What's new

Nov/Dec 2013 Pilot Discussion

Status
Not open for further replies.
Hope everyone gets to where and with whom they want to be today. I've had my fill of Boreas. CLT-DFW-PHL-ORD and PHX-CLT to go. I hate when you end up wearing your beverage 🙂

Happy Thanksgiving.

I'll bet there were a lot of pax "barking for sharks". It sure was nice sitting in the easy chair watching the fireplace!!! It did get kind of breezy though when I opened the door to get more firewood but no turbulence in the easy chair.

Happy Thanksgiving to you,

Bob

'84
 
I asked Szymanski last week if all submissions were done and he answered yes. He also said that Silver could issue a ruling at any time. And yet, these filings keep trickling in. I don't know if that delays her ruling or not.

I also asked if the LUP was a turn of phrase concocted by Silver, or if it was an established and recognized concept under the RLA. He said it was the latter. However, he also stressed the concept of 'wide range of reasonableness' in this case and the requirement that unless a union acts in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner then it is acting in accordance with its LUP.

I think that the MOU and all of its provisions falls well within a WRR and complies with the union's requirement for a LUP.

'84
 
767one said:
Hope everyone gets to where and with whom they want to be today. I've had my fill of Boreas. CLT-DFW-PHL-ORD and PHX-CLT to go. I hate when you end up wearing your beverage 🙂

Happy Thanksgiving.

I'll bet there were a lot of pax "barking for sharks". It sure was nice sitting in the easy chair watching the fireplace!!! It did get kind of breezy though when I opened the door to get more firewood but no turbulence in the easy chair.

Happy Thanksgiving to you,

Bob

'84
We got to DFW just after the storm passed and to PHL the next day just before it arrived. Encountered more than a few crews who were rerouted, delayed or cancelled. Our last leg to CLT cancelled as well, so we deadheaded back and arrived an hour early. I was expecting worse. Good trip, good equipment, good crew but lousy rides. Someone asked me if we changed our uniform shirt color to coffee tone🙂

Have a great holiday.

'84

"Black Friday, the day people trample each other in order to get things when just the day before they gave thanks for already having the things they need."
 
Piedmont1984 said:
"Black Friday, the day people trample each other in order to get things when just the day before they gave thanks for already having the things they need."
 
Great quote.
 
Thank God on Thursday; worship mammon on Friday.  As a society (theoretically overrun with Christians), we are so totally screwed up about these things.  I doubt Jesus would be amused.
 
Res Judicata said:
The LUP for not including the nic in the MOU was sure as hell on trial. My lawyer wants to hide behind 10h but refused to testify. Silver will have to piece together what that means...as if there were any mystery.
The defendant is presumed innocent unless the plaintiff proves guilt, despite Marty's plea to subvert 100s of years of precedent. If a judge assumes the authority to change a contract, without stating her Legitimate Judge Purpose (LJP 😀 ), she is by definition guilty, and her meddling won't endure.

Happy Thanksgiving!
 
Piedmont1984 said:
I asked Szymanski last week if all submissions were done and he answered yes. He also said that Silver could issue a ruling at any time. And yet, these filings keep trickling in. I don't know if that delays her ruling or not.

I also asked if the LUP was a turn of phrase concocted by Silver, or if it was an established and recognized concept under the RLA. He said it was the latter. However, he also stressed the concept of 'wide range of reasonableness' in this case and the requirement that unless a union acts in an arbitrary and discriminatory manner then it is acting in accordance with its LUP.

I think that the MOU and all of its provisions falls well within a WRR and complies with the union's requirement for a LUP.

'84
Silver suggested a LUP to Harper in one of the early trials.
 
Pi brat said:
 
And this, ladies and gentlemen, is a perfect example of what a community college education gets you: the inability to read.  
Click on the above link and see for yourselves- it is interesting, to say the least, but 100% irrelevant to USAPA and the situation the greedy east pilots have put us in.  
"Wide range of reasonableness"  where does that term first come from?  Rakestraw, which is a case dealing with a strike and replacement pilots.  Does that apply here?  Even a community college graduate like PIB can answer that.
The link above deals with racketeering.  Does that apply to us?  Even a community college attendee like PIB can figure that out.  From the link our community college graduate posted:
 
Actually, the ‘sabotage’ to the substation was described in the Enmons decision as the“firing high-powered rifles at three Company transformers, draining the oil from a Company transformer, and blowing up a transformer substation owned by the Company.” However, since it was done during a lawful strike, it did not fall under the Court’s definition of extortion under the Hobbs Act.
 
 
If you really want to look at a relevant case to ours take a peek at Bernard v ALPA.   Here is that case summary:
 
 
 
Bernard sued on behalf of himself and the other Jet America pilots alleging that ALPA had breached its duty of fair representation by: (1) excluding them from all negotiations for an agreement integrating the seniority lists of the two pilot groups; (2) entering into an agreement that discriminated against them in favor of the pre-merger Alaska pilots; and (3) failing to afford them the benefits of ALPA's own merger policy. Bernard then moved for summary judgment or, in the alternative, preliminary injunctive relief setting aside the October 6 agreement pending a trial.
 
http://www.leagle.com/decision/19891086873F2d213_11026
 
So, ALPA got a DFR from a pilot group that they excluded in the formation of a combined seniority list.  Injunction filed and guess what?  Arbitration and seniority integration.  

Now, with us, we have already been to arbitration.  All we are (were) waiting on is (was) a combined contract.  Well, we have that.  10h was placed in there simply to disadvantage the west.  Can you say RIPE?
 
It's the beginning of the final chapter for you easties.  The hysteria is getting comical, PIB's reference above was hilarious (irrelevant to arguing LUP but relevant in demonstrating the east desperation around here).
 
nycbusdriver said:
 
Great quote.
 
Thank God on Thursday; worship mammon on Friday.  As a society (theoretically overrun with Christians), we are so totally screwed up about these things.  I doubt Jesus would be amused.
 
Overrun by Christians?
 
Corinthians 15:33

Do not be deceived: “Bad company ruins good morals."
 
 
 
767one said:
Nope, and I don't think we would have particularly if alpa had given us a vote on the pension and we had voted not to give it away. Doug and friends saw value in an operating bankrupt airline and did not want to see it shut down. There may well have been others waiting for the opportunity but they did not want to openly show interest and show their hand.Hapy turkey day,Bob
Happy Thanksgiving to all of you.
No, USAirways was not going to liquidate. There is no way the leaseholders on all the jets, engines, gates, ground equipment, offices were going to not negotiate to keep the cash flowing. Especially as they were also facing the possibility of other airline bankruptcies as well as a general business climate that was deteriorating. GE Capital was facing an unprecedented financial calamity. They owned hundred of jets flying for distressed carriers. They were more than willing to re do the terms, and history bears that out. A jet flying for less money and power by the hour were way more beneficial than the alternative- no revenue and fees for parking in a desert.
The West has floated this defunct theory for years, and nobody is buying it.
 
BS^^^^^^^^^^^^

AA will take care of what should have happened in 2005

US Airways may have to liquidate without pay cut
ALEXANDRIA, Va. (AP) US Airways Group warned in a bankruptcy court filing that it may have to liquidate by February if a judge does not impose a temporary 23% pay cut on its union workers.
The airline asked a judge on Friday to impose the pay cuts by Oct. 14 at the latest. On Monday, U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Stephen Mitchell scheduled an Oct. 7 hearing on the issue.

Without the reductions, the airline's cash reserves will dip so low by February that its lenders will likely withdraw the financing that has allowed the company to operate while in bankruptcy.

Airways) cannot accumulate cash during the next five months ... there is a high probability that they will suffer irreparable harm to their asset base and ongoing business, resulting in material downsizing, massive layoffs and potential liquidation by mid-February 2005," the airline's lawyers wrote in their motion seeking the emergency cuts

http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2004-09-27-us-air_x.htm
 
The new national motto and the motto of this discussion: "What difference does it make!?"
 
nevergiveup said:
Too much food.....better go check my neck size!
I'm waiting for the FAA to impose a 12-hour rule after a turkey dinner due to tryptophan induced coma.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top