What's new

Temporary Injunction against USAPA filed today

Until they've broken a company policy, which they haven't, then they are within their legal right to decide what gets fixed and when.
Wrong, wrong, wrong. This has nothing to do with "doing something illegal" wrt company policies or FAR's. This has to so with an illegal work action. All they have to do is prove that there was a concerted effort to slow down or hurt the company and it's game over. The text messages alone is enough to prove that. The charts and data just support the argument. A half dozen pilots trying to influence the rest in the name of getting a contract or fighting a seniority dispute is all it takes. Trust me. UA is already on this road with the injunction due to a half dozen pilots. USAPA is toast if the company goes after damages.
 
$9,855,000/year.

That's a far cry from the $400 million the company wants. Figures...

Driver <_<
The dollar figure doesn't really matter. It'll be more than $3m USAPA has. They company will forgive the monetary damages in exchange for the change of control language.

Say goodbye to that backstop.

That was your only way off LOA93.
 
Or consider this.....as professional aviators we are trained to operate appropriately for the condition we are operating under. For the last few months the working environment at this airline have deteriorated considerably. So, if like me you have not participated in an illegal slowdown, you might decide that with the current environment you need to be very careful.

Unlike the Nirvana you enjoy with UA/CO, this place is in civil war. You see it right in front of you on this board. What you haven't seen is the former AWA MEC chairman asking Doug how to write up east crews. You haven't seen a west pilot look into a camera and say "WE HATE YOU GUYS!" You missed the foaming at the mouth "distance learning" crew news. We have to watch our back everyday with our west co-workers and the FAA, and now it looks like we do with the company too, lest innocent guys get caught up in the web.
So you guys started operating appropriately on May 1st?

Nice try.

You sound like an assss trying to explain this away.
 
Wrong, wrong, wrong. This has nothing to do with "doing something illegal" wrt company policies or FAR's. This has to so with an illegal work action. All they have to do is prove that there was a concerted effort to slow down or hurt the company and it's game over. The text messages alone is enough to prove that. The charts and data just support the argument. A half dozen pilots trying to influence the rest in the name of getting a contract or fighting a seniority dispute is all it takes. Trust me. UA is already on this road with the injunction due to a half dozen pilots. USAPA is toast if the company goes after damages.

Would you mind answering a few questions.

What constitutes a "Concerted effort"?

Do the "Half Dozen pilots" have to be official or de facto leaders of USAPA?

I seem to recall that during UA's "Summer of Hell" UA did not seek relief through the courts. Am I right in my recall? Could you speculate as to why they didn't if I'm correct.

Putting on my amateur attorney hat I don't see how you get an injunction without being able to tie the actions of the "Half Dozen" directly to the leadership?
 
Wrong, wrong, wrong. This has nothing to do with "doing something illegal" wrt company policies or FAR's. This has to so with an illegal work action. All they have to do is prove that there was a concerted effort to slow down or hurt the company and it's game over. The text messages alone is enough to prove that. The charts and data just support the argument. A half dozen pilots trying to influence the rest in the name of getting a contract or fighting a seniority dispute is all it takes. Trust me. UA is already on this road with the injunction due to a half dozen pilots. USAPA is toast if the company goes after damages.

I think you are right, and as you said it has happened before.

So, when it happened at UA did it make you straighten up, fly right and be happy in your job? Did it motivate you to excel? Cause I have to be honest jetz, from the jumpseat riders I've had, you guys seem like the most miserable pilot group in the industry.

So, US may be successful in dropping the hammer, only to finish off the job of demoralizing and disenfranchising most of it pilots.

I suggest a different road for our management. That they call a time out. Say "Yeah, let's have on open forum for our LINE PILOTS to air their concerns. Nope, they decided to take a different road. Oh wel.
 
Would you mind answering a few questions.

What constitutes a "Concerted effort"?

Do the "Half Dozen pilots" have to be official or de facto leaders of USAPA?

I seem to recall that during UA's "Summer of Hell" UA did not seek relief through the courts. Am I right in my recall? Could you speculate as to why they didn't if I'm correct.

Putting on my amateur attorney hat I don't see how you get an injunction without being able to tie the actions of the "Half Dozen" directly to the leadership?
This is really not that hard to understand. A CBA has certain rights and responsibilities. One of those responsibilities is they are responsible for the actions of the pilots. Read the complaint. The company sent several letters to the union leadership telling them to stop. The union ignored these letters and said they were not doing it. All other unions when they get those letters put out messages telling the pilots to stop. That is the defense against this type of injunction. usapa has nothing.
 
I suggest a different road for our management. That they call a time out. Say "Yeah, let's have on open forum for our LINE PILOTS to air their concerns. Nope, they decided to take a different road. Oh wel.


How about this, you all sign a binding agreement to call a time out. Then Management or the West decides that after signing it, they don't like it. That sure would suck wouldn't it? Don't ya hate when everyone agrees to something and then someone tries to back out? 😛
 
The long post on how the MEL works was very informative for any civilian posters or lurkers who had no idea what we are talking about.

But, I would like to point something out you may have intentionally missed.

The captain of a flight can apply an MEL without a mechanic ever coming to the airplane, with approval from maintenance control and the concurrence of dispatch. Further, if the airplane had already left the gate then the MEL does not even have to be applied until it reaches the destination, the aircraft can be operated under the conditions of the MEL with the same concurrence from MX and DX.

You can play dumb all you like, but you know the intent of the training and manuals. Following a usapa guidline to fly safe is probably more stupid than using safety as a negotiating tactic.


Agree with you, and didn't want to get to far into the process between being on the gate, pushed, in the air. To sorta clarify what you stated, if you are still on the ground and not airborne, The capt is to look at the item, and determine if the flight can continue....if so, they confer with dispatch and MTC, operate the system within the provisions of the MEL and continue on. If the capt deems it unsafe to continue, then they shall return to the gate. In addition, I believe there are some systems, which require certain maintance functions to be performed prior to being airborne, which would require you to return to the gate anyways, not all of the MELs but some of them. Of course, once airborne, there are other directions to follow for inoperative systems, and you are to alert MTC as to problems so they can be prepared when you land....
 
I would really give you guys a break if you would at least acknowledge that some of the info contained in the injunction is pretty damning.

But instead you guys come up with with the most asinine excuses and arguments that I have no choice but to respond in my beloved fashion.

How about this. You guys stop being idiots and I'll stop calling you idiots.

That's pretty fair.

But its not binding.


Well what's pretty damning from what I see, is the Company requesting the court to make the captions exercise their authority and judgement to decide what to put in the FDML, I think that is pretty much clear cut as to what is supposed to go in there, and when it is supposed to go in there. Now if the company can come out and say, Here's X amount of write ups that are false, then I'd see a problem going on. Where in the FAR's does it says the Capt has to exercise his judgement as to what goes in the FDML, where does it say it in the FOM? I mean in the injunction, in plain language that's what it says......

The only idiot I've run into lately, is the west capt on the van last night. Someone said hello to him, and asked how he was doing, and he glared, FINAL AND BINDING......hahaha....tool
 
Well what's pretty damning from what I see, is the Company requesting the court to make the captions exercise their authority and judgement to decide what to put in the FDML, I think that is pretty much clear cut as to what is supposed to go in there, and when it is supposed to go in there. Now if the company can come out and say, Here's X amount of write ups that are false, then I'd see a problem going on. Where in the FAR's does it says the Capt has to exercise his judgement as to what goes in the FDML, where does it say it in the FOM? I mean in the injunction, in plain language that's what it says......

The only idiot I've run into lately, is the west capt on the van last night. Someone said hello to him, and asked how he was doing, and he glared, FINAL AND BINDING......hahaha....tool

Please don't go into van stories.

I've got a joke for you -

How do you make an eastie look at his shoes?

Say "Hello."
 
Just thought it was funny 'cause it was my 2nd 5% I had encountered, really haven't had any problems out there, and don't look for 'em. Other one was kinda funny story but I'll save you the trouble.
 
We've got the same ones on this side.

Most just don't say anything.

I get the "lottery ticket" one every so often.

A buddy of mine got the "short LCC stock." Why did the east guy say that? Because he thought LOA 93 was a sure win and that as soon as the company lost they would have to declare bankruptcy because of the retro pay alone.

Buddy asked him what he knew about the remedy phase after the decision comes out should the east win. His answer? "We have to go through a remedy phase?"

I laughed my butt off.
 
Or consider this.....as professional aviators we are trained to operate appropriately for the condition we are operating under. For the last few months the working environment at this airline have deteriorated considerably. So, if like me you have not participated in an illegal slowdown, you might decide that with the current environment you need to be very careful.

Unlike the Nirvana you enjoy with UA/CO, this place is in civil war. You see it right in front of you on this board. What you haven't seen is the former AWA MEC chairman asking Doug how to write up east crews. You haven't seen a west pilot look into a camera and say "WE HATE YOU GUYS!" You missed the foaming at the mouth "distance learning" crew news. We have to watch our back everyday with our west co-workers and the FAA, and now it looks like we do with the company too, lest innocent guys get caught up in the web.
Look, I agree with you. This does certainly put innocent guys in the cross hairs. But to that I respond that it is a result of the actions of USAPA, and by association, the east pilots. We have been living this since our injunction. One pilot was fired and several others given time off without pay, which was grieved and in the end guys were made whole again after being put through the ringer. But the injunction makes it very hard for a union to do anything but negotiate until they are released by the NMB. In UA's case, there were no damages sought. But whenever sick leave use ticks up just slightly, we are reminded of the injunction. In your case, the company might very well seek damages, and then use a ruling to negotiate an end to a stalemate. Look what happened to AA. When they were fined for their sick-out, it would have bankrupted them. I don't remember the final settlement, but they got out of much of it, for a price.

Let's say they win even a $100Million judgement. They could say, accept the Nic, here's our best offer for all other sections. Take it or leave it. If you leave it, we continue on this path, but you (the east only) will be assessed to pay the $100M.

I don't doubt that the west pilots "hate" you guys as you describe. I don't envy you being in that position of looking over your shoulder. But after enduring years of RICO suits and attempted terminations due to withholding dues, and more attacks for alleged identity theft, terminating all negotiations on the west's contract, not to mention going back on an agreement (binding arbitration), I can't exactly blame them. I'd be out for blood too if I were in their shoes. Through all the chest thumping, in the end USAPA has only made things worse and worse for you guys. Not better as they have promised.

I know, I know, separate ops, attrition train and all. It's all worth it. Even LOA 93 is worth it to keep one damn newb west pilot out of the left seat before an 18 year furloughee. But is it REALLY? If you say yes, then you can't complain about the innocent guys who get caught in the web. If you say no, then maybe it's time for the potential innocent victims to start undoing the web USAPA has spun.

I wonder how many years it would take a new US captain on LOA93 to make back the money lost already in the form of a pay raise work rules, and union dues, just to get to a break even point. It has to be a few years. Maybe the time he would have been delayed had the nic and a contract happened years ago. Not to mention the many pilots who were no where near a left seat anyway. The only ones I see who have benefited from this debacle are the furloughed east pilots, and those whose ego is bigger than their common sense.
 
Do the "Half Dozen pilots" have to be official or de facto leaders of USAPA?

No. They are operating in the "name of the union" for "union activity." And USAPA did nothing to stop it.

I seem to recall that during UA's "Summer of Hell" UA did not seek relief through the courts. Am I right in my recall? Could you speculate as to why they didn't if I'm correct.

Because they were desperately trying to get their merger with USAir done and approved by the feds.

Putting on my amateur attorney hat I don't see how you get an injunction without being able to tie the actions of the "Half Dozen" directly to the leadership?

They don't have to tie them to the leadership. If they were trying to affect negotiations then the union is responsible. All they need is a few intercepted text messages and some historical data. I am speaking from recent experience here. There is NO WAY USAPA is not getting slapped with an injunction.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top