US pilot labor thread 7/13-7/20

[electricjet98]

I couldn't honestly care much less about the courtroom BS attendant to this issue myself

Too bad...I seem to recall an old saying regarding those that fail to learn from past mistakes are doomed to repeat them. I must assume that you don't mind your dues money being spent on frivolus lawsuits that are meant to further damage and disenfranchise a group of fellow pilots...and then you are shocked at their actions.

"maybe you'd like to 'riddle me this"! Given that "A contract's to be negotiated..and all you people are doing is running about like headless chickens.....while management pre-heats the broiler for you." What do you see to be any projectable net gain from your group's held positon of "Waah!..We don't have a Union!"? I mean seriously..within any/all contexts of the actual, real world?

I would regard our group's position as a simple statment of fact; that we don't have a union that desires to fairly represent our best interest, with or without our participation. Their past actions have already demonstrated this. However, regarding participation, that decision has not been made at this time. We should be hearing from our attorney in a few days. I assume you remember Mr. Freund.

 

[BoeingBoy]

We all know that you are pro ALPA and AWAPPA all-the-way, so save it. I never really expected that you or anyone else would defend the childish actions in the complaint, but I see now I was wrong

How typical - attack those with differing opinions.

As for fines, I was not precise although I mistakenly assumed that it would be clear I was talking about civil cases between private entities since we were talking about this specific case.

To be perfectly clear, my understanding is that there certainly can be civil fines levied against a private party by superior entities such as government agencies. The recent $10 million fine proposed by the FAA against WN would be an example of such civil fine - WN was not accused of any criminal behavior but rather violation of a regulation.

However, it is my understanding that in civil suits between private parties (as in the USAPA vs certain West pilots case) the judge issues a judgment, which may include damages (monetary and/or otherwise). As I said, HP-FA (or anyone else with real legal experience beyond knowing how to use an online dictionary) can correct me if I'm wrong.

Jim

[added] I see that HP-FA answered while I was typing but it didn't clear up the "is it fines or damages" issue when one priivate party brings suit against another private party in a civil case.

 

[EastUS]

...and then you are shocked at their actions.

Umm..yeah..now that you mention it. I've seen far more sane behavior from actual teenaged delinquents. You may spin the behavior of your group otherwise as you see fit. As for your participation being dependant upon what your mouthpiece advises...I hope you don't make your standard decisions only after legal consultations....might take awhile to get a phone patch set up when any emergency arises. 🙄 In any case?...Do what you think best. From my pespective..you've rendered your group utterly irrelevant to the decision making proceedings then. Your choice.

 

[Piedmont1984]

E98

More than one of your esteemed leaders made it crystal clear that should USAPA win the election, it would be all out war from the west.

Consequently, there is nothing we could do or say which would further alienate or disenfranchise the west, or conversely, mitigate their hostile position.

Your actions and rhetoric confirm to many of us in the east that a state of war, unilateral though it is, has existed - commencing with the April 17th election.

 

[EastUS]

Your actions and rhetoric confirm to many of us in the east that a state of war, unilateral though it is, has existed - commencing with the April 17th election.

The following's brought to you by a moment of purely childish whimsy, and intended only for humorous purposes:

"A state of war"? Oh goody!..Does this mean that we can, as "NiceLandingCaptain"/aka "Captain Cool" earlier posted "get suited up in our speed suits", as in; actual old "speed suits", subsequently pull out a few reserve Warthogs/'16's/15's/etc..and just go blast 'em? Heck..this "war" would be over in minutes 😉 Forget all the steenkeeeng lawyers..Let's have it out within the time honored, "Traditional Family Values" inherent in obtaining aerial supremacy! 😉

 

[Piedmont1984]

I guess that did sound kinda like an Edward R Murrow BBC broadcast.

 

[hp_fa]

[added] I see that HP-FA answered while I was typing but it didn't clear up the "is it fines or damages" issue when one priivate party brings suit against another private party in a civil case.

In general terms, civil courts award parties their proven damages. In a contractual matter they may also award attorneys costs and fees. They also may do as they see fit to uphold orders of the court and the judicial system. There are plenty of other things they can do, but what I gave is a brief primer response.

 

[EastUS]

I guess that did sound kinda like an Edward R Murrow BBC broadcast.

I thought it indeed had that fine, reasonant quality to it sir Don't mind me = It's hard to take all of this too "seriously" at times. I mean come on folks..there are actually people thinking themselves "worthy" of taking 20 working years from some with likely 4+ times their experience..and feeling "Righteous" in the process. How can one actually take such completely insane BS seriously? 😉

 

[nycbusdriver]

If you honestly believe that either AWA or US would still exist without this sorry merger...you're "High"..end of statment. No side "saved" the other, and the only thing you have to suport your "Righteous Position" is a perversely birthed lottery ticket....which you can't cash. Get a clue, a grip and get over yourselves. We're tied up in this sorry mess together and the only people "laughing" sit within management. A contract's to be negotiated..and all you people are doing is running about like headless chickens.....while management pre-heats the broiler for you.

Just finished watching the PHX Pilots Whiners' Meeting with Doug Parker. Again, Parker had to reiterate (and it appeared he was tired of repeating himself) that AWA would have declared bankruptcy in 2005 had it not been for the merger. I suppose in two months when he meets with the whiners again, he will have to say it yet again. I suggest that next time when the whine come up, he should walk up to the video camera and put his face quarely into it and repeat it again very slowly (maybe they might understand "words twice") that the only reason east and west are here is because east and west merged.

Will they ever, ever, ever get that through their thick, puerile skulls?

 

[EastUS]

Will they ever, ever, ever get that through their thick, puerile skulls?

All observational data would argue for a response in the negative...and yes...it baffles me as well.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Someone posted on this thread, or last week's, that the federal lawsuit cost USAPA $35,000+. They then asked the question as to whether or not it was worth it.

$35,000 is about $10 per eastie. I will happily send another $20 on the condition that they refile in NC court. Are they taking checks for this?

Regards,
NYCBusdriver
Nicolau Exempt
Golden 517

 

[ableoneable]

Someone posted on this thread, or last week's, that the federal lawsuit cost USAPA $35,000+. They then asked the question as to whether or not it was worth it.

$35,000 is about $10 per eastie. I will happily send another $20 on the condition that they refile in NC court. Are they taking checks for this?

Regards,
NYCBusdriver
Nicolau Exempt
Golden 517

Though the USCABA release did not mention it two of the three complaints were dismissed with prejudice. There will be no re-filing of those charges.

The third charge was untenable and the only reason to re-file would be to try and cost the defendants more in legal fees. This may or may not lead to "success" as USAPA would define it, but is also a dangerous game.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Though the USCABA release did not mention it two of the three complaints were dismissed with prejudice. There will be no re-filing of those charges.

The third charge was untenable and the only reason to re-file would be to try and cost the defendants more in legal fees. This may or may not lead to "success" as USAPA would define it, but is also a dangerous game.

Au contraire, mon frere.

"Judge Martin Reidinger issued a decision dismissing USAPA’s cause of action against AWAPPA and its co-defendants under the RICO act. Due to fact that USAPA’s RICO claim was its sole cause of action under federal law, the federal judge dismissed the remaining state law claims 'without prejudice so that these claims may be re-filed in the appropriate state court.'"

 

[ableoneable]

Au contraire, mon frere.

"Judge Martin Reidinger issued a decision dismissing USAPA’s cause of action against AWAPPA and its co-defendants under the RICO act. Due to fact that USAPA’s RICO claim was its sole cause of action under federal law, the federal judge dismissed the remaining state law claims 'without prejudice so that these claims may be re-filed in the appropriate state court.'"

"Motion to Dismiss Filed by AWAPPA Defendants [Doc. 77] are GRANTED
to the extent that Counts One and Two of the Amended Complaint are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rules 12 B(1) and 12 B (6) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."

Directly lifted from the court documents.

This is what happens when you listen to USAPPA spin instead of reading the source material yourself.

 

[EastUS]

"Motion to Dismiss Filed by AWAPPA Defendants [Doc. 77] are GRANTED
to the extent that Counts One and Two of the Amended Complaint are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE pursuant to Rules 12 B(1) and 12 B (6) of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure."

Directly lifted from the court documents.

This is what happens when you listen to USAPPA spin instead of reading the source material yourself.

"the federal judge dismissed the remaining state law claims 'without prejudice so that these claims may be re-filed in the appropriate state court.'" THis versus: ""Motion to Dismiss Filed by AWAPPA Defendants [Doc. 77] are GRANTED to the extent that Counts One and Two of the Amended Complaint are
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE" Let's count those "counts" again slowly...Counts...One...and Two...leaving any/all remaining issues unresolved within the bigger picture.

"This is what happens when you" clearly have some issues as per reading comprehension, and are simply sweating and drooling AWAPPA Koolaide from every available orifice and gland. 🙄

Frankly?..I'm among those that really don't much care about the lawsuit, as it seems to have succeeded in thwarting the most utterly ridiculous, juvenile delinquents out west from continuing their.."behaviors"...but I'll support the Union with whatever it needs, should it be the case that the suit's refiled in state court. Enough of the westie BS's just plain ENOUGH.