US Pilots Labor Discussion 6/2- STAY ON TOPIC AND OBSERVE THE RULES

[nic4us]

I believe AWAPPA was named as a defendant. If not, I stand corrected. The folks in the suit know who they are. I also do not know whom the webmaster is, or what their relationship to AOL is. All I know is that I got a warning about malicious code, and right afterward you said something about hurting.

And yes, I was referring to the RICO suit.

Still looks suspicious to me.

The AOL update stated that their website had been hit by a cyber attack on Friday following the 9ths ruling. Earlier in this thread east posters were claiming that they got the site shut down. One called it the "icing on the cake". Numerous times east posters then asked flippantly, "where is the AOL website?

Very suspicious indeed.

 

[cleardirect]

I am beginning to see a pattern. Throw out a bunch of unfounded accusations. When they prove to be false. Drop it and move on to the next scam.

 

[traderjake]

You're not coming east to steal anybody's job.

I glad you finally see that the issue is job theft.

You're still a little confused about who the thief is.

 

[767jetz]

Give me a break on all the "I would benefit, but I'm taking one for the team" bullcrap. everybody knows ALPA doesn't work that way.

I guess by everyone you mean everyone who thinks like you. (that's not a very big number btw.)

Actually I've seen all kinds of "practice lists" with UA and CO. I also know someone personally with basically the same DOH at CO that I have at CO. So I know where I'd be if was DOH. I also know that I would not support such an arrangement, and I've already made that clear to my LEC Chairman. I've also seen the framework for a list that had support from each side during talks in 2008. (It's not DOH) So, yes... ALPA does work that way.

Your problem is that you are still in denial about the fact that all unions have not fallen victim to the same corruption and abuse and one-sided-ness that YOUR MEC was/is guilty of. You also can't get yourself to admit that your union problems when you were part of ALPA were your own doing and not a symptom of the name on your union card. As far as USAPA is concerned... same circus, same clowns.

It must really burn your butt that DAL and NWA, both ALPA carriers, had such a successful integration and yours is such a mess. And that UAL and CAL, both ALPA carriers, will have the same success, following the same principles you choose to (wrongfully) blame for all your problems.

I'll give you this though... you east guys certainly provide lots of entertainment for the rest of the piloting community. Keep up the good work! B)

 

[oldiebutgoody]

I guess by everyone you mean everyone who thinks like you. (that's not a very big number btw.)

Actually I've seen all kinds of "practice lists" with UA and CO. I also know someone personally with basically the same DOH at CO that I have at CO. So I know where I'd be if was DOH. I also know that I would not support such an arrangement, and I've already made that clear to my LEC Chairman. I've also seen the framework for a list that had support from each side during talks in 2008. (It's not DOH) So, yes... ALPA does work that way.

Your problem is that you are still in denial about the fact that all unions have not fallen victim to the same corruption and abuse and one-sided-ness that YOUR MEC was/is guilty of. You also can't get yourself to admit that your union problems when you were part of ALPA were your own doing and not a symptom of the name on your union card. As far as USAPA is concerned... same circus, same clowns.

It must really burn your butt that DAL and NWA, both ALPA carriers, had such a successful integration and yours is such a mess. And that UAL and CAL, both ALPA carriers, will have the same success, following the same principles you choose to (wrongfully) blame for all your problems.

I'll give you this though... you east guys certainly provide lots of entertainment for the rest of the piloting community. Keep up the good work! B)

Give it a rest. ALPA isn't coming back.

ALPA SUX!

 

[AWE Dog]

I guess by everyone you mean everyone who thinks like you. (that's not a very big number btw.)

Actually I've seen all kinds of "practice lists" with UA and CO. I also know someone personally with basically the same DOH at CO that I have at CO. So I know where I'd be if was DOH. I also know that I would not support such an arrangement, and I've already made that clear to my LEC Chairman. I've also seen the framework for a list that had support from each side during talks in 2008. (It's not DOH) So, yes... ALPA does work that way.

Your problem is that you are still in denial about the fact that all unions have not fallen victim to the same corruption and abuse and one-sided-ness that YOUR MEC was/is guilty of. You also can't get yourself to admit that your union problems when you were part of ALPA were your own doing and not a symptom of the name on your union card. As far as USAPA is concerned... same circus, same clowns.

It must really burn your butt that DAL and NWA, both ALPA carriers, had such a successful integration and yours is such a mess. And that UAL and CAL, both ALPA carriers, will have the same success, following the same principles you choose to (wrongfully) blame for all your problems.

I'll give you this though... you east guys certainly provide lots of entertainment for the rest of the piloting community. Keep up the good work! B)

Why then did UAL use DOH for the Pan Am pilots? DOH was fair then but not now? You really should know your own United history before you spout this crap. ALPA SUX

 

[Freighterguynow]

Numerous times east posters then asked flippantly, "where is the AOL website?

Very suspicious indeed.

I, for one, wasn't being flippant I read everything USAPA and AOL put out with an eye to the truth being in the middle.

Got the Virus warning as well.

Why would a cyber attack come now?

On another note - I think the West pilot group needs to seize this shrinking window to move forward. Any type of win on the LOA 93 pay snap backs, even a partial one, will sink any hope of a joint contract until the end of the Great Republic. You are all still based only in PHX, you have Reps on the BOD and experienced former ALPA individuals ......

Olive Branch:

The USAPA list is clearly unfair to the West
The Rico needs to be dropped immediately
West pilot dues being spent to fight court battles against themselves is wrong
USAPPA should pay off AOL's outstanding bills after a contract is ratified
Let's get the furloughed West pilots health insurance


Both sides need to come off their respective positions and compromise.

 

[Phoenix]

The NIC was never on trial and never will be. A dfr against usapa was and ripeness was the issue.

Dumb question and dumb answer is that friday from the 9th doesn't change anything in regard to the NIC.

Please call the vp of labor at lcc to confirm. I have and it's clear as cleary....lcc accepted the NIC and will use it going forward with a joint contract or else lcc will be sued along with any cba/usapa that attempts to weasel out of final and binding arbitration.

Can you explain why the 9th circuit majority opinion referred to the arbitration as "internal arbitration" while the dissenting opinion referred to it as "binding arbitration"?

Should USAPA take notice of the different qualifying adjectives used by the majority and dissent? Or more importantly should anyone who might consider suing in the future about "binding arbitration" be concerned?

(Hint: those are rhetorical questions. )

 

[767jetz]

Give it a rest. ALPA isn't coming back.!

Nowhere did I claim ALPA was coming back. Only pointing out the east hypocrisy and the fact that USAPA is a ship of isolation in a world of clearer heads. I couldn't care less what union you have. It would be run by the same clowns anyway.

BTW USAPA SUX too.

 

[Phoenix]

WWUD?

They will negotiate using the the Nic. They have no other option. They are behind closed doors right now in full spin mode. Full spin to explain to the pilots who bought their bill of goods as to why DOH is DOA and they will now be negotiating with the Nic as the list. The 9th gave USAPA the rope to hang itself. BP is in a better place than USAPA right now.

Was the majority opinion of the 9th circuit guilty of spin when they referred to the Nic by the term "internal" arbitration instead of "binding"?

 

[oldiebutgoody]

I, for one, wasn't being flippant I read everything USAPA and AOL put out with an eye to the truth being in the middle.

Got the Virus warning as well.

Why would a cyber attack come now?

Wondered the same thing myself

On another note - I think the West pilot group needs to seize this shrinking window to move forward. Any type of win on the LOA 93 pay snap backs, even a partial one, will sink any hope of a joint contract until the end of the Great Republic. You are all still based only in PHX, you have Reps on the BOD and experienced former ALPA individuals ......

VERY true

Olive Branch:

The USAPA list is clearly unfair to the West

DOH with C&Rs has the potential to be fair. I haven't seen the C&Rs

The Rico needs to be dropped immediately

I disagree. Looks like someone is STILL playing illegal games

West pilot dues being spent to fight court battles against themselves is wrong
USAPPA should pay off AOL's outstanding bills after a contract is ratified

Not with MY money. We may be needing a war chest very soon. Let's not forget the BIG picture here.

Let's get the furloughed West pilots health insurance

I can go for this, if they agree to become MIGS upon return

Both sides need to come off their respective positions and compromise.

USAPA is already proposing a fair solution. How about we wait and see?

 

[Phoenix]

One thing is for certain. The Nic ain't going away. It happened, end of story.

Any and all future seniority schemes will be objectively measured as to how they differ from the Nic. No subjective whinning about what is unfair to Monda, or Nic was senile.

Plain and simple, anything less than the Nic "unquestionably ripe DFR".

Every other arguement east posters have made in the last 5 days has been nothing more than the same arguements about RLA law and unions rights, that Seeham used to put the hook into usapa in the first place. Where did that get you? On the recieving end of a federal injunction,after losing a DFR trial.

Now the 9th says that trial was premature, but makes no comments on its merits or the Nic award, accept to say, in layman's terms, if you get DOH passed, the next verdict will stick.

I am looking forward to usapa doing the right thing and changing their position to supporting the Nic. They can either do that now and save us all a bunch of money, or they can continue to waste our time and money, force seperate ops, tie the company's hands in the larger competative enviroment, and rack up the damages amount coming in their future "unquestionably ripe" DFR loss.

You are putting a lot of words in the mouth of the 9th.

 

[Phoenix]

Here is the bottom line.

Change the Nic, get it passed, the West is suing, "unquestionably".

No longer have to worry about not being timely.

And: the next time, the judge may not release the company if they connive with usapa in actually negotiating and ratifying a DOH list, they have been forewarned would be subject to litigation by not only the West pilot group but also the 9th circuit court of appeals.

Try to remember why we were at the 9th in the first place. We were there because usapa lost a DFR suit on the merits of the case. Bring those same merits ( i.e. change the Nic) with a ratified contract and it is game over for the fake union formed to try and get out of binding arbitration.

The merits of the case presumed Nic was "final and binding arbitration". The 9th called it "internal arbitration."

Even though the 9th dismissed the case, they added that they would "not address the thorny question of the extent to which the Nicolau Award is binding on USAPA." But ironically the terms they used to refer to the Nic say everything you need to know.

In addition to calling it "internal" instead of "binding", they majority went further and noted the dissent, "implicitly assumed" that the Nic, "the product of the internal rules and processes of ALPA, is binding on USAPA."

They didn't have to point it out, but it is obvious. The question of "internal" or "binding" was the necessary premise to deciding ripeness. Does not bode well for West dreams of future lawsuits.

 

[OTTER574]

Can you explain why the 9th circuit majority opinion referred to the arbitration as "internal arbitration" while the dissenting opinion referred to it as "binding arbitration"?

Should USAPA take notice of the different qualifying adjectives used by the majority and dissent? Or more importantly should anyone who might consider suing in the future about "binding arbitration" be concerned?

(Hint: those are rhetorical questions. )

You can not UNDO final and binding arbitration, just like you can not undo the TA to your benefit or the company. But by all means, be sure and suggest this to the company to go along with your scheme because the sooner you do the sooner we'll be back in court with the company sitting by your side as a defendant.

We all know how the usapa brain trust is working feverishly on a joint contract now going on 2 + years and counting...hint to you is to read the TA and how this will procede in regards to this pilot group and the company.

I repeat...usapa, aol, alpa or the company can not take away my rights in a final and binding arbitration!

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You can not UNDO final and binding arbitration, just like you can not undo the TA to your benefit or the company. But by all means, be sure and suggest this to the company to go along with your scheme because the sooner you do the sooner we'll be back in court with the company sitting by your side as a defendant.

We all know how the usapa brain trust is working feverishly on a joint contract now going on 2 + years and counting...hint to you is to read the TA and how this will procede in regards to this pilot group and the company.

I repeat...usapa, aol, alpa or the company can not take away my rights in a final and binding arbitration!

You're right, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals did.

C'est la vie!