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

[Tiger 1050]

I appreciate that sir. I sure wish things were otherwise. I certainly found zero joy in making the sad observations. One sometimes has to wonder if there's really any "intelligent life" on the board of directors...or whether they're just too rich to care or even be interested at all......

I suspect it is a classic good old boys club scenario. The board members sit on other boards as well as work as CEO's and the like for other companies which may have a Mr. Parker on their board. Nobody is dumb enough to rock the boat in that system once you've gotten on. It's lifetime membership. Not, sadly, unlike Congress. Wish I could vote on my own pay and benefits... Not to mention get them for life regardless of my status as an active member. Oops. Sorry rant over.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim,

Did it ever occur to you that the judge may have made some mistakes in this case? Did you ever read B. Wilders comments on his blog?

Yes and yes. But putting off further Federal Court action until the 9th rules seems to be nothing more than common sense to me, not some sign of sure victory for USAPA. One would need to be in very desperate need of any claim of victory to read more into it than exists.

Jim

 

[N924PS]

Clear,

Nothing changes. We would just wait for our attrition to kick in and receive our raises from rapid movement up the east list. If the company can stay in business that long!

Hate

The last rapid movement was back in the 80's at PI and US. Due to growth, not attrition.

There is no growth, little attrition, so don't hold your breath for that "quick" upgrade.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Somehow, all this talk of "rapid movement from attrition" makes me believe that too many believe there'll be more attrition than there'll actually be - especially for those bottom half of A320/737 captains/first officers. How long are those guys/gals willing to wait for the attrition to get them a raise when they could have the same raise with a new contract?

I suspect that the talk of "rapid advancement from attrition" means "enough for me to get that bigger airplane/captain bid."

Jim

 

[nycbusdriver]

There is the truth and then there is USAPA's story

Here is what the court had to say.

Filed: 02/09/2010
Entered: 02/09/2010
Entered By: SJF,
Event Name(s): Status Conference
Full Docket Text for Document 634:
TEXT-ONLY Minute Entry. Proceedings held before Judge Neil V Wake: Status Conference held on 2/9/2010. Appearances: Marty Harper, Andrew Jacob, Kelly Flood, and Katherine Brown are present for Plaintiffs. Nicholas Granath and Lucas Middlebrook are present for Defendants. Status of the case and the pending appeal are discussed. The Court will issue a ruling shortly regarding a stay. If no stay is entered, oral argument on the pending motions (motion for attorneys' fees, doc. 600; motion to dismiss, doc. 620) will be held on Wednesday, February 24, 2010 at 2:00 p.m. (Court Reporter Laurie Adams.) This is a TEXT ENTRY ONLY. There is no PDF document associated with this entry. (SJF)


Spin away!

Yes, what you quoted is indeed what the judge said. But the POINT is that the judge even came out with any of this. If he thought he was on solid ground, why come out with this statement at all? He sees this beginning to slip away, so now he is starting to hedge his bets and opening up some wiggle room so he doesn't look like a complete fool when the 9th rules negatively on ripeness.

The once arrogant Wake is now talking out both sides of his mouth.

 

[cleardirect]

Clear,

Nothing changes. We would just wait for our attrition to kick in and receive our raises from rapid movement up the east list. If the company can stay in business that long!

Hate

Waiting and delay will not be an option. The status quo will not remain.

As you said if the company can stay in business, they would change the game to say in business. A merger would change the deal.

BTW, what is the big complaint from the east? "I am never going to upgrade under the nic". If true that means a lot of that attrition will come from junior F/O's that does not move anyone into a bigger airplane or better paying seat.

So what is it? Never upgrade or the attrition is valuable?

 

[cubfan]

Somehow, all this talk of "rapid movement from attrition" makes me believe that too many believe there'll be more attrition than there'll actually be - especially for those bottom half of A320/737 captains/first officers. How long are those guys/gals willing to wait for the attrition to get them a raise when they could have the same raise with a new contract?

I suspect that the talk of "rapid advancement from attrition" means "enough for me to get that bigger airplane/captain bid."

Jim

Jim,

I agree some what, however I will speak for only myself. This is alot more than just money. Attrition for me would be a better quality of life. I speak of mainly rsv to blk holder. Alot of bottom half you speak of have been on rsv for a very long time. For them and myself it would mean no more sitting in crash pads 20 days a month for 72/76 hrs of pay. No more having your days off changed at company choice. Moving up through attrition means going from 72/76 to 85hrs if they choose, which means more money. For others it would mean an upgrade to capt., but I agree more would move off rsv than would upgrade. Also for the 190 fo's a move to group 2 pay, a huge difference in their food stamp wages. Now you stated how long will they wait for the same raise they could get through a new contract. The companies offer is only parity/+3%. For me their is no parity, only 3% which would be 3.00/hr. A mere 216.00 a month. A new contract in it's present form does nothing but put status quo in place for the next forseeable future. Still on rsv enjoying 20 days a month in some crash pad having my life dictated by crew sked. No thanks. The west speaks it would only be a small percent moving east. Well we really don't know for sure, but what I do know is once it's done, it's to late. There is alot more to this attrition than meets the eye, how ever small or large it may be. Your right, I only look at things as how it will affect me, which is really how we all look at things if your honest. THX.

 

[Metroyet]

Yes, what you quoted is indeed what the judge said. But the POINT is that the judge even came out with any of this. If he thought he was on solid ground, why come out with this statement at all? He sees this beginning to slip away, so now he is starting to hedge his bets and opening up some wiggle room so he doesn't look like a complete fool when the 9th rules negatively on ripeness.

The once arrogant Wake is now talking out both sides of his mouth.

This is a perfect example of the Eastie Alternate Universe. There is nothing in this post that isn't pure projection of fantasy. Wake doesn't give a damn about the 9th. That's how the system works. What else would any rational person expect Wake to say? Why do anything before the 9th? Common Sense, not a desperate buckling to USAPAs will.

 

[ClueByFour]

Indeed Ripeness has been the issue. If you understand the case then you realize a win on ripeness does not equate to a DOH list. A nine member jury verdict is the forecast of what will happen if you get the Company to go with a DOH list. So why would they only to see another jury verdict that would undo your dream list.

This is lost on the East fanbois here.

A win on ripeness merely delays things. The East could have done that simply by voting no. Millions of dues dollars later, same result.

Any of you guys play poker and/or chess for money?

 

[cubfan]

This is lost on the East fanbois here.

The East could have done that simply by voting no.

Many plan to.

 

[nic4us]

Clear,

The judge would love to spank USAPA and you know it! I remember Bringle saying stuff like...I have been doing this for 33 years and never had a judge tell me that. I bet the judge is starting to realize that he is not going to be the one to change labor law in this country. B. Wilder said the judge got it wrong. This is really going to hurt the westies if it goes USAPA's way. LOA 93 pay restoration will absolutely wreck the west resolve.........I am thinking you guys could be in a jam in just a few months from now.

We don't care if the 9th rules in favor of Wake.......he can never take our vote away from us!

Hate

First, Bringle. In his 33 years had he ever defended an association founded, designed and constituted for the purpose of breaking the law or at very least contorting the law and attempting to use it for purposes other than its intent, i.e. renegging on an arbitrated ruling and/or delaying that ruling by gumming it up in the legal process?

Second, B. Wilder. The comments in the blog show a total lack of understanding of what happened in the trial and the foundation of the plaintiffs complaint. He makes some of the same arguements as Seeham, but is careful to point out where Seeham went wrong to make himself look better, but his logic is as plain stupid as Seeham's. They both argue that a union has the sole right to negotiate all sections of the CBA. Well that is true enough, but lets look at a parrallel example. An individual has the right to protect themselves, even use deadly force in self defense. But arguing that the unions right to negotiate allows it to break the law in doing so, would be like arguing self defense for killing a security guard who put a gun in your face while you were robbing the bank he was protecting.

LOA93, whatever happens there happens, there are upsides for the West if usapa is successful, but it pretty much looks like a total loss for usapa from an outside perspective. i.e. you are going to lose that grievance.

Finally, you should care how the 9th rules. I actually think their decision will come as an uphold in part, remand in part kind of instruction. But if they simply uphold Wake, he has numerous options to make your vote inconsequential, up to and including, (in regards to the Nicolau decision), taking your vote away.

 

[ROACLT]

This is lost on the East fanbois here.

A win on ripeness merely delays things. The East could have done that simply by voting no. Millions of dues dollars later, same result.

Any of you guys play poker and/or chess for money?

Yes, in essence it would delay the filing of and subsequent DFR until there was a ratified contract. Other considerations would become big obstacles in filing suit again.

It would remove Judge Wake. Any new filing would be 1-2-3 years down the road whenever there is a new contract. It will be that long, not because of USAPA but the RLA. AA has been in section 6 for 3 years, UAL 2+, and CAL almost 2 and things are moving at a snails pace and 2 of the above are mighty ALPA. AA has been in mediation under section 6 for 2 years and UAL, for 6 months and it seems to be getting them no where fast(just sayin)before the blame game on slow negotiations begins.

At that point Addington could file again with no guarantee of it making it to trial, or if it does, the pace may not be so quick, just look at TWA pilots vs ALPA, 6 years and still going. All the evidence denied in this case, could be allowed next time. New judge, new day. All the expense on top of the 2-3 million already out of pocket would have to be born again by Addington plaintiffs out of pocket. If they haven't completely paid their bills, like so many suits that drag out, how vested would their legal team or any subsequent firm they get be and they could be dumping money into a legal cesspool with no end in sight.

If a new single collective bargaining agreement was reached, it would be DOH with conditions and restrictions until it all resolved.

Not saying there will be a win at the 9th for USAPA, but if there is a ruling in favor of USAPA on ripeness, the obstacles will be huge for the Addington plaintiffs going forward.

 

[nic4us]

Yes, what you quoted is indeed what the judge said. But the POINT is that the judge even came out with any of this. If he thought he was on solid ground, why come out with this statement at all? He sees this beginning to slip away, so now he is starting to hedge his bets and opening up some wiggle room so he doesn't look like a complete fool when the 9th rules negatively on ripeness.

The once arrogant Wake is now talking out both sides of his mouth.

I think it ironic how we both read the same thing and come to polar opposite conclusions.

I have not seen anything from Wake that would make him appear to be "talking out of both sides of his mouth." However, the circular logic employed by Seeham and usapa, now that is talking out of your mouth and your rectum all at the same time!!!

 

[nic4us]

If a new single collective bargaining agreement was reached, it would be DOH with conditions and restrictions until it all resolved.

Not saying there will be a win at the 9th for USAPA, but if there is a ruling in favor of USAPA on ripeness, the obstacles will be huge for the Addington plaintiffs going forward.

You are correct. If usapa gets a favorable ruling on ripeness, Addington would have huge obstacles to overcome. However, in the mean time, the usapa DOH list could possibly have conditions and restrictions authored with the input of West representatives. Possibly garnishing enough West support that an Addington do-over would be unachievable. But most likely, usapa being the abomination that it is, the small ripeness ruling would be seen as a supportive victory ( not just a delay of usapa's guilt) and would be taken as a greenlight to attempt an even bigger land grab by the east than already exist. So, the obstacles would be overcome and usapa's damages would be that much larger.

 

[BoeingBoy]

Jim,

I agree some what, however I will speak for only myself.

That is a somewhat valid point, although movement by attrition would still be there. I was talking about those who talk about those who boast of getting their raises via attrition, though.

Jim