What's new

Temporary Injunction against USAPA filed today

all BEFORE being released.
You should have said that, instead of omitting the "minor detail" that there was indeed a legal strike to make it sound like the IAM was only having an illegal job action. Seems that your absence didn't change your penchant for giving partial details to paint the picture you want.

Jim
 
You should have said that, instead of omitting the "minor detail" that there was indeed a legal strike to make it sound like the IAM was only having an illegal job action. Seems that your absence didn't change your penchant for giving partial details to paint the picture you want.

Jim


Nice job twisting the truth. Of course it was before the strike. If they were out, how did they not come for the pushbacks, parking, cleaning, etc? Unbelievable obfuscation from the master. 700UW was obviously deeply involved in an illegal work slowdown.
 
Do you not think if we were not out there that management wouldnt discipline us?

We were working short handed, I had 3 gates to worry about when I was on the roster, so please explain how I can be in three places at once?

And it was not an illegal slowdown, we worked by our CBA and the company's policies and procedures.

We were not sued in court, nor were any M&R disciplined for doing their job.

If there as an illegal slowdown going on, there were have been discipline up to terminations occurring and they didnt.

But I am so glad your an expert on what happened with the IAM and US leading up to the five day legal strike.

Once again, dont let the facts and the truth get in your way.
 
You should have said that, instead of omitting the "minor detail" that there was indeed a legal strike to make it sound like the IAM was only having an illegal job action. Seems that your absence didn't change your penchant for giving partial details to paint the picture you want.

Jim

Partial details? Jim, if you weren't so busy trying to stick me you would see it. How do you "work to rule" if you are walking a picket line? For once, just once, admit you were wrong instead of blaming the poster.
 
Working by the book was done during the 30 day cooling off period, when it expired we stayed at work and kept negotiating for another week, then went on strike after voting down one cba.
 
Do you not think if we were not out there that management wouldnt discipline us?

We were working short handed, I had 3 gates to worry about when I was on the roster, so please explain how I can be in three places at once?

And it was not an illegal slowdown, we worked by our CBA and the company's policies and procedures.

We were not sued in court, nor were any M&R disciplined for doing their job.

If there as an illegal slowdown going on, there were have been discipline up to terminations occurring and they didnt.

But I am so glad your an expert on what happened with the IAM and US leading up to the five day legal strike.

Once again, dont let the facts and the truth get in your way.

Oh yes, you were actually very much not out there at any time to park anyone. Pretty much still the story except for some of the really outstanding stations, CLT being one of them. So just like now, when the pilots are the targets, how do you really gin up a reasonable attack for an injunction when the airline actually crawls along on its' own, with no action taken by anyone, legal or illegal? How would anybody even notice a supposed slowdown, when the airline has always been pretty dysfunctional?
 
Once again you speak of things you have no idea about.

In 1992 only Mechanics at stations where maintenance was parked airplanes, not utility.

Try again!

One of the concessions taken after the strike was a 50/50 ration of mechanics and utility doing receipt and dispatch.

So explain to the board, how utility was responsible to be out there to park a plane when it wasnt our job function nor were we trained nor signed off on receipt and dispatch?
 
Working by the book was done during the 30 day cooling off period, when it expired we stayed at work and kept negotiating for another week, then went on strike after voting down one cba.

I thought that status quo was required to be maintained during the 30 day cooling off, thus working to book would be illegal (
US Airways current theory). Is that not correct? Are you allowed self-help during the cooling off period?

As for push and receive, you are correct. The mech. delayed there and you guys delayed the cleaning.
 
How is it illegal working by the Agreement between the FAA and US Airways? Doing the job by the established job card, and General Maintenance Manual is not illegal, it is legal.
 
How is it illegal working by the Agreement between the FAA and US Airways? Doing the job by the established job card, and General Maintenance Manual is not illegal, it is legal.

Really? Then what is USAPA being sued for? Did you read their filing where they asked a judge to have USAPA tell us to not write up maint. items?

You were slowing down, be man enough to admit it.
 
Really? Then what is USAPA being sued for? Did you read their filing where they asked a judge to have USAPA tell us to not write up maint. items?

You were slowing down, be man enough to admit it.
The Judge isn't going to direct the pilots to do anything. If he issues the Injunction, it's going to be against USAPPY. I read Cleary's cross examination. He's an idiot. My favorite part is where he waxes poetic about how great the "safety" relationship was between ALPA and the company before the merger. When asked exactly WHO was in charge of safety/flight ops at the time Cleary can't remember. Odd considering he claims to have worked very closely with these people for years isn't it?

The really funny part is where Seigle informs Cleary that those people back then were actually Paul Morell, Lyle Hogg, and Ed Bular...just like today. "oh, i didn't know that" :lol: :lol:

Cleary is going to be the end of USAPA....I can't wait. :lol: :lol: :lol:

He was Bit** Slapped by the company's lawyers on the stand and easily showed to be an Angry little LIAR.
 
The Judge isn't going to direct the pilots to do anything. If he issues the Injunction, it's going to be against USAPPY. I read Cleary's cross examination. He's an idiot. My favorite part is where he waxes poetic about how great the "safety" relationship was between ALPA and the company before the merger. When asked exactly WHO was in charge of safety/flight ops at the time Cleary can't remember. Odd considering he claims to have worked very closely with these people for years isn't it?

The really funny part is where Seigle informs Cleary that those people back then were actually Paul Morell, Lyle Hogg, and Ed Bular...just like today. "oh, i didn't know that" :lol: :lol:

Cleary is going to be the end of USAPA....I can't wait. :lol: :lol: :lol:

He was Bit** Slapped by the company's lawyers on the stand and easily showed to be an Angry little LIAR.

Did you read what the company is asking for from the judge? He is asking him to have USAPA tell us what to do and not to do. Maybe you were too busy reading Cleary's testimony to read the company's filing. Here's a great little section:

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays for relief as follows:
1. That this Court issue a Preliminary Injunction and a Permanent Injunction,
restraining and enjoining Defendants USAPA and Cleary and USAPA’s members, agents, and
employees,
and all persons and organizations acting by, in concert with, through, or under it, or
by and through its orders, pending a hearing on the permanent injunction in this matter, from
calling, permitting, instigating, authorizing, encouraging, participating in, approving, or
continuing any interference with Plaintiff’s airline operations, including, but not limited to, any

slowdown, strike, work stoppage, sick-out, work to rule campaign, concerted refusal to accept
voluntary or overtime flying, or other concerted refusal to perform normal pilot operations in
violation of the RLA, 45 U.S.C. § 151 et seq.

2. That this Court further order that the Defendants take all reasonable steps within
their power to prevent the aforesaid actions and to refrain from continuing the aforesaid actions
if commenced, including, but not limited to, the following:
a. Instructing all pilots represented by Defendant USAPA and employed by
Plaintiff to resume their normal working schedule and practices and
providing Plaintiff a copy of all such instructions;
b. Notifying all pilots represented by Defendant USAPA and employed by
Plaintiff, by the most expeditious means possible, of the issuance,
contents, and meaning of this Preliminary Injunction and providing
Plaintiff a copy of all such notices;
c. Including in such notice a directive from USAPA to US Airways’ pilots
not to engage in a concerted refusal to perform normal pilot operations,
including but not limited to, slow taxiing, writing up maintenance items,
calling in fatigued, delaying flights, refusing to answer a call from the
scheduling, refusing to fly an aircraft that meets legal requirements for
flight, or refusing to accept voluntary or overtime flying, and to cease and
desist all such activity and to cease and desist all exhortations or
communications encouraging same, upon pain of fine, suspension, or other
sanction by USAPA;

Case 3:11-cv-00371-RJC -DCK Document 1 Filed 07/29/11 Page 41 of 4
 
Back
Top