Nov/Dec 2013 Pilot Discussion

[Pi brat]

If Snappy had a clue he would know why PositiveNellie tossed Marty off the bus right before the $billions in damages are awarded for the guilty DFR...  There will be no monetary damage award... The plaintiff never asserted any monetary damage to the pilots and their claim never even asked for a monetary damage award to any of the pilots of the Plaintiff class.  Nope.  Not a penny to the pilots.  No monetary award for the pilots.  None.  Zero.  Zilch.  
 
PositivNellie  has a lean on Marty to get their money, should Marty win any money for lawyer fees, but PositiveNellie understands that even if USAPA is found guilty, and Judge Silver gives the Plaintiff everything they asked for, there is no more money to be earned for PositiveNellie, other than what Marty already owes them.  Nada.   
 
Marty can't even use the PositiveNellie 1-800 number without their permission, and a retainer.  

You mean you have to actually ask for damages AND win your case to get a gazillion dollars in damages? You think nic4us and beancounter know about this?

 

[luvthe9]

I know, like most things, above your head.
 
Let's try Slim Whitman. Still got that 45?
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aEUOo0t_RHQ
 
Did your head explode?

By far, the strangest dude to ever work at America West. Psycho.

 

[luvthe9]

How come PositiveNellie retired him off their letterhead? Serious question... ... Really, serious question. If they are about to hit pay day why push Marty out now?

Harper has gone rogue. They are sick and tired of him and his ignorant Spartans. Lost Cause comes to mind.
There is no money, only embarrassment.

 

[Claxon]

 
"The Association notified the Company of this breach many months ago. Doug Parker assured us that the matter would be taken seriously. Management subsequently identified former PHX Assistant Chief Pilot John Schreff as the individual who transmitted your personal and confidential data to Leonidas by accessing the CATCREW database. To date there has been no assurance from the Company that the information is no longer in Leonidas' possession or that it will be not be used again. Nor are we aware of any Company effort to impose meaningful consequences on those who may have been involved in the theft of confidential information. In view of this most recent mailing, we now know that, absent consequences, Leonidas is emboldened and will feel free to use any information it may have wrongfully obtained. (You should be aware that the accessed database certainly included, by the Company's own admission, pilot name, address and passport number information, and may have included date of birth information and Social Security number, more than enough for identity theft.) USAPA and its attorneys have been in close contact with law enforcement officials who are currently investigating this matter. In the absence of a satisfactory result on this front, we will consider other legal options."

 

[Claxon]

 
Q=BY MR. SILVERMAN: A=john schreff, the management pilot that stole personal id information from company computer.
 
Q. Before I ask you to look at the constitution, at any time
before this either, in your service as a BPR member or
otherwise and your review of the constitution, because you've
been trying to amend it, are you not aware of the fact that the
constitution could be amended by referendum, by getting
referendum from the membership and bypassing the BPR?
A. It requires a two-thirds majority of the membership to
amend the constitution, Mr. Silverman.
Q. Directing your attention to what is being highlighted here
amendment initiated by the membership?
A. Yes.
Q. So it says 25 percent of the members in good standing may
petition the secretary/treasurer to ballot the membership
concerning the proposed amendment to the constitution and
bylaws.
Do you see, that sir?
A. I do see that.
Q. So that at any time that you testified that you've been
trying to get the constitution amended, did you initiate
through -- through the BPR, did you initiate or cause to be
initiated any attempts to amend the constitution by getting the
25 percent of the members in good standing to petition the
secretary-treasurer?
A. The BPR isn't 25 percent of the membership, Mr. Silverman. 02:07:06

United States District Court
JOHN SCHERFF - Cross
I'm not trying to be obtuse but the BPR has 11 members. That
doesn't hardly come up to 25 percent of the membership.
Q. Perhaps it's moot, Mr. Scherff.
Under the constitution, would you agree with me that
there are two methodologies, there are two pathways to
amendment, one by -- with the membership, the other through the
BPR? Do you agree with that?
A. I do.
Q. And you've discussed today in your testimony your attempts
to amend the constitution by proposing a resolution through the
BPR; is that correct?
A. That is correct.
Q. And you've been unsuccessful in doing that; is that
correct?
A. Many times.
Q. Did you --
A. Several times.
Q. Have you ever initiated an attempt to amend the
constitution by getting 25 percent of the members in good
standing to petition the secretary/treasurer?
A. I have not.
Q. Were you aware of that methodology prior to our discussion
today?
A. I read the constitution but the vehicle that I had
available to me with the communications that I have with my
membership is the BPR level. I'm the BPR rep. So that's the
vehicle that I used to try to amend the constitution of USAPA.
MR. SILVERMAN: I move to strike os nonresponsive,
Judge.
THE COURT: I'm going to allow it.

 

[snapthis]

You do understand that if it's on the internet then it must be true!!!

Hook line and sinker.
 
You'd think they would use the resources available such as the legal docs in the online library. Some are not paying attention to detail as I thought. 

 

[snapthis]

By far, the strangest dude to ever work at America West. Psycho.

 
You make me laugh, flounder. 

 

[Claxon]

 
BY MR. SILVERMAN:
Q. Mr. Scherff, my question was simply, were you aware of the
methodology of going to the membership and bypassing the BPR to
amend the constitution prior to our conversation today?
A. At some point, yes, sir.
Q. Okay.
By the way, in terms of the numbers, does the West --
does the Phoenix-based pilots comprise 25 percent of the USAPA
membership in good standing?
A. I'm not sure how many. I wouldn't be the person to ask
that.
Q. Okay.
MR. SILVERMAN: Can we bring up Plaintiffs' 24,
please.
BY MR. SILVERMAN:
Q. Bear with me, please, Mr. Scherff.
Directing your attention to paragraph 10H of MOU II,
is it your testimony, Mr. Scherff, that you have no idea what
this provision means? 0200

United States District Court
JOHN SCHERFF - Cross
A. No, sir. I believe that that paragraph says that it's
stats quo and I stated that I believe the status quo is the
Nicolau.
Q. Okay. So to unpack this a little bit, this provision
says, the words, US Airways agrees that neither this memorandum
nor the JCBA shall provide a basis for changing the seniority
lists currently in effect at US Airways other than through the
process set forth in this Paragraph 10.
Do you agree?
A. Yes.

 

[Claxon]

 
Q. Now, as of the date of the MOU and in, in fact, today, do
you agree with me that there are two seniority lists in effect
at governing seniority of US Airways pilots?
A. I believe there are three seniority lists. There's the
East list, the West list, and the Nicolau that is awaiting a
single contract to use.
Q. Okay. For bidding purposes for Phoenix-based pilots, what
list is used, sir?
A. The West list.
Q. The West list?
A. Yes.
Q. And the same question for the East Pilots, what list is
used, sir?
A. I assume the East list.
Q. Is there any -- in fact, is there any term and condition
that actually governs what a US Airways pilot does in his or
her flying day or career that is presently governed by the
Nicolau list?
A. The Nicolau list is referenced in the East contract and
the West contract and the Transition Agreement.
MR. SILVERMAN: I move to strike, Judge.
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. SILVERMAN:
Q. Mr. Scherff, we can go through this. For vacation
purposes, does a West Pilot use the West list or the Nicolau
list?
A. The West list.
Q. Okay. What other things -- since this is what we have to
do, what other things are there that affects a pilot's career
are governed by seniority on one of the two lists, East or
West?
A. Until there is a single contract, it would be the West
would be governing the West Pilots.
Q. I'm saying what other kinds of things. Vacations?
A. Vacations.
Q. Bids for different aircraft, what else?
A. That's correct. Schedule.
Q. Schedule. Is schedule for a West Pilot governed by the
West CBA or the Nicolau list?
A. It's covered by the West CBA because -- 02:12:41

Q. I'm sorry?
A. I'm finished.
Q. So is there any term or condition of the flying
practicality, the flying life of a pilot governed at the
present time by the Nicolau list?
A. Not yet.
Q. Mr. Scherff, you testified that seniority was not an issue
with respect to the negotiation of MOU II; is that correct?
A. As I understood it, yes.
Q. Isn't it true that there were -- it was specifically
excluded from negotiation because it was already determined
that seniority would be governed by the McCaskill-Bond process.
A. That's interesting. The McCaskill-Bond process applies to
the merger of US Airways pilots with American. It's
prospective, not retrospective. The McCaskill-Bond process is
for the next merger, not the last merger as I understand it.

 

[Claxon]

 
Q. And do you agree with me, sir, that this paragraph H is
saying that, in sum or substance, that we're not going to
change that situation. East follows East; West follows West
for the things that we've talked about here until there is a
process for merging them, those lists, through the process set
forth in paragraph 10 above. Do you agree with that, sir?
MS. AXEL: Objection, Your Honor. This question has
been asked and answered now I think twice.
THE COURT: Overruled. Let me see if I can get an
answer this time.
THE WITNESS: I don't agree with that statement.
BY MR. SILVERMAN:
Q. You don't agree that that is what --
A. I don't understand that paragraph is stating what you just
said, no, sir, I do not agree with that.
Q. Okay. Are you aware of any reasons why US Airways would
not want to put into effect, sort of on an interim basis while
a merger is in the works, a merger of the East and West
seniority lists? They would only want to do that once there is
a merger with American and the American Airlines pilots and all
of the US Airways pilots can be merged together.
A. I don't think I understand the question.
Q. Isn't it true, sir, that US Airways didn't want to do an
merger was pending?
MS. AXEL: Objection. Foundation.
THE COURT: Sustained.
BY MR. SILVERMAN:
Q. Did you ever hear from any US Airways representative that
they did not want to, in sum or substance, do a merger of the
East and West lists that would be in effect for a short period
of time while the merger with American Airlines was proposed
and being planned for the future?
A. No, sir.
Q. Thank you. I'm done with paragraph 10H.

 

[Claxon]

"The Association notified the Company of this breach many months ago. Doug Parker assured us that the matter would be taken seriously. Management subsequently identified former PHX Assistant Chief Pilot John Schreff as the individual who transmitted your personal and confidential data to Leonidas by accessing the CATCREW database. To date there has been no assurance from the Company that the information is no longer in Leonidas' possession or that it will be not be used again. Nor are we aware of any Company effort to impose meaningful consequences on those who may have been involved in the theft of confidential information. In view of this most recent mailing, we now know that, absent consequences, Leonidas is emboldened and will feel free to use any information it may have wrongfully obtained. (You should be aware that the accessed database certainly included, by the Company's own admission, pilot name, address and passport number information, and may have included date of birth information and Social Security number, more than enough for identity theft.) USAPA and its attorneys have been in close contact with law enforcement officials who are currently investigating this matter. In the absence of a satisfactory result on this front, we will consider other legal options."

 

[Claxon]

 

 
snapthis
Posted Today, 08:53 AM


Veteran

• 

It will be as impressive as the rest of your "we were duped!" evidence. You guys haven't listened to a word anyone but AOL has said for years, yet on the MOU you didn't actually read the MOU and you listened to USAPA's lawyers. Yeah, that's it.
 
"Judge, Judge! This east group is the biggest bunch of scabs, cheats and liars we have ever seen! But, they lied to us about the MOU!............... Oh."
 
Who is the real liar on this one snappy?

Still ticked off we dismantled the 10h trick in court?

Do not see it that way.

 

[EastUS1]

Management subsequently identified former PHX Assistant Chief Pilot John Schreff as the individual who transmitted your personal and confidential data to Leonidas by accessing the CATCREW database.

 
Cut him some slack! Perhaps he'd just mistakenly left his "Integrity Matters" T-shirt at home that day? 😉

 

[Phoenix]

Hook line and sinker.
 
You'd think they would use the resources available such as the legal docs in the online library. Some are not paying attention to detail as I thought. 

Give it a rest Snappy.  You are impugning your own integrity.  
 
You now want us to believe that you are smart enough to play a little trick of deceit of your own by posting Marty's proposed order as if it were Judge Silver's  (and you delight yourself that you tricked some Eastholes), but at the same time you want to say you were too stupid to read the MOU and were hoodwinked by USAPA...Either you are stupid and have integrity or you are smart and have no integrity.  You can't have it both ways.   If you keep this up there will be a preponderance of evidence that you might not even be a pilot, but instead may just be a punk paid instigator.  

 

[Portly Dorman]

"The Association notified the Company of this breach many months ago. Doug Parker assured us that the matter would be taken seriously. Management subsequently identified former PHX Assistant Chief Pilot John Schreff as the individual who transmitted your personal and confidential data to Leonidas by accessing the CATCREW database. To date there has been no assurance from the Company that the information is no longer in Leonidas' possession or that it will be not be used again. Nor are we aware of any Company effort to impose meaningful consequences on those who may have been involved in the theft of confidential information. In view of this most recent mailing, we now know that, absent consequences, Leonidas is emboldened and will feel free to use any information it may have wrongfully obtained. (You should be aware that the accessed database certainly included, by the Company's own admission, pilot name, address and passport number information, and may have included date of birth information and Social Security number, more than enough for identity theft.) USAPA and its attorneys have been in close contact with law enforcement officials who are currently investigating this matter. In the absence of a satisfactory result on this front, we will consider other legal options."

As provided by Lyle Hogg.....what's your point?
 
Que link to video and another repeative quote.....
 
And how many personnel accounts where hacked???? This is a yet another Cleary/Bradford goose chase.....
 
Nothng to see here, move along...
 
Who knows what data was on the stolen laptop top of the door frame assaulter.