Machinists Union Filed Today 2/17

[zonecontroller]

Dear Sisters and Brothers,

The Machinists Union today filed a request for the full Third Circuit Court of Appeals to rule on whether US Airways’ subcontracting of Airbus heavy maintenance triggered a major dispute under the Railway Labor Act. A three-member panel recently split 2-1 in deciding that the dispute was minor and should be resolved by a System Board of Adjustment. Two judges ruled that the injunction issued by the District Court prohibiting heavy maintenance subcontracting should be lifted, with the third judge dissenting.

The IAM is asking the full thirteen-member Circuit Court to uphold the District Court’s injunction preventing the carrier from subcontracting Airbus heavy maintenance and affirm that US Airways instigated a major dispute based on the collective bargaining agreement, bargaining history and past practice.

The full Appeals Court will determine the status of the injunction in response to the IAM’s petition.

Today’s IAM filing is available by Clicking Here.

We will advise the membership as we receive information from the Circuit Court.

Sincerely and fraternally,


Scotty Ford
President/Directing General Chairman
IAM District Lodge 141M

Webpage [URL="http://www.iam141m.org/usairway.htm"]http://www.iam141m.org/usairway.htm[/URL]

 

[aerosmith]

If violating our scope isn't a major dispute what could possibly be ruled major. Any idea's what the 3rd circuit is thinking?

 

[A320 Driver]

Just curious, but can the court refuse to hear the case or is a review manditory? The fact that the decision was split tells me there must be enough wiggle room to warrant a review by the full court...but I'm no lawyer either. In any case, my hope is the court will force IAM and U to iron out these problems. Based on what I've read on these boards, there is no reason on earth why our mechanics can't do this job in house and unquestionably better than a third party.

Good luck.

A320 Driver B)

 

[AOG-N-IT]

Just curious, but can the court refuse to hear the case or is a review manditory? The fact that the decision was split tells me there must be enough wiggle room to warrant a review by the full court...but I'm no lawyer either. In any case, my hope is the court will force IAM and U to iron out these problems. Based on what I've read on these boards, there is no reason on earth why our mechanics can't do this job in house and unquestionably better than a third party.

Good luck.

A320 Driver B)

A320driver,

It is my clear understanding that the 13 judge panel is obligated to review this appeal..yet nothing but nothing says a formal judgement has to come from them.

I'm also informed , as are many of the IAM members...that all it takes for the current ruling to stand...and a "Minor Dispute" arbitraition process to go forward as currently ruled , is for 1 Judge out of the 13 sitting on this case to refuse to re-hear the case.

I agree with fellow board member Aerosmith on this. If 54 years of standing history and binding agreements can be brushed asside on a whim? Just what in the hell constitutes a "major dispute" in realistic terms? I'm sure the difference lays between those whom are most connected and influenced instead of representing those whom are most grieviously impacted...and are less able to absorb the impact of such rulings.

Todays form of justice never seems to never cease to amaze me. Those with the money , power and influence can get away with most anything with no fear of consequences. Those lacking money , power and influence seem to feel the entire weight of judgement when they cross a certain line.

IMHO..Money tends to buy justice. The old clich'e says that "Justice is Blind"..maybe it is? But I'm equally willing to believe that justice can count ,feel ,smell ,taste and hear the sound of crisp bills being waved under it's nose. This is one case where Right as to win over Might...too many including those whom we serve have something hanging in the balance otherwise.

 

[ITRADE]

Uh no.

If it was a petition for the full court to rehear the case, its a petition - not a right.

The full circuit can accept the petition to rehear or it can deny the petition to rehear.

I have to call bull#### on your assessment of the judicial system. Federal appellate judges are held in very, very high esteem and it demonstrates a clear lack of understanding on your part to think otherwise.

Money does NOT talk at the federal appellate level.

 

[ringmaruf]

ITRADE-

Do you think that Midge is going to recuse herself? (Or any of the other judges, for that matter.)

I have no doubts that she'd be totally fair and impartial, but there's the whole avoiding even the appearance of impropriety thing.

 

[ITRADE]

ITRADE-

Do you think that Midge is going to recuse herself? (Or any of the other judges, for that matter.)

I have no doubts that she'd be totally fair and impartial, but there's the whole avoiding even the appearance of impropriety thing.

By Midge, I'm assuming you're referring to Judge Rendell.

I'm not sure if there has even been discussion of it to any great extent other than the normal "which way do ya think he {she} will vote" banter.

If US feels that there is any prejudice whatsoever, they may motion to recuse. And, as a course of judicial propriety, judges almost always honor the motion.

 

[ITRADE]

BTW, for a motion for rehearing en banc to be granted, a majority of the active judges in the circuit must vote to rehear.

 

[tim]

BTW, for a motion for rehearing en banc to be granted, a majority of the active judges in the circuit must vote to rehear.

And they will, I assure you.

 

[ITRADE]

And they will, I assure you.

Don't be so smug.

Motions for rehearing en banc are rarely, rarely granted. My group has been involved in four cases in the past two years where a party has requested a rehearing en banc. The circuit court denied the motion in each instance.

 

[tim]

Don't be so smug.

Motions for rehearing en banc are rarely, rarely granted. My group has been involved in four cases in the past two years where a party has requested a rehearing en banc. The circuit court denied the motion in each instance.

Mark My Words


Smug...you invented the term.

 

[ITRADE]

Don't be so smug.

Motions for rehearing en banc are rarely, rarely granted. My group has been involved in four cases in the past two years where a party has requested a rehearing en banc. The circuit court denied the motion in each instance.

Mark My Words


Smug...you invented the term.

This is your legal opinion, of course...

 

[delldude]

ITRADE-

Do you think that Midge is going to recuse herself? (Or any of the other judges, for that matter.)

I have no doubts that she'd be totally fair and impartial, but there's the whole avoiding even the appearance of impropriety thing.

By Midge, I'm assuming you're referring to Judge Rendell.

I'm not sure if there has even been discussion of it to any great extent other than the normal "which way do ya think he {she} will vote" banter.

If US feels that there is any prejudice whatsoever, they may motion to recuse. And, as a course of judicial propriety, judges almost always honor the motion.

can't be anymore serious than scalia popping birds with cheney....

 

[zonecontroller]

It is my understanding that the third party work will continue in Alabama
on 02/19. I understand that we currently have IAM instructors there.

Can third party work the Airbus A/C during the appeal process?


This is what the IAM said in there letter.
The full Appeals Court will determine the status of the injunction in response to the IAM’s petition.

 

[cavalier]

It is my understanding that the third party work will continue in Alabama
on 02/19. I understand that we currently have IAM instructors there.

Can third party work the Airbus A/C during the appeal process?


This is what the IAM said in there letter.
The full Appeals Court will determine the status of the injunction in response to the IAM’s petition.

My understanding is that work can continue because the injunction was lifted. while the Circuit Court decides whether the entire panel will re-hear the case.

Now I'm sure the self appointed Oracle of Knowledge. 700UW will pounce on me for some real or imagined "FACT" that I got "WRONG" and of course we KNOW that the IAM is infallible!

Just witness the fact hat of the 6 major carriers EXACTLY ONE is still represented by the Scotty and Tom, The twin millionaires of the common man.

With help like the IAM you'll all be bankrupt, US and all it's emoloyees. Haven't you had all of the "HELP" you can stand?

Bob you're probably right, ALTHOUGH, the union put out an inner note saying otherwise it looks like it's being done anyway. If anyone jumps on you it's over that inner note which probably isn't gospel.


I will not bash the IAM no matter what, it's all we have for better or for worse. At least they are making a stand on our behalf whether it's self serving or otherwise. I personally don't agree with this national thing where someone far removed determines my destiny, but again, it's what's in place so I live with it.