Dec 2012 / Jan 2013 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[nic4us]

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.

Wrong again pea brain.

Go read the 9ths ruling. It specifically says that they do not hold that a DFR is never ripe until the policy is effectuated.

The company filed the DJ because they are on the hook with your scab union.

Go ahead, attempt to RE-negotiate an already accepted legal list. Uscaba won't get past square one at the negotiating table from which they would shortly be dismissed.

 

[dca319]

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.

And what if its not gone? Will we be able to accept it?

 

[nic4us]

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.

The wake up call coming your way will probably send you over the edge.

Here is a clue for ya, a merger, the MOU, all of it, just does not change the fact that the Nic is our list.

I suggest that rather than seeking to find what constitutes a LUP, you look into what is meant by "binding" and "res judicatory" and "collateral estoppel".

 

[nic4us]

And what if its not gone? Will we be able to accept it?

Accept it? Guys like Bill, Swan, EofA, do not even understand it!

 

[cleardirect]

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.

When the facts are presented to a jury which side do you think will prevail?

A list that was done under oath, in front of a neutral arbitrator that keeps everyone in their relative postion?

Or a list that did not prevail at arbitration that advances every single east pilot ahead of every single west pilot?

Is that a reasonable list?

Using DOH you take a west captain and place a furloughed pilot senior to him. You take all of the east F/O's place them senior to most of the west captain and all of the west F/O's. therefore changing a west F/O's career expectation from upgrading to never upgrading. In exchange for a furloughed pilot that had no expectation of being recalled to upgrading and being senior to a line holding west captain.

Good luck making that case.

 

[Bill Brasky]

The wake up call coming your way will probably send you over the edge.

Here is a clue for ya, a merger, the MOU, all of it, just does not change the fact that the Nic is our list.

I suggest that rather than seeking to find what constitutes a LUP, you look into what is meant by "binding" and "res judicatory" and "collateral estoppel".

Nope.

 

[nevergiveup]

When the facts are presented to a jury which side do you think will prevail?

A list that was done under oath, in front of a neutral arbitrator that keeps everyone in their relative postion?

Or a list that did not prevail at arbitration that advances every single east pilot ahead of every single west pilot?

Is that a reasonable list?

A list that cannot be legally used? A list the ninth said would probably never allow us to get a contract? A list that has dragged down the entire pilot group for how many years? It's time to move forward.

 

[Bill Brasky]

When the facts are presented to a jury which side do you think will prevail?

A list that was done under oath, in front of a neutral arbitrator that keeps everyone in their relative postion?

Or a list that did not prevail at arbitration that advances every single east pilot ahead of every single west pilot?

Is that a reasonable list?

Using DOH you take a west captain and place a furloughed pilot senior to him. You take all of the east F/O's place them senior to most of the west captain and all of the west F/O's. therefore changing a west F/O's career expectation from upgrading to never upgrading. In exchange for a furloughed pilot that had no expectation of being recalled to upgrading and being senior to a line holding west captain.

Good luck making that case.

I know which side will. The side with a case. That would be USAPA. You guys will lose. Period.

 

[cleardirect]

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.

Was it reasonable to deny arbitration and keep EVERY pilot on low wages?

What was the advantage to of advancing EVERY east pilot and harming EVERY west pilot?

Read up on union responsibility. Unions can not advantage one group over another. Unless you think the APA can determine the seniority all on their own. That would advantage the majority. that would be a wide range of reasonableness at least in their opinion.

 

[cleardirect]

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....

But in your world DOH placing hundreds of east furloughed pilots senior to west captains is reasonable? That in most circles would be considered a staple.

Go back and read the labor principles letter from Parker. Learn what he think is reasonable.

 

[traderjake]

Unofficial report:

The Recall of the CLT Reps failed.

 

[cleardirect]

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.

If DOH/LOs is within a wide range of reasonableness why have all seniority integrations not been DOH/LOS?
If DOH is the "gold standard" why have all seniority integrations not gone DOH? Not much of a standard if it can't be counted on.

Sometime DOH has been determined to be within a wide range of reasonableness. That has not been determined in this case. The ninth said nothing about the merits of our case. As Nicolau said each case turns on it's own facts. In one case DOH may be reasonable. In our case DOH was not. Just like staple is not reasonable put you think that placing hundreds of furloughed pilots senior to west captains and placing every east F/O senior to every west F/O is reasonable. Not in this life time.

 

[dca319]

Unofficial report:

The Recall of the CLT Reps failed.

You'll see a challenge coming up because of the actions of the PIC.

 

[luvthe9]

Unofficial report:

The Recall of the CLT Reps failed.

Naaah, It's official YOU LOSE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a bunch of idiots that voted to recall the boys that got them MORE money.

 

[dca319]

A list that cannot be legally used? A list the ninth said would probably never allow us to get a contract? A list that has dragged down the entire pilot group for how many years? It's time to move forward.

There's nothing illegal about using the Nicolau. That's a ridiculous presumption that our own lawyer doesn't even support.