OCT/NOV 2012 US Pilots Labor Discussion

[EastUS1]

I wonder why USAPA omitted this fact in their update.

The only conceivable reason must needs be the universal fear, dread and utter awe of the Great and Powerful OzAOL, from which all out east lose sleep nightly 😉

Now, if you'll excuse me; I'm late for my dally pilgrimage to the Shrine of St. Nic.

 

[Black Swan]

I wonder why USAPA omitted this fact in their update.

Very easy to answer. Because the superior court to Silver, and Wake has already ruled on the matter. It really doesn't matter what Silver says in this regard. Everyone already knows where the appellate court stands. As they have already stated:Thus, even under the district court’s injunctionmandating USAPA to pursue the Nicolau Award, it isuncertain that the West Pilots’ preferred seniority system everwould be effectuated.Additionally, USAPA's final proposal may yet be onethat does not work the disadvantages Plaintiffs fear, even ifthat proposal is not the Nicolau Award.3

 

[nic4us]

Are you saying the East pilots are subordinate to the West pilots in the eyes of the court? And USAPA has to damage more East pilots just to cater to the West and the Nic?

I do not think anybody is saying that. As a matter of fact, I think everyone is saying the obvious...that both groups are equal in the eyes of the court...

What you are completely missing, and have a total lack of understanding of it appears, is both that the 9th did not green light a non-Nic, (once again your quote is one of the possibilities of why Addington is not ripe..i.e. the West could actually sign off on an amendment to the TA and a non-Nic and make Addington moot., not the go ahead for usapa to stray from the Nic)

Also, that both groups entered into a "binding arbitration" agreement and it is the DFR of usapa to uphold the result and represent the members who entered into that agreement. (Silver affirmed usapa's inheriting the TA) Abiding by the Nic does not damage east pilots...or, if it does...compared to what?

A "valid'" arbitration result is powerful evidence of a "fair and equitable" outcome. Exactly what evidence can you offer that re-arranging that result in a manner that drastically favors the east has either any "legitimate union objective" or is by any means "fair and equitable"?

 

[Black Swan]

I do not think anybody is saying that. As a matter of fact, I think everyone is saying the obvious...that both groups are equal in the eyes of the court...

What you are completely missing, and have a total lack of understanding of it appears, is both that the 9th did not green light a non-Nic, (once again your quote is one of the possibilities of why Addington is not ripe..i.e. the West could actually sign off on an amendment to the TA and a non-Nic and make Addington moot., not the go ahead for usapa to stray from the Nic)

Also, that both groups entered into a "binding arbitration" agreement and it is the DFR of usapa to uphold the result and represent the members who entered into that agreement. (Silver affirmed usapa's inheriting the TA) Abiding by the Nic does not damage east pilots...or, if it does...compared to what?

A "valid'" arbitration result is powerful evidence of a "fair and equitable" outcome. Exactly what evidence can you offer that re-arranging that result in a manner that drastically favors the east has either any "legitimate union objective" or is by any means "fair and equitable"?

The 9th is absolutely crystal clear that the deal might not be the Nic, and I am astounded at the fact you continue to imply it has to be the Nic. This is the court ABOVE Silvers' level, that will be called again if need be. Read carefully "WHATEVER USAPA's FINAL PROPOSAL ULTIMATELY IS.... That is not said to be the Nic. You are also completely missing the fact Silver rejected the BINDING arbitration issue. She said USAPA is free to negotiate seniority. If it were BINDING, there would be NO negotiation. It would have to be used. You got it wrong.

Not until the airline responds to the proposal, the
parties complete negotiations, and the membership ratifies the
CBA will the West Pilots actually be affected by USAPA’s
seniority proposal — whatever USAPA’s final proposal ultimately
is. Because these contingencies make the claim speculative,
the issues are not yet fit for judicial decision.

 

[Metroyet]

If USAPA were to lose the next DFR, the east gets (correct me if I am wrong) two barrels shot at them:

1 - Reinstatement of the Nic
2 - Possible damages

Which would erase the gains made at the 9th as well as Silver's court - and then some. If LCC does not appeal then its USAPA's move. This time USAPA should know where the mines are buried in a DFR proceeding. Time to be very careful. The courts have given USAPA more rope. What constitutes a legitimate union objective? How far can USAPA stray from the Nic? I think DOH is too far, but what do I know.

It should be a piece of cake convincing a jury that its an LUO to advance every single East pilot to the sole detriment of every single West pilot AFTER the results of a mutually agreed to Final and Binding arbitration. In fact, I doubt anybody will even notice. The 9ths warnings combined with Silvers unmistakable dangerous ground message is just window dressing. I'm sure it's all flawless, smooth sailing for the fake union from here out.

 

[nic4us]

The 9th is absolutely crystal clear that the deal might not be the Nic, and I am astounded at the fact you continue to imply it has to be the Nic. This is the court ABOVE Silvers' level, that will be called again if need be. Read carefully "WHATEVER USAPA's FINAL PROPOSAL ULTIMATELY IS.... That is not said to be the Nic. You are also completely missing the fact Silver rejected the BINDING arbitration issue. She said USAPA is free to negotiate seniority. If it were BINDING, there would be NO negotiation. It would have to be used. You got it wrong.

Not until the airline responds to the proposal, the
parties complete negotiations, and the membership ratifies the
CBA will the West Pilots actually be affected by USAPA’s
seniority proposal — whatever USAPA’s final proposal ultimately
is. Because these contingencies make the claim speculative,
the issues are not yet fit for judicial decision.

I am astounded that you miss the fact that the company sought the DJ in the first place because the 9th's ruling is so far out there and answeres nothing.

Addington was dismissed by the 9th....end of story. Tashima specifically said he does not address the "thorny question" and left usapa free to go ahead and get sued, and likely lose I might add. Silver did the exact same thing.

Bottom line Swan...you should have listened to Jack Stephan and the east ALPA reps...by stripping the West of representation, you screwed yourself and the little union busting lawyer is now proven to have been absolutely wrong in Silver's ruling.

usapa inherits the TA, and the Nic.

 

[Black Swan]

It should be a piece of cake convincing a jury that its an LUO to advance every single East pilot to the sole detriment of every single West pilot AFTER the results of a mutually agreed to Final and Binding arbitration. In fact, I doubt anybody will even notice. The 9ths warnings combined with Silvers unmistakable dangerous ground message is just window dressing. I'm sure it's all flawless, smooth sailing for the fake union from here out.

Remember, this little tidbit is just as compelling to a jury as you feel yours is. This is NOT all about the West and Nicolau, this is East and Nicolau. And the Nicolau damages an East pilot much worse.



"Although pilots from predecessor US Airways agreed to binding arbitration on seniority, they generally felt so disenfranchised by Nicolau's list that they voted to leave the Air Line Pilots Association after 57 years and to create a new union, the U.S. Airline Pilots Association. The list's most controversial component placed a 56-year-old pilot with 17 years at US Airways, who was never laid off, behind a 35-year-old America West pilot with a few months on the job. In hundreds of similar cases, east pilots with 15 or more years at the carrier went behind west pilots with just a few years." This is a seniority issue that has left the Nicolau timeline far in the past. It is a new day, a new day with West pilots on furlough, and East pilots being hired. This is now your setting for your harm argument, and all the tenets of a Nicolau argument.
Also, Cleary attempted to broker a deal with Ferguson. He was rejected. Ferguson also rejected the use of Geo. Mitchell, Abner Mitvka, and Geo. Pataki in a attempt to work this out.

This is not just about the West anymore, the East group has a compelling argument for harm from the Nicolau. You are on a new stage. At a new date. Try and take the jury back there. It is very clear as time goes on that Nicolau was a flawed integration. Time has proven that very well. Look at where we stand now.

 

[Barrister]

I'd offer that to be the critical question, along with what defines a "wide range of reasonableness". It's clearly evident that west litigation will be forthcoming for anything other than the nic. It follows that any attempted compromise, no matter how well-intentioned, would be attacked anyway. The union's C&By laws specifiy DOH. I'd think it most reasonable to go with that established protocol with C&Rs. One can't reasonably establish a legitimate union objective by first disregarding the union's very constitution it's self.

There is more language. A union is not laible for DFR unless it act in bad faith or is capricious or arbitrary. Is DOH one of these.
Don't think you will find a single case so stating.

NICDOA
NPJB

 

[Barrister]

If USAPA were to lose the next DFR, the east gets (correct me if I am wrong) two barrels shot at them:

1 - Reinstatement of the Nic
2 - Possible damages

Which would erase the gains made at the 9th as well as Silver's court - and then some. If LCC does not appeal then its USAPA's move. This time USAPA should know where the mines are buried in a DFR proceeding. Time to be very careful. The courts have given USAPA more rope. What constitutes a legitimate union objective? How far can USAPA stray from the Nic? I think DOH is too far, but what do I know.

Breath easy PI. Remember we had seperate ratification with a finding by the 9th that a joint contract would not pass with NIC. Damages are waaaayyyy to speculative at this point or any other.

NICDOA
NPJB

 

[EastUS1]

This is not just about the West anymore, .....

I must wish you the very best of luck in ever getting the most viral west posters to even briefly imagine glimpsing the world through such a lens. 😉

 

[EastUS1]

A union is not laible for DFR unless it act in bad faith or is capricious or arbitrary. Is DOH one of these.
Don't think you will find a single case so stating.

"Don't think you will find a single case so stating." Certainly not....not-so-much as one that I've ever heard of or yet even been hinted at.

 

[EastUS1]

.....because the 9th's ruling is so far out there.....

..... left usapa free to go ahead and get sued, and likely lose I might add. Silver did the exact same thing.

usapa inherits the TA, and the Nic.

1) One must necessarily defer to your thoughts there, versus the ruling of a mere circuit court of appeals.
2) "....and likely lose..."???...."likely"!!??? This is most disturbing!!! Having just returned from the local Holy Shrine to St. Nic; it's my sad duty to note that such blasphemy as yours was indeed in the air! The High Priest himself was clearly troubled by it!
3) "..usapa inherits the TA, and the Nic." Whew! Thanks for that at least! My own mindless, unwavering and full devotion to St. Nic was starting to feel threatened and even a bit shaky here! 😉 Umm...meaning no even slight hint of heresy here...but...well...you ARE absolutely certain it MUST be the Nic still? 🙂

 

[cynic]

There is more language. A union is not laible for DFR unless it act in bad faith or is capricious or arbitrary. Is DOH one of these.
Don't think you will find a single case so stating.

NICDOA
NPJB

In this case, DOH would be both capricious and arbitrary. There was an impartial arbitration that met all of the contractual requirements and produced a result. You need to justify going from Nic to DOH, not justify DOH in and of itself.

If USAPA doesn't use Nic, someone will sue them for DFR. Any list that consistently places West personnel below their relative position in the Nic is grounds for a DFR from them. Now, if USAPA we to create a list that places West personnel higher than the Nic (unrealistic, but this is the hypothetical that the 9th was referring to), they become a target for a DFR from East pilots. In reality, anything other than Nic means more lawsuits and delays to the implementation of a new contract.

 

[Zone5]

Check with whoever you want to . It is not a legal theory. It is simply a matter of reading the documents. Look up the term sheet. If within 90 days after being certified by the NMB as the bargaining agent if we do not have a joint contract it goes to yes you guessed it final and binding arbitration. That joint contract will be done long before any seniority arbitration.

Now read the T/A.



Completed seniority list. Check. Company accepted the Nicolau seniority list.
Single operating certificate. Check
Joint contract, east, west and APA. Single agreement. Check

Nothing in there about east and west.

Nicolau seniority list is implemented. That becomes the one and only seniority list for the LCC pilots.

Next step seniority integration with APA using the Nicolau and the APA list.

The documentation is all there go read it.

What do you think is going to happen first? usapa getting the company to the table, negotiating seniority and the rest of the contract or a merger with American and a contract negotiated by APA?

I think you are mistaken. A Memorandum of Understanding and in particular this MOU, is a long way from a ratified JCBA.

For instance, if the MOU had gone foreword and had been voted in by the pilots, would we now be operating as a single pilot group? NO. we would not.

If indeed you are correct and the MOU would constitute an "agreement" under the terms of the TA and thereby trigger the implementation of the NIC, once the East pilots are informed of such, the MOU would never pass rank and file ratification.

Thanks again for the "heads up".


seajay

 

[Metroyet]

Remember, this little tidbit is just as compelling to a jury as you feel yours is. This is NOT all about the West and Nicolau, this is East and Nicolau. And the Nicolau damages an East pilot much worse.



"Although pilots from predecessor US Airways agreed to binding arbitration on seniority, they generally felt so disenfranchised by Nicolau's list that they voted to leave the Air Line Pilots Association after 57 years and to create a new union, the U.S. Airline Pilots Association. The list's most controversial component placed a 56-year-old pilot with 17 years at US Airways, who was never laid off, behind a 35-year-old America West pilot with a few months on the job. In hundreds of similar cases, east pilots with 15 or more years at the carrier went behind west pilots with just a few years." This is a seniority issue that has left the Nicolau timeline far in the past. It is a new day, a new day with West pilots on furlough, and East pilots being hired. This is now your setting for your harm argument, and all the tenets of a Nicolau argument.
Also, Cleary attempted to broker a deal with Ferguson. He was rejected. Ferguson also rejected the use of Geo. Mitchell, Abner Mitvka, and Geo. Pataki in a attempt to work this out.

This is not just about the West anymore, the East group has a compelling argument for harm from the Nicolau. You are on a new stage. At a new date. Try and take the jury back there. It is very clear as time goes on that Nicolau was a flawed integration. Time has proven that very well. Look at where we stand now.

"Fairness" never has been, and never will be on trial. Even the God Child sully was absolutely, 100% useless as persuading a jury of his peers. This will forever be about one single issue. It's: "exactly what is the legitimate union objective" for attempting such a drastic, unheard of, desperate maneuver?

It's LOA93 forever until you and your Employer are summoned to court to explain their actions despite the clear and obvious warnings against doing so. IMHO, you are in an unwinnable position. You have been since day one... When $eham really started milking the emotional cow.

If you get DOH ratified, you won't find a Judge or Jury at this point that won't see the most obvious DFR in history.