Judge Upholds Airline Unionization Rule Change

[dapoes]

Did you read your link? What does SCOTUS deciding that the NLRB should have a minimum of three members before hearing cases have to do with the voting rules change at the NMB?

What ever your throwing at the wall, it's not sticking.

Let's look at the last 8 months:

Voting Rules are proposed *
Comment Period*
NMB publishes FInal Rule on the May10th edition of the Federal Register*
June 10th change pushed back to the 30th of June*
Court denying ATA the Motion for Discovery*
Court denying the ATA an Injunction/Summary Judgement*

vs.

"I'm willing to wait for however long it takes. Even if DAL doesn't contest and the ATA finds its way to the SCOTUS."
"The VOTE NO csmpaign will be in full swing"
"It is some who think after all this time that somehow this change is going to affect the outcome of the election."

Talk about reeking of desperation and instability.

Let me repeat this again and I urge you to read it slowly due to your obvious lack of comprehension...

You missed the point all together and didn't understand the relevance of the article it. Just because decisions was made and enforced by an entity (NLRB) an issue was pushed to the SCOTUS to effectively negate 600 decisions that were made from the NRLB.

So again, even if DAL doesn't contest and the ATA appeals the NMB ruling and finds its way to the SCOTUS....and succeeds, the vote could be invalidated altogether. NMB doesn't trump SCOTUS.

 

[goodgirl37]

Let me repeat this again and I urge you to read it slowly due to your obvious lack of comprehension...

You missed the point all together and didn't understand the relevance of the article it. Just because decisions was made and enforced by an entity (NLRB) an issue was pushed to the SCOTUS to effectively negate 600 decisions that were made from the NRLB.

So again, even if DAL doesn't contest and the ATA appeals the NMB ruling and finds its way to the SCOTUS....and succeeds, the vote could be invalidated altogether. NMB doesn't trump SCOTUS.

forget it Dapoes, its over. Keep your DVD as a reminder of what was.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

Let me repeat this again and I urge you to read it slowly due to your obvious lack of comprehension...

You missed the point all together and didn't understand the relevance of the article it. Just because decisions was made and enforced by an entity (NLRB) an issue was pushed to the SCOTUS to effectively negate 600 decisions that were made from the NRLB.

So again, even if DAL doesn't contest and the ATA appeals the NMB ruling and finds its way to the SCOTUS....and succeeds, the vote could be invalidated altogether. NMB doesn't trump SCOTUS.

This NLRB issue, as well as others being discussed here, was brought forth in Judge Friedman's Summary.
I would suggest that you take the time to read the 30 pages before going on in this vain.
And it does sound like you are all over the map, dapoes. In your mind, representation will be defeated at Delta..either by more NOs than Yesses, or an appeal being heard by SCOTUS (I seriously doubt this will happen.)
The things is, the majority of your predictions/rants have been squelched this past year.....none of them coming to fruition.
I would have to agree with the last poster. If you are unable to move on, the best thing for you to do is dig out your old Sharon Wibben anti-AFA DVD, put on your flannel nightgown and grab a quart of ice cream. (Delta mgt appears to have moved on, why can't you?)

 

[dapoes]

This NLRB issue, as well as others being discussed here, was brought forth in Judge Friedman's Summary.
I would suggest that you take the time to read the 30 pages before going on in this vain.

The previous 2 SCOTUS decisions where not with the NLRB, rather the NMB yourself.

In your mind, representation will be defeated at Delta.

Yes basically that is my assumption.

Don't wet your knickers just yet. DAL doesn't have to do anything if and when the ATA files the appeal. The ball will be thrown back into the unions court to see if they want to waste money on an election knowing the issue will land in the lap of the SCOTUS. And say there was a remote chance (very very remote) that the union is voted in and the SCOTUS strikes down judge Friedman's ruling, the vote will be invalidated and the vote will need to be recast using the original voting methods.

 

[WoRkInG]

The previous 2 SCOTUS decisions where not with the NLRB, rather the NMB yourself.


Yes basically that is my assumption.

Don't wet your knickers just yet. DAL doesn't have to do anything if and when the ATA files the appeal. The ball will be thrown back into the unions court to see if they want to waste money on an election knowing the issue will land in the lap of the SCOTUS. And say there was a remote chance (very very remote) that the union is voted in and the SCOTUS strikes down judge Friedman's ruling, the vote will be invalidated and the vote will need to be recast using the original voting methods.

"Dapoes" The deciding factor is if I vote "yes" or "no", right? I don't care how I vote as long as I can vote!!! Both styles of voting still ends the same.... MAJORITY!!! I actually like the voting rules because it puts more responsibility in my hands to get up and vote yea or nay. I wouldn't want my "yes" vote to be neutralized by someone who don't have to move a muscle to put in a "no" vote. NO ACTION=A "NO" VOTE, SIGNING A CARD/ GET ON A COMPUTER TO VOTE= "YES"? Naaa.... Im Loving the new way of voting.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

The previous 2 SCOTUS decisions where not with the NLRB, rather the NMB yourself.

Never said they were. YOU brought up the comparison (and provided the link) that related to the striking down by the SCOTUS of all the NLRB decisions that were made.
All I can say is that is apparent to me that you (still) have NOT read Judge Friedman's 30-page Summary Judgement.

 

[dapoes]

Never said they were. YOU brought up the comparison (and provided the link) that related to the striking down by the SCOTUS of all the NLRB decisions that were made.
All I can say is that is apparent to me that you (still) have NOT read Judge Friedman's 30-page Summary Judgement.

No you and the others are so giddy over the ruling you are mixing two different arguments. Go figure.

Like I said before....sit back and relax.....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100630/ap_on_bi_ge/us_delta_annual_meeting_5;_ylt=AiALOZaO1pYX9yYQsXTVlSaRP5Z4
NEW YORK – Delta Air Lines CEO Richard Anderson said Wednesday his company "is ready to move on" with union elections that are expected to follow an impending rule change.

But the company said it will stand with the Air Transport Association, a trade group representing major airlines, if it decides to appeal the ruling that would make it easier for workers to unionize.

 

[LukeAisleWalker]

No you and the others are so giddy over the ruling you are mixing two different arguments. Go figure.

Like I said before....sit back and relax.....

OK, for the sake of this "debate", I see what you are trying to get across..mainly that a HYPOTHETICAL ( remember, two things have to occur for this: 1. SCOTUS must decide to take the case. 2. SCOTUS must overturn Friedman's ruling in favor of ATA) final ruling by the SCOTUS in favor of ATA could invalidate what transpires between this upcoming election (should AFA win) and this hypothetical ruling by SCOTUS. Ok, I will throw you that bone.
However, when you mention SCOTUS has upheld the 75-year old interpretation of the NMB rule (majority of all eligible voters) twice, which two cases are you citing? If one is Virginia Railway (1937), Judge Friedman addresses this in his summary judgement. Again, I ask you two things:
1. Have you read the summary judgement issued day before yesterday?
2. Please refresh us as to the two previous SCOTUS decisions upholding the old interpretation/rule.

 

[WoRkInG]

The previous 2 SCOTUS decisions where not with the NLRB, rather the NMB yourself.


Yes basically that is my assumption.

Don't wet your knickers just yet. DAL doesn't have to do anything if and when the ATA files the appeal. The ball will be thrown back into the unions court to see if they want to waste money on an election knowing the issue will land in the lap of the SCOTUS. And say there was a remote chance (very very remote) that the union is voted in and the SCOTUS strikes down judge Friedman's ruling, the vote will be invalidated and the vote will need to be recast using the original voting methods.

How in the world a person with a union gonna tell me not to have a union. What I am getting at is the fact richard anderson is a member/board director for the ATA. To become a member you have to pay dues/membership fees. With that said, the ATA will work for you in the best interest of you/ceo. the ata members are in fact a collective group that consist of c.e.o.'s in the airline/freight industry. Also 6 out of the 11 senior exec have law degrees so its safe to say they know 1 or 2 things about contracts and they fighting to keep others from having one? "Dapoes" you and the ATA just reinsured me to vote "yes". Thanks!