US pilot labor thread 7/13-7/20

[ClueByFour]

I believe that the goals of this suit were to stop the harrassment by a few named individuals, and in this regard it has apparently succeeded. I also believe that USAPA was hoping to minimize penalties against individuals by choosing a civil rather than criminal case.

Google SLAPP.

When you are done doing that, search on my posts about the USA and AUSA in that district. USAPA does not get to file a "criminal case," and the AUSA would have instructed USAPA to, well, STFU if they thought (or intended) upon bringing a criminal complaint.

All that requires is the filing of a police report, or a discussion with the local DA. I'm sure this hasn't happened, or criminal charges WOULD have been filed.

Yeah. Because the locals don't handle the mail, nor (in this particular case) would they handle the telecommunications charges. As I said in an earlier iteration of this thread, one of three things happened: 1. USAPA talked to the AUSA who found that the evidence did not warrant a care, they did and USAPA ignored their advice to wait for the criminal complaint, or USAPA acted without consulting the AUSA or postal inspector, or the FBI.

 

[EastUS]

So a handful of guys call a recorded hotline repeatedly, and the only solution you can come up with is a "fatally" flawed Rico case that cost well into six figures?

Spin it all you want, but the true purpose was much more sinister than just getting the phone calls to stop.

1) What would have been your suggested course of action? It's hardly the case that such individuals responded to reason in any way, shape or form.
2) Oh yes..definately..there's a vast, dark-hearted conspiracy afoot. From the very beginning of time....it was clear that all Righteousness was held in a tiny box in what would later become PHX..and Evil has patiently waited..all this time...just to seek out the very souls of the Noble Knights of St Nic. The sacred Box was wisely packed with phones, jumpseat forms and envelopes, so as to ensure the triumph of "Integrity", Honesty and Virtue on all possible levels...but sinsiter Evil was always lurking in the shadows....Yeah..that's it allright.....Get a grip.

Below link =AWAPPA "Professionals" make their moral, and "Integrity"-laden case against the "sinister" USAPA..and are comforted by Sir Cluebyfour's sage wisdom: http://youtube.com/watch?v=zrzMhU_4m-g

PS: When next we might pass, oh Knights Who Say "We hate You Guys"...know the following; You take yourselves far, far too seriously...Don't expect others to do so. I might consider a few out there to be among the utter dregs of the aviation world, and sorry excuses for "men", or "persons" as appropriate...but I'll NEVER afford anyone in the clothing of a professional pilot the least professional discourtesy within the working enviornment. Even "We hate you guys" himself is welcome on "my" jumpseat.

We're all in this mess together, whether you like it or not, (I certainly don't, but that's life) or whether you get your way in all things or not. Some of you "might" want to try actually growing up a bit.

 

[checksix]

This is the USAPA phone message for Sunday, July 13th, 2008

Item One – USAPA President Steve Bradford released A Presidents Message tonight that discusses the decision that Judge Martin Reidinger issued on Friday, July 11th dismissing USAPA’s cause of action against AWAPPA and its co-defendants under the RICO act. Judge Reidinger dismissed USAPA’s cause of action “without prejudice so that the claims may be re-filed in the appropriate state court.â€

Judge Reidinger concluded that, while the alleged facts supported a finding that the defendants were engaged in a criminal conspiracy to destroy USAPA property, two technical requirements relating to RICO and the Hobbs act were not satisfied. In view of his dismissal of USAPA’s sole federal cause of action, Judge Reidinger determined that the nine state law causes of action alleged in the complaint would be more appropriately adjudicated in a state court.

USAPA has several options which the BPR will consider. The President’s Message will be posted on the Website and emailed to all pilots.

Item Two - In a recent message to the Pilots, President Stephen Bradford discussed attempts by Management to usurp Captain’s Authority, and reminded Pilots that your Union leadership cannot protect “Captain’s Authority†on its own. In the very near future we will be calling on you, our pilots, to support our efforts in protecting “Captains Authority.†The Board passed a Resolution which directs the USAPA Officers to pursue all available options and resources. The complete text of President Bradford’s letter, along with the Resolution, is available on the USAirlinePilots.org web site, under “Updates.â€

Item Three - The Negotiating Advisory Committee (NAC) released a recent update which reported that the Committee was successful in securing an East parity Expanded Leave of Absence (EVLA) program for the West pilots. The NAC will meet again with Management starting July 14th.

Item Four – USAPA Secretary/Treasurer Mark King recently reminded Pilots in an update that USAPA dues should not be sent to the USAPA office, but instead to the address as noted on the invoice.

Item Five – Both the Furlough Committee and the Jumpseat Committee released updates which have been posted and emailed to all pilots.

Please view the website for complete details on the items discussed.

Thank you for listening.

 

[Megasnoop]

Just to clarify something. John and Jane Does are nearly always included in pleadings to preserve the right to change the name to a natural person if and when their true identity is learned, either in responsive pleadings and/or discovery. By and of itself, there is nothing nefarious about John Does.

6, I don't know where you lifted your legal opinions, but you might want to stick to lobbying at least until you get a law degree.

 

[Megasnoop]

If we are gonna compare USAPA to ALPA and AWAPPA based on a web forum then...

Well we've certainly proved that pilots can complain regardless of who they pay dues to.

FedEx Pilots warned us that we would loose our ALPA web board!![/url]

In due time, PHX. Talking to your Reps is the way to get a web board. you've got to join, pay dues and I don't think it's going to be anonymous. FedEx pilots warning us about losing the ALPA web board like they did, not really. There was barely an ALPA web board around in 1995 when ALPA got the boot. I remember a compuserve way of doing it. dial-up, WINDOWS hadn't been invented, and 5 cents a minute, there wasn't a lot of posts to read.

EastUS, I sent a card last fall but I was on the fence until I saw those utubes of USAPA's presentation in PHX. That said it all. There wasn't going to be any dealing with those guys. I wonder how many east votes the utubes caused. S

 

[prechilill]

A couple of statements from the Honorable Martin Reidinger:

"Upon reviewing the Plaintiff’s proposed Second Amended Verified
Complaint, the Court concludes that the Plaintiff’s proposed amendments
Case 3:08-cv-00246-MR-CH Document 97 Filed 07/11/2008 Page 39 of 48
40
would be futile."


"the Court concludes that the Plaintiff’s proposed amendments
would be futile, and for that reason, the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to
Amend First Amended Verified Complaint [Doc. 80] will be denied."


"Because the Court has
determined that the Plaintiff has failed to state a claim under RICO, these
claims must be dismissed." (This is the best one, I think. USAP's file a claim under RICO, only they are too dumb to figure out that their claim doesen't even fall under RICO. Maybe they should hire a paralegal to police their own counsel.)


"The Plaintiff’s request for leave to file its
proposed Second Amended Complaint is futile and therefore is denied."


"the Plaintiff’s requests for a temporary restraining order and a
preliminary injunction are rendered moot by the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s
state-law claims, and for that reason are denied."

 

[Phoenix]

In due time, PHX. Talking to your Reps is the way to get a web board. you've got to join, pay dues and I don't think it's going to be anonymous. FedEx pilots warning us about losing the ALPA web board like they did, not really. There was barely an ALPA web board around in 1995 when ALPA got the boot. I remember a compuserve way of doing it. dial-up, WINDOWS hadn't been invented, and 5 cents a minute, there wasn't a lot of posts to read.

I was making light of the absence of a USAPA web board. And frankly the FedEx pilots in the video appear to be ALPA stooges that serve FPL and Prater instead of the profession. The FedEx pilots put their names in the video. Do a little Google search about their glorious past.

If USAPA never has a web board it would be too soon for me.

 

[sharktooth]

Ok, point taken. Can you provide the name of the defendant who sent the feces in the mail? I think that is a fair question, is it not? I still have not seen that question answered yet, even though I reiterated that question after it was first posted by another. Why did my juvenile post warrant a response, yet my serious question did not?

Wrong jurisdiction, with prejudice.

Ask the USPS. Or, possibly the DHS or FBI. But don't go forum shopping.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

Google SLAPP.

When you are done doing that, search on my posts about the USA and AUSA in that district. USAPA does not get to file a "criminal case," and the AUSA would have instructed USAPA to, well, STFU if they thought (or intended) upon bringing a criminal complaint.



Yeah. Because the locals don't handle the mail, nor (in this particular case) would they handle the telecommunications charges. As I said in an earlier iteration of this thread, one of three things happened: 1. USAPA talked to the AUSA who found that the evidence did not warrant a care, they did and USAPA ignored their advice to wait for the criminal complaint, or USAPA acted without consulting the AUSA or postal inspector, or the FBI.

Oh, I know what SLAPP is, oh know-it-all and cconsistently wrong Mr. Clueless.

Go ahead, file. It won't make it as far as this suit did, if you can even get a lawyer to support you.

You are VERY biased and angry. Apparently it has effected your judgement, as well.

The ONLY thing that the judge ruled was that federal RICO charges do not apply. There is NO WAY you can tell me that the stuff that was charged is legal. NO WAY AT ALL.

 

[sharktooth]

So much for Oldie's belief that USAPA was trying to minimizes penalties against the individuals.

You yourself suggested that someone doing that had better keep it to themselves, right?

 

[hp_fa]

You yourself suggested that someone doing that had better keep it to themselves, right?

I believe that I suggested that anyone using the court system with the intent of sending a message should keep that to themselves.

 

[electricjet98]

A couple of statements from the Honorable Martin Reidinger:

"Upon reviewing the Plaintiff’s proposed Second Amended Verified
Complaint, the Court concludes that the Plaintiff’s proposed amendments
Case 3:08-cv-00246-MR-CH Document 97 Filed 07/11/2008 Page 39 of 48
40
would be futile."


"the Court concludes that the Plaintiff’s proposed amendments
would be futile, and for that reason, the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to
Amend First Amended Verified Complaint [Doc. 80] will be denied."


"Because the Court has
determined that the Plaintiff has failed to state a claim under RICO, these
claims must be dismissed." (This is the best one, I think. USAP's file a claim under RICO, only they are too dumb to figure out that their claim doesen't even fall under RICO. Maybe they should hire a paralegal to police their own counsel.)


"The Plaintiff’s request for leave to file its
proposed Second Amended Complaint is futile and therefore is denied."


"the Plaintiff’s requests for a temporary restraining order and a
preliminary injunction are rendered moot by the dismissal of the Plaintiff’s
state-law claims, and for that reason are denied."

Nice work on the excerpts, prechilill. Can you find where the Judge made the statement that FO Bradford quoted in his update?

Item One – USAPA President Steve Bradford released A Presidents Message tonight that discusses the decision that Judge Martin Reidinger issued on Friday, July 11th dismissing USAPA’s cause of action against AWAPPA and its co-defendants under the RICO act. Judge Reidinger dismissed USAPA’s cause of action “without prejudice so that the claims may be re-filed in the appropriate state court.â€￾

 

[UtterlyUdder]

hp fa,

Do you agree that plaintiffs often use the wrong venue to file suit? I see North Carolina clearly now. 😱 Perhaps that is where the lawsuit should have been filed in the first instance.

UU

 

[UtterlyUdder]

Judge Reidinger dismissed USAPA’s cause of action “without prejudice so that the claims may be re-filed in the appropriate state court.â€￾
[/quote]

North Carolina is a beautiful state indeed. Federal judges are wont to remand such suits to state courts. Wx or not this one will...........well????? 😉

 

[hp_fa]

hp fa,

Do you agree that plaintiffs often use the wrong venue to file suit? I see North Carolina clearly now. 😱 Perhaps that is where the lawsuit should have been filed in the first instance.

UU

From my experience I do not agree. In my experience we made a far bigger deal about being in federal court rather than state court and took even more care to make sure that there were not any procedural or factual impediments regarding filing there. Now I have seen cases actually transferred ("removed") from state court to federal court or transferred to state court, but that is not what happened here. This case was dismissed. There was no motion to transfer.

Does that answer your question?