US Pilots labor Discussion 12/4-

[HPDriver]

Yo HPDriver,

The first ten that Republic just purchased are going to give Doug a little heart burn!

Section 1 Scope is pretty tight language.

The Collective Bargaining Agreement states in pertinent part:

In addition to all other rights under the Agreement, if any pilot whose name appears on the then current System Seniority List would be furloughed in anticipation of or as a result of such action the Company shall not: ***** Sell, lease or otherwise transfer any aircraft currently owned, leased or operated by US Airways, Inc. or any new or used aircraft currently on firm order from the manufacturer or owner thereof, to any Part 121 airline which is owned, controlled or operated by the Company, whether directly or indirectly through an affiliate or subsidiary wholly owned or controlled by the Company, or by a holding company of which the Company is a wholly owned subsidiary, or to another Part 121 airline using the US Airways designator code, name, logo or marketing identity… CBA: Section 1. (B) 4 (B) (emphasis added).

Hate

Good luck with that.

It doesn't apply to these aircraft and even if it did, what do you think USAPA would do to do about it?

 

[luvn737s]

No, the contract language is again being misinterpreted. Regardless, the airplanes will likely go to the Midwest scam operation out of MKE. You know, the one USAPA (defender of all that is right and true) has no opinion on.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Talk of a remand is pretty much nonsense, really. If there was a flaw in how the trial was conducted, then USAPA would have gotten somewhere with their request to stay the injunction. The panel has had the case for some time, they've had the briefs for nearly two months, they get the picture and it's a pretty clear picture: Judge Bybee out of the starting gate hitting Seham with the binding doesn't mean binding line of questioning and then you don't hear from him again. Nothing else to say I suppose. Then Judge Graber letting Seham talk himself into a corner he couldn't possibly hope to get out of was priceless. Then there's Judge T. quietly mentioning the distinction brought out in Ramey which is the exact reason why the case is the centerpiece of the plaintiff's case. So talk of a remand is just plain silly.

Now I'm reminded as to why I only occasionally make guest appearances. You see black, I see white.

No word from you as to how badly Jacob screwed up in his opening oral argument. No mention of how SPECIFIC Ramey supports the Appellant-Defendant. Actually the judges DO get it...ONLY UNTIL THE FINAL VOTE IS TAKEN CAN THE "HARM" (as you call it) OCCURS.

I've said my piece. I've made my prediction and I go back to lurking (until the ruling comed out).

We're in this for the long hall and the enemy of labor unions and EMPLOYEE RIGHTS....AOL and Posinelli, Shugart, are losing the war...for all of us. Even if you lose, they win!! The company KNOWS this if you read their letter to the NMB. If USAPA, ALPA or any other labor union fails to come up with an acceptable CBA agreement with the company has NOTHING to do with the union...it has do with the individual pilot group.

AOL (corporation) and their law firm (corporation) along with US Airways (corporation) are striving to do nothing but drive our union out and get to employee at will. That means whip-saw between you and I. Not only that, NO UNION, no CBA, no Nicolau, and DOH seniority. LOA 93, transition agreement and all the other stuff we negotiated becomes unenforcable. Don't believe me...look at JetBlue.

Read US Airways v. Barnett:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getc...p;invol=00-1250

"[T]he uncontroverted evidence shows that the USAir seniority system has been in place for `decades' and governs over 14,000 USAir Agents. Moreover, seniority policies such as the one at issue in this case are common to the airline industry. Given this context, it seems clear that the USAir employees were justified in relying upon the policy. As such, any significant alteration of that policy would result in undue hardship to both the company and its non-disabled employees." App. to Pet. for Cert. 96a.


An en banc panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. It said that the presence of a seniority system is merely "a factor in the undue hardship analysis." 228 F. 3d 1105, 1120 (2000). And it held that "[a] case-by-case fact intensive analysis is required to determine whether any particular reassignment would constitute an undue hardship to the employer." Ibid.


US Airways petitioned for certiorari, asking us to decide whether

"the [ADA] requires an employer to reassign a disabled employee to a position as a `reasonable accommodation' even though another employee is entitled to hold the position under the employer's bona fide and established seniority system." Brief for Petitioner i.


The Circuits have reached different conclusions about the legal significance of a seniority system. Compare 228 F. 3d, at 1120, with EEOC v. Sara Lee Corp., 237 F. 3d 349, 354 (CA4 2001). We agreed to answer US Airways' question."

The standing issue here is whether US Airways seniority system for agents (DOH) prevails over the ADA.

Answer:

" In its question presented, US Airways asked us whether the ADA requires an employer to assign a disabled employee to a particular position even though another employee is entitled to that position under the employer's "established seniority system." We answer that ordinarily the ADA does not require that assignment. Hence, a showing that the assignment would violate the rules of a seniority system warrants summary judgment for the employer--unless there is more. The plaintiff must present evidence of that "more," namely, special circumstances surrounding the particular case that demonstrate the assignment is nonetheless reasonable."

DOH is an ESTABLISHED seniority system and it can be proven so. The East pilot protections under title 7 age discrimination, correlative with longevity and age of the MORE SENIOR EAST PILOTS and with a LONG established line of seniority systems favors DOH. Hense, reversion to "at will employee" supports the East pilots based on an "established seniority system".

Here, the SCOTUS, supports our position. You have no "special circumstances"....we do under title 7. To do otherwise turns logic on its head.

 

[aquagreen73s]

No word from you as to how badly Jacob screwed up in his opening oral argument. No mention of how SPECIFIC Ramey supports the Appellant-Defendant. Actually the judges DO get it...ONLY UNTIL THE FINAL VOTE IS TAKEN CAN THE "HARM" (as you call it) OCCURS.

Sounds like you've been talking to Lee too much. You need to read Ramey. Ripeness occurs at repudiation.

Dr. Jacob didn't screw it up any more than he's screwed up every argument in every filing which has resulted in the continual a$$ kicking of Lee Seham. Last Tuesday was no different than any other legal battle.

Don't stay gone too long as we should have a memorandum opinion shortly. Then after USAPA pays the $1.8 mil in atty fees plus costs for the appeal, feel free to take it to the Supremes. In the meantime you won't get your stay of the injunction and you'll be dealing with Judge Wake for the rest of your career.

 

[luvn737s]

The Red Herring evolves into the Straw Man (Darwin would love that!).

No, there is considerable damage done prior to the vote. The uncertainty of dealing with a schizophrenic bipolar union makes it impossible to negotiate in good faith with them. That uncertainty leads to delay and leaves members and non-member alike vulnerable to risks they would not face had USAPA not tried to void an arbitrated settlement between the east and west.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Sounds like you've been talking to Lee too much. You need to read Ramey. Ripeness occurs at repudiation.

Dr. Jacob didn't screw it up any more than he's screwed up every argument in every filing which has resulted in the continual a$$ kicking of Lee Seham. Last Tuesday was no different than any other legal battle.

Don't stay gone too long as we should have a memorandum opinion shortly. Then after USAPA pays the $1.8 mil in atty fees plus costs for the appeal, feel free to take it to the Supremes. In the meantime you won't get your stay of the injunction and you'll be dealing with Judge Wake for the rest of your career.

And repudiation occurs when you VOTE!!!

Intent to "repudiate" is different from that valididation of repudiation....namely the vote. Unless and UNTIL that occurs...the rest is just hot air....or as Judge Wake ALREADY VALIDATED, until you VOTE for it you're stuck in the same old situation. TELL ME JUDGE WAKE DID'NT SAY THAT!!!! STATUS QUO!!! That is NOT illegal. The appeal's court UNDERSTANDS THAT!!!

Keep dreaming on the rest. You keep dreaming about those attorney fees and costs. Point to ONE case that supports your legal theory of "common benefit doctrine" regarding this issue. Even if you manage to ultimately SUE USAPA into the groung the ONLY result you have is the DISSOLUTION of the union and we are back to where I said we would be all along...AT WILL EMPLOYMENT. You cannot hold any pilot...EAST OR WEST...to pay the attorney costs on and individual basis.

Liability does not innure to the individual....only to the organization called "the union". If the union dissappears because ALL pilots are required to pay the costs of YOUR litigation expenses...only one two groups get rich on the backs of the aggregate pilots group...A-O-L and Posinelli, Shugart.....CORPORATIONS!!!

Who's the scab now....me or the corporations I just described???

As I predicted before and I say again...the SCOTUS WILL weight in on the issue.

 

[cleardirect]

Now I'm reminded as to why I only occasionally make guest appearances. You see black, I see white.

No word from you as to how badly Jacob screwed up in his opening oral argument. No mention of how SPECIFIC Ramey supports the Appellant-Defendant. Actually the judges DO get it...ONLY UNTIL THE FINAL VOTE IS TAKEN CAN THE "HARM" (as you call it) OCCURS.

I've said my piece. I've made my prediction and I go back to lurking (until the ruling comed out).

We're in this for the long hall and the enemy of labor unions and EMPLOYEE RIGHTS....AOL and Posinelli, Shugart, are losing the war...for all of us. Even if you lose, they win!! The company KNOWS this if you read their letter to the NMB. If USAPA, ALPA or any other labor union fails to come up with an acceptable CBA agreement with the company has NOTHING to do with the union...it has do with the individual pilot group.

AOL (corporation) and their law firm (corporation) along with US Airways (corporation) are striving to do nothing but drive our union out and get to employee at will. That means whip-saw between you and I. Not only that, NO UNION, no CBA, no Nicolau, and DOH seniority. LOA 93, transition agreement and all the other stuff we negotiated becomes unenforcable. Don't believe me...look at JetBlue.

Read US Airways v. Barnett:

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getc...p;invol=00-1250

"[T]he uncontroverted evidence shows that the USAir seniority system has been in place for `decades' and governs over 14,000 USAir Agents. Moreover, seniority policies such as the one at issue in this case are common to the airline industry. Given this context, it seems clear that the USAir employees were justified in relying upon the policy. As such, any significant alteration of that policy would result in undue hardship to both the company and its non-disabled employees." App. to Pet. for Cert. 96a.


An en banc panel of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed. It said that the presence of a seniority system is merely "a factor in the undue hardship analysis." 228 F. 3d 1105, 1120 (2000). And it held that "[a] case-by-case fact intensive analysis is required to determine whether any particular reassignment would constitute an undue hardship to the employer." Ibid.


US Airways petitioned for certiorari, asking us to decide whether

"the [ADA] requires an employer to reassign a disabled employee to a position as a `reasonable accommodation' even though another employee is entitled to hold the position under the employer's bona fide and established seniority system." Brief for Petitioner i.


The Circuits have reached different conclusions about the legal significance of a seniority system. Compare 228 F. 3d, at 1120, with EEOC v. Sara Lee Corp., 237 F. 3d 349, 354 (CA4 2001). We agreed to answer US Airways' question."

The standing issue here is whether US Airways seniority system for agents (DOH) prevails over the ADA.

Answer:

" In its question presented, US Airways asked us whether the ADA requires an employer to assign a disabled employee to a particular position even though another employee is entitled to that position under the employer's "established seniority system." We answer that ordinarily the ADA does not require that assignment. Hence, a showing that the assignment would violate the rules of a seniority system warrants summary judgment for the employer--unless there is more. The plaintiff must present evidence of that "more," namely, special circumstances surrounding the particular case that demonstrate the assignment is nonetheless reasonable."

DOH is an ESTABLISHED seniority system and it can be proven so. The East pilot protections under title 7 age discrimination, correlative with longevity and age of the MORE SENIOR EAST PILOTS and with a LONG established line of seniority systems favors DOH. Hense, reversion to "at will employee" supports the East pilots based on an "established seniority system".

Here, the SCOTUS, supports our position. You have no "special circumstances"....we do under title 7. To do otherwise turns logic on its head.

Lee,

You stayed true to form and misread and misunderstand. I predict great disappointment in your future.

But I guss that is why your firm advertises as:
Unique Legal strategies and Creative Solutions

Not legally sound advice just misreading and applying the law.

Just a quick reminder. We are fighting for our employee rights. To bad it is against the organization that is supposed to protect us. Besides maybe you could point out how Leonidas is losing? There is an injunction and usapa/Seham has been found liable. The ninth had no problem with anything else judge Wake did other than ripeness.

Using age discrimination is a loser for you too. Demanding younger workers go to the bottom is discrimination.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Lee,

You stayed true to form and misread and misunderstand. I predict great disappointment in your future.

But I guss that is why your firm advertises as:
Unique Legal strategies and Creative Solutions

Not legally sound advice just misreading and applying the law.

Moderators:

His baiting by calling me "Lee", and affilliating me with the Seham lawfirm, which I am NOT, and which is not my name, is purposefully designed to evade the issues and cause biting discourse.

Question only:

Would it be acceptable for me to call him "the scab, anti-union corporations of AOL and Posinelli/Shugart", or Mr. Jacobs, which I have NOT done.

Please weigh in for clarification. Thank you.

 

[Metroyet]

Liability does not innure to the individual....only to the organization called "the union". If the union dissappears because ALL pilots are required to pay the costs of YOUR litigation expenses...only one two groups get rich on the backs of the aggregate pilots group...A-O-L and Posinelli, Shugart.....CORPORATIONS!!!

Who's the scab now....me or the corporations I just described???

Well, Since this is all YOUR fault....I'll let you determine the answer to your own question of who the scabs are. BTW, do you have even a rudimentary understanding of what a "corporation" actually is? I would appear not. LLC's have few things in common with a corporation.

 

[hp_fa]

Don't stay gone too long as we should have a memorandum opinion shortly.

I am expecting a published opinion. Perhaps they will issue an Order with an written Opinion to follow.

 

[end_of_alpa]

Well, Since this is all YOUR fault....I'll let you determine who the scab is. BTW, do you have even a rudimentary understanding of what a "corporation" actually is? I would appear not.

Yes I DO understand what a corporation IS!! I have several. The extent to which each corporation is used and incorporated has several purposes. However, e corporation is a corporation. It has to do with struture for the purpose. AOL may be designed to protect but in effect its outcome is to destroy. PERIOD.

Army of Leonidas, LLC (limited liability corporation)

Posinelli/shugart PC (professional corporation)

USAPA/ALPA/labor unions....an organised NON incorporated entity recognized by either a state (NLRA) or Federal entity (NLRA OR RLA) by the Dept. of Labor as certified by their statutory reps for the purposes of COLLECTIVE BARGAINING. NLRB or NMB.

Me, You....pilot.

You won't get a DIME out of each and every PILOT on the property....you're suiing USAPA....NOT ME! You tried that in state court and those claims were dismissed. USAPA, ALPA, IAM, AFL-CIO, whoever....their the ones that inncur the liability. Your issues are with USAPA...not ME!

The only thing you and I get to do is...VOTE...if and only the is a labor union there to ALLOW the vote. Otherwise, HERE COMES AT WILL EMPLOYMENT!

 

[Metroyet]

HERE COMES AT WILL EMPLOYMENT!

Counting the days.

 

[oscarjazz]

DOH is an ESTABLISHED seniority system and it can be proven so. The East pilot protections under title 7 age discrimination, correlative with longevity and age of the MORE SENIOR EAST PILOTS and with a LONG established line of seniority systems favors DOH. Hense, reversion to "at will employee" supports the East pilots based on an "established seniority system".

DOH is AN established seniority system at some places, but it is not THE established seniority system at US Air for the pilots. The Nicolau award is THE established seniority system. It was created by the neutral process agreed to by all three parties and it was ultimately accepted by US Air management. End of story, you have an established seniority system.

So you need to show why you should overturn the established seniority system. You can't go back and re litigate the seniority process, you need to show why overturning the seniority system advances the union in total. Instead, you have only shown that overturning the Nicolau award would benefit the East pilots. This was the pretext of USAPA, this was the reason that some other lawyer told them hide because it was so damaging, and this is the sole focus of USAPA right now. Tyranny of the majority is not democracy. In federal law, the Supreme Court is the check and balance against this tyranny, in union matters the Duty of Fair Representation is the check and balance. USAPA has been checked.

You had a three party process to get to a seniority list, USAPA has now eliminated two of those parties. You cannot change that process now. You cannot get the company to agree to any change in the seniority system. You can only get this DFR loss overturned due to a technicality that you haven't quite defrauded the West pilots YET (we will in the future but not yet, is the argument). What is the way out here?

This whole thing was a folly from the start. It has now devolved into a fool's errand where they only victors are the lawyers and the lawyer's accountants. You are boxed in with no exit possible except to recognize the Nicolau award and try to negotiate a better contract.

2010 will not be the time, but by 2011, it is possible that LCC will have turned the corner and started making profits. There is still some possibility of failure over this winter, but that prospect is getting less likely. Healing the pilot group and allowing cross fleeting can only add to the prospects of a profitable 2011 for you guys. That is your only path.

Do you have leaders that are strong enough to recognize that and take that hard road, or are they going to continue in their pandering and weakness as they have been doing? That choice can be made by the pilots themselves if the current leaders are unwilling to step up.

 

[end_of_alpa]

DOH is AN established seniority system at some places, but it is not THE established seniority system at US Air for the pilots. The Nicolau award is THE established seniority system. It was created by the neutral process agreed to by all three parties and it was ultimately accepted by US Air management. End of story, you have an established seniority system.

So you need to show why you should overturn the established seniority system. You can't go back and re litigate the seniority process, you need to show why overturning the seniority system advances the union in total. Instead, you have only shown that overturning the Nicolau award would benefit the East pilots. This was the pretext of USAPA, this was the reason that some other lawyer told them hide because it was so damaging, and this is the sole focus of USAPA right now. Tyranny of the majority is not democracy. In federal law, the Supreme Court is the check and balance against this tyranny, in union matters the Duty of Fair Representation is the check and balance. USAPA has been checked.

You had a three party process to get to a seniority list, USAPA has now eliminated two of those parties. You cannot change that process now. You cannot get the company to agree to any change in the seniority system. You can only get this DFR loss overturned due to a technicality that you haven't quite defrauded the West pilots YET (we will in the future but not yet, is the argument). What is the way out here?

This whole thing was a folly from the start. It has now devolved into a fool's errand where they only victors are the lawyers and the lawyer's accountants. You are boxed in with no exit possible except to recognize the Nicolau award and try to negotiate a better contract.

2010 will not be the time, but by 2011, it is possible that LCC will have turned the corner and started making profits. There is still some possibility of failure over this winter, but that prospect is getting less likely. Healing the pilot group and allowing cross fleeting can only add to the prospects of a profitable 2011 for you guys. That is your only path.

Do you have leaders that are strong enough to recognize that and take that hard road, or are they going to continue in their pandering and weakness as they have been doing? That choice can be made by the pilots themselves if the current leaders are unwilling to step up.

YOu are wrong. DOH IS the established seniority system for WORKERS at US Airways. Even or boarding priority is based on that. Every union on every property is based on DOH. Even non-union companies and public establishments use tenure/DOH. You are just FLAT OUT WRONG!
Can't have ANYTHING UNTIL YOU VOTE!!!

I would rather have at will employment and compete with you than the Nicolau award. I can only speak for me but the over-whelming majority of the pilots I fly with AND talk with over here agree with me as well.

Your "superior" righteousness personifies the CORPORATE GREED AND ENTITLEMENT!

Don't come up with the "final and binding" argument AGAIN!!! I repeat: nothing until the vote (if and when THAT ever occurs).

I agree with you on one thing: "This whole thing was a folly from the start."

See you out on the flight line.

 

[HPDriver]

YOu are wrong. DOH IS the established seniority system for WORKERS at US Airways. Even or boarding priority is based on that. Every union on every property is based on DOH. Even non-union companies and public establishments use tenure/DOH. You are just FLAT OUT WRONG!
Can't have ANYTHING UNTIL YOU VOTE!!!

I would rather have at will employment and compete with you than the Nicolau award. I can only speak for me but the over-whelming majority of the pilots I fly with AND talk with over here agree with me as well.

Your "superior" righteousness personifies the CORPORATE GREED AND ENTITLEMENT!

Don't come up with the "final and binding" argument AGAIN!!! I repeat: nothing until the vote (if and when THAT ever occurs).

I agree with you on one thing: "This whole thing was a folly from the start."

See you out on the flight line.

No, Lee, YOU ARE WRONG!

DOH is not the established system for all workers at LLC. It may have been at AAA, but not here. In fact, there is an injunction against using the DOH system for pilots.

And if we were to become "at will" employees, it would mean the Nic that much sooner.

USAPA's house of cards is about to come down for good. The motion to stay the injunction will be denied, the appeal will be lost, and your dreams of snapbacks will fade away as it becomes obvious that they're not coming. Even your own committee members know the snapback is not going to happen. The officers were asked what happens when the timer on the USAPA board runs out and had no response.

Can't really respond when you have no leverage, right?

And using the pension vote as a reference, the apathy is increasing. The angry FO group is becoming more isolated.

USAPA's two-year anniversary of doing absolutely nothing to move the pilot group forward will be celebrated with its demise.

Two years of wasted time and dues.

And, BTW, I've now heard no furloughs on the west side and more on the west due to the sale of the remaining EMBs.