US Pilots Labor Discussion 3/11- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[cleardirect]

'
As in even 4th or 5th grade? :blink: ...So..It "matters not" to those out west?...Wow!...Ok then. I guess that's cleared up finally.....umm...well...it matters to a great many other people. I can assure you of that. I've yet to be involved with even so much as a single conversation with anyone not from your group, that responds with other than (at the very kindest and most printable) : "You've GOT to be kidding me!!??"

I am sure that when you tell this story you give the complete and unbiased facts. Including all of the reasons why things ended up where they are. Maybe perhaps you only tell them the part about us being in grade school and the 17 year difference.

You do include the part about FINAL AND BINDING arbitration right? You do include the part where you east pilots decided that a change of union tried to get you out of arbitration right. You do remember to tell them that that 17 year F/O was furloughed right.

Thought so.


Because when I tell people that my union sued pilots for RICO or that they are ignoring FINAL AND BINDING arbitration I get the same reaction. You have got to be kidding me. They can't do that.

Good thing that a federal court agrees with me and not you.

 

[CallawayGolf]

I , always luv these arguments, final and binding , integrity,yea, yea, yea, (that record is skiping again) truth of the matter, just for argument sake ,what if NIC had arbitrated PAY-RATES, duty rigs, between 2 MECS( for the sake of argument that no longer exist to the take it to AYE YES 3rd PARTY, that has the option to ACCEPT OR DENY IT! Then it has to be RATIFIED by those who will ultimetely work under it!( where the reject or accept phase comes in.) IF NIC said In a FINAL AND BINDING STATEMENT $50 an hour for captain and thats it well, you get the drift, besides the REAL 2 parties that were part of that DEAL, DON'T EXIST! AS much as I HATE IT! The " OLD DOGS" get it! MM!

Final and binding is:

Final (last, concluding, ending, ultimate, finishing, allowing no change)​

and​

binding (compulsory, required, necessary, obligatory, no possibility of withdrawal or avoidance)​

Parties that agree to enter into binding arbitration must accept the results of the process or they will face fines and penalties for breach of contract. If a party does not wish to abide by any potential outcome of arbitration, then it should have avoided the arbitration process altogether by negotiating an agreement prior to being bound by arbitration. Any and all of your “what ifsâ€￾ are irrelevant because the answer would be the same – parties are bound by the results of an arbitration process. Like it or hate it, that’s what your CBA signed you up for when they could not agree on terms with their west counterparts.

Of course the two parties still exist as evidenced by those who are still working under two separate CBAs. The representational agent did change, but the parties bound by the NIC arbitration most certainly do still exist. I know you guys have serious issues with judge Wake because you dislike his rulings , but spare us the lunacy that he can’t even determine that the parties bond by an agreement are or are not still in existence. You shred your credibility when you make such an absurd claim. You can say any reasonable outcome is possible at the ninth and I cannot find fault with that, but claiming the parties don’t even exist anymore is completely detached from reality.

 

[nycbusdriver]

And when you DO hear from them, then what? Will you accept whatever they say or will you just cry unfair and belittle them if its not what USAPA wants to hear?

What names do you already have in store for them? Will they be a bunch of senile old men and women too? Biased California Judges? Three Stooges?

Actually, I personally will accept their decision as I think this panel of judges is the first to consider the case without prejudice of the issue. I don't think there was any way that USAPA could get a fair trial by jury in any courtroom in Arizona.

I will discourage USAPA from appealing to the Supreme Court. I doubt they will, but who knows?

of course, none of this is any indication that I will ever vote YES on a contract that contains the Nicolau list. The only way might possibly happen is if there was some ironclad means of fiscal protection for the east pilots who were slammed by Nicolau. Since I don;t foresee the Tempe brain trust ever offering anything that meets that criteria, I will simply vote NO on future contracts. I am fine even with LOA 93 until I retire, and the F/Os I fly with feel the same way....every last one of them so far for the last few years.

 

[nycbusdriver]

As NW/DL clearly shows how to do it vs. East screws West.
Do you guys sleep at night?
Yeah, you probably do.

The NW/DL process was different than that of US/AW. The NW/DL pilots learned from the flawed ALPA process that US/AW followed that it is ludicrous to place career seniority in the hands of one person.

The very fact that NW/DL disregarded ALPA policy is testament to exactly how they feel about the policy that screwed the US east pilots.

We do sleep well at night. Glad to hear that you care.

 

[cleardirect]

The NW/DL process was different than that of US/AW. The NW/DL pilots learned from the flawed ALPA process that US/AW followed that it is ludicrous to place career seniority in the hands of one person.

The very fact that NW/DL disregarded ALPA policy is testament to exactly how they feel about the policy that screwed the US east pilots.

We do sleep well at night. Glad to hear that you care.

Other than having three arbitrators instead of one, how did they "disregard" ALPA merger policy?

Please explain why a one member panel and a three emeber panel came up with the nearly exact same conclusion?

Making a big assumtion there. Assuming that everyone thinks that the east got screwed. Not everyone, not by a long shot.

DAL/NWA went relative seniorty where are the howls of outrage from NWA?

What ALPA learned was that certain groups of pilots can not be trusted to keep their word or tell the truth to their pilots.

 

[HPearlyretiree]

Naturally...umm..everyone cares about yours?

Just noting that our opinions are not law.

BTW, ever figure out what "binding" means?

 

[CallawayGolf]

Actually, I personally will accept their decision as I think this panel of judges is the first to consider the case without prejudice of the issue. I don't think there was any way that USAPA could get a fair trial by jury in any courtroom in Arizona.

I will discourage USAPA from appealing to the Supreme Court. I doubt they will, but who knows?

of course, none of this is any indication that I will ever vote YES on a contract that contains the Nicolau list. The only way might possibly happen is if there was some ironclad means of fiscal protection for the east pilots who were slammed by Nicolau. Since I don;t foresee the Tempe brain trust ever offering anything that meets that criteria, I will simply vote NO on future contracts. I am fine even with LOA 93 until I retire, and the F/Os I fly with feel the same way....every last one of them so far for the last few years.

I fully support your personal right and stated desire to vote no. USAPA needs to cease and desist from any and all delay tactics and futile legal battles and just do the job they were certified as the CBA to do: negotiate a good-faith agreement and put a TA out to a vote of the MIGS. If it fails they go back over and over again until USAPA and management put out a CBA that will pass. A lot of factors will go into passing a new CBA such as court-imposed injunctions, fines, penalties, pay rates, work rules and of course the NIC just to name a few. How MIGS as a group will vote given these factors is a whole other discussion.

 

[Black Swan]

I fully support your personal right and stated desire to vote no. USAPA needs to cease and desist from any and all delay tactics and futile legal battles and just do the job they were certified as the CBA to do: negotiate a good-faith agreement and put a TA out to a vote of the MIGS. If it fails they go back over and over again until USAPA and management put out a CBA that will pass. A lot of factors will go into passing a new CBA such as court-imposed injunctions, fines, penalties, pay rates, work rules and of course the NIC just to name a few. How MIGS as a group will vote given these factors is a whole other discussion.

You first. Drop Addington.

 

[nic4us]

Sigh..then it's a sorry joke indeed that you're a "captain" over such a person...one that fails to make laugh. What's your point?..That you would like to see many, many more such absurd travesties enabled by merry old nic?

Hmmmm, never really considered myself a "captain over such a person", more like...the captain of a crew lucky enough to have such a person in it.

Never found it an "absurd travesty" that members of the crew were older than me, that has been the case most of my career.

But two can play at your game.

What is your point? That age gives an individual the right to steal from their younger co-workers?

 

[Black Swan]

Hmmmm, never really considered myself a "captain over such a person", more like...the captain of a crew lucky enough to have such a person in it.

Never found it an "absurd travesty" that members of the crew were older than me, that has been the case most of my career.

But two can play at your game.

What is your point? That age gives an individual the right to steal from their younger co-workers?

Now we are thieves. It never stops Nic4us. Let me put it this way. Your vaunted carrier was for most of it's life a low wage payer. You also were in 2 bankruptcies. Just because ours happened at a different time, one when mergers were rampant, now means you the right to steal years from us? This is your logic. I choose to slam the door shut on your stealing fingers. That is my choice.

 

[CallawayGolf]

You first. Drop Addington.

USAPA filled the appeal, not Addington. It would be USAPA's move to abandon their appeal and accept the district court's ruling. If USAPA dropped the appeal and negotiated in good-faith to put out a TA for ratification, then the federal injunction would potentially be lifted (if Wake agrees that USAPA is in compliance with their DFR).

Even if all your hopes and dreams came true that Addington would just go away, USAPA still has the problem that the company accepted the NIC as the list and already testified in court that that is the only list they will consider. So the ball is entirely in USAPA’s court to either do what there are federally required to do as a CBA or to keep abrogating all responsibility and paying the penalty for doing so. Nothing I do will change that.

 

[N924PS]

The very fact that NW/DL disregarded ALPA policy is testament to exactly how they feel about the policy that screwed the US east pilots.

ALPA merger policy was followed in the DL/US merger. In fact, the methodolgy applied was quite similar to Nicolau.

Did you get screwed? How many former America West pilots are senior to Mr. Super Senior himself?

Keep up. (If you can.)

 

[Black Swan]

USAPA filled the appeal, not Addington. It would be USAPA's move to abandon their appeal and accept the district court's ruling. If USAPA dropped the appeal and negotiated in good-faith to put out a TA for ratification, then the federal injunction would potentially be lifted (if Wake agrees that USAPA is in compliance with their DFR).

Even if all your hopes and dreams came true that Addington would just go away, USAPA still has the problem that the company accepted the NIC as the list and already testified in court that that is the only list they will consider. So the ball is entirely in USAPA’s court to either do what there are federally required to do as a CBA or to keep abrogating all responsibility and paying the penalty for doing so. Nothing I do will change that.

All or none. You drop Addington first. Then we drop the RICO.

 

[Black Swan]

ALPA merger policy was followed in the DL/US merger. In fact, the methodolgy applied was quite similar to Nicolau.

Did you get screwed? How many former America West pilots are senior to Mr. Super Senior himself?

Keep up. (If you can.)

ALPA merger policy has been a moving target. Driven by UAL. AAA had a constant date of hire merger history, including the one where you benefitted greatly, but soon forget in your quest for the gold. DOH with big fences in this case. If ALPA merger policy had been one constant, maybe someone could deal with it. It is not. We stay away from the west, they stay away from the east, for a long time. Then all comes down.

 

[hp_fa]

You also were in 2 bankruptcies.

Want to try again?

(pssst, the answer is one and it was filed in 1991.)