Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Res Judicata]

Thank you. I've no further questions for this witness.

See you in court.

 

[CallawayGolf]

That should be good for a few laughs right there.

Or it may just be the phrase in Judge Silver's ruling that provides the Company the grounds for an appeal. How can either or any party move forward with an undefined term in a federal court ruling that was intended to eliminate legal questions, not raise another undefined one? Silver, like the Ninth the first go-around, didn't resolve any issues (other than making clear what is an unquestionably ripe action) and so this legal issue remains one that only a court will be able to decide if they finally gather the fortitude to actually resolve the open question. If the question makes its way back on appeal, will they punt again or actually make a definitive ruling this time?

 

[nic4us]

Nope. Wrong on all counts. And, who cares what a company lawyer says or thinks. It's irrelevant.

And to answer an earlier post, there is no rearranging of seniority lists. There has never been a combined seniority list at LCC, as testified to in court by the company.

You keep losing.

Who cares what a company lawyer says......umm....the company.

The company did not testify in court that there is not a combined list, they testified the Nic is the status quo at LCC and they fear liability for changing the status quo merely to appease a union bent on committing a DFR violation.

 

[BLT]

As long as it meets the standards of "a wide range of reasonableness", and works to the advantage of a MAJORITY of the union members. If you weren't aware of this, you need to educate yourself.

Wow, that's amazing! So a DFR is judged only on whether or not it works to the advantage of the MAJORITY, and meets a wide range of reasonableness. Those stupid westicles are sooooooo screwed!!!!! Why are we offering them DOH. Lets just staple them Bill. Majority rules!

 

[Bill Brasky]

Or it may just be the phrase in Judge Silver's ruling that provides the Company the grounds for an appeal. How can either or any party move forward with an undefined term in a federal court ruling that was intended to eliminate legal questions, not raise another undefined one? Silver, like the Ninth the first go-around, didn't resolve any issues (other than making clear what is an unquestionably ripe action) and so this legal issue remains one that only a court will be able to decide if they finally gather the fortitude to actually resolve the open question. If the question makes its way back on appeal, will they punt again or actually make a definitive ruling this time?

There WAS a definitive ruling. It was that there is NO DFR until there is a ratified contract. Also, Judge Silver ruled that if there is a Legitmate Union Purpose that there is no DFR. Ripe or not ripe, LUP means no DFR. It's pretty definitive to everyone but a thievin' westicle. The company only filed for the DJ as a stalling tactic, to drag this thing out while they pocket more money and arrange a merger. They are the real winners here.

Now, let's hear more conspiracy theories about the MOU. The Nic isn't happening. Not now, not ever.

 

[Bill Brasky]

Wow, that's amazing! So a DFR is judged only on whether or not it works to the advantage of the MAJORITY, and meets a wide range of reasonableness. Those stupid westicles are sooooooo screwed!!!!! Why are we offering them DOH. Lets just staple them Bill. Majority rules!

Since stapling won't come under the "wide range of reasonableness", it won't work. The westicles aren't screwed, they just have to pay the same dues as everyone else. The "stupid" part, well you know how I feel about that....

Please stop this foolishness. Now, on to the MOU....

 

[BLT]

Since stapling won't come under the "wide range of reasonableness", it won't work. The westicles aren't screwed, they just have to pay the same dues as everyone else. The "stupid" part, well you know how I feel about that....

I guess I don't understand why we can trash the nic, in favor of DOH, but we can't staple them. In both cases it would be better for the majority. In both cases we are discarding an arbitrated award for one that clearly favors the east pilots at the expense of the west pilots. If DOH is reasonable, why is stapling them unreasonable? And yeah I know how you feel. Trust me.......

 

[Zone5]

So, according to the "Company Lawyer": "Most notable are that the Nic is status quo at LCC per the RLA, and that the company fears liability in the case. It seems he thinks usapa has no LUP for changing the LCC pilot's seniority, whatever the legal definition of a LUP."

You just got to be amazed at "legal logic"! Here is a lawyer, who says USAPA has no LUP, without even being able to DEFINE what a LUP is! Keep in mind also that all this "legal mumbo jumbo" is in reference to circumstances that will be rendered moot, in the event of a merger with AMR. I don't think the company gives a hoot about what AOL wants if the merger is consummated.


seajay

 

[Bill Brasky]

I guess I don't understand why we can trash the nic, in favor of DOH, but we can't staple them. In both cases it would be better for the majority. In both cases we are discarding an arbitrated award for one that clearly favors the east pilots at the expense of the west pilots. If DOH is reasonable, why is stapling them unreasonable? And yeah I know how you feel. Trust me.......

Because DOH or LOS has been ruled to be within a wide range of reasonableness. In fact, It's been called the "gold standard" for seniority integrations. Stapling is the reason that McCaskill-Bond came to be. It isn't fair, never has been. I would never support a straight staple, nor would any other reasonable person.

Your arguments are tired and stupid. Be an adult and make some sense.

 

[Res Judicata]

Because DOH or LOS has been ruled to be within a wide range of reasonableness. In fact, It's been called the "gold standard" for seniority integrations. Stapling is the reason that McCaskill-Bond came to be. It isn't fair, never has been. I would never support a straight staple, nor would any other reasonable person.

Your arguments are tired and stupid. Be an adult and make some sense.

Bill, all of this B.S. was tried before. You're going to court, where once again, AOL is going to kick the s?@t out of your fake union and the scabs that champion its cause. See you in court shortly.

 

[Zone5]

How about we all just stop "what-if-ing" all this old East-West SLI stuff and just wait and see if the merger with AMR comes to pass, because if it does, none of this will even matter. It will have been "overtaken by other events" and be rendered inconsequential.

Yes, in another year or two if the merger happens, once there is a ratified USAPA-APA JCBA, AOL can file all the suits they want, but it won't be anytime soon and the outcome of that effort would be anything but certain.


seajay

 

[Bill Brasky]

Bill, all of this B.S. was tried before. You're going to court, where once again, AOL is going to kick the s?@t out of your fake union and the scabs that champion its cause. See you in court shortly.

You mean like at the Ninth? Or was it at Judge Silver's court? Remember, Judge Wake shouldn't have even heard the case in the first place. See you in court. You're going to lose again, just like everyone except your high-priced lawyers keep telling you.

I concur with the sentiment about waiting for the merger. Then, it will be so obviously gone that even the westies won't be able to deny it.

 

[BLT]

Because DOH or LOS has been ruled to be within a wide range of reasonableness. In fact, It's been called the "gold standard" for seniority integrations. Stapling is the reason that McCaskill-Bond came to be. It isn't fair, never has been. I would never support a straight staple, nor would any other reasonable person.

Your arguments are tired and stupid. Be an adult and make some sense.

To sum up our position then, we would state the following to a judge or future arbitrator (whose highly esteemed colleague we have repeatedly disrespected). "DOH or LOS are fair. Staple is not fair. Because DOH is the "gold standard" for seniority integrations. Thank you, we rest our case." Well, I don't think we have anything to worry about then.

 

[Pi brat]

Maybe we've been googling the wrong term. I tried legitimate union objective and got this http://www.nrtwc.org/nl/nl201201.pdf.

How hard can it be? ;-)

 

[CallawayGolf]

There WAS a definitive ruling. It was that there is NO DFR until there is a ratified contract. Also, Judge Silver ruled that if there is a Legitmate Union Purpose that there is no DFR. Ripe or not ripe, LUP means no DFR. It's pretty definitive to everyone but a thievin' westicle. The company only filed for the DJ as a stalling tactic, to drag this thing out while they pocket more money and arrange a merger. They are the real winners here.

Now, let's hear more conspiracy theories about the MOU. The Nic isn't happening. Not now, not ever.

So what does the NMB have to say about the negotiating process subsequent to Silver's ruling? Have negotiations been unparked because the definitive ruling from the Ninth or Silver now makes closing out Section 22 possible with USAPA's non-NIC approach? If the Company is only doing this for a delay as you say, the NMB would certainly be able to send the parties back to the table or tell them to prepare for self-help, right? Seems to me that the Company, who is neutral on the SLI, the NMB, the west pilots at a minimum do not see things as you proclaim. So the real question is why does USAPA and east pilots like you stand alone in their interpretation on these federal court rulings?