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

[luvthe9]

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

C'est la vie!

You beat me to that one!!!!! no brainer. What's a NIC?

 

[Phoenix]

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 didn't answer the question.

You keep clinging to the term of "binding" but the 9th called it "internal". Do you get it yet? ALPA called it "binding", the 9th rejected that term in preference for "internal". You should have your lawyers think on that and tell you exactly what that means in relation to any law suits you are planning. On second thought, you need to get an independent, second opinion. Your lawyers have a conflict of interest.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You didn't answer the question.

You keep clinging to the term of "binding" but the 9th called it "internal". Do you get it yet? ALPA called it "binding", the 9th rejected that term in preference for "internal". You should have your lawyers think on that and tell you exactly what that means in relation to any law suits you are planning. On second thought, you need to get an independent, second opinion. Your lawyers have a conflict of interest.

If by "conflict of interest" you mean that they need to find a way to get paid. They've got to know that it's pretty improbable that they'll get much of their 1.8 mil from the plaintiffs.

They're grabbing at straws by trying to get an en banc hearing for a case which doesn't even set a precedent, let alone one of "exceptional importance", a requirement for such a hearing.

It'll just be more billable hours they won't be able to recover.

Maybe you should ask Mr. Harper to do it "Pro Bono". maybe he needs a tax writeoff.

 

[BoeingBoy]

You didn't answer the question.

You keep clinging to the term of "binding" but the 9th called it "internal". Do you get it yet?

Actually, there's nothing to "get". The arbitration was internal because it was the last step in ALPA's internal merger process which both sides agreed to. That internal process made it binding, which both sides also agreed to. Even USAPA uses binding arbitration as part of it's merger process if it comes to that stage.

Jim

 

[Phoenix]

If by "conflict of interest" you mean that they need to find a way to get paid. They've got to know that it's pretty improbable that they'll get much of their 1.8 mil from the plaintiffs.

They're grabbing at straws by trying to get an en banc hearing for a case which doesn't even set a precedent, let alone one of "exceptional importance", a requirement for such a hearing.

It'll just be more billable hours they won't be able to recover.

Yes, by conflict of interest I mean that the West lawyers know full well that the question of what "binding" vs. "internal" means will determine whether or not their clients should pursue a law suit (ie. the lawyers continued employment is in the balance of that question).

A careful reading of the majority and dissent opinions clearly reveals the answer. The question of whether or not Nic is indeed binding or internal is the necessary premise to the conclusion of whether or not the suit was ripe.

"Binding" = already ripe, and an injunction is necessary. "Internal" = USAPA free to pursue anything that is not “wholly irrational or arbitrary.”

 

[AWE Dog]

Actually, there's nothing to "get". The arbitration was internal because it was the last step in ALPA's internal merger process which both sides agreed to. That internal process made it binding, which both sides also agreed to. Even USAPA uses binding arbitration as part of it's merger process if it comes to that stage.

Jim

Yes Jim, Internal ALPA, There is no more ALPA to be internal of.

 

[AWE Dog]

Yes, by conflict of interest I mean that the West lawyers know full well that the question of what "binding" vs. "internal" means will determine whether or not their clients should pursue a law suit (ie. the lawyers continued employment is in the balance of that question).

A careful reading of the majority and dissent opinions clearly reveals the answer. The question of whether or not Nic is indeed binding or internal is the necessary premise to the conclusion of whether or not the suit was ripe.

"Binding" = already ripe, and an injunction is necessary. "Internal" = USAPA free to pursue anything that is not “wholly irrational or arbitrary.”

Very Good point

 

[Phoenix]

Actually, there's nothing to "get". The arbitration was internal because it was the last step in ALPA's internal merger process which both sides agreed to. That internal process made it binding, which both sides also agreed to. Even USAPA uses binding arbitration as part of it's merger process if it comes to that stage.

Jim

Of course its binding. It is so easy even a herd of cave men get it. The cave men are assembling for a road trip to the 9th. I'ld go too but I'll be busy practicing the fire from two sticks trick.

 

[OTTER574]

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

C'est la vie!

You're wrong again oldie. First rule of war is to know your enemy. The company and the west do. We're not going to give up our rights on the west and I repeat never. Section 22 is done and accepted by the company. Did you call al hemenway vp labor lcc today to confirm this BTW?

We're are basically parked because of ..........take your pick of answers but it requires you and rest of the east looking into the mirror and admit to your actions since this merger began.

Still waiting for the usapa list to be passed to the company oldie. I think it may be awhile but hey enjoy those bankrupt wages under loa 93. Hear certain regional pilots are making more than east pilots on the e190.

 

[oldiebutgoody]

You're wrong again oldie. First rule of war is to know your enemy. The company and the west do. We're not going to give up our rights on the west and I repeat never. Section 22 is done and accepted by the company. Did you call al hemenway vp labor lcc today to confirm this BTW?

We're are basically parked because of ..........take your pick of answers but it requires you and rest of the east looking into the mirror and admit to your actions since this merger began.

Still waiting for the usapa list to be passed to the company oldie. I think it may be awhile but hey enjoy those bankrupt wages under loa 93. Hear certain regional pilots are making more than east pilots on the e190.

I'm done arguing with you on this. You are wrong. I think you've been out playin' in the peyote cactus a little too long.

 

[OTTER574]

I'm done arguing with you on this. You are wrong. I think you've been out playin' in the peyote cactus a little too long.

I called al and have recieved the companies answer. You did not if I read your BS/fud correctly. Signing off to work on my pbs july bid..should take all of 30 minutes.

 

[nycbusdriver]

Section 22 is done and accepted by the company.

Accepted.

Years ago a favorite aunt gave me a birthday card in it with a check for more money than I knew she could really afford. (She spoiled me rotten as a kid, God rest her soul.)

I accepted the card and the check. I never cashed the check, though.

Accepted.

 

[luvthe9]

.

Hear certain regional pilots are making more than east pilots on the e190.

You guys might find yourself along side with them if the upcoming transactions come true.

 

[767jetz]

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

You really should educate yourself on the facts before spouting YOUR crap. UAL used ALPA merger policy every time. News Flash: it no longer contains DOH. Hasn't for MANY years. It also doesn't prohibit DOH if both groups agree that is the fairest method. Funny thing is, you are the only group that has a problem with it.

Every merger turns on it's own merits. Pan Am brought to UA 747's and the Pacific that is now the envy of everyone else. That really was fair then. What is it that US brought to the table? A bunch of narrow body airplanes, a regional domestic route structure, competition from SW and Jet Blue in almost every market, baggage from 2 bankruptcies, countless mergers, and years of mismanagement. Oh yeah, and a handful of A330s really old 767's. What USAPA has been trying to foist upon the West is not fair.

Get it? Different set of circumstances - different measure of what's really fair.

So let's see... keeping what you have by fencing off your domiciles and keeping any growth for yourselves is fair now. But fencing you off the 747 and 777 forever, which was proposed to you in the UA/US merger attempt in 2000 wasn't fair then? Hmmmm. Talk about spouting crap. (your words not mine) You guys keep the double standards flowing. You're good at that. :blink:

 

[Tiger 1050]

Hopefully the furloughed will be coming back soon. The reps I have spoken with say the company is having serious issues staffing already. Hopefully you will be back soon. If everybody flies only what is legally required, it will happen sooner.

There are many on the west who can't seem to grasp this concept... Much to my and many others consternation!