sharktooth
Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 27, 2006
- Messages
- 1,846
- Reaction score
- 0
You guys really need to consider that the law firm you are using has lost most drives than they've won.
Non sequitur. This is not a drive to bring a specific "union" to control. This is to dump ALPA. The worst that could happen is to empower the MEC and put them back into the drivers seat, where they belong. Indirectly, this is an attempt to save US because implementing the "nic" in any way, shape or form will, IMHO, bring on operational problems like you have never seen. You think PHL intl was a disaster last summer?
Nic won't go away with a change of representation.
No one said it ever would. It certainly can be rendered moot, however.
The west group needs to independently ratify any joint contract (thanks to the transition agreement). The language in the transition agreement specifically references ALPA merger policy. USAPA is stuck with the transition agreement.
Wrong, and you know it. Even if we were in an alternate reality and what you say is true, then it would allow USAPA to explore ALPA merger policy in a public venue, you know, the part about windfall.
And yes, Garland could absolutely win a DFR lawsuit. There is no legal reason to prohibit him from running for union office that would hold in court.
The operative word being, "could". I "could" win the lottery tomorrow, also. Garland is welcome to run for whatever office blows his skirt up. Run for President if he wants. If he has a lawsuit, it would not be with the US pilots.
All this effort, but you won't get a DOH integration with either HP or any future merger victi, err, partner airlines. Not gonna happen.
The US pilots will get tremendously more control over their lives than they ever got with ALPA. It may be LOS or whatever, but, it will not be "nic". Have a good day, sir!