TPA Employees Read This

A

AOG-N-IT

Veteran
Aug 19, 2002
1,132
1
JonC, Maybe the Job or the company that provided it at one point isn't worth the effort? , But principals are always a worthy and noble grounds for direct confrontation. The way you folks were treated is beyond any acceptable measures.

I hope that USAirways has stepped on it!..and if they are in violation of State or Federal regulations regarding the WARN Act? I hope you folks tear these heartless and gutless SOB's a new one.

From my perspective..and from one of not being a lawyer , I see this as a cause of having absolutely nothing to lose...and everything to possibly gain for you folks. Afterall...what else can they do? that they have not already done? Simply put, absolutely Nothing!!


As they say, The greatest failure in life..is that of the failure to try!! Take it to them amigo!!

To paraphrase the words of Al Davis...and that of our mutual friend N628AU "Just Win Baby!!"
 
The IAM guy (his name not worthy to mention) told us that the IAM looked into it and the IAM attorneys told them that the law was not broken. Something about a BK escape clause.

But just because it was said doesn't mean it is true. If I'm in TPA I pursue legal help outside the IAM.
 
Do not trust the iam. Research everything for yourself, or contact a lawyer that is not affiliated with the iam. The iam is stacked as crooked as a bag of french fries!
 
I was always under the impression that the company only had to give an employee 60 days notice if they were closing the base but beings they eliminated a department their only obligated to giving 10 days notice which they are doing by paying the employees for the next 10 days and telling them not to report to work.[BR][BR]At any rate Im sure ole Dave is dotting all his i's and crossing his t's before he makes any decisions. Especially one of this magnitude.
 
This is duplicated over in [a href=http://www.usaviation.com/idealbb/view.asp?topicID=2190]another thread[/a], but in short, there are three exceptions to the 60 day notice. One is "unforseen circumstances" and another is "faltering company", either of which can be used in the Company's favor since they're in Ch.11 and still waiting for the ATSB loan guarantee to be approved and closed.
 
Eolesen's explanation is correct. Although a lawsuit may feel good in the beginning, it would likely be a drawn out process, very frustrating/expensive, and would be fruitless.

As noted, the company holds all of the cards in bankruptcy.

Chip
 
[blockquote]
----------------
On 12/1/2002 3:55:23 AM chipmunn wrote:

Eolesen's explanation is correct. Although a lawsuit may feel good in the beginning, it would likely be a drawn out process, very frustrating/expensive, and would be fruitless.

As noted, the company holds all of the cards in bankruptcy.

Chip



----------------
[/blockquote]

Then they just need to wait until the company comes out of Chapter 11 to call the lawyer. Besides, with the company in the toilet right now, you'd be just another creditor standing in line at the soup kitchen. Wait until you can actually get something.

Even if they didn't win a lawsuit, just making US Airways have to spend the money on lawyers and fighting it would be a beautiful sight. I want to kick the company in the shins hard and on any opportune occasion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top