August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[Metroyet]

Your comments please sir.


"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

What's the LUP? Surly you must have been able to fabricate one by now!

 

[Pi brat]

Nobody wants to make a guess on my quote? nic, preacher CG, metroyet? Come on now.;-)

 

[CallawayGolf]

Nobody wants to make a guess on my quote? nic, preacher CG, metroyet? Come on now.;-)

No guess. I just know it wasn't me.

 

[EastUS1]

Nobody wants to make a guess on my quote? nic, preacher CG, metroyet? Come on now.;-)

I'll go with Koontz....?

 

[cactusboy53]

Take a gander at document 183 filed by USAPA, concerning subject matter jurisdiction. Judge Silver took a wrong turn, and despite a one month delay, continues to refuse to ask for directions. She has already stretched the limits of ripeness, now she distorts the concept of jurisdiction in an apparent Wake-like lark supporting the local West Class. I predict a further delay in Judge Silver’s trial. Current events continue to blur the logic of her decisions. And while the West Class continues to hop around on one foot ( following their ill-advised and in fact desperate exchange with the Company) we now get further great news in the UAL list. Unfortunately, all these missteps by Silver and the West Class ensure we will go without a new contract for at least two years (cue response from junior West Class member telling me how low my pay is!) RR

Reed;
You should sit down and write Judge Silver your summation. I'm sure it will be beneficial.

CB

 

[Pi brat]

Reed;
You should sit down and write Judge Silver your summation. I'm sure it will be beneficial.

CB

It thought you had him on ignore.

 

[Pi brat]

I'll go with Koontz....?

Ding, ding, ding. Of course it was from this anonymous board so I could be wrong. And to his credit he was anti-DOH and backed it up supporting cases.

Some more:

Mark my words, this will go exactly like Pan-Am/National. Why? Because the merger is almost a dead-ringer. Because the "unfairness" arguments from the Pan-Am/National merger have already been argued in federal court following the merger and all challenges lost. That means there is already precedent for this sort of integration. It's the safest way out for the arbitrator, the unions (national leadership, of course) and the two airlines. And that's what everyone wants; just dispose of it as soon as possible. Anybody expecting something other than a ratio based on longevity will be disappointed.

But the PanAm-National merger directly applies. And that was straight longevity for the top part of the seniority lists, and then dovetailing for the rest. That's the scenario you outlined above. It's been done before and will be done again.

As for slotting, don't assume it would be one for one or tailed in such a way that the bottom flying UAir guy is paired with the bottom AWA guy. There will be some sort of slotting but consideration will be given to age and longevity as well. I expect the number one UAIR guy on furlough won't be much worse off than the bottom UAIR pilot flying. If he were markedly worse off solely because of his "furlough" status, then we're getting away from fairness and into pure arbitrariness in dictating peoples' lives and careers. The number one guy on furlough all of a sudden falls way behind the bottom flying guy, just ahead of him. Not cool. Make your arguments and let the chips fall where they may. It'll be a subjective, gut instinct decision on the part of the arbitrator, but that is just the way it is and is the best way for all.


But I doubt the furloughees with 15 years of longevity will go to the bottom. My guess on the ultimate integration will be to integrate using a weighted longevity formula. Somebody with fifteen years at U that's now on the street is likely to integrate somewhere around senior AWA f/o or perhaps very junior captain. But that's just a guess.

Given my place, it won't make much of a difference whether there is a dovetail or longevity based integration. I suspect I'd end up right around the 90-91 hires. I'm a somewhat senior f/o by the way.

I'd like to say one more thing about the integration: the focus needs to be on results, not applications. Just because a method is applied uniformly does not make it fair. Lots of ideas seem fair, but all ideas should be put to the test and judged according to the result. It's not fairness in the application we should seek but fairness in the result because it's the result we all have to live with.

 

[Freighterguynow]

Is that a lecture posed as a question? 🙂

As always yes - if that guy wants to risk his career over $50 a month let him become an objector and be marginalized.

 

[Black Swan]

Yet unfolding events help to magnify the wisdom of the 9th who properly identified the erroneous "implicit assumption" of the dissent (and of Wake and anyone else who ventures to meddle).

Without an implicit assumption that USAPA must use the Nic, there is simply no way to demonstrate that negotiating something else is necessarily harmful to anyone.

If there is no immediate and direct harm prior to negotiations truly being complete (i.e. at an effective date of an MOU/JCBA/WhaterverContract.... then there is no factual harm in negotiating apart from the previous negotiating position.

I.e. simply put, negotiating is merely evidence of negotiating. It is not evidence of harm.

The West has all the risk, and with every passing day the wide range of reasonableness has more real life examples. 😀

Silver is walking a dangerous path. How Harper can continue to steal the West pilots money, knowing fully you cannot have harm until damage is done is stunning. How do you sue another driver for an accident before the accident happens? This is the basic premise Harper just cannot get through his greedy head. Meanwhile Cactusboy and the other incompetent PHX leaders keep the cash flow going to Polsinelli. Unbelievable.

 

[cactusboy53]

Silver is walking a dangerous path. How Harper can continue to steal the West pilots money, knowing fully you cannot have harm until damage is done is stunning. How do you sue another driver for an accident before the accident happens? This is the basic premise Harper just cannot get through his greedy head. Meanwhile Cactusboy and the other incompetent PHX leaders keep the cash flow going to Polsinelli. Unbelievable.

You really shouldn't worry about how we spend our monies. Do we lecture you on you spending your hard earned LOA 93 wages on the SnapBack, Pension Investigation, & the fabled 3%?

Oh wait! we're funding that TOO!

BTW, I feel GREAT about Marty & his team. Which lawyer are you using for DOH now? Seham? No he ran away with around 10 Million, and is now espousing the EXACT OPPOSITE legal argument. That's right it's Szmanski now.

CB

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Silver is walking a dangerous path. How Harper can continue to steal the West pilots money, knowing fully you cannot have harm until damage is done is stunning. How do you sue another driver for an accident before the accident happens? This is the basic premise Harper just cannot get through his greedy head. Meanwhile Cactusboy and the other incompetent PHX leaders keep the cash flow going to Polsinelli. Unbelievable.

I think it is really a movie " SENIORITY REPORT" by STEVEN STEALBURG,!

 

[JetMonkey]

Sorry, the MOU sucks but the desperate voted for it, I did not and now what's funny is no one will admit voting for it just like LOA93. Except Traitor, he's proud of it.

I voted for it, and with the risk of not knowing what will happen to my domicile.

 

[traderjake]

Quiz time for those that disagree with me about the Nic. Who said this in 2005?

"As for slotting, don't assume it would be one for one or tailed in such a way that the bottom flying UAir guy is paired with the bottom AWA guy. There will be some sort of slotting but consideration will be given to age and longevity as well. I expect the number one UAIR guy on furlough won't be much worse off than the bottom UAIR pilot flying. If he were markedly worse off solely because of his "furlough" status, then we're getting away from fairness and into pure arbitrariness in dictating peoples' lives and careers. The number one guy on furlough all of a sudden falls way behind the bottom flying guy, just ahead of him. Not cool."

We said it years ago and we do not care if anyone ever agrees with us.

 

[traderjake]

Taken from the arbitrators' award in UAL/CAL that references our own SLI:

"That Award {AWA/AAA}, by an experienced impartial arbitrator, was plainly based on the facts in that case record and the terms of the Merger Policy then in effect (but now changed)."

 

[MUTATIS MUTANDIS]

Taken from the arbitrators' award in UAL/CAL that references our own SLI:

"That Award {AWA/AAA}, by an experienced impartial arbitrator, was plainly based on the facts in that case record and the terms of the Merger Policy then in effect (but now changed)."

" and the terms of the Merger Policy then in effect(but now changed)" is that a LUP? just curious, or is it a rolling statement of our union our policy? Sounds to me like a union negotiated CB right to me!