Nicolau Award seniority list will not be used is incorrect.​
  
  *****************************************************************************
  
  
  
  . The fact that the MOU does not contain a finalized integrated seniority list also​
  
  
  . 13 does not raise the same ripeness concerns as in Addington I. The Ninth Circuit’s decision​
  
  
  . 14 was premised on the assumptions that the final integrated seniority list would be the​
  
  
  . 15 product of back-and-forth negotiations between US Airways and USAPA (and ultimately​
  
  
  . 16 subject to ratification by USAPA’s membership), and that a ratified non-Nicolau seniority​
  
  
  . 17 list in conjunction with the improved terms and conditions of employment that might be​
  
  
  . 18 contained in a single collective bargaining agreement – both of which were contingent​
  
  
  . 19 future events at the time of the Addington I litigation – might be satisfactory to the West​
  
  
  . 20 Pilots. Addington, 606 F.3d at 1180-1181. However, the factual and legal landscape of​
  
  
  . 21 the US Airways/American seniority integration is totally different.​
  
  
  . 22 There will not be any negotiations between USAPA and US Airways regarding the ​
  
  
  . 23 relative placement of East and West pilots on the integrated seniority list. ​

 

[prechilill]

You clowns voted in Addington II, the company has sided with the west on all accounts of adjudicating our claim, AMR and the UCC want a shot in Silver's court to affirm their ripeness arguments... the whole world is ganging up on USAPA.

Scott Theuer, how do you feel about the 98% now??? LOL. You voted Addington ripe with the MOU. And I bet this isn't a surprise to Gary Hummel or many in the USAPA leadership. The only surprised people are the east animals frequenting this board.
The ripeness issue is settled, just like Marty said it would be.
The only question at this point is damages... how much and when do they start to accrue. God, what a great way to start off the weekend!!!!

The west got a huge affirmation of our legal standing with the company's filing in Doc 49. USAPA is now left twisting in the wind all by themselves! LOL

Reading document 49 puts another big nail in usapa's coffin, you clowns are done.

 

[prechilill]

Every argument Seham proffered in the formative stages of usAPA about the company supporting a cost-neutral alternative contract with a reordered seniority list are addressed and not agreed to by the company, you see it throughout Document 49 repeatedly. The company is offering an alternative settlement with a three way in this document using the mostly untested and new MB arbitration process, but this concept flies directly in the face of labor law and the MB verbiage as to who represents a pilot class at the table. We have only one CBA (thank god for that!!!!) now since Bradford took the west union away. Had he not done so the America West pilots would still have their own union and their potentially could have been a three way because if we were still ALPA we would have two US Airways MECs and of course the APA would have theirs.
But alas, the west was folded into the east CBA and now there is only one US Airways CBA. All I can say for that is THANK GOD! That preserved the Nicolau and the west's ability to file a DFR claim. You east animals did everything right... to preserve the Nicolau award. Thank you!

P.S. The west will be using Bradford's/ Seham's own arguments against them wrt a question of a 3 way. It was argued by you guys back in 2008 that there is only one CBA that was legally voted in and that one CBA has the right to modify contracts on behalf of the west pilots. Today, the west couldn't agree more with that premise. We have one CBA, one voice and the MOU spells out and identifies only one US Airways CBA. It's all coming together now.

 

[end_of_alpa]

You clowns voted in Addington II, the company has sided with the west on all accounts of adjudicating our claim, AMR and the UCC want a shot in Silver's court to affirm their ripeness arguments... the whole world is ganging up on USAPA.

Scott Theuer, how do you feel about the 98% now??? LOL. You voted Addington ripe with the MOU. And I bet this isn't a surprise to Gary Hummel or many in the USAPA leadership. The only surprised people are the east animals frequenting this board.
The ripeness issue is settled, just like Marty said it would be.
The only question at this point is damages... how much and when do they start to accrue. God, what a great way to start off the weekend!!!!

The west got a huge affirmation of our legal standing with the company's filing in Doc 49. USAPA is now left twisting in the wind all by themselves! LOL

Reading document 49 puts another big nail in usapa's coffin, you clowns are done.

The law is clear on this point. In fact, it's called ""black letter" law. Procedural due process requirements MUST be met before substantive due process requirements. It's in the Constitution. It's NOT RIPE until the "Knife is thrust". It doesn't matter what the Company or the UCC believe. Judge Silvers ruling in the DJ case are clear. No DFR trial until after MB is complete. Keep tilting at windmills and SYIC.

 

[Phoenix]

....

Scott Theuer, how do you feel about the 98% now??? LOL. ...

Still persuading yourself Scott is here and reading your every word. If he knew your affection for him I wonder if he would give it any thought.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Contents of the company's filing, Document 49:


***********************************************************************


US Airways sets . forth its position that plaintiffs’ DFR claim against USAPA is indisputably ripe for

. 2 prompt and final adjudication by this Court.​

******************************************************************************

. The MOU expressly provides that “US Airways . . . shall remain​

. 6 neutral regarding the order in which pilots are placed on the integrated seniority list.”​

*****************************************************************************

. Contrary to USAPA’s suggestion (see USAPA’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 44)​

. 24 at p. 10 (p. 15 of the ECF filing)), the Ninth Circuit in Addington I did not rule that the​

. 25 West Pilots would never have a justiciable DFR claim prior to the finalization of an . integrated US Airways/America West seniority list. Rather, the court reasoned that​

. 2 plaintiffs’ DFR claim against USAPA in that lawsuit was not yet ripe because it remained​

. 3 uncertain “what seniority proposal ultimately will be acceptable to both USAPA and [US​

. 4 Airways] as part of a final CBA” and “whether that proposal will be ratified by the​

. 5 USAPA membership as part of a new, single CBA.” Addington v. US Airline Pilots​

. 6 Ass’n, 606 F.3d 1174, 1179-1180 (9th Cir. 2010). But the court made clear that its​

. 7 conclusion did not mean “that a DFR claim based on a unions’ promotion of a policy is​

. 8 never ripe until that policy is effectuated.” Id. at 1181.​

. 9 In light of the US Airways/American merger, the facts are entirely different and ​

. 10 none of the contingencies at issue in Addington I are present here. ​

• 
  
  ***************************************************************************
  
  
  
  . 23 While USAPA notes that a JCBA must still be negotiated following the merger,​
  
  
  . 24 and asserts that the MOU is therefore not a “final product” and “does not affect [the​
  
  
  . 1 ripeness] analysis at all” (USAPA’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. No. 44) at pp. 9-10 (pp. 14-​
  
  
  . 2 15 of the ECF filing)), it fails to mention that the MOU itself has already determined and​
  
  
  . 3 sharply circumscribed the parameters of the JCBA.​
  
  ******************************************************************************
  
  
  
  
  . Contrary to USAPA’s​
  
  
  
  . 11 argument, the material terms and conditions of employment for both the East and West​
  
  
  
  . 12 pilots following the merger are now known and fixed by the MOU.​
  
  ******************************************************************************
  
  
  
  . What is not settled by the MOU, however, is the seniority list(s) for US Airways​
  
  
  . 14 (East and West) pilots that will be used in the overall seniority integration with​
  
  
  . 15 American’s pilots. Any suggestion that the parties to the MOU (including US Airways)​
  
  
  . 16 have agreed that the Nicolau Award seniority list will not be used is incorrect.​
  
  *****************************************************************************
  
  
  
  . The fact that the MOU does not contain a finalized integrated seniority list also​
  
  
  . 13 does not raise the same ripeness concerns as in Addington I. The Ninth Circuit’s decision​
  
  
  . 14 was premised on the assumptions that the final integrated seniority list would be the​
  
  
  . 15 product of back-and-forth negotiations between US Airways and USAPA (and ultimately​
  
  
  . 16 subject to ratification by USAPA’s membership), and that a ratified non-Nicolau seniority​
  
  
  . 17 list in conjunction with the improved terms and conditions of employment that might be​
  
  
  . 18 contained in a single collective bargaining agreement – both of which were contingent​
  
  
  . 19 future events at the time of the Addington I litigation – might be satisfactory to the West​
  
  
  . 20 Pilots. Addington, 606 F.3d at 1180-1181. However, the factual and legal landscape of​
  
  
  . 21 the US Airways/American seniority integration is totally different.​
  
  
  . 22 There will not be any negotiations between USAPA and US Airways regarding the ​
  
  
  . 23 relative placement of East and West pilots on the integrated seniority list. ​

So, the 26th has passed where's the responses?