June - US Pilots Labor Discussion

[Black Swan]

Because USAPA has been parked by the NMB and there is no JCBA which is what triggers that implementation of the arbitrated seniority list. Given the choice between running separate ops with the east pilots on bankruptcy wages and having the NMB release the parties to self help, I'm sure Management prefers to have USAPA parked and enjoined rather than entering a period of self-help.

Let's ask the reverse. If the award is not binding on USAPA, why haven't they closed out S22 and put a TA out for a vote after four years? If the award isn't binding then why didn't Silver grant USAPA's request for their motion to dismiss?

S22 is an issue between the COMPANY and USAPA, not an agreement between USAPA and its' members. You failed to answer the issue I asked. The LOA 93 decision came out when USAPA was "parked" and it was final and binding. DId the LOA 93 decision require a joint contract as you state to make it final and binding? Absolutely not. So did other arbitrated awards. The East has had many arbitrations as has the west during the period of non joint contract, and every one stuck. Every one. Except the big one. The Silver grant has the same weight as Judge Wake. None. I don't know why she didn't. You will have to ask her. I guarantee she cannot decide this and neither can Parker. They all know it. One more time. Why did EVERY other arbitration during this time period become final and binding, and the Nic. did not? And when does not having a JCBA stop the priors? (which were implemented to the one.....)

 

[Black Swan]

But am I as far off as when you claimed that LOA 93 was a winner for the east, or when you claimed that the company was "days away" from selling of the west operation, or when you claimed that Management wouldn't prevail in the status quo violation some east pilots had clearly engaged in? With such a track record of being wrong, one has to wonder why you feel you suddenly got this one right.

Simple Callaway, I was wrong............

 

[Move2CLT]

Will someone who takes the side the Nicolau Award is final and binding please answer this: If it is binding, why has it not been implemented and other arbitrations that involved the company and USAPA were arbitrated and then awarded with the binding caveat? Ex: LOA 93. Why was that binding? Why is the Nicolau still being contested, and why was it not locked in immediately on the day the decision came out?

You should have figured it out by now as it has been discussed numerous times.

Either go back and research the answer or leave the board.

 

[Move2CLT]

Simple Callaway, I was wrong............

But let me guess - the Nic is dead for sure. You were wrong about everything else except this.

 

[Black Swan]

I never did say I felt he would sell the West. I was obviously wrong on LOA 93. I do feel Parker was truly seeking a merge a while back with Alaska and others. We shall find out in the end if he tells the story. I feel he was looking at a lot of options for a long time. My question is still, why is the Nic still out there, in dispute and supposedly binding, and all the other bindings lived up to that and got locked down immediately?

 

[Black Swan]

You should have figured it out by now as it has been discussed numerous times.

Either go back and research the answer or leave the board.

Go away. I really give you no credence other than most likely being some stupid intern with too much time on her hands......

 

[Black Swan]

You should have figured it out by now as it has been discussed numerous times.

Either go back and research the answer or leave the board.

Give me an answer then smartie. Let's see what you have in you other than too much time on your hands.

 

[CallawayGolf]

If binding arbitrations are always implemented the day they are awarded the why was the NIC not implemented on May 1, 2007? ALPA was still the bargaining agent at the time so according to your logic all pilots should have been using their NIC seniority number on May 2nd right? It doesn't work that way and it wasn't intended to. That's why it was called a Transition Agreement.

 

[Phoenix]

Will someone who takes the side the Nicolau Award is final and binding please answer this: If it is binding, why has it not been implemented and other arbitrations that involved the company and USAPA were arbitrated and then awarded with the binding caveat? Ex: LOA 93. Why was that binding? Why is the Nicolau still being contested, and why was it not locked in immediately on the day the decision came out?

The 9th removed the injunction that made it binding. Apart from that injunction, it was/is not binding, as is abundantly obvious. Why else are people hoping for a new injunction?

 

[nic4us]

Callaway, there is no ACCEPTING here. The LOA 93 decision came out, and immediately the decision was hallmarked, and accepted by both sides as binding. Why would the company and USAPA immediately accept as final and binding EVERY OTHER DECISION that was arbitrated, yet does not come out and implement the Nicolau that day seven years ago? The answer is the decision was between the union and it's own members, as opposed to a decision between an employer and it's employees as BOUND BY THE CBA. It is that simple. You are WAY off on this one.

Calloway is right on the money and you are off in fantasy land.

First, the LOA93 arbitration was final and binding, yet the scab union looked into means to vacate in federal court. That is how it works. However, usapa had no prayer to get that award overturned, they did not even have a snowballs chance of winning the disingenuous persuit that was nothing more than another means to scab their way out of the Nic.

Also, the Nic is not between "the union and its own members". The Nic is between the membership of the union. That is a huge difference than between the union and the company, not because the arbitration is any more or less final and binding, but because when it is between the company and the union, either side has immediate remedy....???? Well sort of, it took close to three years and the West has still not been paid for the TA-10 min block grievence the scabs put on the back burner while in persuit of their pie in the sky LOA93 arbitration.

In short Swan......you are an idiot if you think the NIc is going away...at LCC or in an LCC/AMR merger.

 

[nic4us]

I never did say I felt he would sell the West. I was obviously wrong on LOA 93. I do feel Parker was truly seeking a merge a while back with Alaska and others. We shall find out in the end if he tells the story. I feel he was looking at a lot of options for a long time. My question is still, why is the Nic still out there, in dispute and supposedly binding, and all the other bindings lived up to that and got locked down immediately?

again...where is my TA-10 settlement???? It has been 4 years since the company violation, it has been 3 years since the West won the grievence? Where is my money???

Swan you are so far off base it is easy to pick you off trying to steal.

Oh, and the NIc is between you and me, and I am no longer in the mood to let you off the hook.

 

[Black Swan]

If binding arbitrations are always implemented the day they are awarded the why was the NIC not implemented on May 1, 2007? ALPA was still the bargaining agent at the time so according to your logic all pilots should have been using their NIC seniority number on May 2nd right? It doesn't work that way and it wasn't intended to. That's why it was called a Transition Agreement.

I appreciate your return. The Nic decision was rendered, and the decision was given to ALPA, not the company. As it should have been as it was a decision that was in reference to a dispute or issue within ALPA, not ALPA and the Company. This was never a dispute between the company and pilots, but a dispute between pilots and pilots. And immediately, there was issue from the East pilots, that it did not follow ALPA merger policy. So the dispute was not with the company over the way THEY wanted to order seniority but with the organization that represented the pilots of the same company. The East pilots then contested the award as being out of the parameters of ALPA merger policy, and hence the Wye River session as a last ditch attempt to circumvent what was now brewing- an East revolt stating ALPA merger policy not being followed. ALPA clearly recognized the threat of the loss of the USAirways Pilots in whole over this dispute. Obviously, it was not binding if the pilots defected, not binding even staying in ALPA as Wye River established. IF it were binding, why Wye River? Why not just tell the East pilots to accept the list? Why the warning from Freund "All the risk lies with the West.......?" Freund clearly recognized the defection was coming, and the list was NOT binding. He was warning the West reps to compromise, or risk losing the award in entirety. Either way, the defection and formation of USAPA clearly allowed USAPA to order seniority as they internally chose, and to submit it. That, has been done. All before a joint contract. USAPA is not beholden to the agreement of ALPA. USAPA is liable for harm, if it can be proved, but is not beholden to the Nicolau.

 

[Black Swan]

again...where is my TA-10 settlement???? It has been 4 years since the company violation, it has been 3 years since the West won the grievence? Where is my money???

Swan you are so far off base it is easy to pick you off trying to steal.

Oh, and the NIc is between you and me, and I am no longer in the mood to let you off the hook.


If you are not letting me "off the hook" then why haven't you collected your prize in SEVEN years? That, my friend, is more than ample time.

 

[Black Swan]

Sorry, I quoted in your box. What I am saying is, if you are not "letting me off the hook" fine, just why has the hook, not been set? Seven years later!

 

[EastCheats]

Calloway is right on the money and you are off in fantasy land.

First, the LOA93 arbitration was final and binding, yet the scab union looked into means to vacate in federal court. That is how it works. However, usapa had no prayer to get that award overturned, they did not even have a snowballs chance of winning the disingenuous persuit that was nothing more than another means to scab their way out of the Nic.

Also, the Nic is not between "the union and its own members". The Nic is between the membership of the union. That is a huge difference than between the union and the company, not because the arbitration is any more or less final and binding, but because when it is between the company and the union, either side has immediate remedy....???? Well sort of, it took close to three years and the West has still not been paid for the TA-10 min block grievence the scabs put on the back burner while in persuit of their pie in the sky LOA93 arbitration.

In short Swan......you are an idiot if you think the NIc is going away...at LCC or in an LCC/AMR merger.

They are fine with cashing our dues checks and the TA-10 fiasco is a perfect example of the incompetence of this union. If any union was a poster child for one that needs oversight from an actual union is this one. It's one misstep after another with this group and totally unprepared for what lies ahead.