US pilot labor thread 7/13-7/20

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Lynyrd quote below;

"Let me say it this way. If any east pilot has truly read the court documents to see for himself, and still supports usapa's actions, he has no ethics and is not welcome on my jumpseat.

In my own cockpit it is moot, however, the baby is simply out with the bathwater."


another lynrrd quote below;

lynyrdskynyrd
Rating: 0
View Member Profile
Find Member's Posts
Posted on: Jun 25 2007, 10:41 PM

"As a west pilot, I'm not high fiving anything. I personally think Prater is finally getting the right idea, but you obviously disagree, thats fine. If you work towards finding new representation, thats fine also, I respect that.

It may not work out the way USA320 writes it out though. Ultimately, it will work itself out one way or another, and we'll all deal with it one way or another. And as long as I have a jumpseat, you are welcome on it, we'll just talk about girls."


Typical Nick fever hypocrite from america west.

Not really, up until the lawsuit any and all were welcome. After the new union decided to ruin innocent people, I re-evaluated. Simple as that.

 

[EastUS]

I re-evaluated. Simple as that.

Oh!..DARN!!..Western civilzation as we know it's now held hostage to your current whim..oh "ProfessionaL" Abve notwithstanding..grow up..you'll do yourelf and yours great favors thereby. Either:

1) You have actual principles or
2) They blow away in the faintest breezes..and have no meaning in reality. That's how things actually work in life...with "some".

Welll.."IF I'm a man of my Word..and..only if I always get my way of course..then I'll stay one" means absolutely NOTHING. Sounds like time for another "INTEGRITY MATTERS" westie rant to me. No matter= there's always plenty of fools available for any given Fool's Errand..I'm sure that I'll not be grossly dissapointed if I check back even days later.

 

[2BorNot2B]

SOS, different day! :down: Good grief ... don't you people get sick of yourselves??

Mod ... whatever happened to the " Do not make it personal" part of your thread?

2B

 

[nostradamus]

Not really, up until the lawsuit any and all were welcome. After the new union decided to ruin innocent people, I re-evaluated. Simple as that.

You say they were innocent. Lets look at the lawsuit accusations that I will provide below. If your people are innocent they should sue for defamation of character, but I firmly believe there was no defamation, just defecation on the part of the america west pilots.

USAPA vs awappa

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

Now read what the Judge wrote. I mean what the Judge wrote, not Stevie B's summary.

 

[nostradamus]

Now read what the Judge and wrote.

The judge did not say you were innocent of all charges by any means. You would have a great defamation of character suit if he did. He said it is not part of his jurisdiction.

Your pilots for america west have a very questionable history, check the history of my posts, I have documented the truth, I dare you to sue me. I have only presented the facts with links. You are what you are.

I get occasional legal advice myself, but I never have to pay for it, get it.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

The judge did not say you were innocent of all charges by any means. You would have a great defamation of character suit if he did. He said it is not part of his jurisdiction.

Your pilots for america west have a very questionable history, check the history of my posts, I have documented the truth, I dare you to sue me. I have only presented the facts with links. You are what you are.

Well why did he throw it out. Yea, yea , yea I know, minor techincalities......... Sure.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

I have only presented the facts with links. You are what you are.

Facts with links? You just provided a mismash of trumped up bs that a federal judge threw out.

I am what I am? Oh man, did that hurt.

 

[nostradamus]

Well why did he throw it out. Yea, yea , yea I know, minor techincalities......... Sure.

OJ, er I mean OK, did the judge "throw out" the whole case, no. Did he say you were innocent of all charges, no.

The technicalities of his findings are the rule of law, it in no way implies that america west pilots have any common sense or innocence whatsoever.

Very troubling example of professional pilots you are portraying. I have backed this by evidence not by opinion.

Please review the history of my post to remind you of the history of your pilots character.

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

OJ, er I mean OK, did the judge "throw out" the whole case, no. Did he say you were innocent of all charges, no.

The technicalities of his findings are the rule of law, it in no way implies that america west pilots have any common sense or innocence whatsoever.

Very troubling example of professional pilots you are portraying. I have backed this by evidence not by opinion.
[/quote


Good night.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Quite frankly, I'm not sure how to differentiate between the slimeballs and the decent guys.

The slimeballs wear their shoes on the wrong feet and orange socks.

 

[traderjake]

A man either has serious beliefs and principles..or he doesn't. If they truly exist; they're not something that one's ever "not so sure" about...no matter what they personally cost...EVER!. bout having no

A man either does what he agrees to do or he has no integrity, e.g. binding arbitration agreements.
.
A man with no integrity who claims otherwise is a lowlife and (deleted by moderator).

 

[GorgeousGeorge]

A man either does what he agrees to do or he has no integrity, e.g. binding arbitration agreements.
.
A man with no integrity who claims otherwise is a lowlife (deleted by moderator).

The U.S. supreme court adjudicated by a ruling of 7-2 in the Dred Scott case that a man was property. A war had to be fought to right that wrong and ensure that the words contained in the Declaration of Independence had meaning.

 

[cleardirect]

Sued? In what court? under what charges? which captains were named?

That would be North Carolina Federal court. Where USAPA spent well over $100,000 of association money to sue west pilots. However reading the complaint and looking at all of the evidence the federal judge threw the case out "with prejudice"

This is from the requested temporary restraining order. At the bottom, number three is the requested action. If you will notice it asks a federal judge to issue a TRO against each and every captain in the US. "access to jump seat on aircraft operated by any commercial carrier". USAPA is so arrogant that they want to deign every captain in the US his "captains authority" to decide who sits on his jump seat.

Hope that answers your questions.

(6) A concerted effort to deprive pilots at US Airways the ability to commute to work by denying USAPA members the use of the cockpit jump seat (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 113-120; Declaration of Bill Lloyd [hereinafter “Lloyd Decl.â€]; Declaration of Kevin Airey [hereinafter “Airey Decl.â€]; Theuer Decl., Exs. 3-8);

access to cockpit "jump seats" is being denied to "East" pilots based on their membership or participation in USAPA, or based on pilots’ status as "East" pilots (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 113-120; Theuer Decl., Exs. 3-8; Lloyd Decl.; Airey Decl.);

USAPA will also likely succeed on the merits of its cause of action under the UDTPA based on plaintiff’s claim that the defendants and their co-conspirators have participated in a concerted effort to deprive pilots at US Airways the ability to commute to work by denying USAPA members the use of the cockpit "jump seat" on flights flown by former America West pilots as well as flights flown by pilots at other carriers. (Am. Cmplt. ¶¶ 113-120; Theuer Decl., Exs. 3-8; Lloyd Decl.; Airey Decl.).

3. From denying, conspiring to deny, or instigating denial of, access to "jump seats" on aircraft operated by any commercial carrier because of suspected membership in, or support of, USAPA, or status as an "East pilot," or because of any pretextual excuse to hide such anti-USAPA animus, or animus against East pilots;

 

[nycbusdriver]

That would be North Carolina Federal court. Where USAPA spent well over $100,000 of association money to sue west pilots. However reading the complaint and looking at all of the evidence the federal judge threw the case out "with prejudice"

Just to be clear. The federal judge dismissed the federal claims "with prejudice." The federal judge dismissed in federal court the state claims "WITHOUT prejudice," meaning that the state claims can still be pursued in state court.

The case is not necessarily over. It's just that none of these charges can be pursued any longer in federal court.