I am continually amazed those like you continue to attack the professionalism of the East lawyers. With a few exceptions, I have seen very little of that going the other direction. I just don't get that behavior. The closer we get to the last hearing, the more you guys ramp up the personal slams.
If the Ninth wanted to "send USAPA packing" they simply could have passed on taking the case in the first place. But they did take it. There are issues here that go way beyond the squabbling of two pilot groups, and the Judges will be addressing those issues. Like I have said here many times, a complete win by Addington going forward here fundamentally changes the way labor law is applied going forward. Unions will be sued by disgruntled minorities over contract proposals, Unions will be held accountable for actions prior to certification, Unions will be forced to use internal policy set by the union that proceeded them, and much more.
Maybe the application of the law will change..who knows what the Ninth is thinking. They already "have" the case before them, and I am sure they will show up with questions. I look forward to the transcript and/or recordings of the procedures. I look forward to the arguments and answers presented by both sides. I do not look forward to your continued personal attacks on our lawyers.
RR
First off, I am attacking
usapa's lawyers, not the "
east lawyers." usapa represents both east and West, and therefore SSMP are
my lawyers to slam as I see fit. It is this attitude that got usapa in the trouble they are in from day one. A complete lack of representation of the the West to the point of hostile discrimination. This suit is not about the Nic, its about this DFR discrimination. usapa was formed in the back of a van with the sole purpose of stealing from the West to favor the east, end of story. Frankly, the entire world does not care if the Nic was fair or not, it was reached by binding arbitration from a third party neutral ( in this country that is as
fair as it gets), the former east pilots deseserved no more or less than that award, yet since they thought they could steal more from the West they tried by forming usapa. Blatant DFR, and the only lawyer willing to fuel the van
our current counselor.
A complete win by Addington, will not change anything. You are falling for Seeham's line of BS. Unions will be sued over contract proposals, yes, and if those proposals are illegal, as in our case, they will lose, really no change. Unions will be held accountable for illegal actions they take prior to certification, no change there. Unions will be forced to adhere to contractual policies of there predecesor union, seems to be the status quo.
But lets look at what a usapa win would change. A union could reneg on its contracts simply by having its members certify a name change. A union could take advantage of dual unionism for the purposes usapa seeks. A union could violate minority rights at will. Arbitration will no longer be usable by unions or under the RLA (no point in arbitration if you can simply ignore the result). Past arbitrations could be voided by unionization.
Bottom line, I to look forward to the transcripts and broadcast. If I hear Seeham mention any of the fabrications he threw out there in the recent videos, well then
our lawyer will be most deserving of the slams headed his way, but my guess is those slams will continue to come from individuals wearing black robes, much less those typing online anonymously.
