TWU - Do your job, not managements jobs.

[TWU informer]

AA and US Airways tell TWU to BUTT OUT!

American Airlines and US Airways said thanks but no thanks Tuesday to the request of the Transport Workers Union to intervene on their side in a lawsuit seeking to block the carriers’ merger.

So it seems the airlines and DOJ officials seem to be in agreement for once in the lawsuit brought by the U.S. Department of Justice to stop the merger on antitrust grounds.

The TWU filed a motion last week to intervene in the case, with a supplemental motion Monday. U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly gave the DOJ and the airlines until 5 p.m. Tuesday to respond, and TWU now has until 5 p.m. Wednesday to respond to their response.

“The Airlines greatly value the interests of TWU’s members and support TWU’s participation in this case as amicus curiae,” the carriers wrote in their response to the TWU’s request to intervene.

“There is no need for TWU to intervene, however, because the interests of TWU and its members in this case are fully aligned with – and thus adequately represented by – the Airlines. TWU’s motion to intervene should thus be denied,” 1 the airlines said in their response.

And “furthermore, TWU’s intervention would complicate the proceedings, potentially jeopardizing the trial schedule that the parties, the Special Master, and the Court are working to implement. TWU can fully achieve its goal of ensuring that its members’ interests are “adequately presented to the Court… by participating as amicus curiae along with other unions representing the employees of both Airlines,” the carriers argued.

“If TWU is permitted to intervene rather than simply act as amicus, these other unions and similar interested parties – all of whom can legitimately claim a deep interest in seeing the merger approved – may also seek to intervene, further complicating the tight trial schedule,” American and US Airways said in their response to the TWU request.
Now, TWU has until end of day Wednesday to respond to the carriers and the DOJ.

Keep reading for the airlines’ brief.

DEFENDANTS’ RESPONSE TO AMENDED MOTION OF
TRANSPORT WORKERS UNION TO INTERVENE

Pursuant to the Court’s October 7, 2013 Minute Order, Defendants US Airways Group, Inc. and AMR Corporation (together, the “Airlines&rdquo respectfully submit this response to the Amended Motion of the Transport Workers Union of America AFL-CIO (“TWU&rdquo to Intervene as of Right or, Alternatively, to Appear as Amicus Curiae (Dkt. 98) (“Am. Mot.&rdquo. The Airlines greatly value the interests of TWU’s members and support TWU’s participation in this case as amicus curiae. There is no need for TWU to intervene, however, because the interests of TWU and its members in this case are fully aligned with – and thus adequately represented by – the Airlines. TWU’s motion to intervene should thus be denied.[sup]1[/sup]
A party may intervene as of right under Rule 24(a)(2) only if: (1) the motion to intervene is timely; (2) the party claims a legally cognizable interest relating to the property or transaction which is the subject of the action; (3) the action’s disposition might otherwise impair or impede the party’s ability to protect that interest; and (4) the party’s interest is not adequately represented by existing parties. See In re Endangered Species Act Section 4 Deadline Litig., 270 F.R.D. 1, 4 (D.D.C. 2010). Even assuming TWU satisfies its burden with respect to the first three of these requirements, it does not satisfy the fourth.
TWU’s Amended Motion to Intervene explains why it is in the interest of all TWU workers to have this merger approved – and that interest is fully aligned with the Airlines’ interest. While the Airlines appreciate TWU’s desire to convey to the Court all the reasons the proposed merger is procompetitive and consistent with the antitrust laws, the Airlines are making precisely these same points. Compare Mem. in Supp. of Am. Mot. (“Mem.&rdquo at 6 (“without the merger, the stand-alone American Airlines will find it more difficult to compete effectively against its much larger rivals, new Delta and new United&rdquo, with AMR Corp.’s Answer (Dkt. 80) at 1 (“This transaction would create a third comprehensive, global network carrier . . . fully capable of competing with the two that exist today [Delta and United] . . .&rdquo and US Airways Group, Inc.’s Answer (Dkt. 79) at 3. TWU’s ultimate goal is the same as the Airlines’, and its arguments for that end result are the same as those urged by the Airlines.[sup]2[/sup] See Building & Constr. Trades Dep’t, AFL-CIO, v. Reich, 40 F.3d 1275, 1282 (D.C. Cir. 1994) (affirming denial of motion to intervene where the movant “offered no argument not also pressed by” the defendant); Schoenman v. FBI, 263 F.R.D. 23, 25 (D.D.C. 2009) (denying motion to intervene because, among other things, the movant’s “alleged interest . . . [was] already adequately represented by Plaintiff himself&rdquo.

Furthermore, TWU’s intervention would complicate the proceedings, potentially jeopardizing the trial schedule that the parties, the Special Master, and the Court are working to implement. TWU can fully achieve its goal of ensuring that its members’ interests are “adequately presented to the Court,” Mem. at 10, by participating as amicus curiae along with other unions representing the employees of both Airlines. If TWU is permitted to intervene rather than simply act as amicus, these other unions and similar interested parties – all of whom can legitimately claim a deep interest in seeing the merger approved – may also seek to intervene, further complicating the tight trial schedule.
The Court “has broad discretion to permit . . . proposed intervenors to participate as amici curiae.” Dist. of Columbia v. Potomac Elec. Power Co., 826 F. Supp. 2d 227, 237 (D.D.C. 2011). Exercise of that discretion is particularly appropriate here, since permitting TWU to act as amicus curiae together with other interested employee unions would “adequately serve[] the purposes of the desired intervention without unduly delaying or prejudicing the [existing] parties.” In re Vitamins Antitrust Litig., No. 99-0197, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 31702, at *33 (D.D.C. Nov. 30, 2004) (denying motion to intervene). In any case, TWU is not entitled to intervene as of right, and its request to do so should be denied.[sup]3[/sup]
Respectfully submitted,
/s/
Richard G. Parker
John M. Majoras
[sup]1[/sup] The Airlines take no position as to “whether the failure to file a pleading with a motion to intervene constitutes a defect,” Am. Mot. at 2, except to note that TWU’s inability to plead “an independent cause of action or defense,” id., is further evidence that TWU should participate in this action, if at all, as amicus curiae.
[sup]2 [/sup]The Airlines understand and commend TWU’s concern over “the risk to TWUrepresented employees” should the merger be blocked. Mem. at 6. For the purposes of intervention, however, the motives or rationale for litigating an issue are not relevant; all that matters is whether the ultimate objectives and interests overlap. See Dairy Maid Dairy v. United States, 147 F.R.D. 109, 112 (E.D. Va. 1993).
[sup]3[/sup] TWU does not seek permissive intervention under Rule 24( and could not meet that Rule’s requirements in any event. Under Rule 24( , “the court may permit anyone to intervene who: (A) is given a conditional right to intervene by a federal statute; or ( has a claim or defense that shares with the main action a common question of law or fact.” TWU has no statutory right to intervene and readily acknowledges that it “does not have an independent cause of action or defense to plead.” Am. Mot. at 2.

 

[TWU informer]

The TWU always at adequate representation at the bargaining table, so they try to piggy back on management, and any other possible way to show success.

Why not just become an adequate union and stop trying to manage and/or interfere in the management of AA? TWU already destroyed the Tulsa Maintenance Base by playing management guru, now they want to manage the DOJ lawsuit...... BUTT OUT AND DO YOUR OWN JOB TWU!

 

[FWAAA]

The comedy (lunacy) from the TWU continues. When I saw that the TWU was asking to intervene as a party in the merger injunction lawsuit, I remembered the legal brief (and I use that term loosely) that TWU filed early in the bankruptcy that was woefully short on legal citations but did mention Bain Capital. I don't remember if Levine worked the Occupy New York movement into the brief but overall, the document fell short of expectations.

Get back to the children's table, TWU, and let the adults handle things.

 

[TWU informer]

The comedy (lunacy) from the TWU continues. When I saw that the TWU was asking to intervene as a party in the merger injunction lawsuit, I remembered the legal brief (and I use that term loosely) that TWU filed early in the bankruptcy that was woefully short on legal citations but did mention Bain Capital. I don't remember if Levine worked the Occupy New York movement into the brief but overall, the document fell short of expectations.

Get back to the children's table, TWU, and let the adults handle things.

The TWU reasoning is always the same. Failing so miserably, they try any attempt to climb on board and piggy back any smell of a success story, so they can claim a victory to publish and pound into the membership's brains. Sad, but true fact of being represented by the worthless wonders.

 

[WNMECH]

The TWU reasoning is always the same. Failing so miserably, they try any attempt to climb on board and piggy back any smell of a success story, so they can claim a victory to publish and pound into the membership's brains. Sad, but true fact of being represented by the worthless wonders.

They can still just file an amicus brief and claim the same victory.
That way they can actually do less and claim to be winners.

 

[Bob Owens]

Don't remember anybody asking the members or representatives of the members where we stood on the merger. This was Little's baby, I was never in favor of creating the largest carrier in the world with the worst labor contracts, for mechanics at least, in the industry. I hope the deal falls flat, those who are pushing the deal say that it opens the door to changes in the contract, well yes and No. Nothing stops the company from sitting back and doing nothing till our deal becomes amendable, and nothing stops the company from opening the contract without a merger. The IAM sure doesn't seem to be in a hurry to settle either. So yes the merger would lead to "harmonization " talks. Not real negotiations though, there is no end game that the Unions could legally use as leverage to secure improved conditions because these would not be Sect 6 negotiations under the RLA where if we reach an impasse it could lead to self help. If the end game was to renegotiate with the merger then why didn't they push for a shorter terms where real negotiations would begin, and don't even bother bringing up early openers, they mean nothing, we had them in the 2003 deal and what good did they do us then? Hell with Videtich still in there I could see them saying they will cut the make believe cap from 35% to 25% (where they are anyway)in exchange for dropping the Mid Term wage adjustment. I say let AA choke on this deal and give us profit sharing and the mid term wage adjustment for six years or more instead of a paltry 4% for maybe 18 months. I can see it already, Videtich and Overspeed will be here arguing how the bump in wages from the adjustment will increase the total maintenance spend to the point where AA can outsource what's left of Tulsa and "ALL the B-checks", so we have to give it back to not only save Tulsa but all those line jobs as well. Spin spin spin. After seeing how Videtich managed to drag out even asking to be released, over a year after we voted against the TA, the last thing I want to see are any negotiations whatsoever where he holds an International position. He has done more damage to our profession than Frank Lorenzo or deregulation-combined.

 

[Overspeed]

Don't remember anybody asking the members or representatives of the members where we stood on the merger. This was Little's baby, I was never in favor of creating the largest carrier in the world with the worst labor contracts, for mechanics at least, in the industry. I hope the deal falls flat, those who are pushing the deal say that it opens the door to changes in the contract, well yes and No. Nothing stops the company from sitting back and doing nothing till our deal becomes amendable, and nothing stops the company from opening the contract without a merger. The IAM sure doesn't seem to be in a hurry to settle either. So yes the merger would lead to "harmonization " talks. Not real negotiations though, there is no end game that the Unions could legally use as leverage to secure improved conditions because these would not be Sect 6 negotiations under the RLA where if we reach an impasse it could lead to self help. If the end game was to renegotiate with the merger then why didn't they push for a shorter terms where real negotiations would begin, and don't even bother bringing up early openers, they mean nothing, we had them in the 2003 deal and what good did they do us then? Hell with Videtich still in there I could see them saying they will cut the make believe cap from 35% to 25% (where they are anyway)in exchange for dropping the Mid Term wage adjustment. I say let AA choke on this deal and give us profit sharing and the mid term wage adjustment for six years or more instead of a paltry 4% for maybe 18 months. I can see it already, Videtich and Overspeed will be here arguing how the bump in wages from the adjustment will increase the total maintenance spend to the point where AA can outsource what's left of Tulsa and "ALL the B-checks", so we have to give it back to not only save Tulsa but all those line jobs as well. Spin spin spin. After seeing how Videtich managed to drag out even asking to be released, over a year after we voted against the TA, the last thing I want to see are any negotiations whatsoever where he holds an International position. He has done more damage to our profession than Frank Lorenzo or deregulation-combined.

You must be bored

 

[swamt]

You must be bored

Really? Is that all you got after Bob's very specific posting?? Again, speaks volumes...

 

[Bob Owens]

You must be bored

Once again , a reflection upon yourself?

 

[Vortilon]

Bob is right. The TWU is very predictable when it comes to negotiations. If there is a wrong path to take or strategy to use - count on the TWU to use them.

Once the AMTs at AA leave the TWU for AMFA - Lombardo can thank Jim Little and Don Videtich for their recruiting efforts - for AMFA.