August 2013 Pilot Discussion

[mrbreeze]

Read the TA...it is a contract....it is in effect and controlling our operations. the company and/or the APA can collude with the scab union at their peril.

Your opening statement just shows that what you believe is a long reach instead of reality. The MOU states that it supersedes all previous agreements and you guys overwhelming approved the MOU. Now, for you to go back and sue after agreeing to the new MOU, well, good luck with that, pal.

 

[cleardirect]

No flame bait... 😉

Read the MOU again ... "10. a. A seniority integration process consistent with McCaskill-Bond shall begin as soon as possible after the Effective Date."

Don't worry yourself about anyone using MB. No one agreed to use MB, per se, that would be illegal! 😉 😉

To be clear. Your contention is that we are going to use some process "consistent" with M/B but we are not going to use M/B.

That when the NAC came around selling the MOU and when ALL of the communication from usapa said we would use M/B to integrate us airways and American. It really meant some form of, kind of like M/B but not really M/B. is that what you are now saying?

That some made up not quite M/B only represented by east pilots with no west pilots at the table is fair and equal.

Please make that argument to a federal judge. Let's see how that defense goes over.

I think bad faith can be proven if that is how the union thinks they can get out of using the Nicolau list.

 

[cleardirect]

Your opening statement just shows that what you believe is a long reach instead of reality. The MOU states that it supersedes all previous agreements and you guys overwhelming approved the MOU. Now, for you to go back and sue after agreeing to the new MOU, well, good luck with that, pal.

If you believe that, you have nothing to worry about. Judge Silver should have dismissed our case and moved on. However she has not dismissed it has she?

As I said I think she is going to wait for the POR date and take ripeness off the table. Then we can get to the injunction hearing very quickly.

One other point. If usapa and the company could so easily negotiate away the Nicolau what took so long?

If usapa can supersede the T/A with a new agreement and just ignore the Nicolau like it never happened I think we all have a slam dunk case against usapa for delaying a new contract for years.

 

[Phoenix]

To be clear. Your contention is that we are going to use some process "consistent" with M/B but we are not going to use M/B.

That when the NAC came around selling the MOU and when ALL of the communication from usapa said we would use M/B to integrate us airways and American. It really meant some form of, kind of like M/B but not really M/B. is that what you are now saying?

That some made up not quite M/B only represented by east pilots with no west pilots at the table is fair and equal.

Please make that argument to a federal judge. Let's see how that defense goes over.

I think bad faith can be proven if that is how the union thinks they can get out of using the Nicolau list.

I say we get to follow the MOU, just like we all agreed to.

What did Silver say about the need for USAPA to adopt using the NIC?

 

[mrbreeze]

If you believe that, you have nothing to worry about. Judge Silver should have dismissed our case and moved on. However she has not dismissed it has she?

As I said I think she is going to wait for the POR date and take ripeness off the table. Then we can get to the injunction hearing very quickly.

One other point. If usapa and the company could so easily negotiate away the Nicolau what took so long?

If usapa can supersede the T/A with a new agreement and just ignore the Nicolau like it never happened I think we all have a slam dunk case against usapa for delaying a new contract for years.

I am not worried at all. You are entitled to you opinion and can spend as much money as you want to try to make it come true. (your opinion is all that you are entitled to though) You are the one who should be worried since you are the one writing the checks. The bottom line is that the TA was never completed and the MOU was a do over that you guys agreed to. You can't deny that.....dream away though.

 

[cleardirect]

I say we get to follow the MOU, just like we all agreed to.

What did Silver say about the need for USAPA to adopt using the NIC?

Oh! So now you want to follow an agreement.

I see.


You eastie did not want to follow your agreement to arbitration.

You did not want to follow your agreement to follow the T/A.

You did not want to follow your agreement as a union to represent all pilots equality.

You did not want to follow your agreement to get a contract in a timely manner.

But now you want to follow the MOU. I guess until you figure out that We did not agree to use M\B to integrate east and west. That you don't want to follow.

Situational ethics once again.

I agreed to use M/B to integrate us airways and American. I agreed to use arbitration to integrate east and west. How about we follow those agreements?

When you ask what judge Silver said about the Nicolau do you mean what she said in a written order or what she said in an off hand comment during a hearing? Because in a written order she said usapa had to use the Nicolau unless usapa had an LUP.

Does usapa have an LUP? Because they sure did not articulate one so far.

 

[cleardirect]

I am not worried at all. You are entitled to you opinion and can spend as much money as you want to try to make it come true. (your opinion is all that you are entitled to though) You are the one who should be worried since you are the one writing the checks. The bottom line is that the TA was never completed and the MOU was a do over that you guys agreed to. You can't deny that.....dream away though.

The do over I agreed to was union representation. Not seniority.

I agreed to use M/B to integrate us airways and American. You agreed to use the Nicolau to integrate east and west.

How hypocritical of you to remind people of want they agreed to.

 

[Claxon]

Oh! So now you want to follow an agreement.

I see.


You eastie did not want to follow your agreement to arbitration.

You did not want to follow your agreement to follow the T/A.

You did not want to follow your agreement as a union to represent all pilots equality.

You did not want to follow your agreement to get a contract in a timely manner.

But now you want to follow the MOU. I guess until you figure out that We did not agree to use M\B to integrate east and west. That you don't want to follow.

Situational ethics once again.

I agreed to use M/B to integrate us airways and American. I agreed to use arbitration to integrate east and west. How about we follow those agreements?

When you ask what judge Silver said about the Nicolau do you mean what she said in a written order or what she said in an off hand comment during a hearing? Because in a written order she said usapa had to use the Nicolau unless usapa had an LUP.

Does usapa have an LUP? Because they sure did not articulate one so far.

A classic lecture disguised with questions. "NO"

 

[Claxon]

The do over I agreed to was union representation. Not seniority.

I agreed to use M/B to integrate us airways and American. You agreed to use the Nicolau to integrate east and west.

How hypocritical of you to remind people of want they agreed to.

Wye River, secret meetings in St. Louis. All the risk lies with the west.......
Funny how your all in stance cost you everything. Just heard a funny story how all the west pilots smugly felt the east pilots would NEVER get the votes to leave ALPA when the windfall was dealt. Now you know the walls are closing in. "NO"

 

[EastUS1]

That some made up not quite M/B only represented by east pilots with no west pilots at the table is fair and equal.

You personally want to usurp any/all professional respect that's been properly earned by others through at least 10+ more working years than you've contributed here...and you can yet even mention the words "fair and equal"? I just stopped in for a laugh. Thanks for predictably providing one. 🙂

 

[Phoenix]

Oh! So now you want to follow an agreement.

I see.


You eastie did not want to follow your agreement to arbitration.

You did not want to follow your agreement to follow the T/A.

You did not want to follow your agreement as a union to represent all pilots equality.

You did not want to follow your agreement to get a contract in a timely manner.

But now you want to follow the MOU. I guess until you figure out that We did not agree to use M\B to integrate east and west. That you don't want to follow.

Situational ethics once again.

I agreed to use M/B to integrate us airways and American. I agreed to use arbitration to integrate east and west. How about we follow those agreements?

When you ask what judge Silver said about the Nicolau do you mean what she said in a written order or what she said in an off hand comment during a hearing? Because in a written order she said usapa had to use the Nicolau unless usapa had an LUP.

Does usapa have an LUP? Because they sure did not articulate one so far.

Like shooting fish in a barrel.

No court has implemented the Nic. No one is willing to implement the Nic. Everyone has gone to great lengths to pretend they "believe the Nic is fair"... and one day it may prove useful in making them immune from a lawsuit, just as much as USAPA's immunity from being defunct. Who needs a LUP (even though Silver herself stated one)?

 

[nycbusdriver]

Do you think a federal judge would allow a union being sued for DFR to avoid the very law designed for a fair and equitable process?

Yes. When the basis for the suit becomes null on the date of the POR and the plaintiffs voted 98% to approve the MOU which nullifies the basis for their own DFR.

 

[Claxon]

Not true at all breeze.

What you are intentionally overlooking is that the TA has been executed, and still in force to this day.

Do we have one operating certificate? Did we establish single carrier status? How are furloughs recalled...etc...etc...

The fact is the Nic is the only accepted system seniority list for all LCC pilots in compliance with the already executed SLI section of the TA. Done deal. There is no ratification requirement of the Nic, as a matter of fact the Nic is the only option per the TA for any JCBA.

Now the MOU is a whole other animal, and seniority neutral is a misnomer. The MOU specifically says how the LCC pilots will be integrated with the AMR pilots, it is only "neutral" in the sense that it does not say how the already integrated LCC pilots will be integrated....oh, gee, I wonder why?

Further,

Here comes another delusional lecture by a Nicolau disciple.
The image that comes to mind of Nic4Us is one of a frustrated and angry person attempting to climb a greased brass pole.

 

[cleardirect]

Yes. When the basis for the suit becomes null on the date of the POR and the plaintiffs voted 98% to approve the MOU which nullifies the basis for their own DFR.

The plaintiffs voted 98% to use M/B to integrate us airways and American. The plaintiffs also can read the law that says M/B can't be used to integrate east west.

The plaintiffs also voted to kick usapa to the curb.

Nothing in the MOU nullifies the Nicolau. However the MOU does make our case ripe.

 

[cleardirect]

A classic lecture disguised with questions. "NO"

Says the former president of usapa that posts endless videos and years old irrelevant documents.

Using DOH. NO!
Getting rid of the Nicolau. NO!
Usapa ever winning a law suit. NO!
Mike Cleary is a rational and stable person. NO!