US Airways Pilots Labor Thread 4/21-4/28

Status
Not open for further replies.
Anyone know the history of DFR's and their miserable rate of success? I think only 1-2 since 1975 have ever won. Pan Am/delta is the only one I know of.

Despite all the pontificating here by both sides, a DFR is almost impossible to win.
 
Anyone know the history of DFR's and their miserable rate of success? I think only 1-2 since 1975 have ever won. Pan Am/delta is the only one I know of.

Despite all the pontificating here by both sides, a DFR is almost impossible to win.
DFR's almost impossible to get into court. The odds go up a lot once it is in court.

This goes to trial today.
 
Indeed, while seeking to place people that were literally then children in grade school ahead of and "senior" to working pilots hired during the former "[pilots" glory days in sixth grade....clearly represents the pinnacle points in both human "reasoning" and, of course what's truly "honorable"? :lol:

Folks...You just can't make this type of stuff up....no one would believe it. :blink:

East

I understand how these instances seem to carry your arguement, but the seniority we combined was not that of where we all were 30+ years ago and it is somewhat irrelevant.

So the answere is yes, a 45 year old West captain is..was..and should remain senior to a 58 year continuously employed, very near the bottom East F/O, regardless of the reality that would mean said West captain was in the 6 grade when the East junior F/O was hired at whatever airline back in 1974.

We combined the seniority of 2 airlines, not the age of individual pilots of those airlines.
 
We fund it ourselves, while the companys "right-sizing" PHX and LAS. Your bases are expendable. Ours not nearly so much. sloop
You can wish all you want. I guess furloughs did not cut deep enough for your satisfaction. We'll soon see how any future base reduction affects this pilot group. You may not like the result.
 
MegaFUD. So much inaccuracy.

And what youve been putting out isnt? What does FUD stand for?


DFR's almost impossible to get into court. The odds go up a lot once it is in court.

Yeah, like the odds go up from 0% to something slightly higher.

Anyone know the history of DFR's and their miserable rate of success? I think only 1-2 since 1975 have ever won. Pan Am/delta is the only one I know of.
Despite all the pontificating here by both sides, a DFR is almost impossible to win.


Skyflyr, best I remember the ALPA National attorney briefing(1995, I think), ALPA didnt really lose the DAL/PanAm DFR. They chickened out. 2 groups of PanAm pilots sued. ALPA lost the first case and appealed. While the 1st was appeal, ALPA settled with the second group for about $50M. Then the appeals court overturned the first group win, but ALPA already paid the money to the 2nd group. In that case BOTH groups permanently lost their jobs, not just furloughed or had their seniority messed with. ALPA itself didnt do much wrong, except fail to supervise the DAL and Pan AM MECs deals with each other and the company. Crazy conspiracy theory that ALPA Pres Duffy (DAL pilot) screwed with it. I met him when I was a Rep and he was a standup guy. Doubt if he had anything to do with it. DAL got off the hook because they thought they were negotiating in good faith with the MECs. President of ALPA has to sign contracts and modifications. That case were huge financial losses due to permenant job terminations. Even still ALPA ultimately won the case on appeal.

DFRs are extremely hard to win. Based on the PanAM/DAL case, this alleged DFR is chump change. snoop
 
You can wish all you want. I guess furloughs did not cut deep enough for your satisfaction. We'll soon see how any future base reduction affects this pilot group. You may not like the result.

Thats a very sick accusation, 79. Id never wish for you or anyone east or west to lose jobs. Im sure you wouldnt RIK. snoop
 
Thats a very sick accusation, 79. Id never wish for you or anyone east or west to lose jobs. Im sure you wouldnt RIK. snoop

Snoop,

There is no confusion on my part that PHX and LAS are "expendable" in your mind. Your words, not mine.

Once again, be careful what you wish for.
 
Snoop,

There is no confusion on my part that PHX and LAS are "expendable" in your mind. Your words, not mine.

Once again, be careful what you wish for.

Just more of the entitled, superiority complexed delusions of Grandeur. Anybody going to the watch the festivities this week? I'll skip today, maybe show up tomorrow.
 
Snoop,

There is no confusion on my part that PHX and LAS are "expendable" in your mind. Your words, not mine.


Its what the company has been saying for the past year, 79. My words is those hubs are more expendable than ours. Look where the cuts came. Were in full arbitration mode to get those jobs back. What I WISH for is the end of world hunger and world peace. What I dont need is out-of-context distortions. Point is, if USAPA is forced into BK and cant represent either side, its every base for itself. I think we all know where the revenue is generated.

Be careful what you wish for.

Again, a sick distortion. None of us wish for a non-union carrier. Some just have more at stake than others. Let the trial sort it out. snooper
 
Let the trial sort it out. snooper
I read that your CLT have already conceded to a loss and are preparing for the appeal as the the venue where the real litigation is going to take place.

And all this from a case that has "no merit."

But then they always knew this was where it was going. Except for the fact that it wasn't supposed to make it this far until fall at the earliest.

So it had no merit, yet it made it to trial. It made it to trial but that's no problem because the appellate court is where its at as stated here:

"Therefore, this jury decision is actually good news because it is what's needed for us to get our opportunity to bring this to the correct court. We fully anticipated this turn of events"

Talk about your sick spin.

And of course USAPA can't possible lose because:

"We are confident that case law (which has already clearly ruled in favor of a union’s right to bargain) weighs heavily in our favor. Anything less than a victory by USAPA would severely constrain a union’s ability to bargain, and we do not believe that such a constraint was intended by the courts, as evidenced by this previous case law."

So it's still a slam dunk for USAPA.

I didn't read anywhere that less than 5% of cases in the 9th are overturned.

But hey, that's a downer nobody wants to hear.
 
Just more of the entitled, superiority complexed delusions of Grandeur. Anybody going to the watch the festivities this week? I'll skip today, maybe show up tomorrow.
That is the message I heard, entitlement. Snoop and I agree, this is for the courts to decide. I've been there twice and don't want to suffer through jury selection.

I'll be there on Wednesday.
 
So the answere is yes, a 45 year old West captain is..was..and should remain senior to a 58 year continuously employed, very near the bottom East F/O, regardless of the reality that would mean said West captain was in the 6 grade...


The instances cited don't involve any "45 year old West" anything, versus much older and more experienced east people..and you know it full well. The nic "list" places west people that weren't even BORN when many out east began professional flying careers, ahead of and "senior" to said east pilots..and you know that as well. Enough with the ridiculous "spin" attempts.....
 
Did anyone catch the recent CLT "update"? (I use that term liberally.) McKee basically is waving the white flag before the trail even begins. I guess he feels like a few other notables in history, like Captain Smith of the unsinkable Titanic, for example. Here he is, the day of the trial staring the unthinkable in the eyes. Where has all the confidence gone in the east? It sure is quiet around here.

CLT excerpt: "On a final note, as the trial begins and the strategies unfold, we must not forget that we are in our opponent’s backyard. This trial is being conducted in Arizona and in the Plaintiffs’ hometown. Be prepared for any contingencies in the lower court proceedings"

So guys, where is the beef?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top