US Pilots labor Discussion 12/4-

[aquagreen73s]

And repudiation occurs when you VOTE!!!

There's not a single case anywhere that says that and the reason should be obvious to anyone: repudiation is based on acts manifesting an intent to repudiate. There's a giant difference between repudiation and ratification in both the labor sense and legal sense. That's why the Ramey court makes the parallel to anticipatory repudiation in contract law.

Seham has gotten his argument all backwards. He checkmated himself the moment he hung his hat on the nonexistent rule of law - ripeness begins at ratification. If that were the rule, then no claims would ever be ripe as they'd be open to ratification at any time. The practical effect of such a rule would be to have a majority ensure that the minority never had a ripe claim. That was Judge Bybee's point in cornering Seham with the statement that the ratification process could drag on indefinitely. Following that reasonsing was Judge Graber's hypothetical which you can say was an illustration of the potential danger of Seham's rule.

 

[Hope777]

I will add that the Fleet Service Agents at US are NOT DOH.

 

[cleardirect]

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.

The Trump/Empire guy disagree with you. The recent DAL/NWA arbitration proves the statement wrong. They used relative seniority.

"This whole thing was a folly from the start."

Would that be USAPA?

 

[Metroyet]

Don't come up with the "final and binding" argument AGAIN!!!

Unfortunately for you, this is the very heart of the matter. The next contract the pilots of US Airways work under...either brought to you by USAPA, ALPA, Some other unknown union, NO UNION, Teamsters, Hamsters, or Pampers, WILL contain the Nic award. The Permanent Injunction is perfectly clear on that. You might drag this out 10 years with your "resolve" and your magic vote, but eventually Nic. is here. It's already etched in stone.

The courts acknowledge this fact, The West pilots get it, even the Company is unambiguous on the matter. The Nicalau award is the singular list moving forward. The only ones that don't get that are Lee Seham and his delusional flock of hopefuls. We'll never agree on this because you live in a World that doesn't contain reality. I do.

If the company crams LOA 93 down the throats of the West pilots after the East loses in the ninth, that's it. Common contract, NO VOTE, Impasse removed, Hello Nic. I expect this is becoming the more likely scenario moving fwd. They've already stated that they have the right to do it. We'll see. What I do know is this: One way or another, someday, there will be a common contract. Stall as long as you like. However, eventually contempt of court issues will start appearing and Wake will throw his weight around. It will be interesting to see how Wake enjoys the NMB letter from the company. There is no way out of this and everybody knows this except the extremist minority running USAPA.

"Final and Binding" will be brought up again. It will be referenced by the ninth as to why their unanimously upholding Wake. Sorry.

 

[aquagreen73s]

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

Memorandum first followed a few months later by an opinion. That's my prediction because this was an expedited appeal. The airline is stuck in this as well and for the pragmatic reasons Judge Wake cited on moving the case through the trial court expeditiously, I suspect the 9th will follow as well. We'll see.

 

[exB717Flyer]

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.

No baiting, just the implication that you're a shill for Mr. Seham. It's amusing how you take offense to it. Frankly, I'd say you're more of a shill for Dear Leader Cleary. Your supreme confidence in the outcome of the appeal and future action of the SCOTUS smacks of his extremism. Am I right, Mr. Cleary?

 

[Hate2fly]

You westies give Cleary way to much credit! What you are failing to realize is that USAPA does what the majority wants! Majority rules......get it!

[/quote]In United States law, ripeness refers to the readiness of a case for litigation; "a claim is not ripe for adjudication if it rests upon contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all. The goal is to prevent premature adjudication; if a dispute is insufficiently developed, any potential injury or stake is too speculative to warrant judicial action.

Good luck!

Hate

 

[HPDriver]

You westies give Cleary way to much credit! What you are failing to realize is that USAPA does what the majority wants! Majority rules......get it!

In United States law, ripeness refers to the readiness of a case for litigation; "a claim is not ripe for adjudication if it rests upon contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all. The goal is to prevent premature adjudication; if a dispute is insufficiently developed, any potential injury or stake is too speculative to warrant judicial action.

Good luck!

Hate

You obviously have not been paying attention to the votes being cast over the last few issues.

That's not a majority. Get it!

And the BPR is feeling a bit left out of the decision making process lately.

Good luck!

 

[aquagreen73s]

In United States law, ripeness refers to the readiness of a case for litigation; "a claim is not ripe for adjudication if it rests upon contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all. The goal is to prevent premature adjudication; if a dispute is insufficiently developed, any potential injury or stake is too speculative to warrant judicial action. Hate

Please cite a case - ANY CASE - which says that ripeness is a choice of the majority. Essentially, that's what Seham argues and there's a good reason why he can't cite a single case in support of his proposition. He's that off.

 

[cleardirect]

You westies give Cleary way to much credit! What you are failing to realize is that USAPA does what the majority wants! Majority rules......get it!


Hate

Really! I don't recall a vote on going to appeal or not. I don't recall a vote on the childish letter sent to the DOJ of the slot swap. I don't recall a lot of vote over many issues. How does usapa know what the majority wants if no one is asking?

BTW all of you east guy had better stow that majority rules nonsense. If we merge with someone we all us air pilots are going to be in the MINORITY. It is going to sting a lot the first time AA or UAL tells cleary majority rules take seat.

 

[aquagreen73s]

BTW all of you east guy had better stow that majority rules nonsense. If we merge with someone we all us air pilots are going to be in the MINORITY. It is going to sting a lot the first time AA or UAL tells cleary majority rules take seat.

They'll be thanking their lucky stars that litigation over the supposed supremacy of majority rules was just completed. How ironic.

 

[Hate2fly]

You obviously have not been paying attention to the votes being cast over the last few issues.

That's not a majority. Get it!

And the BPR is feeling a bit left out of the decision making process lately.

Good luck!

Yo Driver,

I would not worry about the east pilots resolve..........If I were you I would be concerned that your boy in the desert got the ripeness issue wrong! He must have missed law school the day they were teaching the ripeness doctrine! Look what they said in the Breeger case.

Concerning the ripeness of a DFR claim, the Supreme Court has recognized that the “final
product of the bargaining process may constitute evidence of a breach of duty [of fair
representation].The parties have not cited, and the undersigned is unaware of, any published federal authority addressing whether a union’s conduct may give rise to a ripe DFR claim prior to the conclusion of negotiations with the employer.

You guys seem very uptight lately!

Hate

 

[aquagreen73s]

Concerning the ripeness of a DFR claim, the Supreme Court has recognized that the “final
product of the bargaining process may constitute evidence of a breach of duty [of fair
representation].The parties have not cited, and the undersigned is unaware of, any published federal authority addressing whether a union’s conduct may give rise to a ripe DFR claim prior to the conclusion of negotiations with the employer.
Hate

You're citing Breeger which is an unpublished decision by a magistrate judge in a case that was dismissed. The reason for the above quoted language is because the plaintiff's attorney essentially failed to cite the case law out there which clearly shows that not only is there case law out there which stands for the proposition that a DFR claim becomes ripe before the conclusion of negotiations. What was really at play in Breeger is that the plaintiffs had a pilot - lawyer as their counsel and the quote you cite to is a remark saying that the plaintiff's attorney eff'd up. The only rule one can draw from that case is that pilot-lawyers should stick to flying airplanes.

 

[nic4us]

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

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.

Two points to make.

One, I do not see "black" while you see "white", I see "black and blue" for the entire pilot group, brought to us courtesy of usapa and their complete refusal to acknowledge and/or grasp the situation they are in. Everyone, and I mean everyone, the company, the ceo, your former ceo, the mediator, the arbitrator, your merger counsel, the West merger committee, told you you would not get DOH. After the fact, add, the West pilot group,J. Prater, the Rice committee, the NW merger committee, the UA merger committee, even your prospective lawyers, and now judge Wake and a jury said, you are not going to get DOH and your persuit of it is illegal. Thanks to usapa's outright idiocy, we are all "black and blue" and quite a few dollars poorer. So lets quit the "your lawsuit" BS and put the blame right where it belongs, this is the east majority/usapa's fault end of discussion.

Two, the east pilots have no special protection under title 7. Actually the age discrimination in employment act (ADEA) protects the West pilots from any altering of the Nic, if we do end up "at will". Go take a look at the ADEA again, it prohibits employers from discriminating against employees aged 40 or older. Newsflash, the overwhelming majority of West pilots have already reached their 40th birthday, and are protected by the ADEA. The ADEA specifically says, an employer cannot deny an employee pay and benefits when the only justification is age, nor may an employer classify employees into groups on the basis of age, that unfairly deprives workers of employment opportunities. There are no "special circumstances" the east has over the West. Unless of course by "special" you mean, in need of a different curriculm, because you cannot grasp the subject matter the rest of the world is using.

 

[luvthe9]

Thanks to usapa's outright idiocy, we are all "black and blue"

That might be the way you see it but the east majority is alright with how things are going, we waited 5 years a little longer won't matter. I ran into a west crew in ORD the other morning (actually nice guys ) but they seem to get it and were very concerned about the future of this company and know with our average age in the late 50's we pretty much don't care if this place is around or not (yes I would perfer to stay in business) but things are not going to go well next year I think but who knows.