US Pilots Labor Discussion 1/26- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[Black Swan]

Would that be for the legal fund to sue the senile arbitrator that denies the grievance?

No, that is the Alanis Morissette pin, also available soon. Billy Mays will be pitching that one.

 

[Black Swan]

At least we agree that jumpseat denials are a no no.

Good luck earning the 93 pin...

This is no BS. Luv the9, Hate and me want to meet some of you in PHL. We need to work it out and have a talk.

 

[HPearlyretiree]

To start with, certainly more basis than just calling the judge "your boy", "the desert judge" or "a senile old man" for the arbitrator. Disagreeing with a judgment should have more basis than just making slurs on the judge's or arbitrator's character. Disagreement should have some basis in fact or law, wouldn't you agree?

Jim

They need a scapegoat, they have yet to respond to my challenge to produce any evidence that Wake is not a good judge. The blame for USAPA lies in their mirror.

 

[flyinawa]

This is no BS. Luv the9, Hate and me want to meet some of you in PHL. We need to work it out and have a talk.

In PHL? Are you crazy? Aren't they expecting another blizzard? Come on down to PHX, the weather is GREAT this time of year. As added bonus, we'll be right by the company headquarters so you can visit with Doug Parker and tell him what a poor job he's doing or maybe you all can stop in to see our "Desert Judge" and tell him how foolish and senile he is.
I'm sure you'd all have a great time.

 

[EastUS]

Should the perrogative, of any supposedly free people, to find fault with the glorious renderings of any court be somehow denied to east pilots?..if so; on what basis?"

To start with, certainly more basis than just calling the judge "your boy", "the desert judge" or "a senile old man" for the arbitrator. Disagreeing with a judgment should have more basis than just making slurs on the judge's or arbitrator's character. Disagreement should have some basis in fact or law, wouldn't you agree?

Jim

Does it really matter what's voiced by any by way of "names" or epithets for/by anyone involved? Is it now your contention that all must always "play nice" or else have no well thought out reservations or objections?

I'll dismiss, for a moment, my personal and deep beliefs that the nic's an utterly immoral and even insane abomination.

OK. Let's examine some facts:

That your evident personal holding is that there's no basis for disagreement with alpa, alpa's nic monstrosity or the good Judge Wake's doings hardly argues the case that others shouldn't differ severely. Factually; the nic, for almost three years now, has been functionally demonstrated to be an entirely unsuccessfull methodology for effectively/actually combining the two pilot groups. Perhaps I've just missed the true and subtle genius of it all, but, even a casual glance can offer to even any bystander the valid observation that it's produced almost unimaginable levels of labor group disunity and completely failed in it's intended purpose. Would you argue otherwise?

I'd gently suggest addressing the actual efficacy of it first...and then...feel free to offer up any "facts" you may have as to how wondrously usefull and practical an instrument it's truly proved itself to be. Once you've achieved that....it should be simple indeed to establish why all should immediately (or even ever) agree that an initial courtroom result, that sought to release this virus from it's petri dish...is something to be accepted without continued questioning.......????

Good luck.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Does it really matter what's voiced by any by way of "names" or epithets for/by anyone involved?

Apparently not to you. Since you love to ask questions but don't answer any I'm done.

Jim

 

[cleardirect]

Should the perrogative, of any supposedly free people, to find fault with the glorious renderings of any court be somehow denied to east pilots?..if so; on what basis?"




Does it really matter what's voiced by any by way of "names" or epithets for/by anyone involved? Is it now your contention that all must always "play nice" or else have no well thought out reservations or objections?

I'll dismiss, for a moment, my personal and deep beliefs that the nic's an utterly immoral and even insane abomination.

OK. Let's examine some facts:

That your evident personal holding is that there's no basis for disagreement with alpa, alpa's nic monstrosity or the good Judge Wake's doings hardly argues the case that others shouldn't differ severely. Factually; the nic, for almost three years now, has been functionally demonstrated to be an entirely unsuccessfull methodology for effectively/actually combining the two pilot groups. Perhaps I've just missed the true and subtle genius of it all, but, even a casual glance can offer to even any bystander the valid observation that it's produced almost unimaginable levels of labor group disunity and completely failed in it's intended purpose. Would you argue otherwise?

I'd gently suggest addressing the actual efficacy of it first...and then...feel free to offer up any "facts" you may have as to how wondrously usefull and practical an instrument it's truly proved itself to be. Once you've achieved that....it should be simple indeed to establish why all should immediately (or even ever) agree that an initial courtroom result, that sought to release this virus from it's petri dish...is something to be accepted without continued questioning.......????

Good luck.

So now Nicolau is immoral and insane. The west pilots did not create the seniority list, unlike the east pilots and your DOH, Nicolau did. So when you say things like immoral or insane you are implying that the creator is those things.

Now let’s look at the definition of moral.

Main Entry: 1mor·al
Pronunciation: \ˈmȯr-əl, ˈmär-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Middle English, from Anglo-French, from Latin moralis, from mor-, mos custom
Date: 14th century

1 a : of or relating to principles of right and wrong in behavior : ethical <moral judgments> b : expressing or teaching a conception of right behavior <a moral poem> c : conforming to a standard of right behavior d : sanctioned by or operative on one's conscience or ethical judgment <a moral obligation> e : capable of right and wrong action <a moral agent>
2 : probable though not proved : virtual <a moral certainty>
3 : perceptual or psychological rather than tangible or practical in nature or effect <a moral victory> <moral support>

What would you call an individual or group that fails to live up to their agreements? Would they be immoral? Who gets to determine what moral behavior is? Is the behavior of middle eastern terrorist moral? If you ask them they say it is. So to invoke morally is a long stretch.

Is shunning your agreements ethical? Would you teach anyone that trying to get out of your obligation is the right behavior? Is it virtuous to try and screw 85% of the west pilots by stapling us to the bottom of a made up list? Would it be your perception or reality that the Nicolau list is immoral? Every other person or group that has looked at the Nicolau list finds it acceptable. That means that it is only the east pilots that perceive it to be immoral. Making your guys the small minority among the world.

I find it interesting that you point to “factsâ€￾ that say the Nicolau has been unsuccessful. That is because the east pilots have failed to live up to your agreements. It is the east pilots that have failed to accept the list. It is the east pilots that have prevented this from being successful. It is the east pilots that have and are causing the labor disunity.

Time to look in the mirror and find the immoral ones.

 

[Freebird]

This is no BS. Luv the9, Hate and me want to meet some of you in PHL. We need to work it out and have a talk.

Arent you all the same person?


What kind of 'talk', PHL thuggery style?

 

[CallawayGolf]

2) Show me anywhere/anytime I've given you or anyone else out west my personal word and not kept it....? Spare me any further BS about "Integrity".

You didn't have to give your word to support the ALPA merger policy or to agree to binding arbitration. You were hired on at US Airways as a pilot. As a condition of that employment you agreed, explicitly or implicitly, to let a union represent you as an agent on all matters of employment. Your agent, who has full legal authority to act on your behalf, developed a seniority integration policy, signed a transition agreement with the HP pilots’ agent, and ultimately submitted every pilot of US/HP to a final and binding arbitration process.

Your agent’s word was legally your word because you appointed them to represent you. The failure of your agent to abide by the binding arbitration award along with its stated desire to ignore the award lacks integrity by any definition. Personal integrity on your part could be demonstrated by actively seeking to have your agent implement the award because your agent agreed to it and it has continuously failed in that regard.

 

[fatherabraham]

Westies,
The east side has proven multiple times in the past to "suck it up" when they have disagreed with an arbitration. You guys have not even come close to the past east situations. You guys are NOT proven. Way easy to claim rightousness going into arb when worst case scenario was immensley better in LONG TERM than AWA offered in pre-merger DOH progression. You had nothing to lose and all to gain.
An equally nausiating scenario would have been a staple of your list below the bottom east furlough. My $ says a thousand to 1 that the west would be taking same steps.
Thats human nature and you know it. Absent an indisputable (current) corrupt and spineless ALPA leadership, none of this would have happened.
FA

 

[lynyrdskynyrd]

The east pilots have the numbers, it really is that simple.

 

[hp_fa]

You had nothing to lose and all to gain.

Tell that to the guys who have been laid off and the whole West pilot bunch who have not had their contract negotiated. In other words I disagree.

 

[CallawayGolf]

Westies,
The east side has proven multiple times in the past to "suck it up" when they have disagreed with an arbitration. You guys have not even come close to the past east situations. You guys are NOT proven. Way easy to claim rightousness going into arb when worst case scenario was immensley better in LONG TERM than AWA offered in pre-merger DOH progression. You had nothing to lose and all to gain.
An equally nausiating scenario would have been a staple of your list below the bottom east furlough. My $ says a thousand to 1 that the west would be taking same steps.
Thats human nature and you know it. Absent an indisputable (current) corrupt and spineless ALPA leadership, none of this would have happened.
FA

Seniority didn’t have to go to arbitration. There were multiple options in the process where both sides could have moderated their positions and negotiated to achieve an optimal, middle-ground outcome. Instead they remained intransigent and the issue went to binding arbitration. Even there, with the decision completely out of any pilot’s control, a compromise position could have been, should have been, offered to the arbitration panel. Again the groups did not take this opportunity which sealed the fate of the combined seniority list.

With no useful compromise presented, the panel was left to blend the two groups into a single seniority list the manner they saw fit based on the merger policy. Any dispassionate forethought would have led the east pilots to believe that a ratio integration was the most-likely outcome. If that wasn’t going to be to the east’s liking, they should have moved off the DOH demands well before George Nicolau made his ruling. ALPA national can’t be blamed. Nicolau can’t be blamed. Management can’t be blamed. The list was established according to the policy, an unbiased arbitrator and a panel of pilot neutrals, and it is therefore fair by any objective measure. Vote any way you see fit to do so, but complaining about fairness is simply not a message that is going resound with anyone other than the reality-challenged USAPA supporters.

 

[ableoneable]

Westies,
The east side has proven multiple times in the past to "suck it up" when they have disagreed with an arbitration. You guys have not even come close to the past east situations. You guys are NOT proven. Way easy to claim rightousness going into arb when worst case scenario was immensley better in LONG TERM than AWA offered in pre-merger DOH progression. You had nothing to lose and all to gain.
An equally nausiating scenario would have been a staple of your list below the bottom east furlough. My $ says a thousand to 1 that the west would be taking same steps.
Thats human nature and you know it. Absent an indisputable (current) corrupt and spineless ALPA leadership, none of this would have happened.
FA

Hey, it's Red Forman - "Easties are hard-working, loyal, proven and dependable, westies are not hard-working, they are not loyal, they are not dependable. Now where are the keys to the hovercraft."

 

[767intl]

Westies,
The east side has proven multiple times in the past to "suck it up" when they have disagreed with an arbitration. You guys have not even come close to the past east situations. You guys are NOT proven. Way easy to claim rightousness going into arb when worst case scenario was immensley better in LONG TERM than AWA offered in pre-merger DOH progression. You had nothing to lose and all to gain.
An equally nausiating scenario would have been a staple of your list below the bottom east furlough. My $ says a thousand to 1 that the west would be taking same steps.
Thats human nature and you know it. Absent an indisputable (current) corrupt and spineless ALPA leadership, none of this would have happened.
FA

We got the long-term scars to prove it. If you survive, the wounds only make you stronger. Problem was, West got an arbitration result so out of our thinking that we couldn't stomach it. We took action, while our MEC played the ALPA political game. ALPA Natl couldn't stomach it either, or at least the threat of losing $10M/yr in dues money. Not that it would have mattered much, since I doubt if ALPA would have stayed on property even with ALPA's Wye River proposal agreed to. ALPA's fate was sealed long before the NIC award. NIC just opened the flood gates, being the catalyst that not even ALPA Natl could stop. In the end, both East and West have held their ground, regardless how this turns out. We both think we hold moral high ground. We both always will. It's pointless to continue to debate who was right. If Addington is reversed, it doesn't really answer who was right, only who won the legal battle. It was the jellyfish at ALPA HQ that hemmed and hawed and couldn't make a decision. They sealed their fate early on by not presenting the NIC immediately. Not that we could expect anything different. What would have happened if ALPA had followed their own rules and immediately presented the NIC to the company and then forced a contract, even as bad as the Kirby? They've done it before. Most likely they would still be gone, but we'll never know.

The east pilots have the numbers, it really is that simple.

Yes, it really is. BTW, in last week's PHX BPR update, the West BPRs made the case for Addington litigation expenses being germane. But what do they know?