August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[nevergiveup]

How many issues are you wrong in this statement?

Did you purchase anything from UPS? Are you going to return it to UPS or the person selling the item?

Can the company simply return the Nicolau list back to Nicolau and get a refund?

Do try and come up with something a little better than this to make a point.

You shouldn't let this get to you. It's not that important. Worst case scenario, you have a great career. Enjoy your Saturday.

 

[Pi brat]

The company never accepted usapa's section 22 proposal. I have a letter signed by Parker accepting the Nicolau list.

I am sure that you would like to ignore the last eight years and have a redo. That is what you guys have demanded from the beginning. Not going to happen.

You need to understand what you voted for.

I have a letter saying they did accept USAPA's proposal. There. Now, tell me when the Nicolau Award became "effective" as in "in effect", like in the MOU.

You know what gets me about you clear? You keep making definitive statements when you have been so damn wrong, so often. I guess you go by the theory that you will have to be right sometime. We'll see.

Did you ever get around to reading those C&BLs? You dropped off without answering me, but you do that quite a bit.

 

[Phoenix]

How many issues are you wrong in this statement?

Did you purchase anything from UPS? Are you going to return it to UPS or the person selling the item?

Can the company simply return the Nicolau list back to Nicolau and get a refund?

Do try and come up with something a little better than this to make a point.

The company agreed to make all prior agreements a nullity at the effective date (the effective date that makes the MOU effective and all prior agreements a nullity, as in no longer awaiting an effective date ).

The company won't be returning anything to anyone. Its all worthless and not even worth the time and effort to open the trash can lid. It all will rust, rot, and decay right where it sits.

 

[EastUS1]

Still pathetically trying that east pilot impersonation, I see. How truly sad to observe. Get yourself some much-needed and clearly-long-overdue help.

Sshhhhhh, take a break General. I'm getting worried about you - your posts are a bit more succinct. Everything alright at home?
And aren't the CBL's "our" (east and west) CBL's? When USAPA, as an entity, is going up against the APA, isn't it "us" (east AND west)? Did I miss something there Colonel?

No surprise that you've no actual defense to offer. That reads like a cry for help, Move2CLT. If you're still intent on pursuing your insane impersonation here; at least drop your signature, well-patterned "speaking" style and try something different. Just for example: How many posters have, when stressed for a response, resorted to your trademark "Sshhhhhh," wholesale contempt for and "cute" cycling of military ranks/etc, or are you both too delusional, and/or just plain too stupid to realize such things? While "You just can't fix stupid" may well be in play...You might well benefit from some help in other problem areas. Your problem(s) = Your choice to fix or not.

 

[cleardirect]

I accepted a package from UPS last week. Does that mean I cannot return it? And why did he agree not to trigger the NIC after reaching a JCBA?

How many issues are you wrong in this statement?

Did you purchase anything from UPS? Are you going to return it to UPS or the person selling the item?

Can the company simply return the Nicolau list back to Nicolau and get a refund?

Do try and come up with something a little better than this to make a point.

You have a letter..

You also think you have a congressional prohibition denying you the freedom to willingly choose a process consistent with MB.

Be sure to post when you have a fortune cookie announcing the effective date of the Nic.... Meanwhile you do have an MOU that defines an "effective date"

Better read the MOU closer. Paragraph 10h says the lists can’t be changed except for paragraph 10. Paragraph 10 says consistent with M/B. You have to go read M/B to understand what process we agreed to. M/B says that it can’t be used for any merger prior to December 2007 or for intra union integration. As I said in an earlier post if you violate major parts of the law it is not consistent with the law.

So tell me, what process if you refuse to use the already completed fair and neutral process do you propose to use to integrate the east and west? Because M/B can’t be used and the MOU states integrating US Airways pilots and American pilots.

h. US Airways agrees that neither this Memorandum nor the JCBA shall provide a basis for changing the seniority lists currently in effect at US Airways other than through the process set forth in this Paragraph 10.

10. a. A seniority integration process consistent with McCaskill-Bond shall begin as soon as possible after the Effective Date. If, on the date ninety (90) days following the Effective Date, direct negotiations have failed to result in a merged seniority list acceptable to the pilots at both airlines, a panel of three neutral arbitrators will be designated within fifteen (15) days to resolve the dispute, pursuant to the authority and requirements of McCaskill-Bond. That arbitration proceeding will commence no later than 60 days after the designation of the arbitrators, or as soon thereafter as practicable given the availability of the designated arbitrators, provided that it is understood that, in no event, shall the seniority integration arbitration proceeding commence prior to final approval of the JCBA pursuant to the deadlines and procedures in Paragraph 27 below. The panel of arbitrators will render its award within six (6) months of the commencement of the arbitration, and in any event not later than 24 months after the Effective Date.

What does the M/B law say?

sections 3 and 13 of the labor protective provisions imposed by the Civil Aeronautics Board in the Allegheny-Mohawk merger (as published at 59 C.A.B. 45) shall apply to the integration of covered employees of the covered air carriers; except that— (1) if the same collective bargaining agent represents the combining crafts or classes at each of the covered air carriers, that collective bargaining agent’s internal policies regarding integration, if any, will not be affected by and will supersede the requirements of this section; and

Will supersede the requirements of this section. Means that M/B can't be used to merger east and west. Using it in a three way would not be consistent with the law.

(c) APPLICATION.—This section shall not apply to any covered transaction involving a covered air carrier that took place before the date of enactment of this Act.

(d) EFFECTIVENESS OF PROVISION.—This section shall become effective on the date of enactment of this Act and shall continue in effect in fiscal years after fiscal year 2008.

Why would congress give this it's very own paragraph it they intended for it to be used in a consistent manner? They intended for it to not be used for mergers that took place prior to 2008. I know this involves going to the source documents and making more than one step to get to your answer and that is hard for you. But there it is. What legal source can you cite that says M/B can be used to merge the east and west?

 

[cleardirect]

I have a letter saying they did accept USAPA's proposal. There. Now, tell me when the Nicolau Award became "effective" as in "in effect", like in the MOU.

You know what gets me about you clear? You keep making definitive statements when you have been so damn wrong, so often. I guess you go by the theory that you will have to be right sometime. We'll see.

Did you ever get around to reading those C&BLs? You dropped off without answering me, but you do that quite a bit.

OK!

I throw the BS flag. Post the letter from the company saying they have accepted usapa's DOH seniority list proposal. Where is it?

What are you babbling about C&BL question?

 

[Pi brat]

OK!

I throw the BS flag. Post the letter from the company saying they have accepted usapa's DOH seniority list proposal. Where is it?

What are you babbling about C&BL question?

Dear USAPA,

I got your proposal.

Doug

Have you read the C&BLs about dissolving the union. Keep up.

 

[Pi brat]

From the deposition of Al Hemingway during Addington I:

"On September 30, 2008, USAPA passed an initial seniority
integration proposal to US Airways. To date, the parties have scheduled six additional days of
negotiations to take place before December 4, 2008. Despite these efforts with both ALPA and
USAPA, to date, the parties have not yet reached agreement on a single labor contract."

So how did USAPA pass it, if the company didn't accept it? Did they fumble?

 

[dca319]

Still pathetically trying that east pilot impersonation, I see. How truly sad to observe. Get yourself some much-needed and clearly-long-overdue help.



No surprise that you've no actual defense to offer. That reads like a cry for help, Move2CLT. If you're still intent on pursuing your insane impersonation here; at least drop your signature, well-patterned "speaking" style and try something different. Just for example: How many posters have, when stressed for a response, resorted to your trademark "Sshhhhhh," wholesale contempt for and "cute" cycling of military ranks/etc, or are you both too delusional, and/or just plain too stupid to realize such things? While "You just can't fix stupid" may well be in play...You might well benefit from some help in other problem areas. Your problem(s) = Your choice to fix or not.

There's the little General we all know. I was getting worried about you.

 

[dca319]

From the deposition of Al Hemingway during Addington I:

"On September 30, 2008, USAPA passed an initial seniority
integration proposal to US Airways. To date, the parties have scheduled six additional days of
negotiations to take place before December 4, 2008. Despite these efforts with both ALPA and
USAPA, to date, the parties have not yet reached agreement on a single labor contract."

So how did USAPA pass it, if the company didn't accept it? Did they fumble?

You do understand that it was passed and then pushed back with a 'no thank you' from the company because 'we already have a list'. All that move did was help the west's cause.

 

[dca319]

OK!

I throw the BS flag. Post the letter from the company saying they have accepted usapa's DOH seniority list proposal. Where is it?

What are you babbling about C&BL question?

They never did. I think Pi is the only one over here that thinks that. There's always one in the bunch.

 

[Pi brat]

You do understand that it was passed and then pushed back with a 'no thank you' from the company because 'we already have a list'. All that move did was help the west's cause.

No, I'm not. Show me. I'm sure you can back that up because it is contrary to public pronouncements of the company and simple logic.

 

[Claxon]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
US Airways, Inc.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Don Addington, et al.,
Defendants.
))))))))))
No. CV-10-01570-PHX-ROS
AMENDED JUDGMENT
(to add description of class)
Pursuant to the Court’s resolution of the motions for summary judgment,
IT IS ORDERED Counts I and III of the complaint are dismissed and judgment is
entered in favor of US Airline Pilots Association on Count II of the complaint. US Airline
Pilots Association’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty of fair representation
provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose. This judgment is binding on the
following class: “All pilots employed by US Airways in September 2008 who were on the
America West seniority list on September 20, 2005.”
DATED this 4th day of December, 2012

Judge Silver
Company appealed the ruling. From the final appeal brief by the company.

"The factual recitation in this brief is based on the record before the district
court. Since that record was developed, a merger between US Airways and
American Airlines, Inc. was announced. The merger is subject to regulatory
approvals and other customary conditions. If, as expected, those conditions are
satisfied and the merger closes during the third quarter of 2013, the factual record
before the district court will become obsolete and the issue on this appeal will
become moot."

 

[dca319]

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
US Airways, Inc.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
Don Addington, et al.,
Defendants.
))))))))))
No. CV-10-01570-PHX-ROS
AMENDED JUDGMENT
(to add description of class)
Pursuant to the Court’s resolution of the motions for summary judgment,
IT IS ORDERED Counts I and III of the complaint are dismissed and judgment is
entered in favor of US Airline Pilots Association on Count II of the complaint. US Airline
Pilots Association’s seniority proposal does not breach its duty of fair representation
provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose. This judgment is binding on the
following class: “All pilots employed by US Airways in September 2008 who were on the
America West seniority list on September 20, 2005.”
DATED this 4th day of December, 2012

Judge Silver
Company appealed the ruling. From the final appeal brief by the company.

"The factual recitation in this brief is based on the record before the district
court. Since that record was developed, a merger between US Airways and
American Airlines, Inc. was announced. The merger is subject to regulatory
approvals and other customary conditions. If, as expected, those conditions are
satisfied and the merger closes during the third quarter of 2013, the factual record
before the district court will become obsolete and the issue on this appeal will
become moot."

In between your poo flings, please go back and bold the following that you so clearly missed:

...provided it is supported by a legitimate union purpose.

 

[dca319]

No, I'm not. Show me. I'm sure you can back that up because it is contrary to public pronouncements of the company and simple logic.

The company has not ever accepted a list from USAPA. Ever. Parker has stated that the only list in their possession is the Nicolau award and nothing else.