AUG/SEPT 2012 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[traderjake]

Judge Silver's ruling leaves little doubt that the Nicolau Award will never be memorialized in Section 22 of any JCBA.

She hasn't ruled yet.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

She hasn't ruled yet.

Did you read the transcripts?

 

[A320 Driver]

She hasn't ruled yet.

She's done everything except put the date on it. I wouldn't be surprised to see either the company or the West pilots appeal to the 9th. I don't think they stand a chance seeing how Judge Silver's ruling reflects the previous ruling from the 9th.

In any case, I see more delays in our future. USAPA (meaning the BPR), in my opinion, is incapable of crafting a comprehensive proposal to satisfy the problems with the seniority integration. They lack both the courage and the foresight to pull it off. Most of them will take what happened in Judge Silver's court as a blank check to do what they want and that is clearly not the case. No, it doesn't have to be the NIC, but it had better be something that protects the interests of the West pilots or USAPA ends up back in court defending a DFR suit.

Sorry, I'm stating the obvious but I just felt like saying it...

Driver...

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

She's done everything except put the date on it. I wouldn't be surprised to see either the company or the West pilots appeal to the 9th. I don't think they stand a chance seeing how Judge Silver's ruling reflects the previous ruling from the 9th.

In any case, I see more delays in our future. USAPA (meaning the BPR), in my opinion, is incapable of crafting a comprehensive proposal to satisfy the problems with the seniority integration. They lack both the courage and the foresight to pull it off. Most of them will take what happened in Judge Silver's court as a blank check to do what they want and that is clearly not the case. No, it doesn't have to be the NIC, but it had better be something that protects the interests of the West pilots or USAPA ends up back in court defending a DFR suit.

Sorry, I'm stating the obvious but I just felt like saying it...

Driver...

The courage, foresight! Pleez sounds like a case of ALPA envy, nothing will happen till DUI and his AWE SHUCKS(PI84) Mngmnt team are motivated to do anything, the ball was clearly tossed back to DUI, and their BS excuses weren't being bought! Nope AWE SHUCKS likes their options open, for a number of specific purposes! MUTATIS!

 

[Barrister]

She's done everything except put the date on it. I wouldn't be surprised to see either the company or the West pilots appeal to the 9th. I don't think they stand a chance seeing how Judge Silver's ruling reflects the previous ruling from the 9th.

In any case, I see more delays in our future. USAPA (meaning the BPR), in my opinion, is incapable of crafting a comprehensive proposal to satisfy the problems with the seniority integration. They lack both the courage and the foresight to pull it off. Most of them will take what happened in Judge Silver's court as a blank check to do what they want and that is clearly not the case. No, it doesn't have to be the NIC, but it had better be something that protects the interests of the West pilots or USAPA ends up back in court defending a DFR suit.

Sorry, I'm stating the obvious but I just felt like saying it...

Driver...

Go read the case law. DOH is fair and the mistake that the West has ALWAYS made is to believe that everything will be compared to the NIC to determine a DFR. Says who. You want to count judges. Well the last 2 could have easily validated the NIC but did not. Read the cases. DOH does serve the pliot group as a whole. Can't wait for the next trial. NIC probably won't even be mentioned.

NICDOA
NPJB

 

[Barrister]

When? A few months down the road? Years? And then how long could we have stayed in bankruptcy. You of all people should know that. Many, many years of floundering as the worst case scenario for us.

You?

Liquidation.

Hey idiot ...you run out of bullets and are now throwing the gun......not one person here has any empathy for you. Rot in PHX.

NICDOA
NPJB

 

[Ames]

I'm sorry Ames, but your crystal ball has proven less than accurate. A blast from the past:

"Ames Today, 11:43 AM


file:///C:/Users/Family/AppData/Local/Temp/msoclip1/01/clip_image002.gifcleardirect, on 31 December 2011 - 11:34 AM, said:
I think what the west is saying the seniority fight will be over by April. Once Silver rules that should be the end. The company will point to the court and say the court said. an appeal is not going to matter. Once the company makes up their mind and it will time to move towards a contract or merger. If there is a merger the company is going to say the seniority dispute is over so investors don't worry.

An appeal does not matter. Even if the court says not ripe or you can do something other than the Nicolau They can still stand on the Nicolau. they need to move forward and are not going to wait much longer. So yes the seniority issue will be over by April. The usapa leadership issue should be over by April too."



"Well said. I, too, will go on record to say that the seniority fight will be over upon Judge Silver's ruling. There is no doubt the east will continue to stamp their feet, hold their breath, and cry but the fight will be over. Tantrums will continue but they will be totally impotent"

You might be right, but I don't know. Breach of contract? Does that work with the RLA?

Wow. I should be honored that you consider my opinion so highly as to dig through year old posts of mine. Judge Silver hasn't made a final ruling yet. Oral arguments could have changed her mind.

Either way, I will admit I was wrong about the timeline and may be wrong abour her ruling. So what.

The bottom line is that we are no further along than we were before the company filed the DJ. Despite ucrapa's extremely inaccurate declaration that they are free to negotiate without the Nic the ball is back in Parker's court.

If he attempts to negotiate without the Nic he will be in breach of contract and that is much easier to litigate than DFR.

The company was hoping (in its cowardly way) that the judge would do its dirty work for it. She hasn't.

If Parker wants to move along with his merger the easiest course he can take is to merge with the Nic list. It's legal, he already accepted it and his attorney stated so in court. Your DOH fantasy is not the path of least resistance and we all know he likes that path.

 

[Ames]

I'm just not seeing it. What I take away is that Silver affirmed that we (USAPA) can negotiate any seniority list we want. Wasn't that always the case? I didn't think that was in dispute. Correct me if I am wrong.

What Silver did NOT do is take away the legal repercussions of negotiating away from the Nic. Not from USAPA and not from the Company. So the the one thing that has kept us all in Purgatory all this time... the legal threat of a hybrid DFR... still exists.

Looks like the same stalemate continues. Even IF USAPA negotiates another seniority list, AND the company accepts it, AND a new contract puts it all into effect, Leonidas gets an immediate injunction, and sues LCC (or AMR) and USAPA (or APA) into extinction.

So, someone please explain what has been won here. (And spare me the standard talking points, spin, and out of context quotes. I'm already quite well versed in those. Aren't we all? I'm looking for real answers and realistic scenarios that can unfold in a way that doesn't end in the above mentioned injunction.)

Quite accurate.

 

[Ames]

Show us the CONTRACT where it is Ames. You can't. The one that says NICOLAU clearly in print.

The transition agreement is the contract. Even the company's attorney stated so in court. Read the transcripts. Pay attention.

 

[Ames]

But, I will leave you with this, the company wanted cover from the West lawsuit, they did not get it. So, ask yourself which the company fears more, the parked union, or the West pilot class lawsuit that has already been proven?

Words worth repeating.

 

[Ames]

Indeed, and speaking of honestly; can anyone honestly wonder exactly how and why this whole mess got started in the first place?:

"The list's most controversial component placed a 56-year-old pilot with 17 years at US Airways, who was never laid off, behind a 35-year-old America West pilot with a few months on the job. In hundreds of similar cases, east pilots with 15 or more years at the carrier went behind west pilots with just a few years."

Yes, yes...we all know: "Fair and Equitable!"...."Integrity Matters!"..."We saved you!"/etc, etc....well...toxic BS forever remains toxic BS..... no matter how many layers of additional BS it's ever coated with....Period!

This tired old argument, yet again.

 

[Ames]

If the company really wanted the Nicolau Award implemented, they should have done so 5 years ago. Instead, they thought they would be clever and saw an opportunity to milk hundreds of millions in savings by allowing this dispute to fester. Parker and Kirby have made it clear on numerous occassions that the pilots and/or the courts will need to resolve this dispute and they have gone on record and in public arguing the same. Now it's too late to go from neutral to partisan - although they tried with the Declaratory Judgement.

Judge Silver's ruling leaves little doubt that the Nicolau Award will never be memorialized in Section 22 of any JCBA.

But what they (Parker) can say is "Fellas, it won't be DOH either. We just can't risk a DFR and you need to figure something else out." If the merger goes forward, I would not be surprised if he does just that since Silver put the ball back in his court. If the merger does not proceed, he will continue with his 'awe shucks' routine for as long as possible.

This time around I hope USAPA has a plan B ready.

What you appear to misunderstand is that the company already accepted the Nic and is contractually bound to it as they admitted in open court.

 

[cleardirect]

OK boys! Even though the judge has not issued her final order, usapa has declared victory and ding dong the Nicolau is dead.

USAPA is free to pursue any seniority proposal, and need not advance the Nicolau award.

Now that this obstacle has been removed, we will immediately petition the National Mediation Board to resume section 6 contract negotiations.

So now what? Any prediction on how long it is going to take the all-knowing all powerful usapa to get a contract with DOH and huge pay raises?

Usapa had the excuse for not getting a contract that the Nicolau was in the way. Now there is no excuse (says usapa). Usapa said there are no more obstacles to negotiations. Where is that industry standard contract?

THE COURT: Are negotiations really at a standstill between US Air and USAPA until this decision is made?

MR. SIEGEL: Mr. Szymanski and I actually agree on that subject. The federal mediators have told us that. They have not scheduled recent negotiations and they have reported to us, because they are quite aware of the legal battle over the seniority proposal and they understand you can't reach agreement on a Collective Bargaining Agreement without a seniority proposal and they are aware of this proceeding in this court. So that is exactly what has occurred since we were last here.

THE COURT: And are you waiting until there is something affirmative about whether or not there's going to be a merger? I mean, do the negotiations go ahead without it or are they determining the merger in order to not waste a needless consumption of time?

MR. SIEGEL: We are still governed by what's Section 6 of the Railway Labor Act. We have a government obligation with USAPA. It's under the jurisdiction of the National Mediation Board and the Board sets the date for the mediation. I know that USAPA a while ago asked the Board to set dates and as I've said to the Court, the Board has told us that it is, in fact, aware of the legal issue on the seniority proposal.

The company seems to think that without an answer from the court there will be no contract negotiations. They did not get their answer. Think the company is going to go into section 6 uncovered? Does the NMB suddenly schedule meetings because usapa says the obstacle has been cleared even though the court did not answer the question?

While usapa says they are free to negotiate, where is it written that the company is willing to negotiate for seniority? In order to negotiate you have to have 2 parties willing. The company has already said that they are not willing to negotiate line bidding and we will have PBS. What if the company says we don’t know what our liability is so we have to stick with the safe harbor and will not negotiate seniority other than the Nicolau? The NMB is not going to release over seniority. So what does usapa do if no one will negotiate seniority?

What happens if usapa drops a DOH list on the company and they simply say no? They have done it with PBS, parity, pay rates, insurance, work rules and everything else usapa has demanded. What is plan B if the company just says no?

How long will it be before usapa actually has to perform and provide the entire pilot group some benefit other than delay? Show us how it is done fellows. No more road blocks. You east pilots have the majority and all that experience. Go get that DOH contract. The sooner the better please. Courts are backed up and we need to get to DFRII.

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

What has happened here, as Your Honor knows, we have

the arbitration decision that was conducted before Mr. Nicolau.

We have the constitution of USAPA that says it cannot be

Nicolau and it has to be date of hire. We have the two pieces

and the carrier doesn't negotiate the seniority list. It

accepts from the union the seniority list. It was asked

originally to accept the result of the arbitration award and

then when the new union came in, it was asked to accept the

date of hire, but it doesn't negotiate the seniority list in a

traditional sense. It just accepts it. SIEGEL

 

[cleardirect]

What you appear to misunderstand is that the company already accepted the Nic and is contractually bound to it as they admitted in open court.

This little exchange points that out to the court.

MR. HARPER: And I do feel for Airways and Mr. Siegel because this is a difficult case. It is unique. But this whole situation with respect to negotiating a new seniority list, the time, as Mr. Siegel was trying to tell you, I believe, has passed for the Airline to be able to do that. The time when the seniority provisions, and the outcome of what the seniority provision was going to be, occurred back in 2005 when the Transition Agreement was put into place. And at that particular point in time, the Airline and ALPA -- and you now found that USAPA is bound by the TA and is a successor to ALPA. They negotiated the outcome, the process for the outcome of the seniority list. And that is what is causing the Airways to have a bad feeling here today. Can I put a chart up for you that we have? I think we have handouts, too. You've sent them out? Okay. Do you mind if I stand over here?

THE COURT: Oh, no. I can see it.

MR. HARPER: Back in the TA, they agreed on a process, East and West would get together and they would go to Nicolau and there would be an arbitration decision which be the single list. Airline, ALPA, the predecessor now to USAPA, presented that to the Airline in December of 2007. The Airline accepted it back in 2007. Seniority was done at the end of December 2007. Now, you asked about aiding and abetting. If they now go back and rescind this acceptance, given everything that has happened in the last 49 months, and we have been at litigation since September of 2008, yes, they are exposed to aiding and abetting a change in this process --

THE COURT: As a matter of law, without any facts?

MR. HARPER: I think it is a matter of law. I mean, I don't know what the different facts here would be.

THE COURT: You mean just based -- because they accepted. They are aiders and abettors, as a matter of law, in any Court?

MR. HARPER: They are participating in an unfair labor practice to the extent this list is a detriment. We have to prove the unfair labor practice and we would have to prove the aiding and abetting. There's not too many facts that would be --

THE COURT: What would be the aiding and abetting based upon the facts that you've given?

MR. HARPER: Allowing them to implement a seniority list that is to the substantial detriment of the best pilots without a legitimate objective purpose by the union, and the union has told us and they write it in their papers --

THE COURT: And if they know -- and that is a good point, Mr. Harper, that exception. If they know without legitimate reason by the union, they know that. So, then, they go and give them a legitimate reason, it's not -- then the well-represented carrier not going to do it; right?

MR. HARPER: I would hope not. But we have been going --

THE COURT: Well, if they do, then they are sued; right?